Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board directs FGM Architects to assess Bethany Road site, asks faster timeline and 2035 cost comparison
Summary
The Sycamore CUSD 427 Board of Education authorized entering a contract with FGM Architects to deliver a facility assessment for 1947 Bethany Road, asked administration to seek an earlier delivery date and requested a cost comparison through 2035 for each administration building.
Get email alerts on the Facilities Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Sycamore CUSD 427 Board of Education voted to direct administration to enter a contract with FGM Architects to produce a facility assessment for 1947 Bethany Road and to seek an earlier report timeline.
Board members said they want an apples‑to‑apples comparison of projected costs through 2035 for the district’s administrative buildings before taking further steps on building disposition or renovation. The motion asked administration to ask FGM whether the September 26 target date in the proposal could be moved up and to produce a summary showing annual costs through 2035 for each administration building.
The request for a comparison followed board members’ discussion of an earlier FGM estimate for Exchange Street that included work scheduled many years out. Board members said some of the higher totals reflect work forecast for 2030–2035, such as asphalt and mechanical-system replacements, and that a comparative projection for the Bethany Road site would help make decisions about renovation versus sale.
The motion to contract with FGM carried on a roll call vote. Board members voting yes included Tom Gregory, Tomlinson, Alan Zantu, Christian Coppell, Beth Evans, Britos and Didier.
Administration will return with FGM’s report and the requested cost comparison when available. The FGM scope included a deliverable described in the agenda packet; the board asked staff to seek an accelerated delivery if feasible.
No additional spending beyond the contract authorization was approved at the meeting; the vote directed administration to sign the contract and manage timelines and reporting back to the board.

