Document text
3 of 3 Premium Clicks used this month SUBSCRIBE Print + Online Subscriber Activation | Register x Forgot Password | Need an Account? e-edition | subscribe | newsletter | deals Classifieds Jobs Autos Real Estate FEATURED » NEWS NOW Our View: Dropped golf course a loss for the south coast ... Trading coho for chinook ... UPDATED: Ten dead in UCC shooting ... Our View: Dropped golf course a loss for the south coast ... Trading coho for chinook ... UPDATED: Ten dead in UCC shooting ... OUR VIEW Police/fire cost explanation doesn't add up Our View: Police/fire cost explanation doesn't add up Comment MailTribune.com Writer Posted Aug. 30, 2015 at 12:01 AM Posted Aug. 30, 2015 at 12:01 AM » RELATED CONTENT • Faulty towers: How will Medford pay $6 million in cost overruns for police and fire stat... » Social News Medford residents should not willingly accept the explanations we've heard so far for the "surprise" $6 million increase in the cost of a new police headquarters and three new fire stations. City officials — especially the City Council — should demand answers to many questions before unloading this exorbitant increase on taxpayers. Adroit Construction and ORW Architects blame a lack of subcontractors in the local market for the cost overruns. Plumbers, masonry workers and others have told Adroit they are already overcommitted to other jobs because the housing construction market is heating up. Masonry workers have been imported from Utah in some cases, according to an Adroit spokesman. The cost overruns are not minor. The original budget for the four buildings was about $32.7 million. The new cost estimate for the police station is $1.6 million higher, plus a $900,000 addition for a facade to improve the appearance of the police parking structure. The fire stations, originally estimated at $10.6 million, are now $14 million, bringing the total to nearly $38 million. We're not convinced by assertions that "nobody saw this coming." Someone should have. The Great Recession that started in 2007 devastated the construction industry, driving many subcontractors out of business. With housing construction rebounding, no one should have been surprised by a shortage, least of all major design and construction firms. The new estimate for the fire stations — a 32 percent increase — puts the cost at an astonishing $340 a square foot, while the cost for the police station is up 9 percent without counting the extra cost of the facade improvement. Why so much for fire stations? That disparity should cause alarm bells to ring throughout City Hall, and council members should insist on a thorough explanation. If Adroit and ORW — which seem to have a lock on major city projects — didn't anticipate higher subcontractor costs when they submitted their bid, the question is why not? Why should the city suddenly have to scramble to find $6 million when apparently its contractor failed to do its homework? The facade improvement for the police parking garage has become tangled up in the cost overruns, but is really a separate issue. There is already a bare-bones parking structure right next door, behind the new — and lackluster — county human services building. The facade improvement is an investment in making the city a more attractive place and is low on our list of expenses to pare. The city's finance director has already secured an offer from US Bank to loan the city $4.8 million at a favorable interest rate. That's her job: to provide options to the City Council. But the council has other options, as Councilor Dan Bunn pointed out: Cut one of the fire stations, or delay it. At the new, higher estimate, each fire station accounts for $4.6 million. That's most of the extra cost right there. Before agreeing to borrow money — no matter how favorable the terms — the city should cut back on the project and demand that the contractor do a more reasonable job of living up to its promises. City residents are paying for these buildings through their utility fees, and they would pay the interest on the loan as well. The expedient solution is to borrow the money and move on, but that's not the right answer. It's up to our elected city officials and the people who work for them to find that answer. MailTribune.com Writer Posted Aug. 30, 2015 at 12:01 AM » Comment or view comments Reader Reaction » STAY INFORMED Email NewsLetter Sign Up Today Sign up for our newsletter and have the top headlines from your community delivered right to your inbox. Southern Oregon Directory Featured Businesses Loading... Business Name address Location, ST | website.com Find Southern Oregon Attractions Bars Restaurants Beauty Salons Entertainment Doctors Medical Specialists Contractors Education Lawn Services Lawyers Shopping Travel Tanning Used Cars Wedding Services ▼ Add your business here + Events Calendar Connect with MailTribune.com Facebook Twitter RSS Back to top Reader Services Reader Services Home Subscriptions Subscriber controls Contact us Submissions Photos Events Letters to the editor Corrections Announcements Obituaries Story ideas Since you asked Alerts Email Alerts RSS Feeds Text Alerts Advertise Media Kit Home Products and services Ad rates Advertising contacts Propel Marketing Mail Tribune Daily Tidings The Nickel Shop Our Valley Blogs Mobile Site Stay Informed Email newsletter Sign Up Today Sign up for our newsletter and have the top headlines from your community delivered right to your inbox. Your privacy is important, read our privacy policy. © Copyright 2015 Local Media Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Local Media Group Publications Original content available for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons license, except where noted. MailTribune.com | P.O. Box 1108, Medford, OR 97501