HBCSD Corruption
Lie #8
The Misleading Information:
(1) Residents question Hermosa Beach bond measure, by Ryan McDonald, exact published date unknown, assumed to be sometime in 2016, Easy Reader News
“Under Measure S, North School would be rebuilt, with preliminary
cost estimates ranging between $28 million and $33 million. The
district arrived at this option after commissioning a Long Range
Facilities Master Plan, which examined options to “modernize” or to
“rebuild” the school.”
COMPETING INFORMATION:
The statement that “the district arrived at this option after commissioning a Long Range Facilities Master Plan, which examined options to “modernize” or to “rebuild” the school” gives the impression that the Long Range Facilities Master Plan recommended rebuilding North School over modernizing North School. It did not. Architects simply calculated the dollar cost for each option. The LRFMP did not make a determination as to which option the district should pursue. School board members on their own decided to pursue the most expensive, the most complicated and the most time consuming option - to rebuild North School.
NOTE: See Lie #51: HBCSD told a blatant lie and made misleading statements regarding the options proposed in the 2014 Facilities Master Plan in the Environmental Impact Report for North School.
(2) Terry Tao, HBCSD Attorney (2002-):
"Ah, for example, um, two of these schools here, ah, I worked
on both of these. [picks up poster with pictures of Newport Beach
Elementary and El Segundo USD, Richmond Street Elementary schools
brought in by resident Blair Smith of examples of older campuses that
were renovated and are still in use today.] Ah, the Newport
[Elementary] school, that was unreinforced masonry school, that cost
$55 million dollars to renovate. [Loud gasps from the audience]
May 31, 2016 presentation to the Joint meeting of the HB City Council
members and HBCSD School Board members. Time Stamp: 02:00:55
FALSIFICATION: Newport Beach Elementary school cost $4.1 million in hard costs to renovate in 2002.
(3) Terry Tao, HBCSD Attorney (2002-):
“Ah, that school [Richmond Street Elementary school], let's
see, I was actually, I worked on that one too. Um, El Segundo here,
that was two bonds. You know I’m going back in history. That one
was actually two bonds that was, ah, $25 million dollars in '01,
which is when they did that work, and then they had to do a
subsequent bond for $14 million dollars. Just to kind of give you
an idea on what it costs to do some of these historical renovations.
It is very expensive.” May 31, 2016 presentation to the Joint
meeting of the HB City Council members and HBCSD School Board
members. Time Stamp: 02:00:55
FALSIFICATION: Richmond Street Elementary school cost $5.3 million to renovate in 2001. $14 million and $25 million were bonds for El Segundo High School; most of which was to remodel existing structures and build new structures NOT for seismic retrofit. $11 million from Measure C in 1997 renovated the existing bell tower at the El Segundo High School.
NOTE: HBCSD attorney Terry Tao outright lied and misrepresented nearly all the information he presented at his approximately one-hour May 31, 2016 presentation. Why would he tell the truth on this issue? Please see Terry Tao’s entire presentation at the May 31, 2016 joint city and school district meeting with fact checking for the full impact of his misinformation and misleading statements. Terry Tao was not under oath to tell the truth. It is not illegal to lie.
NOTE: Taxpayer paid Superintendent Pat Escalante colluded with taxpayer paid HBCSD attorney Terry Tao and school board members in over six hours of meetings to give an approximately one-hour presentation filled with false and misleading information one week before the June 7, 2016 bond vote in order to win a $59M facilities bond.
NOTE: Why would Terry Tao lie about the cost to renovate schools? Was he told by Superintendent Escalante or certain school board members to inflate the cost to renovate in his presentation so school board members could pass an expensive bond to rebuild North School?
NOTE: The May 31, 2016 presentation was made ONE WEEK before the June 2016 $59M bond vote and was uploaded to the school district website under Measure S information. Terry Tao’s invoiced HBCSD $11k for his curated presentation of misinformation given one week before the bond vote.
(4) The first modernization estimate was provided by BCA Architects Paul Bunton. Paul Bunton was hired by school board members to “advise” the Facility Planning and Advisory Committee (FPAC) members in spring 2013.
March 13, 2013 – Consulting Agreement for Facilities Planning Advisory Committee Expert B-46/12/13 Agreement for Educational Consulting Services.
“RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of
Education approve the Consultant Agreement with BCA Architects to
act as an expert on school buildings for the Facilities Planning
Advisory Committee to consult at a cost not to exceed $5,000.00”
NOTE: The “expert” from BCA Architects was Paul Bunton.
“BACKGROUND: The Facilities Planning and Advisory Committee
[FPAC] is researching the options of modernization, new construction
and property acquisition/exchange for the North School site, in
order to report their findings to the Board of Education. The
committee requires a school architect expert opinion to provide
relevant data to the committee for their consideration.”
(5) Paul Bunton gave an estimate of $14.9M and 30 months to rebuild North School. The actual cost was $29M and five years to rebuild North School. Please see: February 6, 2013 – Hermosa Beach City School District North School Planning Studies.
1. In March 2013, the Facilities Planning and Advisory Committee
members were given an estimate of $14.9 million and 30
months by the district’s hired expert Paul Bunton of BCA
Architects to completely reconstruct North School. In the
same report, Paul Bunton’s estimate to modernize North School
was $10.9 million and 20 months.* The FPAC used these estimates in order to make their recommendations to the school board in April 2013.
2. In 2013 the estimate given by Paul Bunton to fully
reconstruct North School was $14.9 million dollars. In 2014
(one year later) the Long Range Facilities Master plan authors
GKK Works estimated that the average cost to completely rebuild
North School as being $32,378,954.
3. NOTE: By comparison the new construction at Valley School
(gymnasium, library and two classrooms, elevator) from 2006 to
2008 was reported to cost $11M.
4. *Given the small difference of approximately $4 million dollars
and 10 months according to Paul Bunton’s estimates between completely demolishing and reconstructing North School versus modernizing the campus, the FPAC recommended to school board members that they completely reconstruct North School.
5. *The actual final cost to rebuild North School was $29M and
about five years. A $15M dollar difference in cost from Paul
Bunton’s estimates.
NOTE: When Paul Bunton advised the FPAC members, he had just been involved in legal proceedings against him in San Diego, CA. Please see: Legal Complaint against Paul Bunton of BCA Architects by San Diegans for Open Government, Case #37-2012-00101391-CU-MC-CTL in San Diego Superior Court.
1. “The complaint also alleged that respondent engaged in a civil
conspiracy to bribe public officials.” …”Respondent, for its part
in the stipulation, agreed to pay $250,000 to the District.
Respondent however did not report this settlement to the Board
within 30 days.”
2. “Third Cause for Discipline, False Statement on Renewal
Application, Business and Professional Code sections 498 and
5579. “Respondent has subjected his architectural license
to discipline for submitting a false statement under penalty
of perjury on an application to renew his architectural license…”
3. BCA Architects have since rebranded themselves as Studio
W Architects. https://studiow-architects.com/about/
4. As of Spring 2024, HBCSD has retained Studio W
Architects to create building plans for new classrooms and
administrative offices at Valley School with their new $28.7M
facilities bond offering.
5. Was Paul Bunton hired to tell the truth to FPAC members
about the cost to renovate vs. rebuild North School? Or
was he hired to give skewed information that matched what
some school board members had already decided they wanted
to do: rebuild North School? Was rebuilding North School part of
a quid pro quo between the City and HBCSD to keep the Community Center only for City use and build another campus whether or not we actually needed another campus?
6. Please also see Fact #7: Several Facility Planning Advisory
Committee members were unhappy with how the FPAC process
worked.
(6) In April 2013, with very little information other than Paul Bunton’s estimates, FPAC members recommended rebuilding North School over modernizing existing buildings at North School. Please see: April 10, 2013 – from HBCSD School Board meeting transcripts – presentation by FPAC Chair Monique Ehsan recommendation for North School modernization, new construction and/or property change/acquisition:
1. FPAC members were given highly slanted, incorrect information
and projections of large increases in future district enrollment by
enrollment consultants Decision Insite. Please also see: Decision
Insite Complete Discussion and Facts.
2. …”We asked ourselves, ah, does modernization meet our project
facility needs for enrollment trends? It does, we could establish,
under modernization 432 seats which is adequate. Um, would
there be enough classrooms? Yes, there would be 16 classrooms.
‘Revenue Potential’; we think we could carve out space for a
preschool for instance…” “Capacity, yes, enough classrooms,
however no library or cafeteria…”
a. This is an incorrect statement. North School has a cafeteria,
it doubles as the multi-purpose room which is normal for a
small elementary school. North School also has a kitchen
b. Any classroom can be turned into an elementary school
library.
c. HBCSD hired “expert” Paul Bunton was supposed to have
given the FPAC members a tour of North School. Did he
leave out the kitchen and multi-purpose room on the
tour?
3. With a difference of only $4M dollars between Paul Bunton’s
estimate to modernize North School versus rebuild North School,
FPAC members recommended rebuilding North School.
4. Once FPAC chairwoman Monique Ehsan gave the opinion to
rebuild North School, school board members (Jack Burns,
Patti Ackerman, Lisa Claypoole, Carleen Beste and Ray
Waters) ran with the suggestion, even after GKK works
came back with an estimate that was twice as large as
Paul Bunton’s to rebuild North School.
(7) In 2014 architectural firm GKK Works was hired by HBCSD to create a Long Range Facility Master Plan for the district.
1. GKK Works estimated $14.7K to renovate North School in 2014.
2. GKK Works estimated $34M to completely rebuild North School in
2014.
(8) Independent builders, Juge Construction, gave an estimate of $6.1M in 2017 to completely renovate North School AND add a new administration and classroom building to the site.
NOTE: Juge Construction company was the same construction company
that rebuilt Valley School in 1987.
(9) Residents question Hermosa Beach bond measure, by Ryan McDonald, exact published date unknown, assumed to be sometime in 2016, Easy Reader News
“Opponents of Measure S argue that the district has given
insufficient attention to the “modernize” option."
“Resident Cassandra Bates said that school districts both
locally and across the country are increasingly refurbishing their
old buildings rather than tearing them down, generating savings
that could be reinvested in classroom technology.” “HBCSD, she
said, has focused single-mindedly on the rebuild.” ““We are just
looking for financial accountability – that we truly are getting
the most cost-effective solution,” Bates said.”
"Superintendent Pat Escalante said that the rebuilding
option was the result of “a great deal of consideration.”
“Escalante said the district would present a historical
resource assessment* of the structure [buildings at North School]
at the May 11th school board meeting.”
*NOTE: The Historical Assessment Report of North School by Pamela Daly, May 2016 contained egregious amounts of misinformation and outright fabrications of fact. The incorrect and misleading information in Pam Daly’s Historical Assessment Report of North School was later used for the North School Environmental Impact Report from 2017 to 2019 and posted to the internet as fact without the corrections that were provided by Hermosa Beach residents. See Lie #18: Misinforming the public as to the historical facts and value of North School contained in Pamela Daly’s May 2016 and Final 2019 Historical Assessment of North School Report.
(10) The Environmental Impact Report (2017-2018): Section 7.3, page 7-4: Alternatives Considered and Rejected during the Project Planning Process:
7.3.2.3, page 7-8: Alternate 3, Alternative Locations: Alternate 3d, Community Center, page 7-8, 7-9:
“This property is at 710 Pier Avenue at Pacific Coast Highway.
It is a designated historic property, and improvements to bring it into
compliance with current building and historic building codes and to
meet seismic requirements per the Division of State Architect, would
likely be costly.”
NOTE: There is no evidence that renovating either the Pier Avenue
Community Center or North School would be "costly". The
Environmental Impact Report in which this statement was made,
gave NO SPECIFIC information on what proof HBCSD had to make the
claim that renovating either Pier Avenue Community Center
or North School would be "costly". However, there was plenty of
evidence to show that the Community Center or North School would
not be expensive to renovate.
NOTE: See Lie #48: HBCSD made shamelessly inaccurate, misleading and incorrect statements about the district's use of the Community Center as an alternate to demolishing and rebuilding North School in the Environmental Impact Report. #1. HBCSD did not disclose the true facts surrounding the seismic safety and condition of Pier Avenue Community Center for use by students. #2. HBCSD did not disclose the true details of the district’s contractual provision to lease classrooms at the Pier Avenue Community Center as an option to tearing down North School. #3. HBCSD did not disclose the true details of the City and District's history regarding the Open Space designation. #4. HBCSD shamelessly incorrectly states the official Naylor Act provisions in Section 17491 of the California Department of Education as a reason North School should not be sold.
NOTE: See also: Lie #6: Misleading the public as to the condition and
safety of the Community Center or grandfathered in North School for
students.