It's pretty clear none of the other trustees can spell the word "fiduciary", much less understand it.The couple comments on your article regarding cost of a tear down and rebuild and the other comment about the details of exactly what’s done to make sense. But ultimately the fact that it was rubber stamped to go through except by you tells everyone all they need to know. Somebody on that board will be receiving a nice kickback
The other Alumni "trustees":Re: tear down option - rarely a cost effective option and usually dropped after the first round of analysis. When you see a tear down at that scale it means the foundations were unsalvageable. Think the Florida Surfside condo disaster.
Thanks for the no vote, Barry. It's why we voted for you. Disgraceful that DeLevey, Short, Lubrano, Brown, Pope, Paterno, Hasenkopf, and Wagman all sat their with their *&^% in their *#$%s. Wait- Pope and Paterno seconded the nominations of the current chairs, that was a lot of work. Sounds like they're getting very cozy.
You have to spend money to spend money.
First off, thank you for thtransparency, Barry.
Cost per bed at PSU is over twice than cost per bed at Wisconsin.
Barry did his homework regarding overall comparative scope of work in the quotes and I assume that the buildings were comparable in size.
There is something fundamentally wrong in the bidding process. Union vs. Open Shop? Wide open bidder qualifications vs. restricted approved bidder list? Overall total project cost (bid price PLUS anticipated project cost amendments) evaluations?
Lot of stuff to chew on here. This project sounds very similar to the construction cost "differential" on a recent dorm construction project at a SE PA branch campus within the past 2 - 3 years.
Probably half as bigAre PSU’s beds twice as big?