This is the first of two articles on the Chaparral Middle School building project assessment exposing what has gone wrong with the New Chaparral Middle School build causing the increase in needed funds. The following assessment of incidents, missteps, arrogance, and incompetence shows what has happened since the 2019 GO Bonds were passed to build a new Chaparral Middle School.
The Public School Capital Outlay Council (PSCOC) manages the allocation of the Public School Capital Outlay Act Fund (PSCOF) to public school facilities. The Public School Facility Authority (PSFA) partners with school districts on planning, design, and construction projects (including technology infrastructure) to provide project management support and technical expertise. Unfortunately, Alamogordo Public Schools decided they knew better than the experts and decided to have multiple architectural firms design a school THEY wanted without consideration of the funds approved by these agencies.
This is like designing a house and then going to the bank and demanding the money to finance your new house despite NOT qualifying for the mortgage amount. No matter how much you insist you should have it, the cost far exceeds the amount approved by the bank. Yep, that’s what APS did and kept trying to do and still doing.
Click here for the email from PSFA to Moore, Tagle, and Burks referred to below. Page 1 Page 2 Page 3
This assessment was prepared by Fred Stong from our community and sent to Judy Rabon, President of the APS School Board as dated below.
ASSESSMENT
Date September 12, 2023
Judy Rabon, School Board President – District 1
I am Fred Stong, an independent journalist. I am writing concerning the ongoing construction project at Chaparral Middle School (CMS). As the primary stakeholder for APS in this initiative, I firmly believe your board must address potential project risks. I appreciate your attention to this matter.
I am supporting an investigation into ongoing civil cases filed that allege wrongdoing by APS employees. During this investigation, I discovered data suggesting potential mismanagement of the Chaparral Middle School (CMS) project. Therefore, I am writing this letter to request a construction review of the project by a neutral third party. This review is necessary to ensure an accurate project accounting and identify any corrective measures required to maximize the return on the investment that has already been approved. Several APS employees appear to dominate as the key decision-makers.
From my research, data indicates project stakeholders were likely excluded from collaborative meetings and not given information in time to prevent late discovery of significant project execution and cost overrun challenges. Quoting the Public School Facility Authority (PSFA): APS “has stalled this project by deciding to leave PSFA out of the design process. . . . [H]ad the district listened to the concerns of this agency, we would not be in a place where we had to ask the design team to pause progress.” During high inflation, excluding PSFA construction oversite resulted in a program delay, likely leading to cascading cost increases. [see email, Ryan Parks Cc Colleen Tagle, 6/23/2022, in your possession.]
A thorough independent review is also needed to identify the root causes and decision-makers responsible for any preventable mistakes made during the site selection process. Possible inattention given to early notice of the economic infeasibility of the proposed site appears to have resulted in architectural cost escalations authorized in the firm’s contract. You were given information on October 11, 2021, expressed by the hospital board chair that “APS could not afford to build there because of the huge amount of fill that would be needed to build up the site . . . in a flood zone” and impact upon the “high amount of ambulance traffic . . .”. You relayed the information to C. Tagle later that day. [see email NMPSFA/e-Builder (5/18) -> Benson: P20-001 Chaparral MS (Alamogordo) has been escalated because it meets escalation conditions set for workflow. In your possession.]
PSFA appears to become knowledgeable about the floodplain issues and mitigation work in July 2022. In a July 08, 2022 email, PSFA wrote: “Importance: High – Good morning, At the special subcommittee meeting on Tuesday, Alamogordo Schools mentioned that some work had been done to mitigate the flood plain concerns. PSFA is not aware of any documentation other than the FEMA flood plain map submitted by the design team.” “CID is inquiring.” Discovering and mitigating the causation of late discovery is essential to reducing project risk. [see email, Judy Rabon To Colleen Tagle, 10/11/2021, in your possession] [Also see email, Ryan Parks To Justin Burks, 7/8/2022, in your possession.]
Thank you for considering a project review by a neutral third party to protect the viability of a new CMS. I am available to appear before a board meeting to answer any questions.
Sincerely,
Fred Stong
(425) 337-8925
FSS@SASECindus.com
Summary
Two project management issues have likely resulted in measurable cost increases in the CMS construction project, causing the $36M estimated project to grow to a $50M+ project by completion. A timely, neutral third-party project review is needed to resolve potential mismanagement.
First, APS excluded PSFA from the design process, which PSFA asserts caused a project hold. Project delay and mismanagement during high inflation results in considerable cost increases.
Second, Site selection decisions, seemingly inconsistent with the 2020 Capital Improvement Plan for a new CMS at the existing site, were changed to the recommended site [Hang Gliders Park]. In addition, APS’s possible failure to thoroughly investigate the economically infeasible floodplain build requirements early in the design project likely resulted in the late discovery, unnecessary expenses, and delayed abandonment of the proposed site. PSFA questions at their late entry appear to overshadow APS statements like PSFA floodplain questions “derailed positive momentum at an inopportune time” and “We all had several meetings early in the process with the extended team” already on that topic. Notably, key stakeholder PSFA was arguably excluded from that team and was prevented from providing responsive aid.
[see email, July 27, 2022, Tagle To. Greg Papay <gpapay@lakeflato.com> Cc. Justin Burks, in your possession.]
Please find the following research data for your review and assessment.
APS Historical Architectural Design Flow (Notional) – Four (4) Recent Projects
New CMS Property – Proposed Build Site Issues
See Part 2 for chronological issues of the design/build process.
