China Municipal Building Committee member Edwin Bailey discussed his concerns about recent changes in the plan for a records storage vault at the town office building at an Oct. 24 committee meeting. He, Scott Pierz and chairman Sheldon Goodine did most of the talking, with occasional comments from Terry DeMerchant and Angela Nelson.
Committee members voted to continue the discussion with select board members, at that board’s Nov. 4 meeting if there is time on the agenda.
Discussions of the project began more than three years ago, Goodine said. Engineer Keith Whitaker, of Presque Isle-based B. R. Smith Associates (BRSA) has assisted committee members through the years.
The basic concern is the paper records that the state requires a town to keep forever, and that needs climate-controlled, fireproof storage space. Currently they are in a room off the meeting room. The new structure planned to house them came to be called a storage vault.
In 2022, the select board authorized money for BRSA to make an engineered plan for a storage vault plus a concept plan for a larger addition.
Since then, the focus has been on versions of the storage vault, with occasional mention of a bigger addition. On April 25, 2023, the China Planning Board issued a permit for an addition housing a concrete storage vault, connected to the south side of the town office by a corridor.
At the June 2023 town meeting, voters approved up to $43,000 from undesignated fund balance (formerly called surplus) for “the municipal records fireproof vault storage project.”
When select board members sought bids on the work that summer, they received none. In the spring of 2024, however, they awarded a bid to an out-of-town firm – for more than $267,000. No contract was signed, according to Town Manager Rebecca Hapgood.
Discussion quickly turned to another alternative: create safe storage for ordinary records in the former barn north of the town office and build the special vault in the east end of the main building. The idea of using the barn has not been rejected; Goodine said there has not been time to develop details.
The main objection is the inconvenience to town office staff of having documents they might need in a separate building.
At the June 2024 annual town business meeting, voters appropriated up to $155,489 from federal ARPA (American Rescue Plan Act) funds for “Municipal records fireproof vault storage.”
At their Oct 7 meeting this fall, select board members approved a revised, less expensive concept plan (see the Oct. 10 issue of The Town Line, p. 3), with an engineered plan to be developed promptly.
This plan locates a 26-by-28-foot vault in a new room off the south side of the town office near the east end, with some interior redesign. The town would be general contractor, contracting with local contractors.
Goodine notified the other committee members of the select board action on Oct. 8, and offered to schedule a meeting on request. Bailey emailed questions, and Goodine scheduled the Oct. 24 meeting.
Goodine explained:
— He, select board member and builder Blane Casey and Whitaker developed the plan. Goodine received the final version the day of the select board meeting at which it was approved, so he had no time to share it with committee members.
— The contractors would be whoever is available, as local as possible, and when possible people who had worked for the town before. China’s public works crew could do the groundwork, if schedules allow.
— The budget estimates for each piece of the project, totaling $187,655, came mostly from Casey. Goodine summarized possible decreases and increases, depending on many factors.
Bailey and Pierz asked whether a new plan needed re-approval by voters. After reviewing the wording of the town meeting warrant article, they decided probably not.
Codes Officer Nicholas French told planning board members at their Oct. 22 meeting the new plan would need a new permit, because the 2023 permit has expired and the plan has been changed.
Another question was whether the state Fire Marshal’s re-approval was needed. Goodine said the engineered plan will have it.
Federal requirements say ARPA money has to be “needed” by Dec. 31, Nelson said. There was confusion over what “needed” means, and consensus that the ARPA money does not need to be spent by that deadline.
Committee members discussed inconclusively whether work can or should start this fall. Cold-weather work, like pouring concrete, costs more, Bailey said; but he and Pierz doubted bid prices would hold until the 2025 construction season.
To the editor:
by Emma Wooley