$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Moderator: Chip
-
skygeek AKA Seabass
- Posts: 252
- Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 9:34 pm
- Location: Newhall
- Contact:
I was wrong thinking the report was like a big 5 accounting firm audit document which is commonly used to show the value of a company for shareholders and is from an objective neutral party. A Report is more like a Newspaper report story and generally has the opinion of the writer and is sensationalized to get readers. A Report is also copy-written so it can't be reproduced or reprinted. I was thinking it could be made into a screenplay for a video documentary of SHGA history or the history of the Pavilion construction with a time lapse photography of its construction. I've seen a lot of creative hang gliding videos posted with interesting techniques used. It would be up to the selected filmmaker to cast it in what ever light. Just look at Clint Eastwood's Letters from Iwo Jima(2006) made from the reverse perspective. I think there is enough video footage to make a great DVD. This report could be a great asset to the club, if we can secure the movie rights.
That's your opinion, but the report is not made up on opinion's. In the next four months we will be separating facts from fiction at the board meetings.
The board meeting on the 8th, bring your opinions ... please.
If you are trying to describe my wife, you are so far off, but you have your opinion.sensationalized to get readers
The board meeting on the 8th, bring your opinions ... please.
God help us all!!
Here is a thought! let's tell the members the truth on what happened ... that might help.
I know the truth hurts, but it will also set you free.
After the facts are out, and people digest it ... things will be fine.
I know the meetings are difficult to attend, being on a Thursday, but I encourage members to come for the next four months
Here is a thought! let's tell the members the truth on what happened ... that might help.
I know the truth hurts, but it will also set you free.
After the facts are out, and people digest it ... things will be fine.
I know the meetings are difficult to attend, being on a Thursday, but I encourage members to come for the next four months
I think I am following the crowd in believing there "is" a cost overrun.
I need to see proof before I will believe it.
We waited 4 years and the consumer price index rose 3% 3% 5% 3% for an increase 14% or more - this is a fact.
We thought we would have more volunteers but we didn't so we had to pay for a project manager on the Concrete and Steel. We knew this before we started.
The CUP consultant costed $5,000 and this is being lumped into this project.
I think it falls within line of a 20% variation that Rockwell and Boeing use for procurement and is boiler plated on the backs of their purchase order forms.
Also of note:
I think I remember hearing the Concrete project being negotiated and having the price quoted lowered from the original estimate(this needs clarification)
It was said the housing market was 28% down so contractors were charging less. I checked with a forum of experts and there is no evidence of this, only they are charging more than ever, but a skilled buyer can negotiate a lower price.
These facts need to be countered with facts not hearsay.
Then I will follow the crowd.
The fact remains that the possibly remains that when all is said and done that we brought it in significantly(50%) under "revised" budget when you look at all the upgrades,its appraised value, and out of pocket cost, and a new quote from a builder to build the exact same duplicate structure today.
I need to see proof before I will believe it.
We waited 4 years and the consumer price index rose 3% 3% 5% 3% for an increase 14% or more - this is a fact.
We thought we would have more volunteers but we didn't so we had to pay for a project manager on the Concrete and Steel. We knew this before we started.
The CUP consultant costed $5,000 and this is being lumped into this project.
I think it falls within line of a 20% variation that Rockwell and Boeing use for procurement and is boiler plated on the backs of their purchase order forms.
Also of note:
I think I remember hearing the Concrete project being negotiated and having the price quoted lowered from the original estimate(this needs clarification)
It was said the housing market was 28% down so contractors were charging less. I checked with a forum of experts and there is no evidence of this, only they are charging more than ever, but a skilled buyer can negotiate a lower price.
These facts need to be countered with facts not hearsay.
Then I will follow the crowd.
The fact remains that the possibly remains that when all is said and done that we brought it in significantly(50%) under "revised" budget when you look at all the upgrades,its appraised value, and out of pocket cost, and a new quote from a builder to build the exact same duplicate structure today.
You are wrong on the figure and it is not lumped into the construction cost.The CUP consultant costed $5,000 and this is being lumped into this project.
So far we have been talking about hard cost and we haven't discussed any soft costs yet.
Again, come to the board meeting. I have it all in the report.
By the way it was $6000.00 for the consultant. We didn't need his assistance and could have moved forward without him..
Glenn I agree with much of what you said. Thanks for your perspective.
Doug, you should come to the board meeting. You'll learn a lot.
Last edited by Busto on Thu Mar 01, 2012 6:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Only the people that were present and participating throughout the entire evolution of this project have anything approaching an accurate concept of what, when why and how the pavilion came to be what it is, why it cost what it did. Even then, there are differing opinions and accounts because not all of us were at each meeting with politicians, inspectors, consultants and others and some memories have faded.
Any attempt to "tell the truth" by analyzing only the financial and written contractual aspects and their outcome will only be a small part of the story.
Anyone attending the next four board meetings will, hopefully, come away with some useable information that helps them in their private endeavors. I have no doubt that Pi-Hsuan's insight, professionalism and experience as a capital project manager at UCLA would be advantageous for anyone's future construction projects. I am also sure that Pi-Hsuan is not ignorant of the difficulties and compromises involved in the care and feeding of a committee "... a creature with no head and many stomachs..." Heinlein - UCLA is rife with them.
So I also hope that her report will be objective and not accusatory of the parties, namely, me, responsible for the directions and mis-directions this project followed. But if blame has to be placed, it's mine. I was the most informed of the undertaking. And most and least influential manager of this plan at the most counterintuitive and critical moments. Oh, well...
Robert: Everyone likes you; I like you... But the witch-hunt behavior is hurtful. Alienation and chasing good people with good intentions away from participation in work, helpful to the club you so ardently support, is not useful. Come spew at me. However, note that I will never speak to you again about the history of this project, knowing that what I did say was subverted to fuel your fires . Have your objective say through Pi-Hsuan, count the money spent as good or bad and then step back from your limelight and enjoy flying at your site, the best in the country.
I am.
Any attempt to "tell the truth" by analyzing only the financial and written contractual aspects and their outcome will only be a small part of the story.
Anyone attending the next four board meetings will, hopefully, come away with some useable information that helps them in their private endeavors. I have no doubt that Pi-Hsuan's insight, professionalism and experience as a capital project manager at UCLA would be advantageous for anyone's future construction projects. I am also sure that Pi-Hsuan is not ignorant of the difficulties and compromises involved in the care and feeding of a committee "... a creature with no head and many stomachs..." Heinlein - UCLA is rife with them.
So I also hope that her report will be objective and not accusatory of the parties, namely, me, responsible for the directions and mis-directions this project followed. But if blame has to be placed, it's mine. I was the most informed of the undertaking. And most and least influential manager of this plan at the most counterintuitive and critical moments. Oh, well...
Robert: Everyone likes you; I like you... But the witch-hunt behavior is hurtful. Alienation and chasing good people with good intentions away from participation in work, helpful to the club you so ardently support, is not useful. Come spew at me. However, note that I will never speak to you again about the history of this project, knowing that what I did say was subverted to fuel your fires . Have your objective say through Pi-Hsuan, count the money spent as good or bad and then step back from your limelight and enjoy flying at your site, the best in the country.
I am.
Jim you know me and you know Pi-Hsuan. What I feel is never what she writes. I may seem like a witch hunter, and I apologize. I have mentioned that everyone on the board I would vote for again. So it's not personal.
The work that people are doing is tremendous. I ca not say enough good things about them.
I told Rob this and I'll try to keep that promise with you. I told Rob that I will move on and not bring up the gazebo as long as I do not think about it.
It will all be cool ... lets fly.
Jim, thanks for voicing your perspective.
It will be fare and objective. Jim you were always straight forward in conversation and your effort in the project was anything but a conspiracy.So I also hope that her report will be objective and not accusatory of the parties, namely, me, responsible for the directions and mis-directions this project followed. But if blame has to be placed, it's mine. I was the most informed of the undertaking. And most and least influential manager of this plan at the most counterintuitive and critical moments.
The work that people are doing is tremendous. I ca not say enough good things about them.
I told Rob this and I'll try to keep that promise with you. I told Rob that I will move on and not bring up the gazebo as long as I do not think about it.
It will all be cool ... lets fly.
Jim, thanks for voicing your perspective.
Every day I have some meetings with Vice Chancellors, Associate/Assistant Vice Chancellors, attorneys, directors, architects, engineers, consultants, contractors and/or vendors regarding building projects. Right now I am managing several multi-million-dollar projects simultaneously. Do you know why UCLA has all kind of constructions going on right now? It was because in the past few years, we were seeing bids coming in much lower than the estimated costs, sometimes in millions of dollars, for almost all the projects. We were encouraged to start projects that were originally years away in planning. A lot of projects were accelerated to take the advantage of the recent bidding environment.
One problem with the Gazebo project was that we did not seek for competitive bids. To be fair to the Board, they were pushed to go forward on fallacies. There were plenty of interested builders out there. We did an experiment calling contractors around and proved that. Do you know how many general contractors showed up at the job walk for one of my small projects that was estimated at about half of million? Twenty-two. (There were another dozen of contractors who called and were sent away because they did not have enough bonding capacity.) Eleven of them actually submitted the bids and the lowest bid was about 25% lower than the professional cost estimate. I would like to know what forum of experts you checked with. What I stated was what I observed daily.
A building project is more complex than an equipment installation project. You are comparing apples and oranges. Please come to the Board meeting next Thursday. You will learn a lot of facts to form your opinion whether the project cost could have been much less or the club members would not have had worked as hard or even worked at all.
The CUP Consultant or CUP issue is another subject at another time. Please come to the next four Board meetings and I will discuss it in details.
I understood the Gazebo budget and I was not trying to audit the expenses. Nor have I ever thought about making a documentary of the Gazebo history.
One problem with the Gazebo project was that we did not seek for competitive bids. To be fair to the Board, they were pushed to go forward on fallacies. There were plenty of interested builders out there. We did an experiment calling contractors around and proved that. Do you know how many general contractors showed up at the job walk for one of my small projects that was estimated at about half of million? Twenty-two. (There were another dozen of contractors who called and were sent away because they did not have enough bonding capacity.) Eleven of them actually submitted the bids and the lowest bid was about 25% lower than the professional cost estimate. I would like to know what forum of experts you checked with. What I stated was what I observed daily.
A building project is more complex than an equipment installation project. You are comparing apples and oranges. Please come to the Board meeting next Thursday. You will learn a lot of facts to form your opinion whether the project cost could have been much less or the club members would not have had worked as hard or even worked at all.
The CUP Consultant or CUP issue is another subject at another time. Please come to the next four Board meetings and I will discuss it in details.
I understood the Gazebo budget and I was not trying to audit the expenses. Nor have I ever thought about making a documentary of the Gazebo history.
It might be a good idea for the club to have a resident witch hunter to contain costs..
It was said hiring the consultant was a bad idea and we didn't need him. Maybe just the act of hiring him got the government to approve us once they saw we were serious.
I can see UCLA publishes their bidding results on projects. Project P026 shows all bids were rejected.
http://www.capital.ucla.edu/bidresults.asp
I am still not convinced contractors are lowering their rates. The US Labor Department just released their Beige Book with this report for our area and no mention of reduced labor rates in construction:
"Economic activity in the Twelfth District continued to grow at a moderate pace during the reporting period of January through mid-February. Price increases for final goods and services were limited, and upward wage pressures were minimal. Sales of retail items rose on balance, and demand improved modestly for business and consumer services. District manufacturing was mixed but appeared to expand overall. Demand grew further for agricultural producers but was uneven for providers of energy resources. Activity in District housing markets remained sluggish, and demand for nonresidential real estate stayed weak overall. Financial institutions reported a small increase in overall loan demand.�
My oldest brother represents UC Irvine on the UC Sentate and months ago their biggest concern was was the tear gassing of student protesters over the higher tuition and fees. Along with the Obama administrations pressure on UC to hold back costs this may have contributed to UCLA management starting to bid more competitively.
Also if UCLA is starting more construction projects this will reduce the overall available supply of contractors to the rest of us and cause them to raise their rates.
Here is the historical consumer price index. 28% increase between 2006 and 2012.
http://inflationdata.com/inflation/cons ... alcpi.aspx
The only real screw up I saw while working on the Concrete portion was being shipped re-bar that was too small in diameter that what was ordered and it was not caught until the inspector blocked the concrete pour. The contractor remedied the situation and the inspector approved us. I imaging the contractor ate that cost.
The contractor mentioned he also years ago installed a swimming pool but as he was pouring the heat increased to 104 and the concrete set too quickly. He had to jackhammer the whole pool out and start over. A lesson thankfully learned before we poured our foundation and deck.
I am currently researching the flood that overtook the Pacoima dam spillway around 1971ish and killed 2 or 3 people on and around Gridley street. The Army Corp of Engineers moved thousands of trucks of sediment trapped at the Lopez dam and constructed at least 2 berms to protect Symlar from floods. If we built on the berm then it would be as volatile as the San Francisco Marina district which is built from landfill and is subject to increased damage every earth quake from liquefaction. The extra robust Pavilion foundation may have been a good idea.
It was said hiring the consultant was a bad idea and we didn't need him. Maybe just the act of hiring him got the government to approve us once they saw we were serious.
I can see UCLA publishes their bidding results on projects. Project P026 shows all bids were rejected.
http://www.capital.ucla.edu/bidresults.asp
I am still not convinced contractors are lowering their rates. The US Labor Department just released their Beige Book with this report for our area and no mention of reduced labor rates in construction:
"Economic activity in the Twelfth District continued to grow at a moderate pace during the reporting period of January through mid-February. Price increases for final goods and services were limited, and upward wage pressures were minimal. Sales of retail items rose on balance, and demand improved modestly for business and consumer services. District manufacturing was mixed but appeared to expand overall. Demand grew further for agricultural producers but was uneven for providers of energy resources. Activity in District housing markets remained sluggish, and demand for nonresidential real estate stayed weak overall. Financial institutions reported a small increase in overall loan demand.�
My oldest brother represents UC Irvine on the UC Sentate and months ago their biggest concern was was the tear gassing of student protesters over the higher tuition and fees. Along with the Obama administrations pressure on UC to hold back costs this may have contributed to UCLA management starting to bid more competitively.
Also if UCLA is starting more construction projects this will reduce the overall available supply of contractors to the rest of us and cause them to raise their rates.
Here is the historical consumer price index. 28% increase between 2006 and 2012.
http://inflationdata.com/inflation/cons ... alcpi.aspx
The only real screw up I saw while working on the Concrete portion was being shipped re-bar that was too small in diameter that what was ordered and it was not caught until the inspector blocked the concrete pour. The contractor remedied the situation and the inspector approved us. I imaging the contractor ate that cost.
The contractor mentioned he also years ago installed a swimming pool but as he was pouring the heat increased to 104 and the concrete set too quickly. He had to jackhammer the whole pool out and start over. A lesson thankfully learned before we poured our foundation and deck.
I am currently researching the flood that overtook the Pacoima dam spillway around 1971ish and killed 2 or 3 people on and around Gridley street. The Army Corp of Engineers moved thousands of trucks of sediment trapped at the Lopez dam and constructed at least 2 berms to protect Symlar from floods. If we built on the berm then it would be as volatile as the San Francisco Marina district which is built from landfill and is subject to increased damage every earth quake from liquefaction. The extra robust Pavilion foundation may have been a good idea.
Doug
Doug,
It is the "Big 4" accounting firms. The 5th "disappeared" years ago.
As for Board Meetings - haven't been to one yet - and I see no reason to attend the next four, any of the next 12, or any ever!
Jim (Board Members and others that contributed towards the project) - I fully support your past efforts. The next four Board Meetings will be nothing but a waste of time since (I believe) there are no more major projects planned. By the time any major projects are planned and executed, the presentation will be dated and therefore borderline worthless.
My views are based upon being an auditor for over 30 years - my job is to shoot the down and injured.
It is the "Big 4" accounting firms. The 5th "disappeared" years ago.
As for Board Meetings - haven't been to one yet - and I see no reason to attend the next four, any of the next 12, or any ever!
Jim (Board Members and others that contributed towards the project) - I fully support your past efforts. The next four Board Meetings will be nothing but a waste of time since (I believe) there are no more major projects planned. By the time any major projects are planned and executed, the presentation will be dated and therefore borderline worthless.
My views are based upon being an auditor for over 30 years - my job is to shoot the down and injured.
Don,
Thank you for your opinion, but I think the report will benefit the club in a few ways. I'm not trying to tell you to come, I encourage those that are interested to attend. I understand that if we had been more involved it would have saved us money, man hours, among other things.
During the January Board meeting, discussion about the glider storage took up much of the evening. What should the price be? Should we raise the cost, or lower it. Jay spoke and presented a perspective that only he could see, since he handles the containers. Jay said that he didn’t want the price to be increased. According to him, there were members that found it difficult to pay yearly, and even monthly was difficult. Jay gives an answer to why I think it is important to look back and go over the past. The member’s money should be handled more respectfully, not on the wisdom of “It’s not a lot of money from one person, its a little money from a lot of people�.
This is one opinion and it's mine. I know a lot of pilots that are in this situation. They are not rich, they find it difficult in paying for the membership. They have been in the club longer than I and they keep scratching out the membership fee and the trips up the hill. I have a desire to point out where their money went and how it was handled.
I think that we should work on the CUP, I also think we will build around the containers to legalize them. I also think we will try either building a club house near the gazebo with flushing toilets, or work like hell to get a permit to build legal walls on the gazebo and have flushing toilets near the stairs.
The one thing I want to see is the club not running into the difficulties we have on the gazebo. Glenn mentioned that all members agree that we spent to much. I am confident that what ever endeavors we work on in the future, the report will help tremendously.
I will not try to explain why I think Pi-Hsuan is right. She spoke on what she does and what she experiences. I think her opinion is gold in helping our club in the future, but if you think Doug knows what he is talking about, then please, Doug ... lead, because we will do more building in the future.
The information you have on Fedor is far from the truth. He didn't get us a CUP, $3000.00 was in contract for that reason. He took us down a back alley and didn't finish his part. Joe and Jim did all the leg work and we gave him another $3000.00. You should talk to Jim, Ken, Rob and others. They all expressed to Pi-Hsuan and I a story about Fedor that is anything but kind. I can tell all members with confident that Doug and Don have no clue about Fedor among other things. The board minutes describe Fedor like Waldo ..."Where's Fedor".
I told Jim yesterday, the report will be fare and it doesn't tar and feather anyone.
I would like our club to be legal on all counts. To do that without any hiccups, we better understand our past.
Thank you for your opinion, but I think the report will benefit the club in a few ways. I'm not trying to tell you to come, I encourage those that are interested to attend. I understand that if we had been more involved it would have saved us money, man hours, among other things.
During the January Board meeting, discussion about the glider storage took up much of the evening. What should the price be? Should we raise the cost, or lower it. Jay spoke and presented a perspective that only he could see, since he handles the containers. Jay said that he didn’t want the price to be increased. According to him, there were members that found it difficult to pay yearly, and even monthly was difficult. Jay gives an answer to why I think it is important to look back and go over the past. The member’s money should be handled more respectfully, not on the wisdom of “It’s not a lot of money from one person, its a little money from a lot of people�.
This is one opinion and it's mine. I know a lot of pilots that are in this situation. They are not rich, they find it difficult in paying for the membership. They have been in the club longer than I and they keep scratching out the membership fee and the trips up the hill. I have a desire to point out where their money went and how it was handled.
I think that we should work on the CUP, I also think we will build around the containers to legalize them. I also think we will try either building a club house near the gazebo with flushing toilets, or work like hell to get a permit to build legal walls on the gazebo and have flushing toilets near the stairs.
The one thing I want to see is the club not running into the difficulties we have on the gazebo. Glenn mentioned that all members agree that we spent to much. I am confident that what ever endeavors we work on in the future, the report will help tremendously.
I will not try to explain why I think Pi-Hsuan is right. She spoke on what she does and what she experiences. I think her opinion is gold in helping our club in the future, but if you think Doug knows what he is talking about, then please, Doug ... lead, because we will do more building in the future.
The information you have on Fedor is far from the truth. He didn't get us a CUP, $3000.00 was in contract for that reason. He took us down a back alley and didn't finish his part. Joe and Jim did all the leg work and we gave him another $3000.00. You should talk to Jim, Ken, Rob and others. They all expressed to Pi-Hsuan and I a story about Fedor that is anything but kind. I can tell all members with confident that Doug and Don have no clue about Fedor among other things. The board minutes describe Fedor like Waldo ..."Where's Fedor".
I told Jim yesterday, the report will be fare and it doesn't tar and feather anyone.
I would like our club to be legal on all counts. To do that without any hiccups, we better understand our past.
I think my motivation is I put a lot of work(by my standards) into the LZ and Pavilion and if facts are going to be published to reduce my opinion of the greatness of the work performed by me and so many harder working others, I would at least like to fact check every last statement. I feel I owe it to the cause.
It could take a while and I would need a list of the facts presented.
Will these facts be footnoted in MLA style?
http://www.aresearchguide.com/7footnot.html
Fact checking is a profession:
http://www.factcheck.org/
What fact checking means online
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/magaz ... ium-t.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable published source using an inline citation. The citation should fully identify the source, and the location within the source (specifying page, section, or such divisions as may be appropriate) where the material is to be found. See Citing sources for details of how to do this.
Talking to a few contractors at UCLA may not be a large enough "sample size" to allow a valid confidence interval to make the study more valid that of other larger studies like the Beige Book.
http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm
I can produce a study of contractors I know that will say $250,000 for turnkey construction.
The "rejected bids" post I made only shows the UCLA is actively managing the bidding process and transparently.
I like to write on the forum. I took a class at Drake University called expository and persuasive writing.
"Expository essays should not reveal the opinion of the writer."
In my opinion facts that are not printed and footnoted will not be considered.
It could take a while and I would need a list of the facts presented.
Will these facts be footnoted in MLA style?
http://www.aresearchguide.com/7footnot.html
Fact checking is a profession:
http://www.factcheck.org/
What fact checking means online
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/magaz ... ium-t.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable published source using an inline citation. The citation should fully identify the source, and the location within the source (specifying page, section, or such divisions as may be appropriate) where the material is to be found. See Citing sources for details of how to do this.
Talking to a few contractors at UCLA may not be a large enough "sample size" to allow a valid confidence interval to make the study more valid that of other larger studies like the Beige Book.
http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm
I can produce a study of contractors I know that will say $250,000 for turnkey construction.
The "rejected bids" post I made only shows the UCLA is actively managing the bidding process and transparently.
I like to write on the forum. I took a class at Drake University called expository and persuasive writing.
"Expository essays should not reveal the opinion of the writer."
In my opinion facts that are not printed and footnoted will not be considered.
