GUILFORD – A year after the completion of Guilford’s new town hall and highway garage, town leaders have revealed the project’s final cost exceeded estimates by more than half a million dollars.
According to Town Supervisor George Seneck, the construction of the two buildings cost Guilford $2,173,240 – $523,240 over the $1.65 million authorized by voters.
“I’m not trying to cover anything up here,” said Seneck, who ordered a review of the project’s cost after taking office in January.
Seneck, who sat on the town board throughout the process, said he and other members of the town council were aware the project was going to exceed its budget as early as March or April of 2009. But even he was “significantly surprised” at just how far over budget they actually were, he said.
What went wrong? According to Seneck, it started with fundamental errors and miscalculations on the part of Keystone Associates, the Binghamton-based architectural and engineering firm with which the town contracted for the project.
According to Seneck, the municipality had originally been told by the firm that the project was “very doable” for the $1.65 million voters had authorized.
But when bids came in – at $1,941,800 – it became apparent that Keystone’s “cost estimates were significantly off,” he said.
“We couldn’t have built probably at a worse time,” said Highway Superintendent Bob Fleming, at a town board meeting in July, when the cost review was discussed. “It was a no-win situation.”
After receiving an opinion from the New York State Comptroller’s office on the use of approximately $400,000 the town held in reserve for so-called soft costs associated with the capital project, the town board, then under the leadership of former Supervisor Al Doyle, decided to move forward with their plans.
Only later, Seneck said, did they realize that a number of necessary items had been left out of the scope of work and budget. These additional expenses – which included the clerk of the works’ salary, bonding fees, other contractual engineering expenses and installation of a water pump among others – totaled $284,710.
The town had also decided to proceed with finishing the interior of the town hall building, despite the fact that it wasn’t included in the original project cost.
“I supported that decision,” said Seneck.
While he has no problem accepting responsibility for the approximately $78,000 finishing the building added to the project’s total cost, the other over-runs have prompted the town supervisor to consult legal counsel with regard to Keystone. Not just for the cost estimates. One of Seneck’s other complaints is that the Binghamton-based firm drew up the original design documents to meet Broome County building codes, rather than Chenango County.
At this time, however, Guilford’s leaders have decided not to proceed with legal action against the firm.
“The cost of litigation would be greater than what we’d look to recover,” he explained.
Seneck said he had contacted the comptroller’s office after taking office to request a formal audit of the project, but was told one wasn’t necessary. He said he has also been assured that the town will not face any sanctions or penalties for exceeding the amount authorized by voters.
At least one of those voters, however, isn’t happy about what she referred to as a breach of trust.
“You weren’t supposed to spend a penny more than $1.65 million,” said Guilford resident Celeste Aber, as she chastised the town board last month. “It’s a little upsetting.”
Aber found support from one of the board’s newest members, Dee Fuller, who said the town needs to take what it learned from this experience and it “into consideration” for any future projects.