MOULTRIE — The Colquitt County School Board voted Tuesday to seek a construction manager for projects recently approved by voters in a sales tax referendum.

Projects include a new agricultural facility across from Colquitt County High School, demolition and construction at Willie J. Williams Middle School, construction of classrooms for ninth grade students at CCHS, and demolition of buildings at C.A. Gray Junior High to be done after the ninth grade moves from there to the high school. They are being funded by an Education Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax approved by voters in March.

Superintendent Ben Wiggins said the board’s construction consultant, Jake Grant; a representative of the state Department of Education and the architect had all recommended a competitive sealed bid process instead of a construction manager.

Chairman Mary Beth Watson then asked Wiggins to remind them about how Grant, who was in the school construction business years ago in Atlanta and is now retired, became a part of the process. Wiggins said that Grant was the director of construction and facilities for the Gwinnett County School District and he had gotten to know him years ago.

“He is widely known as the school construction expert. In fact, he teaches the courses on school facilities and capital outlay projects for Georgia School Superintendent Association,” Wiggins said.

During discussions, members Kevin Sumner and Trudie Hill supported the construction manager proposal.

Sumner spoke up first, stating that he had served for 11 years and had been involved in several projects. He said that when he first got on the school board, he and Watson, who was also new, didn’t have the opportunity to give a lot of input on the initial plans for the new high school. He said, however, that they did have an opportunity to choose who built it and, at that time, there were only two options: hard bid and construction management.

“So, at the time, we chose to go with construction management. That was on the table about three or four weeks ago. I don’t know if it was a majority of the board or if everybody agreed that we settled on construction management,” Sumner said. “I’m gonna stick with construction management, it’s worked good for us in the past. I don’t foresee any changes in that. We actually saved money by going with that. The guys that built it were very transparent and we had a good relationship with them and do have a good relationship with them. I don’t see any reason to change. My position hasn’t changed or my stance hasn’t changed one bit on that.”

He said the board had saved money with the construction management option in the past and that they have had a good relationship with the companies who have done the work for them.

Hill said she had been on the board when they planned the new high school and that the board did have input.

“Some of those plans included some of my suggestions and I don’t see why we can’t continue with the construction management,” she said. She added they have had great success with that method and there was a lot of transparency. “So, I’ve been pleased with the relationship, as well as the work that they have done over the years.”

Board member Jon Schwalls was more hesitant.

“In my business, I don’t ever rush into something. I don’t drag my feet but my opinion changes as my information changes. and I feel like information has changed since the last meeting and I don’t feel like I have enough of all the information of what the options are,” he said.

One question he asked: What would the outcome be if there are bids and board members don’t like any of them? Would they start over?

“I’m certainly not prepared to vote in good conscience,” Schwalls said. He moved that the vote be tabled, but his motion failed for lack of a second.

Watson said that, as she understood it, with he competitive sealed bid, they would decide how much of a factor price would be in the ranking process.

Wiggins responded, “Well we make up the RFP (request for proposal). We assign the percentages whenever the board feels like it’s important in that process. It’d be very, very similar to the RFP in construction management.”

Watson asked, “In construction management, the price is not revealed until the end because you’re ranking the factors about capacity?”

Schwalls answered saying that was how he understood it but had never done business like that. He said, in construction management, that they would have to wait until they got to the end of the project to find out what it cost. He went on to explain that the design-bid-build is what was done in “general business.”

“With the design-bid-build, you’re looking at price only and that is the only factor,” responded Watson. “Competitive sealed bid, you determine what the percentage price is. Now with construction management, we’ve had a guaranteed price before we broke ground and if you come in under that price, the school system gets part of the money back.”

“The advantage of the competitive sealed bid is once you get all the sealed bids in, you can look at the bids and look at the rubric and if there’s a couple of companies that scored really high, then you can approach those companies and have a conversation about where they may have scored low in a rubric and do they want to change anything,” said Wiggins.

Hill said that she was told that they would be saving 2 to 5% with competitive sealed bids, and she asked what guarantee did they have of that with the economy fluctuations.

Wiggins responded that it was based on past performance of all construction projects and that it was a conservative number that all of the parties felt comfortable with.

Sumner said that his community charged him with, “You spend my money wisely and you get the best possible person to do anything for you and that’s where my savings is gonna happen.”

He said that he understood Schwalls’ position, “But all of that should have happened before we got to this point. … and time is money.”

He went on to say that the conversation was started a long time ago about what they were going to build, it was presented to the taxpayers and the taxpayers had voted on it and approved it.

“What we’ve done in the past has worked and it’s worked well and there’s no need to change it,” Sumner said.

After discussion ended, Watson asked if there was a motion concerning the selection of the construction process and Sumner made the motion to proceed with the construction management option. Hill seconded the motion and it carried with a vote of 5-0 with Schwalls abstaining.

“The next step will be to put out an RFP request,” said Wiggins after the meeting.