Belmont Panel: Finish the Job

Completion of the Belmont Learning Complex, including solving environmental problems at the stalled Los Angeles high school, could cost another $80 million, a panel of experts has concluded.

The extra cost could bring the final tab for Belmont to more than $250 million, guaranteeing its place as the costliest high school ever built in California.

The panel hired by the Los Angeles Unified School District reviewed three proposals from private firms seeking to finish construction of the high school near downtown. It found that they would be able to make the school safe for its anticipated 4,000 students.

However, after a separate investigation by the school district’s inspector general, one of the three bidders was disqualified on Wednesday because of a potential conflict of interest.

“The Belmont Learning Center can be completed and can be safe,” said Terry Sanglerat, an environmental expert on the seven-member panel and executive vice president of GeoSyntec Consultants of Huntington Beach.

“Our conclusion is that the district should proceed and finish the center,” he said.

The half-finished school, where work was halted in 1999 because of environmental worries, sits atop an abandoned oil field that contains methane and hydrogen sulfide gases. Partly wrapped in plastic, the hulking structure at the corner of Beaudry Avenue and 1st Street is a constant reminder of the nasty political debates and prolonged litigation that its problems spawned.

Even with such extra costs, the panelists and school district officials said that completing the campus makes financial sense. Building a school from scratch for the same number of students could cost about $170 million and take five years, they said.

The Belmont school could be finished in two to three years, panel members said.

“This school will tremendously relieve overcrowding and get kids off buses,” Supt. Roy Romer said. “It is an important educational tool if we can get it.”

The school district is deliberating over whether to finish the school and, if so, which of the two remaining bidders to hire.

The review panelists briefed school board members Thursday on their findings. They will deliver their report publicly next Tuesday. Romer is expected to recommend one of the two remaining bids later this month. The school board will make a final decision in March.

The panel did not rank the three proposals. Romer has not publicly expressed a preference.

The disqualified bidder, meanwhile, held out hope of getting back into the competition.

Romer threw out a proposal from Eastridge Cos., citing an internal investigation that revealed an apparent conflict of interest. Eastridge’s lead executive for its Belmont bid was reported to be working for the district as a real estate consultant on other projects at the same time he was preparing the company’s Belmont bid, possibly giving the firm an advantage, the investigation concluded.

The chief executive of the Eastridge firm strongly disputes those findings and said she was stunned by the turn of events.

“The district has a lot at stake with this [Belmont] proposal, and I’m still convinced that our proposal was going to be the only solution to getting the project done,” Susan Eastridge said.

One of the partners of a competing team said he fears the process could be held up by a lawsuit. But Eastridge said her firm has no plans to sue.

The review panel evaluated the three proposals on how each would finance the project, resolve environmental hazards at the site and finish construction.

The panel found that all of the proposals offered sufficient remedies for alleviating the dangerous gases beneath the school. They said that cleaning and monitoring the environmental hazards would cost as much as $15 million, a figure wrapped into the total cost.

A state regulator who participated in the reviews told the district that all three plans are workable and meet state environmental standards.

In general, experts are recommending plans that would actively vent the underground gases beneath the 34-acre site.

“This is all off-the-shelf technology,” said panelist Timothy Buresh, director of engineering and construction for the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority. “There’s nothing here we’re inventing.”

Officials said the district has spent $154 million on Belmont so far and about $20 million more on attorneys, litigation and other costs associated with the school. The panelists estimated that finishing the campus would cost $60 million to $80 million.

School Board President Caprice Young said she is still weighing whether to build Belmont, but she is encouraged by the panel’s report.

“Now I think we have a shot at potentially building a safe school,” she said.