School board discusses processes to renovate Benicia High School stadium

(Originally published in the 3/20/16 edition)

   The Governing Board of the Benicia Unified School District continued the discussion from its March 3 meeting on the process of procuring a contractor to construct Benicia High School’s new stadium at Thursday’s meeting.

   Benicia High’s stadium renovation project was one of the largest projects that was part of the Measure S bond, which was approved by Benicia voters in June 2014. At the last meeting, Patrick Wilson of School and College Legal Services of California in Santa Rosa argued the merits of a lease-leaseback process, in which a district leases the site to a qualified contractor instead of advertising for bidders, and the site is leased back to the district after construction is completed. 

   At Thursday’s meeting, Loren Sokup, an associate general counsel with School and College Legal Services presented the pros and cons of both the general bidding process and the lease-leaseback process. She began by noting that both methods share common elements, including the Division of the State Architect having to approve construction plans and the contractor paying prevailing wages.

   She then discussed the pros and cons of a general bidding process. On the positive side, a bidding process would likely lead to more competition and better pricing due to advertising and would decrease the likelihood of favoritism. However, the district would have to award the project to the lowest bidder even if a superior contractor is available, Sokup said.

   “Price is the primary driver in this, and the district is subject and locked in to those restrictions,” she said. 

   Under a lease-leaseback process, the district would be able to have a highly qualified contractor who will construct the project in a timely manner. On the other hand, Sokup noted, the process of sole sourcing can be abused, the pricing may be higher and has not necessarily been vetted by a competitive bid process and the contractor may want to delay the start of work for at least 60 days afterward to rely on validation procedure.

   Additionally, Sokup noted that the lease-leaseback process has become more controversial in the wake of Davis v. Fresno Unified School District, in which Fresno Unified misused the process for a variety of projects. Among other things, it was determined that the district had violated conflict of interest laws by granting the project to a construction firm that had previously assisted with consultation on the project.

   Sokup also noted that a pre-qualification process is mandatory for lease-leaseback and required for most bidding projects. Among the subects addressed in the process include whether or not the contractor’s license has ever been revoked or suspended, prior experience with K-12 stadium projects and the provision of audited financial states. 

   Trustee Stacy Holguin asked if there was a time frame difference in carrying out the two processes.

   “With regard to the bidding, there is a required advertising period,” Sokup responded. “With lease-leaseback, it tends to be a shorter time period. That being said, contractors are wanting to wait and start work after 60 days after the contract is awarded.”

   Holguin then noted that lease-leaseback is frequently used at the community college level and asked why it was so controversial at the K-12 level. Sokup noted that it was actually more controversial at the community college level because community college districts haven’t been verified while there is a verification process at the K-12 level.

   Superintendent Charles Young said the board would be moving forward with the bidding process.

   “With the issues of the legal process around lease-leaseback, the 60-day timeframe just pushes us out even further,” he said. “We’ve talked about this quite a bit, and we would like to go ahead with the bidding process.” 

   Trustee Diane Ferrucci concurred with Young’s reasoning.

   “The more I’m reading about lease-leaseback in light of all the recent legislation, it concerns me that they keep saying the district is going to have a really difficult time meeting the level of requirements in order to participate in that lease-leaseback,” she said. “I really prefer going this way with some really clear expectations and requirements.”

   In other business, educational services coordinator Jan Rogenski discussed the rigorous Reading and Writing Project that had been implemented at the elementary schools. Brian Douglas of Mary Farmar Elementary, Kathy Crozier of Matthew Turner Elementary and Deborah Campbell of Joe Henderson Elementary discussed what their students were learning under this program, and some of their students even got to present some of the reports they had written.     Additionally, Young formally announced Brianna Kleinschmidt as Benicia High’s new principal. 

Loren Sokup discusses the differences between lease-leaseback and general bidding. (Photo by Nick Sestanovich)

School board questions process to renovate stadium

(Originally published in the 3/6/16 edition)

    The Governing Board of the Benicia Unified School District heard a discussion on the progress of Benicia High School’s renovated stadium and questioned the approach the project was using. 

   The stadium, which was financed through Measure S, will feature a new all-weather track, a renovated entryway, upgraded lighting and bleachers that can seat up to 3,300 people. Patrick Wilson of School and College Legal Services of California in Santa Rosa explained that the district is planning to use a lease-leaseback process to construct the stadium.

   In a lease-leaseback project, school districts are authorized to circumvent the process of advertising for bidders and instead leases the site to a contractor. After construction is done, the site is leased back to the district. 

   “One thing that lease-leaseback allows you to do is pick the contractor who has special qualifications that meet the need for your project,” Wilson said. “You reserve lease-leaseback for exceptional projects, and the general rule is you’re going to bid your painting and paving projects and the more generic projects. But for a project like this that is complicated and involves track and field and stadium development and school buildings that are associated with that on a short timeline, you’ll want to have a general contractor who has done this kind of project before and has good recommendations.” 

   However, lease-leaseback has seen controversy. Last year, Fresno Unified School District went to court over its alleged misuse of the lease-leaseback method. The district had used lease-leaseback for a variety of projects, including the construction of Rutherford B. Gaston Middle School. The 5th District Court of Appeal ruled that the contract was leaseback in name only and the district violated conflict of interest laws by awarding the project to Harris Construction who had previously done consultation on the process, according to The Fresno Bee.

   However, Wilson said they will not repeat Fresno’s mistakes. 

   “Fresno Unified got into trouble, partly because they were using lease-leaseback for almost everything, and they were sole-sourcing it,” he said. “They weren’t casting the net wide and trying to allow qualified contractors to compete against one another. They tended to overly focus on one contractor who seemed to do all their work.”

   “We’re trying to avoid those pitfalls and help you get your stadium project off the ground,” he added. 

   The board trustees were quick to ask questions about the process.

   “If we state what we’re looking for, why wouldn’t qualified contractors apply to the job in the first place?” Trustee Andre Stewart asked. 

   “When you go out to bid, which is the general method of selecting contractors, you basically have to pick the low bidder regardless of whether you think they’re as qualified as you’d like them to be or not,” Wilson responded. “The way that we structure lease-leaseback is you reach out to four or five contractors, all of whom you think are highly experienced, and you get them to compete against one another. You whittle the pool down to one or two, and the board decides who you want to proceed with.” 

   Trustee Peter Morgan raised issues over the political impacts of lease-leaseback.

   “The lease-leaseback approach, used improperly, can circumvent a lot of the controls that are intended to ensure that taxpayers’ dollars are used most effectively,” he said.

   Morgan requested a written report detailing why lease-leaseback makes sense for the district and what the issues were in the Fresno case.

   “Fresno Unified forgot that bidding is the general rule, and lease-leaseback’s an exception that should be used for exceptional cases,” Wilson responded. “They started using it in all instances, and they had no element of competition. In virtually every lease-leaseback I’ve worked on, we do have competition.” 

   In other business, the board approved a new facilities master plan, and Superintendent Charles Young highlighted the process of implementing a new bell schedule. A special meeting will be held in Room L-3 at Benicia High School at 7 p.m., Thursday, March 10 where high schools from Albany and Piedmont will talk to parents about how their schedule changes worked for them. 

Roxanne Egan, Measure S bond director, briefly talks about the stadium renovation before handing the microphone to Patrick Wilson. (Photo by Nick Sestanovich)

School board to hear update on stadium renovation project

(Originally published in the 3/1/16 edition)

   The Governing Board of the Benicia Unified School District will listen to a status update on Benicia High School’s new stadium at Thursday’s meeting.

   The stadium is one of the largest projects to be financed through Measure S, an initiative approved by Benicia voters in 2014 to provide $49.6 million in bond funding to be spent on facilities at district schools. 

   The renovated athletic facility will still be used primarily for football and soccer as well as track and field, pole vaulting and discus throwing. It will also retain the existing scoreboard, but it will have a new 8-lane all-weather track, upgraded lighting, bleachers that would fit up to 3,300 people and a redesigned entryway. 

   The project is awaiting approval from the Division of State Architecture. If approved, construction will begin when summer break starts in June and is projected to be completed in October. 

   Bond Director Roxanne Egan will give a presentation on where the status of the project lies at this point in time. According to a report by Egan, the district is still looking for contractors.

   “The district’s standard practice when constructing school buildings is to use the traditional low bid process which allows any licensed contractor to bid on the work,” she wrote. “However, there are other legal methods of construction delivery that sometimes are a better fit.”

   Egan cited a “lease leaseback” method, which authorizes a district to lease a school site to a contractor for a nominal amount. After the contractor builds the project, it leases it back to the district for 40 years, at which point ownership returns to the district. This process is done without competitive bidding. 

   “The stadium project involves multiple complex construction challenges which must be completed on a tight schedule,” Egan wrote. “The lease leaseback method will allow the district to select from a list of preferred contractors who have previously performed similar stadium projects for public school districts.” 

   Egan also noted that staff is working with legal counsel to make sure all construction documents meet legal requirements. 

   In other business, the board will consider the criteria for determining the order of seniority for employees who have the same date when they began working in the district. Chief Business Official Tim Rahill will also be reviewing the 2015/16 Second Interim Financial Report.

   The board will meet at 7 p.m., Thursday, in the Benicia Unified School District Board Room at the district building on 350 East K Street. There will be an earlier closed session at 6 p.m.

School board discusses merits of proposed BHS stadium design

  (Originally published in the 10/18/15 edition)

 A presentation on a proposed new design for the upper stadium at Benicia High School prompted much discussion and disagreement at the Benicia Unified School District’s board meeting Thursday night.

   The renovated stadium is another project to be funded through Measure S funds. Measure S was approved by voters in June 2014 to provide $49.6 million in bond funding to be spent on facilities at BUSD schools. Projects have included renovated elementary school playgrounds and the repainting of Benicia High School.

   To help the stadium reach its goal, construction will be done by Verde Design out of Santa Clara. That company’s owner, Derek McKee, delivered a presentation on what the new upper field would look like.

   The remodeled stadium would feature an all-weather track, bleachers that would fit up to 3,300 people instead of the current 1,960 and a modern sign welcoming “Panthers.” The total cost would be over $8.9 million. If approved, the construction would take place between June and October, 2016, with the overall completion scheduled for Oct. 24 of that year.

   One design element that hadn’t been decided on was the choice to use natural or synthetic turf. Ralph Caputo of the construction management service RGM & Associates gave a presentation on the advantages and disadvantages of each.

   The overall presentation sparked a healthy amount of debate from board members and citizens alike. Trustee Peter Morgan raised concerns about graduation chairs on the new footing.

   “Let’s just include chairs in the costs so we can pay for it through the bond money versus realizing that we need to buy other stuff to use it,” he said.

   Morgan also expressed concern about the safety of synthetic turf, noting that when women play soccer on synthetic turf, they suffer a far higher rate of injuries than men who play on natural turf.

   “Our first obligation is not to make the field available for play,” he said, “The first and foremost obligation is the safety of these children.”

   Trustee Gary Wing assured that they would be using natural rubber and not shredded tires for the synthetic turf.

   “We need a field that isn’t half dirt by the second game of the season,” he said

   Trustee Andre Stewart questioned why the field was receiving the highest priority over other aging sports facilities on campus. 

  “We’re looking at the football field, but I know the basketball court is not padded and we’ve talked in the past about tennis courts,” he said. “Is there a way to do all this at one time?”

   Chief Business Official Tim Rahill said that Geotech will be doing soil samples around the tennis courts and gym where the basketball court is at some point.

   “At some point we’re going to address those areas,” he said. “The magnitude of the upper track and field is greater.”

   Mary Beyer, a Benicia resident whose children are both student athletes, took to the podium to  voice her concerns about the stadium renovation making up a more sizable portion of the bond than necessary. 

   “There has to be some money for the school and education and not just a stadium,” she said. “That is not what I agreed to when I voted yes for the bond.”

   Craig Holden, Benicia High’s athletic director and head football coach, shared others’ views that the gym floor and tennis courts were in need of repair, but he also felt the stadium was the showcase project at the moment.

   “I want to make sure that things are done right,” he said. “If we jump out there and do 14 different projects at one time, then it slows everything down and I have no place to put those different sports programs. As athletic director, I’m looking at the big picture.”

   The item will be brought before the board again at the Nov. 5 meeting, where it will be voted on.

   In other business, the four principals of Benicia’s elementary schools presented their Single Plan for Student Achievement goals which were unanimously approved by the board.