1912 High School (Whitworth)Building

[WMSteed@aol.com]

Re: 1912 Moscow High School

To: Mayor and City Council

From: Walter M. Steed - 9/6/99

Having attended the Monday, August 30 city council meeting almost by 
accident, I stayed because of the information provided to the public.  For 
the first time the council heard the additional approximately $1 million cost 
of renovation, the $180,000 start up costs and $156,000 annual expense of 
operation.  Apparently, at least four council persons were taken back enough 
to delay a decision for a week in order to receive additional citizen input.  
The following are my thoughts on the subject for your Tuesday, September 7 
council meeting:

Most interestingly, nowhere in the Preliminary Design Report given to the 
council last Monday does anyone or any entity take ownership of the document 
and the information contained therein.  Except for some presumably 
subcontracting architect and engineer letters and memorandums, there is no 
one person or firm who can be held accountable for its contents.  While the 
drawings contained therein do have the Design West logo on them, the cost 
estimate has only "Whitworth Building Renovation 6/19/99."  

I notice the construction contingency contained in the cost estimate is only 
7% .  In my experience this is an extremely low construction contingency at 
this early stage, particularly for a project of this type.  Renovation is a 
very open ended process as you never know what is behind the next wall you 
tear into.  A larger, more realistic, contingency percentage of 15% would 
raise the total estimated cost another $225,982 for a total project 
construction cost of $4,185,620.  (6% of this amount for start up costs is 
$251,137.)

Another construction cost question is the expense for removal of hazardous 
materials.  Is there no asbestos or other material in the building which 
requires special, expensive handling or has it already been removed or is 
there a cost item in the budget which I overlooked?

Granted, the plan is to raise all construction dollars from donations, so why 
should the cost matter?  Apparently for the proponents a million dollars 
extra wasn't enough to even cause a pause.  Realistically, unless a second 
unnamed benefactor or the one you have tosses in a lot more, you could have a 
problem finishing the project.  I find it hard to believe there are two or 
more million dollars in disposable income available in Moscow for a building 
that is so limited in its uses; meeting rooms, senior center, science center, 
arts center and city offices.

It seems the item which did give some council members pause was the $156,000 
annual cost of operation.  If the existing community room brings in $8,000, 
almost 20 times this amount will be needed to cover the new building's cost; 
ignoring my higher figure above.  The Preliminary Design Report Overview, 
again not credited for authorship, states the seniors will continue to lease 
the kitchen and great room two days per week.  This seems to say they cannot 
be counted on for additional income despite the tripling of dedicated space.  
That leaves the sciences group (who are these people and is there an entity 
which can sign a $50,000 annual lease for one-third of the building?) and the 
city to pick up the rest.

Let's overlook for a moment previous commitments that "no tax dollars will be 
spent on the Whitworth Building."  Since the city budget is restricted to 
only $70,000 to $100,000 per year in tax increases, it would appear that 
either all future tax increases will be dedicated to the building or some 
existing budget items will have to be foregone for the next 100 years to 
operate the building.  Are you sure you wish to restrict future councils in 
this way.  It sure would make annual city budgeting easy.

I don't know how to stop this juggernaut which, I believe, is dearly wanted 
at any cost by one hundred or so people in Moscow.  I believe many more, the 
unheard from majority, either don't care, question its value or don't take 
the local paper to know what is going on.  

Although there have been meetings about its use, to my memory there has not 
been a public hearing about whether or not to pursue this project.  Do 
proponents fear a bond issue vote by the citizens of Moscow who can only then 
speak to the real community commitment for this project.  

Such a vote seems the only way to properly raise operating money now that it 
is obvious tax dollars are going to have to be used.  Thank you.