Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board authorizes feasibility work for West Scranton High gym; debate over costs and priorities
Summary
The board authorized administration to seek proposals for a feasibility and cost analysis for a new gym at West Scranton High School (financial impact to be determined). Directors debated whether advertising/RFP costs and basic building repairs should take priority; a motion limiting initial advertising costs to $2,000 failed, and the final motion passed 6-2.
The Scranton School Board voted Dec. 9 to authorize district administration to solicit proposals from professional firms to provide feasibility and cost analysis for a new gymnasium at West Scranton High School. The motion, as approved, left the project—s financial impact "to be determined" and passed on a 6-2 roll-call vote.
Directors discussed the history of the gym proposal, citing a prior 2016 estimate and earlier design work; one director recalled a prior feasibility study and noted the district previously spent roughly $138,129 on initial design and engineering work, while another director stressed that the building currently needs substantial repairs (administration previously cited more than $50 million in basic work for West Scranton alone).
Administration staff explained typical advertisement costs for a request-for-proposals would likely range from about $700 to $1,700 per legal/RFP advertisement, and noted board-adopted procurement thresholds usually allow administrative purchases under $5,000 if budgeted and not multi-year contracts. Directors debated amending the motion to cap advertising costs at $2,000; that amendment failed. Several directors urged staff to revisit a prior firm—s offer to perform feasibility work at no cost and to bring any such option forward; administration said it could explore that possibility while the motion as written would give the administration flexibility to proceed.
Proponents described the motion as a fact-finding step to prioritize facilities work and scheduling; opponents said the district should prioritize basic safety and repairs before undertaking new building projects. The board approved the motion authorizing RFPs to determine feasibility and cost, with the understanding that the RFP process and subsequent contracts would return to the board for further approval.
