Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facility Equipment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Donated Vasquez scoreboard could cost tens of thousands more after DSA review, staff says
Summary
District staff presented vendor quotes for a donated digital scoreboard at Vasquez High School — installation listed at $9,950, architect fees $19,000 and DSA submittals $18,000 — but warned DSA-required upgrades and ADA work could raise the total to as much as roughly $170,000. The board tabled the item for more input.
District staff presented vendor estimates for installing a donated digital scoreboard at Vasquez High School and warned the final price could be far higher than the donation’s sticker value.
"The installation itself is 9,950," said Mr. Moore, a district staff member responsible for facilities, as he read the quotes. Mr. Moore also cited an architect fee of $19,000 and $18,000 for DSA submittals and approvals; the spreadsheet total he read was $72,230. He cautioned employees and board members that "this project could end up being a $170,000 project" if DSA requires structural upgrades or ADA-related work.
Board members and staff discussed siting options and technical hurdles. Contractors declined to provide firm installation bids because of the scoreboard’s size, Mr. Moore said, and the district would need to hire an architect to produce engineering drawings before installers will commit. Board members asked whether the scoreboard could be split or placed on the gym wall rather than the field; staff said field placement might trigger additional DSA questions and could be harder to approve.
Facilities staff described the panel as large — about 20 by 16 feet — and noted that individual modules weigh roughly 18 pounds. A staff member assisting with the vendor walk-through said the district’s IT team could handle some on-site network work to reduce costs, but that basic engineering and DSA submittals cannot be avoided.
The board did not vote on the scoreboard. Members agreed to table the item and asked staff to contact the absent board member, gather the architect’s scope and return with updated proposals at the next meeting.
