A town board bond resolution, dated April 15, 2013, authorized the construction of a town storage building, at an estimated maximum cost of $865,000 and authorizing the issuance of serial bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $865,000.

The Town Board Monday evening modified the Original Bond Resolution for purposes of increasing: (a) the estimated maximum cost of the project from $865,000 to $1,330,000 and (b) the amount of serial bonds authorized to be issued from $865,000 to $1,330,000.

At the pre-file resolution comment session, prior to resolution voting, residents questioned and commented on the reasons for the $465,000 increase in cost in a less than two year period.

Resident Lee Chowaniec: Mr. Abraham, you are the sponsor of the highway storage bond amendment so I will direct my questions to you. At the budget hearing, I asked Supervisor Fudoli in passing the reasons for the forthcoming bond amendment and the reasons for the significant increase in cost. His answer was that some mistakes were made. Can you elaborate on that statement and the reasoning for the significant increase in cost; $465,000?

Councilman John Abraham: I will let Mr. Harris answer the question, but I know that we scaled down the construction size for the first building design (from 25,000 sq. ft. to 20,000 sq. ft.) and the bids came in and were still too high. We couldn’t scale it down anymore or it would not be a usable building for the highway department. From the logistics part of it Mr. Harris can answer those questions.

Chowaniec: Nothing has changed regarding the size of the building, the materials used, etc; in other words it’s the same size and design as was bonded for in April of 2013 for $865,000? It was answered that nothing had changed.

It is my understanding that the estimated cost of constructing the building and the amount bonded fell short by $50,000. The town put in for a grant for the $50,000. Now two years later the town is amending the original bond and bonding for an additional $465,000. Why the increase?

Abraham: Cost increase, delay of going to the bank …

Chowaniec: Why wasn’t this bond amended near two years ago when the difference was supposedly only $50,000?

Abraham: The last time we did the bonding was in April of 2013. We started working on this in July of 2013. It takes some time. I had to make sure I had four votes. I know the supervisor was not in favor of amending the bond. There were meetings that went by where I didn’t have four members to get a supermajority to pass the bond. It got pushed off at the last meeting because of the storm. I mean I’ll take my share of the blame as to why it was not done earlier.

Chowaniec: I am not looking to blame anyone in particular. I am looking as what it took to cause a significant increase like this one. I have coming before this board for 15 years and have seen other projects similarly delayed and where the end result was millions of taxpayer dollars wasted. Here we are looking at an uptick of $465,000. I am not going to ask Town Engineer for an accounting. I am not here to lay blame on any particular individual but to say how disappointed I am in this board in how the process was handled and how taxpayers will once again have to pay for a mistake made by the town.

Resident Dan Beutler: What Mr. Chowaniec spoke about reminds me of the Colecraft Building and the wasted millions of that project. Taxpayers are the ones that are going to pay for another mistake. I want to see the highway department get their building but this another example of this town board delaying a project and costing town taxpayers money.

Resident Mike Fronczak: So, we are still going with a pole barn here; this is not going to be a brick and mortar building?

Fudoli: Same structure? (to Town Engineer Robert Harris)

Harris: Yes.

Fronczak: So we actually going up over 50% in cost?

Harris: No.

Fronczak: Well it’s going up by $465,000.

Harris: This bond also includes … we don’t want to change the bond and miss by $50,000. It includes money that wasn’t included in the $900,000 for relocating an electrical pole, some contingency, some engineering costs and some costs for the bonding. I don’t think when we bid it out again the complete construction costs re going to be $1.33 million. But I certainly don’t want a bond set at $1.1 million and find it’s $1.12. We have some room to make soft costs which is just about the $50,000 we didn’t have before. I don’t think we are going to see this come in at $1.33. If we re, we can still award it. But I think with this bond we can pay for things that if we did not have figured, like the $50,000, we will have the money to cover it. But I don’t think the construction is going to be $1.33.

Councilman Mark Aquino: What are your figures?

Harris: My best estimate on what this will cost to complete construction is $1.05 million; and we’ll see some day if I am right. I may be off by a little bit, but I don’t think it will be enough to exceed the set bond amount.

Fronczak: Is it going to be radiant heat like the last time?

Harris: Floor heat like the last time.

The four council members voted for resolution approval. Supervisor Fudoli voted no.

Fudoli voted to approve the April 2013 bond resolution but has adamantly opposed amending the 2013 bonding application and adding to the cost of the original project's under-estimated costs.