Judge Says Courthouse Restoration Is Imperiled

After meeting with the federal agency overseeing the restoration of San Diego’s old federal courthouse, a U.S. district judge said Tuesday that the plan to refurbish the building is in danger of being scrapped.

After missing several completion deadlines, the project to restore the courthouse ground to a halt eight months ago, Judge John S. Rhoades said during a news conference in his chambers.

Rhoades, who since 1986 has helped promote and raise money for the project, said construction workers discovered large amounts of asbestos and lead paint that added unforeseen costs to the $5.4-million, congressionally funded project. By the time the federal General Services Administration officially terminated work in August, $4 million had already been spent, and the contract estimate had been revised to $7.2 million, Rhoades and GSA officials said.

In a Nov. 13 meeting, Rhoades and Chief U.S. District Judge Judith N. Keep met with three GSA officials to talk about the next step in the project.

“What was said was very fuzzy, vague,” Rhoades said. “We were told they may or may not go ahead, that it’s going to have to go back to Congress for approval . . . and unless we come up with another $7 million, there’s going to be a delay.”

Rhoades said he and Keep requested a written clarification of how much additional money is needed and a revised schedule for completion.

“It would be very nice if the project could go ahead,” said Mary Filippini, a GSA spokeswoman. “But we are not in the position, from a financial standpoint, to decide.”

Filippini said the $7-million estimate discussed during the meeting between the GSA and the judges is tentative and not meant to be released publicly.

“It’s a gross estimate,” she said. “It could be that high. . . . We don’t really know. We have no firm figures, and what the GSA discusses is just between the judges and us.”

The delay has concerned not only the U.S. Bankruptcy Court--the would-be tenant of the restored courthouse--but the U.S. attorneys and other district courts now jockeying for limited space in federal buildings. Other moves have been scheduled on a presumption that bankruptcy court will move into five newly restored courtrooms in the 78-year-old building at 325 W. F St.

“I know that there were a whole lot of people all the way back to Washington jumping up and down, screaming to get this project done as soon as possible,” said Bill Dobyns, vice president of Kilgallon Construction, the project’s former contractor.

The frustration level of the parties involved has risen during the life of the restoration project, which dates from 1983, when Congress allocated money for the task. Originally, the Immigration and Naturalization Service planned to move into the tile-roofed building, with its twin towers and 10 stately columns. The courthouse has been closed since 1976.

After a 1 1/2-year lobbying effort led in part by Rhoades, the GSA agreed in 1986 to renovate the building for use by the bankruptcy court. The decision to preserve the historical landmark as a courthouse rather than converting to offices was widely lauded, as was the prospect of more courtroom space.

During a dedication ceremony that year, then-U.S. Sen. Pete Wilson celebrated the rebirth of the courthouse. Wilson, the GSA and San Diego’s federal court employees joined with a Marine Corps band to sing praises on the courthouse steps, Rhoades said.

“Since then, there have been endless, endless, endless, reconsiderations over how it should be done. . . . If they (the GSA) had been put in charge of building the pyramids, they would still be trying to work out designs and specifications today.”

Originally, the scheduled completion date was August, 1990. That was pushed back to December, then to January, 1991. If the funding works out, the project may be finished by May, 1993, Filippini said.

Others involved with the project have criticized the GSA for its handling of the restoration.

“The GSA is a lot of different parts,” said Gerri Crockett, chief deputy of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court’s Southern California district. “That’s the problem. It seems like it takes forever for them to talk to each other.”

Aged and outdated building material has provided further delays, former construction project manager Dobyns said.

“There have been 20 different change orders,” he said. “In every phase of the contract--in nearly every corner of the building--we encountered conditions that required changes in design and scope.”

About 14 months of work was devoted to asbestos removal, Dobyns said. The latest hurdle, one that prompted the GSA to terminate the original contract and prepare another request for proposals, is the presence of lead paint.

At each turn, Dobyns said, the GSA was unresponsive to adapting the contract.

“The way it’s been handled is the epitome of red tape,” he said. “Bureaucracy at its best.”

When Dobyns’ company differed with the GSA over the cost of paint removal, it was let go, he said. Engineers were hired by the GSA to work out a lower estimate, Filippini said. When the GSA secures money to pay for paint removal, bidding for a new contract will open, preferably before January, she said.

If the cost proves to be exorbitant, Rhoades said, he was told by the GSA, the project will be scrapped.