The Town of Cheshire Construction Committee reviewed a revised guaranteed maximum price (GMP) for the new North End School and approved motions to reject several contractor bids, but did not take a final vote on the GMP document.

Laurel, the committee's construction presenter, said the GMP for North end stands at $68,791,561 and described the document's structure, allowances and schedule. The committee reviewed four categories of bid actions (rebid tile work, reject a roofing low bidder, allowances for utilities and other contingency items) and debated a proposed increase in on-site mechanical/electrical coordination staffing that would add roughly $130,000–$140,000 per project.

The committee voted to reject all tiling bids for North End and to rebid that package after determining the apparent low bidder missed sizeable corridor tile work; the low bid of about $548,000 omitted tile in hallways while the next bid was about $703,000, the presenter said, so members preferred to rebid the package rather than award to the second bidder. The motion to reject the tiling bids and rebid passed unanimously.

Separately, members approved motions to reject Young Developers' roofing bids for the North End and for the Norton project. Each roofing rejection was taken as a separate motion, and each passed with one abstention recorded in the roll call for that vote.

Committee members pressed O&G (construction manager) and the design team for more detail on a proposed staffing change that would place a single full‑time MEP coordinator on the two simultaneous school projects rather than the originally proposed part‑time coverage. Committee members characterized the change as a substantive cost increase (the presenter estimated roughly $130,000–$140,000 charged to each project), and asked O&G to provide line‑item backup showing which staffing hours and tasks are new compared with the original preconstruction staffing. O&G offered to provide the requested breakdown and said those changes could still be adjusted before final acceptance of the GMP.

Laurel walked the committee through the GMP attachments: trade contractor award summary, accepted alternates 1 and 2, allowances and a list of drawings and addenda. She explained that the GMP assumes approval of the listed “lowest responsible bidders” and that withdrawal of a listed bidder would require a GMP adjustment to reflect the next responsible bidder. The GMP includes a 3% Centermin (CM) contingency applied to defined line items; the presenter noted unused contingency at project close would be returned to the town.

Committee members also asked for clarifications on allowances that the GMP captures as estimates pending final contractor pricing: electrical scope revisions rolled from Phase 2 into Phase 1 (an estimated allowance of about $25,000 to cover a potential $36,000 impact), utility relocation allowances (poles and permanent service work), and small allowances for equipment and finish clarifications. The presenter said final pricing for several allowances would be available after upcoming coordination meetings with Tekton, the electrical subcontractor and vendors.

Schedule and turnover questions were discussed: Laurel said the GMP lists January 10 as the construction start and July 16, 2026, as substantial completion for North End (the Norton date is the same). She noted some landscaping and commissioning work would extend into the fall because planting season and heating‑system commissioning are seasonally constrained; the team also described a phased turnover so portions of the building (classroom areas) could be available for furniture and staged move‑in ahead of the full substantial completion date.

The committee did not vote to approve the GMP at the meeting. Members asked O&G to provide an electronic copy of the revised GMP and the requested line‑item backup on the staffing/MEP coordinator change and said Norton’s GMP would be presented at the next meeting for side‑by‑side comparison. The meeting record shows the committee intends to revisit both GMPs after receiving the additional materials.

Votes at a glance
- Motion to reject all tiling bids for North End School and rebid the package — outcome: approved (unanimous).
- Motion to reject Young Developers’ roofing bid for New North End School (bid package 2.07 R) — outcome: approved (1 abstention recorded).
- Motion to reject Young Developers’ roofing bid for Norton School (bid package 2.07 R) — outcome: approved (1 abstention recorded).
- No final action taken on the GMP document; committee directed staff and O&G to provide further documentation and to bring Norton GMP for comparison at the next meeting.

Why it matters: The GMP establishes the construction price and which trade contractors will be engaged; rejecting low bidders and rebidding select packages can alter schedule, trade contract values and the town’s contingency exposure. The proposed change to O&G staffing—adding a full‑time MEP coordinator shared between the two projects—was the largest uncovered cost item discussed and will materially affect the final GMP if accepted.

What’s next: O&G will circulate the latest GMP electronically and provide detailed backup showing changes between the prior staffing proposal and the staffing included in the current GMP. The committee expects Norton’s GMP to be presented at the next meeting for direct comparison; the committee may take final votes once the requested documentation is received and reviewed.