Hancock County Alliance for Good Government: Bay Waveland Schools lack of soil sampling means 7 more years bad luck

I’m getting word from last night’s school board meeting that the concrete pads under the new bleachers at Bay High Stadium must be demolished due to the failure to account for the high water table here in Soggy Bottom. I’m further told this may well be headed to litigation.

Vital background can be found here.

7 thoughts on “Hancock County Alliance for Good Government: Bay Waveland Schools lack of soil sampling means 7 more years bad luck”

  1. Interesting to hear the architect, Taylor Guild, insinuate last night at the school board meeting, that he had been “pushed” to have the stadium ready for the May graduation. Who pushed him? As head of the project he should have told them he could not do it by that date in order to produce a acceptable job for the public.
    Having said that, the administration and Board now have to deal with the fact they really did issue a substantial completion by using the bleachers for graduation, when they had other venues for graduation–an air conditioned gym, and an auditorium. The stadium was not their only option–no justification for pushing.
    If this goes to litigation, and it looks like that is where it’s headed, the School Board had better remember that the architectural firm will be showing up with a lawyer too.
    I understand it might get ugly before it gets fixed due to lack of communication throughout the project.
    Time will tell, and tax dollars will be spent on more lawyers. Jus what we needed.
    No leadership, none.

  2. The Architect and Engineer are the “experts”. You really can’t say that a non-expert forced you to do something, and that you went against your best professional judgment. I really wouldn’t want to be in their shoes in this case. I wouldn’t be stunned if the contractor winds up with some issues, but the preliminaries you have reported put this very much in the design teams camp.

    When I was working for an engineering firm a number of years ago, I got into some trouble for being stubborn about the grounding system for a telecom system. After some unfortunate lightning strikes blew out the fire alarm system (tied into the telecom system), twice, and the fire alarm contractor reported that it looked like it had come in through the telephone lines, my stubbornness was viewed in a different light.

  3. While everyone may be pointing fingers at the School Board and Architects what about the city.

    I believe the city Code Inspector may have some exposure here. How can a commercial structure be built without proper engineering plans. These plans would also have to include soil testing to determine the proper loads for any foundation. The city has to approve all of this before permits can be issued.

    Who from the city was overseeing these phases of construction and give inspection approval ?? Who from the school district was overseeing the project ??

    Why is the board hiring an attorney. I thought we had one already representing the school district with Mr. Artigues.

    More tax dollars being spent. I hope the citizens of Bay St Louis and parents of BWSD children are ready to vote and make a change in the current school board members.

  4. Good point, Disgusted. Where was the city Building Inspector? It’s like catching a bunch of kids after something has gotten broken all pointing the finger at one another saying nobody did it. Well, Mr. Nobody strikes again.
    The city building department is, now that you mention it, the crucial part of this equation.We all know Mr.Barlow has no expertise in construction, and sometimes architects goof. This is a good example. So, the ultimate over seer of this project should have been the city.
    That’s where it gets totally hopeless, and the results are in front of all of the taxpayers of the school district.

  5. Michelle,
    When you go back in time, you can see the real picture. In February of 2012, the current Superintendent of Education got a $20,000 a year increase in salary for the next 3 years. Her responsibility in section B. of her contract is to be responsible for organization ,management, and evaluation of the instructional and
    “business affairs” of the district.
    That begs the question: why did the School Board deem it necessary to hire a construction management firm to oversee the current high school parking lot and football stadium projects? Could it be because the Superintendent judged that she would fulfill her responsibility by appointing the Food Service Manager to oversee these projects? And the school board accepted her recommendation to do so.

    How many layers of expense are the taxpayers going to have to fund in the Board’s search for SOMEONE who can carry out section B. of the Superintendent’s contract?
    We are now at salaries for the Superintendent, Food Service Manager/Project Manager, Construction Management Contractor, Architect, and 3 lawyers to sort this out. If we lose, I hope we don’t have to pay attorney fees for the architect’s legal expenses.
    Add to that our compensation of the City Building Inspector— all of these layers of expense for a big mess.
    Wonder if the Board members would tolerate all of this incompetence with construction on their own private property?
    And think of our far all of this wasted money could have gone to support the learning process in the classrooms. That is the saddest part of all.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *