Southtowns Record

Town of West Seneca - Capital Project Management (2019M-195)

Government
Town of West Seneca
Posted by publisher
Mar 6, 2020
Kind
State audit
Topics
Budget and taxes, Audits and oversight, Parks and recreation

Publisher's summary

The Board did not properly plan and manage the capital project and clearly inform taxpayers when the estimated cost and scope of the project changed. In addition, the Board was not fully transparent on the anticipated project costs. As a result, original estimates were $9.8 million and increased by more than $3.6 million after competitive bids were received. When inaccurate costs are included in project estimates, there is an increased risk that the Board may issue more debt than necessary to finance the project because funding is available to pay for costs that were not within the original project scope. Finally, Town officials did not ensure an itemized project budget outlining revenues and expenditures was maintained in the accounting records and periodically updated.

Original document

Text · page 5 of 14

that the existing library (7,000 square feet) would be renovated at a cost of $175
per square foot and the addition would be constructed at a cost of $275 per
square foot, which we calculated at an estimated total cost of $3.9 million.

The Supervisor told us that in November 2014 a snow storm damaged the
building that housed the Town’s recreation department and in 2015, another
building, which housed the Town’s finance office, was found to have damage.
Due to concerns, the finance office was moved to a temporary location. The
Supervisor told us that it became necessary to address these issues by including
them in the capital project. Additionally, the Board wanted to create a community
center that Board members believed would be a catalyst for the Town’s economic
development and growth.

The engineer prepared a preliminary estimate of $9.8 million for the community
center construction and library renovation project, which was presented to the
Board in March 2016. This estimate included such things as unfinished space for
future offices on the first floor, a community recreation room, first floor mechanical
room and unfinished space for a café. Based on this estimate, on May 23, 2016,
the Board passed a bond resolution subject to permissive referendum3 that
determined the estimated maximum cost of the project to be $9.8 million.

The project was to be financed by the issuance of up to $8.4 million in serial
bonds, application of $1.4 million in funding from the Town’s equipment lease/
purchase agreement dated February 12, 2016, related to the Town’s energy
performance contract dated November 15, 2014 (energy performance contract
funding), and application of any funding expected to be received from the
State for the project. The $9.8 million estimated maximum cost included $7.9
million for building repairs and construction and $1.9 million for furnishings and
contingencies. In September 2016, the Board formally accepted the proposal from
the engineer’s firm to provide engineering and architectural services related to
the project; this proposal stated that the project budget was approximately $9.5
million.

The Board solicited bids in October 2016, which were received in November, and
awarded to five contractors on December 5, 2016. While the engineer’s initial
estimate for the project was $9.8 million, the post-bid estimated cost increased
to more than $13.4 million, approximately $3.6 million more than the estimated
maximum cost established by the Board. According to a memo from the engineer
to the Board dated December 5, 2016, the bids were more than the initial
estimate because it was made prior to the addition of second-story office space

3 A permissive referendum is a ballot proposition submitted to qualified electors of the town at a special
election, to approve or disapprove a bond resolution that has been adopted by the town board. A permissive
referendum is held if the requisite number of qualified electors petitions the town board to hold the special
election for the ballot proposition.

  Of f ic e of t he New York State Comptroller  3