Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisor urges board to use available funds to pave middle-school parking lots
Summary
A county supervisor told the school board during public comment that past bids and rollovers left money available to pave gravel parking lots at Hurley Middle School and other sites; staff responded that certain state grants are restricted to new construction and offered to review budget carryover details.
During public comment at the start of the meeting, a county supervisor pressed the Buchanan County school board for clarification and action on paving middle-school parking lots, arguing that previously-identified funds and bid results should cover immediate repairs.
"So my question here tonight is... do we have money here to do these projects?" the supervisor asked, citing an October 2023 lump-sum bid of about $598,511 and an option to pave one parking lot for approximately $132,073. He told the board the county had been told there was roughly $602,000 available in the 2023 fiscal request and questioned why several school parking areas remain in poor condition, pointing to a recent incident in which "a lady fell and broke her leg." (Lawmaker, speaker 7)
What the board was told: School administration responded that some state grants tied to the consolidated Southern Gap project were written specifically for new construction. "I guess that's a BDOE grant that was written for new construction... It can't be used for me," an administration speaker said while explaining grant restrictions and carryover accounting. Staff offered to meet with the supervisor and finance personnel to reconcile carryover and encumbrance questions. (Sherry Fletcher / school staff, speaker 9)
Context and numbers: The speaker asserted that bidding changes after October 2023 shifted the procurement approach from lump-sum to per-ton pricing, producing a low per-ton bid of $89 versus another close bid at $250 per ton; he argued that the district-provided asphalt at around $110 per ton meant the district should have had cash on hand to cover the planned work. The speaker also referenced a $287,000 carryover that he said had not been requested properly and a rollover figure reported in staff materials as $293,205.09.
Responses and next steps: Board members and staff discussed whether the cited funds were encumbered or spent at fiscal year close and whether leftover money could be repurposed. Administrators noted the difference between funds earmarked for new construction and funds that could be applied to existing facilities and proposed a follow-up budget meeting with the supervisor and finance staff to provide verified accounting information.
Provenance: Topic introduced by the public commenter at SEG 022 and concluded with administrative follow-up offers by SEG 339. No formal board action on paving allocations was taken at this meeting.
