So now we find out that the Utica City School District has been wasting months "studying" a project that it cannot carry out. While the architects are taking the fall, I see this as really the administration's incompetence . . . and an example of how educators are not qualified to be managers. They saw a huge pot of money and could not wait to get their hands on it. They made the assumptions on what it could be used for and took action before Synthesis even got on board - - unless Synthesis was 'unofficially' advising the administration before they were 'chosen' from among several 'competitors' (but there is no evidence of that). The administration is letting their contractor take the fall.
Should this be any surprise when these administrators and school board are the same people who brought you the scheduling fiasco and no-textbooks fiasco a couple years back?
One has to wonder, also, about the competence of the state leaders who made such a tempting huge pot of money available. It only encourages waste. 300 million for Utica, almost a billion for Syracuse . . . now add together similar projects across the state and you know why NY is the highest taxed state in the land.
If New York can blow this kind of money on education, New York can well afford to give us a free Thruway . . . which will probably do more to boost Upstate's economy than all the new school facilities combined.
2 comments:
I'd have to say that you're dead-on again Strike.
This looks like they had everyone lined up to spend, with no idea what they were spending on. Also, I could be out of line, but since when is it the responsibility of the Architect client to advise the School Board on the details? Thats a School Administration, they should have known the requirements THEMSELVES without depending on the Architects to know, and report these "details".
Even more rediculous: When the realise that they can't make NEW buildings, suddenly we hear of all these "mothballed" buildings they "overlooked" while anticipating entirely new buildings.
Whats going on here?
I have a funny feeling this is just a hubbub to allow them to re-install Tomaselli BACK into the contracts.
This whole thing seems backwards: The Board of Ed applies for the funding, yet when they get the funds, they have little idea what to do with them...
That makes it sound like the $300 Million was the priority... not the underlying need that necessitated it.
How can they apply for funds with no clear idea what they need in the first place? Doesn't anyone else see how absurd that is? Deasn't anyone think that the OD seeming to buy into, and give voice to this "excuse" and blame to the Architect, is strange?
Thanks for another great post. You're right.
If NYers were serious about "taking a stand" against school funding waste and the shenanigans that go on in those over-priced buildings, they'd pull their kids out. Until the taxpayers get serious about reform, there ain't gonna be no reform. Complaining is not reform.
Post a Comment