top of page

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.



(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 with another $300,000 or so

coming out of district coffers to finish the job.


4.      Given the small difference of approximately $4 million dollars

and 10 months in Paul Bunton’s estimates between completely

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.


1. 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.


2. In addition to the $5,000 Paul Bunton received from HBCSD for about four hours of “advising” FPAC members.  HBCSD school board members also found a way of throwing an additional $2,400 his way:


June 12, 2013 – Proposal to Close Out Division of State

Architect Projects at Hermosa View School and North School

B-76-12/13.


"RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of

Education approve the proposal from BCA Architects to assist

the District with obtaining Division of State Architect (DSA)

closeout of projects at Hermosa View School and North School

at a cost not to exceed 2,400.00.”


BACKGROUND:  District received notification that

three past construction projects, two at Hermosa View School

and one at North School were not closed out with DSA.  The

architect Y’Deen & Associates was responsible for closing these

projects, but did not. Staff has compiled information to close

out the projects, but needs the assistance of an architect to

complete the close out. The District received four proposals:

PM Solutions - $15,000.00; Another Perspective, Inc.

- $12,480.00; Dougherty & Dougherty - $10,000.00; BCA

Architects - $2,400.00”


  1.      According to the DSA client #F19-45 (HBCSD) list of

applications, the last time construction work was done

at North School was in 1998, DSA application #A-100604.

It is interesting that apparently fifteen years after the fact, the DSA was NOW notifying the district that certain projects still needed

to be closed out.  From 2001 onward, HBCSD architects were

Dougherty and Dougherty.


2.      The three other bids for this job were four to six times

higher than the bid that BCA Architects submitted.   It

seems that the other bids were not serious ones.  They

seemed to have been submitted just to satisfy the district’s

need to get competitive bids but the bidders were not

interested in taking the "job".  Another possibility was

that the other firms were told by the district admin ahead

of time that they should bid high so that the district could

award the “job” to BCA Architects.


3.      Why didn’t HBCSD contact the original architects to close

out the projects that were their responsibility?  Y’Deen &

Associates is still in business with an address in Brea, CA.


4.      Was this proposal to close out old projects from as far back

as 1998 for North School simply a way to throw an extra

$2,400.00 to Paul Bunton for his work “advising” the Facility

Planning and Advisory Committee?


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 so school board members could

point to the FPAC recommendation to give them cover?


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

with a serving bay.


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.  Please see misleading and incorrect information 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 also: Lie #6: Misleading the public as to the condition

and safety of the Community Center or grandfathered in North

School for students.



The information in this website proves these statement as fact.

bottom of page