[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6594778,"mediaKeyId","3066101-2c89b34131bc9c39b309b848aaabac04","parentId",3066101,"title","Plum Borough board reviews middle school summer bids and O'Block renovation estimates; no formal approvals tonight","audioSeconds",769,"startMs",1199000,"endMs",1968000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3066101-2c89b34131bc9c39b309b848aaabac04&start=1199&end=1968","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3066101-2c89b34131bc9c39b309b848aaabac04/thumbnail_1199000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6594778/Pennsylvania/Plum-Borough-board-reviews-middle-school-summer-bids-and-OBlock-renovation-estimates-no-formal-approvals-tonight","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6594778-06ba45f53e41052ee662d656a8606947/orig.mp4?Expires=1770870278&Signature=VZb8oMhEsIO1v6zg~sc4QMyXRhqB3i3HhSxjAsq~xBTYduMnPk8NXxzwvh8~fOJlubKO945tnCPDa~53gVfcaAqs8TOiaIzhRzd434wX7wAnHAXbfh8oFib5Q6OvmWfLgT6ioneIkJOzR-KUc8n3R~Slea6ZY62Fyd4b-pUkvgxduJ1t7c75A9LBOo9zl2i410~Qlb48YzWfkxihEsEFT908X9dBhIQ8pSGFN-2vTwK-Uk8LyZR-3VQkrMmWoOZ0TvirpRw9pzwlXEhv9-fI3caVgSLVmV2Ds6JrG195v8L7HIg6iebNKWJR9-vQFcIxdYQvuW0IY6y6FHHF6nyN4g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Plum Borough School District ","date","2025-04-16T00:00:00Z","article","Plum Borough School District board members heard presentations April 16 on two sets of school facility projects — immediate summer work at Plum Middle School and a proposed two-story renovation and addition at O’Block Elementary — but did not vote to authorize construction documents or award contracts that evening.

Architects from HDG and construction manager Eccles provided updated cost estimates and schedules and presented two contractor bids received for Plum Middle School work: a controls/automation package and a separate mechanical package driven by a dust-collection replacement. HDG said the controls contractor bid (recorded in the presentation as Combustion Services and Equipment) was about $635,000. The mechanical/dust-collector package bid (named during the presentation as Limbaugh) was described in the board presentation material; HDG and the construction manager said the first two received bids put the overall middle-school program about $643,000 under the district’s schematic-design estimate after accounting for escalation and soft costs.

For O’Block, Eccles presented two independent estimates. One estimated the construction hard cost at roughly $21.3 million and a total project budget near $26.3 million after soft costs, contingency and owner-controlled insurance; a second independent estimate produced a similar range. Eccles also presented a queue of deduct alternates and value-engineering items the board could accept to reduce cost. The construction manager and HDG said more detailed, line-by-line pricing will become available in the construction-document phase and that the district would receive formal contractor bids after the documents are issued.

Board members used the presentations to press administrators and the design team on priorities. Several members urged the district to prioritize safety and near-term repairs — notably the running track and turf at Plum Middle School — over aesthetic or “nice-to-have” interior finishes. One board member described the middle-school track as a safety hazard that has led to twisted ankles and asked why it had not been prioritized, noting that earlier bid results left the first two projects under budget. Administrators and the architect replied that some site repairs, including large grading or turf changes, carry additional scope implications (grading, utility work) that drive cost and can push such items down a priority list; they said those items remain on the master list and could be re-ranked when bids on projects 3 and 4 are returned.

The district’s operations staff also reported a separate, long-running sewage odor concern at Plum Middle School. Facilities staff said they had conducted camera and smoke testing, corrected some floor-drain issues and extended rooftop vent piping for certain rooftop units; staff reported the odor has not recurred since those changes. Board members asked that the district share the investigation findings with the public; operations staff confirmed they would.

Construction manager Eccles explained the project phasing and the owner-controlled insurance plan the district intends to use for O’Block. Eccles outlined the phased contracting approach (general contractor, HVAC, electrical and finishes trades) and said contingency and escalation assumptions (a 5% allowance cited in the presentation) are appropriate given the renovation scope and current market volatility. Board members asked for clearer line-item detail on interior finishes (for example, “accent” ceiling work) so they could consider deselecting aesthetic elements to free funds for safety and site repairs.

Administrators and the architects said the next step is to finish construction documents and return to the board for votes to advertise and award contracts. The board president confirmed at the meeting’s close that formal votes on the listed middle-school and O’Block contract/authorization items are scheduled for the April 22 voting meeting.

What happened next: the board did not take final action on contractors or construction documents April 16; staff and the design/construction teams will provide the board with more detailed pricing, written alternates and an updated priority list before the April 22 vote.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Board Meeting - April 16th 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Plum Borough School District officials reviewed contractor bids and updated estimates April 16 for Plum Middle School summer work and a large renovation/addition at O’Block Elementary but took no formal authorizations at the special meeting.","taxTitle","Plum Borough SD, School Districts, Pennsylvania","taxId",53781,"location","Pennsylvania","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6594783,"Plum Borough School Board appoints Purcell to fill Adams seat after tied ballots",8401,107000,8508000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3066101-2c89b34131bc9c39b309b848aaabac04&start=107&end=8508","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3066101-2c89b34131bc9c39b309b848aaabac04/thumbnail_107000.jpg","/articles/6594783/Pennsylvania/Plum-Borough-School-Board-appoints-Purcell-to-fill-Adams-seat-after-tied-ballots","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6594783-49f6de7509561c05f44716392623916d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770870278&Signature=FcSp2voCiLA14YekVlwa0F0sjz38X3xoR0TSKaKUAQ~EbC7~RbDOni03idbKMi5cL2N-EtKrqMqopLUVG9iRzqx24ZOzK-al-1iv4XlF59UT~qd~Zoh-OEJKCCUL5hqWZBK6fhcXbQusTOGVhh1lfZhxLBfAtDJMP7iz2609YooFGT6~vk7HSjVs1Kje5PChoBb8kCCghjKudhTTvx8bZEUAsnODAlvWi4T7PQqTqjdJY3ZmXGI47y-KmGaEECiLC2KwE91a7uLAGnuCohuRAr8X433v3PcAFwu9zrCY9B4vr6hX8lZxbkK1JzY-ohEUwwmXMpHgvJn~GYwmV7qSOA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Plum Borough School District Board of Directors voted 5-3 on April 16 to appoint Amy Purcell to fill the board seat vacated by Devin Adams, whose term runs through Dec. 1, 2025.

The appointment followed multiple rounds of roll-call voting at a special board meeting that produced repeated 4-4 splits before the final motion to appoint Purcell carried. The board debated voting procedure during the meeting and reviewed how abstentions would affect the threshold needed for appointment.

Board President Dr. Anderson opened the discussion by reading Resolution 2025-4-16-1, which formally placed the appointment on the special meeting agenda, and explained how votes and abstentions would determine whether a candidate needed five votes (if all eight board members vote) or four votes (if at least one member abstains). Solicitor Mr. Dice confirmed the vote thresholds cited by the board.

The board initially conducted a first round in which three candidates — Purcell, Amy Wetmore and Tom Feeney — were given the opportunity to receive members’ preferred names in a rotating alphabetical roll call. That round yielded three votes for Wetmore, four for Purcell and one for Feeney, eliminating Feeney from the head-to-head runoff and producing later 4-4 ties on subsequent head-to-head tallies between Purcell and Wetmore.

After the board exhausted multiple balloting formats and considered returning the appointment to the county, a motion was made and seconded to vote specifically on Purcell. A final roll call for Purcell resulted in five votes in favor and three opposed. The clerk recorded the outcome as “yes in favor of Miss Purcell, 3 opposed” and the board chair announced that the motion passed.

The board discussed logistics following the appointment. Clerk Miss Mackerel said the appointee has 10 days to take the oath of office with the magistrate, and Superintendent Dr. Walsh (not present) asked that the district provide an orientation meeting for the new director before the next regular meeting. The board president said the district would offer whichever swearing-in format the appointee prefers — in the magistrate’s office or at the next voting meeting.

Board members explained reasons for their votes during the discussion phase rather than in a formal recorded floor statement tied to the final roll call. Several members who supported Purcell said they favored a candidate who could step in quickly on ongoing projects and committees; other members cited experience and prior board service when arguing for Amy Wetmore. One member said he would not appoint a candidate whose past public comments demonstrated what he considered poor judgment.

The board’s action completes the resolution required to keep the appointment inside the district’s 30-day window for selecting a replacement; the clerk will record the official paperwork and Purcell must complete the oath within 10 days to be certified for board service.

The board scheduled its next regular voting meeting for Tuesday, April 22, when the newly appointed director may attend after being sworn in.","The Plum Borough School District board appointed Amy Purcell to fill the remainder of Devin Adams’ term after several rounds of roll-call votes produced ties and 4-4 splits. The board discussed voting procedures, quorum rules and next steps for oath-taking.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Plum Borough board reviews middle school summer bids and O'Block renovation estimates; no formal approvals tonight

Plum Borough School Board appoints Purcell to fill Adams seat after tied ballots