Math test: An examination of costs of JCPS two high school plan

Shown in this July 8, 2015 file photo, Nichols Career Center added two trailers to the lot on the center's west side to accommodate increasing need for more space.
Shown in this July 8, 2015 file photo, Nichols Career Center added two trailers to the lot on the center's west side to accommodate increasing need for more space.

The price of the Jefferson City School District's two-high school proposal - which is planned to be on the April election ballot - has raised some concerns in the community.

"They won't pay for it if they don't have trust," said Dan Ortmeyer of the community's attitude, during the public comments portion of the Board of Education's Thursday meeting at Lewis and Clark Middle School.

Ortmeyer said he had opposed the 2013 ballot issue that would have built one large high school, but would not necessarily oppose the two-high school plan so long as he was convinced there were no unnecessary costs.

"We have to get it right this time," he said, encouraging district officials to work on the cost estimates given to them by the architects.

A partnership between ACI Boland Architects and The Architects Alliance was the option JCPS Superintendent Larry Linthacum recommended to the board Thursday for the two-high school plan, citing the district's positive past experiences with the two firms. The board will vote on Linthacum's recommendation at the Jan. 9 meeting at Thomas Jefferson Middle School.

The News Tribune wanted to examine how and why the estimated numbers of a two-high school plan by architects have increased over the years of discussion and presentation - from between $61 million -$67 million in 2011 to $116 million in 2014 to almost $130 million today.

 

Renovation of Jefferson City High School and Nichols Career Center

According to previous News Tribune reports, the district's 2011 proposal to renovate the current high school at 609 Union St. was projected to cost $10.98 million. That figure covered "significant renovation including interior, exterior and building systems."

Not included in the proposed $10.98 million was another $4.2 million to build a new gym - to make the school compatible with the increased level of student athletic participation post-Title IX - and student commons areas for "study, dining and assembly options." Renovation of the Nichols Career Center across Jay Drive at 605 Union St. was projected to cost an additional $166,800 - that facility requiring only "minor architectural finish renovations."

The 2014 projections from the district's Long Range Facility Planning Committee - which the district currently is operating from in its proposals, plus inflation and increased costs - pegged renovation of the high school alone at about $16.9 million.

Jason Hoffman, JCPS chief financial and chief operating officer, told the News Tribune last week the cost of updating the heating and air-conditioning systems in the high school would alone be more than the original $10 million budgeted for the whole renovation.

Linthacum cited at the Thursday board meeting $15 million in deferred maintenance costs at the high school, which were noted in a 2013 appraisal of the facility by ACI Boland.

"We don't know exactly what we're getting into" when ceilings start to be opened up and walls are taken down at the high school, said Michael Kautz, a principal architect at ACI Boland and director of the firm's education market.

The current high school was built in 1964, and its structure is a load-bearing masonry wall and slab floor design. The school's heating is provided by hot water, and air conditioning through window units - neither centralized.

The 2013 ACI Boland appraisal rated the condition of the high school overall as "borderline" - between "poor" and "satisfactory" on a scale from "very inadequate" to "excellent." The site scored 695 points out of a possible 1,000 from a tally of evaluations of the school's features including its location; sidewalks; parking; drainage; roof; foundation; plumbing; electrical system; fire protection systems; restrooms; storage space; finishes on window, door and wall surfaces; security systems; and classroom and other space sizes.

Linthacum has characterized the overall score as a D+ rating in academic terms - not something to be satisfied with.

The additional $4.2 million for a new gym and locker rooms did not change between the 2011 and 2014 plans, but renovation of the Nichols Center had grown to $5.8 million.

Both Hoffman and Kautz said this is because renovations of Nichols are expected to be much more thorough than originally planned, and the original 2011 estimates were preliminary. Kautz specifically cited the possibility of updating some of Nichols' shop classrooms.

Linthacum has explained at the board's past two meetings that 29 of the classrooms at Nichols are dedicated solely to Jefferson City High School classes because of a lack of space at that building - leaving only about a half-dozen to serve their original purpose of accommodating Nichols students.

Linthacum said at Thursday's meeting that the plan as it is would not guarantee getting all 29 of those classrooms back for Nichols to use as intended, but it could potentially get 12-15 back.

Along with the costs of renovating Nichols itself, another $2.7 million is on the 2014 proposal to build a connection between the high school, across the street to Nichols.

Hoffman explained this connection would close off traffic on Jay Drive and create an enclosed, pedestrian-only passageway between the buildings. Without the connection, Hoffman said, the crossing would continue to be a safety hazard - both in terms of students' safety as they cross the street and in terms of the security of the building and monitoring who is going in and out at any given time.

 

A second high school, contingencies and furniture costs

The cost of building a second, new high school was estimated at $40 million in 2011. In the 2014 plan, construction was estimated to cost $58.7 million.

Hoffman said the 2011 budget is simply not a good comparison to the 2014 budget. In addition to the 2014 cost estimates taking into account more detail than 2011's preliminary guesses, the estimates were drawn up by different architectural firms - Architects Alliance for 2011 and ACI Boland for 2014.

Even though the district's 2014 proposal has construction costs of the new high school estimated at $58.7 million, the total cost estimate for the new high school is listed as $76.4 million, about $17 million more than the construction projection itself.

The total projected cost of renovations at the current high school and Nichols combined, with a new gym there and the high school-Nichols enclosed connection, are estimated to cost $40 million. Yet, construction costs alone only account for about $30 million of this.

What makes up these multi-million dollar differences between the estimated costs of construction and the total projections for the respective parts of the district's $130 million two high school plan?

The answers are funds for contingencies, furniture and equipment, also listed in the project budgets and factored into the total cost projections. The 2014 plan's numbers for these contingency and furniture and equipment funds are significantly different from the 2011 estimations.The total design contingency for the 2011 estimate - taking into account both renovations and new construction - was 10 percent of the total budget then, or about $5.2 million. A separate fund for furniture, fixtures and equipment was estimated at 7.5 percent - $3.9 million.

In 2014, contingency funds and costs for furniture and equipment were respectively 30 percent of both new high school construction and the renovations at the current site - $17.6 million for the former and $9.2 million for the latter.

Given no architectural plans for the two-school proposal have been finalized, and won't be until after the district accepts Linthacum's recommendation of firms and completes contract negotiations, the contingency funds exist to have flexibility built into project budgets before a tangible plan is complete, Hoffman said.

Hoffman said once the green light to draw up plans is given, architects will ask staff what they need out of new or renovated classrooms - the features a science lab or art classroom ought to have, for example. Given what is feasible and affordable, architects can use the contingency funding to incorporate some of these details into their designs.

Kautz said the contingency funds in the current plan are typical for other districts ACI Boland has worked on. He wouldn't comment on the differences with the 2011 plan because he didn't work on it.

Kautz explained contingency estimates exist to allow "for variances in the marketplace when (a project) gets out onto the street for bidding."

In addition to spikes in the costs of construction materials, these funds can cover unforeseeable expenses on sites. At the proposed site of the new high school, for example, he said of excavating the foundation "we anticipate we'll hit some rock, but won't know for sure until soil drilling."

Kautz said it can be reasonably expected that a lot of new furniture and equipment will be needed.

"There's not a lot of equipment coming from any place else," other than maybe a little bit from Simonsen, he said.

Hoffman explained equipment includes items like kitchenware for the school cafeteria.

 

Inflation and construction costs

Linthacum said at Thursday's board meeting the increased cost estimation from $116 million in 2014 to roughly $130 million today for the two-high school plan is due to inflation and rising construction costs.

"There's nothing additional from that time to now," he said of the plan's details.

The district has used inflation estimates in its public presentations from the Turner Building Cost Index. Turner is an international construction services company, according to its website.

According to the district, those inflation estimates bring the 2014 proposed total cost of the two-high school plan to the nearly $130 million discussed now. Turner has estimated slightly more than a 1 percent rise in inflation for construction costs per quarter since the fourth quarter of 2014.

Producer Price Index data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics offers another point of comparison when it comes to estimates of the inflation of construction costs for new schools specifically. As of Dec. 15, this month's preliminary estimates are not in yet. However, a preliminary estimate from November 2014 to November 2016 shows about a 2.3 percent inflation in new school construction costs on a national level.

There are lots of nuances to local inflation rates and material costs, though, that broader level rates may not take into account.

Inflation and cost spikes often affect different aspects of construction unevenly, said Cary Gampher, Architects Alliance's principal architect.

"Just because construction prices are going up doesn't mean that all the materials in the building go up the same," Gampher said. "One thing is the price of fuel," he explained, because delivery of light loads of material costs less than heavy ones - i.e., insulation versus concrete.

There are variances within material prices themselves, too.

"Just because wood or concrete goes up by 'x' percent a year doesn't mean that lighting does," he said.

Gampher said to estimate the cost per square foot on any given project, his firm looks at comparable facilities (high schools, in this case) and major subdivisions of construction, which include footings (the substructure or foundation), the super-structure (the frame and block walls), the exterior envelope (the facade, of brick or glass), interiors, mechanical, electrical, plumbing and fire protection systems.

"If it's an easy site, the substructure is cheaper. If it's built on a cliff, or in a swamp or whatever," it won't be, he explained.

In terms of the local construction labor market in Central Missouri, Gampher said he has not noticed any shortages of skilled workers like plumbers and electricians. "We have several construction projects going right now, and they all seem to have the forces they need," he said.

He did say a large project coupled with seasonal variables like whether there's snow on the ground and how muddy a site is can affect timelines.

"Right now, I know that masons are busy right now, but I can't tell you that they'll be busy" at a different point in the future, he said.

Gampher said when it comes to the existence of a reliable overall inflation number, "there is for an economist, yes (but) I'm looking at it differently," thinking in terms of materials - a run on steel for a year or two versus tile or carpet.

"I'm looking at greater detail than a market or banker-type person," he said.

 

What will Jefferson City residents pay if the school levies pass?

Two separate votes are being considered for the April ballot. The first is a 65-cent property tax increase to pay for the bond issue covering construction and renovation costs of the two-high school plan. The second vote is a combined 55-cent levy, which respectively covers operating costs for a second high school (25-cent levy) and operating needs for the current JCPS system (30-cent levy).

To calculate how much this might cost you as a homeowner, you have to understand how property taxes work.

Taxes levied are based on this formula: assessed value of your home, divided by 100, then multiplied by the overall tax rate.

According to the Cole County Assessor's Office, assessed value of your property is the number obtained by multiplying the market value (or appraised value) of your property by an assessment rate for that type of property. For residential homes here, that rate is 19 percent, and for commercial properties it is 32 percent.

For example, a home valued at $139,000 - what the district has said is the market value of an average Jefferson City home - would have an assessed value of $26,410. Divide this number by 100, and you get $264.10.

The current tax rate in Jefferson City for a residential home $4.9144, including the existing $3.6928 school levy, as well as additional city and county levies.

So a Jefferson City family who currently owns a $139,000 home would pay about $1,298 in property taxes annually, or about $108 a month. This payment is in addition to any other financial arrangement on the home, like a mortgage.

Increasing the school levies by the proposed $1.20 means the total tax rate for a residential home in the city would be $6.1144. Doing the math under this tax rate means the same family in the same average Jefferson City home would pay almost $1,615 a year in property taxes.

This means the homeowner would pay about $26 more a month in property taxes if the levies are approved.