Indexes
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- On global warming and same-sex marriage (174)
- George W. Bush will take a legacy of failure with him (132)
- Another vote against the Supercenter (63)
- Being a Kennedy doesn't make you qualified (27)
- People can find an excuse for doing almost anything (25)
- Regional Roundup (24)
- Lodi City Council sends plan for DeBenedetti Park back to staff for more review (24)
- Wine Country Cardroom in Lodi wants to increase games, hours, tables (23)
- Aimee Murry promoted to division chief in Lodi Fire Department (14)
Is Delta College's new $84 million math and science center really needed?
News-Sentinel Staff Writer
When Delta College trustees committed to building a new Cunningham Math and Science center, they agreed to spend nearly a third of the college's Measure L bond money on a single, high-tech building.
Now that building is funneling money away from other projects and has some people connected to the college asking if the school really needs it.
The new Cunningham building is envisioned as a large science and math complex with cutting-edge technology and a modern, open design that is much different than the cramped corridors and busy laboratories of the existing structure.
The college initially budgeted the Cunningham building at $38 million in December 2003. The budget grew to $61 million some time later, and in June, San Joaquin Delta College's new bond team told trustees that even that budget was a gross underestimate for the 100,000-square-foot structure.
Raul Rodriguez, Delta's president and superintendent, picked Lee Belarmino, vice president of information services for Delta, to lead the new bond team in April, said Greg Greenwood, spokesman for the college. Belarmino formed the rest of the team, which consists of about a dozen Delta employees and one consultant.
A few weeks after the June bond workshop, the team recommended that the Cunningham project be completed as designed.
Board agrees building needed
Team members said that not only is the building needed to accommodate extra students, but if the college backs out or changes its plan, it would risk losing $30 million in state funding for the project.
The board agreed.
"The great push in this country is math and science," trustee Anthony Bugarin said at the meeting where board members voted to go through with the project.
The agreement to go ahead with the Cunningham project contributed to the decision to nix an $8.5 million district support services center. It also dipped deeply into funds that could have funded other up-in-the-air projects, including a satellite campus in Lodi.
Funding
Construction timeline
Source: Delta College
Out of the $250 million bond that the college passed in 2004, only $64 million is left to go toward the college's Lodi, Mountain House and Manteca campuses. That's $31.6 million less that what the board originally budgeted for the three projects. The Mountain House project alone is currently budgeted for $94.2 million.
Delta trustees have yet to decide the fate of the satellite campuses. District officials seem to be getting increasingly comfortable with the idea of a pared-down plan for each of the sites.
The new bond team recommended that the college build the Cunningham building for several reasons, Belarmino said.
First, he said, the current Cunningham building, constructed in 1975, is inadequate for the college's math and science needs.
"My understanding is we really needed more lab space," Belarmino said.
Instructors also told the bond team that the current building's layout is inefficient for running lab classes smoothly. Supply rooms can be quite a distance from the labs they serve, creating headaches for instructors and lab technicians.
One instructor said the tables in the labs are too wide for group work. The lab stations don't have Internet access, which makes it difficult to run simulations or share data. In his classroom, none of the tables have gas piped to them to run experiments. They also don't have a sufficient number of electrical outlets.
Belarmino said the people who built the Cunningham building and the rest of the Delta campus designed as far into the future as their vision could carry them.
"They had no idea how computers were going to work," Belarmino said.
Bond team considers options
The bond team considered all its options: delaying the project, constructing a smaller version or remodeling the existing building. Each option had downsides, they said, and could incur greater or equal costs with lesser results.
The biggest of the fiscal issues is that the college would most likely lose close to $30 million in state funding if they change the project significantly.
The plans, which have already been submitted to the state, call for demolishing the existing Cunningham building. Should Delta decide to keep the existing Cunningham building, the college would violate their agreement with the state and lose its funding.
Pulling out of the agreement with the state might also jeopardize future funding requests, members of the bond team said at the June 26 bond workshop.
The bond team cautioned that putting the project out to bid now, while the market is favorable, would keep costs down. Redesigning the building, on the other hand, would incur additional costs and delay the project further. It's assumed that the cost of materials needed to construct the building would continue to increase during the delay.
Greenwood said one of the reasons that the project has become so expensive in the first place is the rising cost of materials over time.
Still, knowing the circumstances, some instructors say that the building is a money pit, draining bond funds away from other projects.
"Most of us have been against this since the conception," said one veteran science instructor, who preferred to remain anonymous. "There's absolutely no reason for a new building, as far as I'm concerned."
The instructor suggested that the administration has let the existing Cunningham building decay as an excuse to build a new one. He said most staff members won't even use the restroom unless they absolutely have to because they're so dirty.
He also worries that the new Cunningham building will be filled with the old equipment. If that's true, he said, all instructors are going to have are new walls, which, he says, doesn't make sense.
"I could teach my class in a tent," he said.
Disagreement
Other staff members don't feel quite the same way.
Nina Bookman, a senior science laboratory technician, works in the Cunningham building, making sure lab classes get all the materials they need. Her office, the first-floor prep room, is packed with chemicals, test tubes and models.
In the last few days of summer session, working in the prep room isn't too bad, she said. Come fall semester, though, she'll have students, assistants and professors crammed into the small space from 6:30 a.m. to 9:30 p.m.
"When it isn't working, it becomes pretty obvious," said one professor about the prep room.
Bookman's looking forward to the day when she has a better-planned space to work with.
According to current designs, the new building will consist of two interconnected structures with open-air walkways, similar to the spaces already found on Delta's campus, Greenwood said.
Renderings show the building has have a crisp design with lines that fit into the campus, skyline and a glass-contained staircase.
Though the new Cunningham building was designed to fit in with the rest of the college, some say it's fairly modern-looking as well.
Whether one agrees or not, the building is sure to be the jewel of the campus.
Belarmino has high expectations for the new Cunningham building, too.
"It is totally state-of-the-art," he said. "All the things that (we) wish were in the building, are."
Contact reporter Amanda Dyer at amandad@lodinews.com.

Reader Feedback
Lodian2 wrote on Aug 6, 2008 9:51 AM:
College. Also read the 5 comments and doesn't surprise me a bit by TP's comments. He stands alot to lose in commissions if Delta chooses not to locate there. It won't be able to be annexed and the developers won't get their hands on it, so much more lost in his commissions. I don't think Delta's 'needs' are his top priority. "
T&C wrote on Aug 5, 2008 10:19 PM:
DeltaEnglish wrote on Aug 5, 2008 10:05 PM:
Of course, I'm not "suggesting the "escape clause" is supposed to make everyone feel warm and fuzzy about the $50 mil whoops?" I said it "allows the board to cancel projects it PROMISED to the citizens of the college district." I don't think the voters and taxpayers should be resigned to the mess the board (and the administration) have made of the bond projects. I'm as angry about their incompetence as most of the people writing into this blog. I've actually seen it up close and personal for seven years. For me, it's not enough to call these people fools and use them for sarcasm practice. Look at the records of the incumbents up for re-election in November, if your satisfied with there performance vote for them. If you're not consider voting for the challengers. This is not the "blame game"; it's the responsibility game. Every incumbent trustee this election cycle has an opponent for the first in decades. You have choices. Check out the archive of articles at SJDCWatch (sjdc.blogspot.com) and look for other sources of information--and evaluate their performance. "
commonsense1 wrote on Aug 5, 2008 4:27 PM:
Lodian2 wrote on Aug 5, 2008 3:00 PM:
commonsense1 wrote on Aug 5, 2008 2:19 PM:
JF wrote on Aug 5, 2008 12:45 PM:
al da long wrote on Aug 5, 2008 11:38 AM:
JF wrote on Aug 5, 2008 11:13 AM:
To quote from one of my favorite movies "you cant handle the truth". You are no dairy guy, you are a hypocrite! I know exactly who you are. Read the archives better, you are supposed to be good at research, read the quotes from attornies and the quotes from rodriguez about "screwing up". The deal in Lodi is not dead, re read the article, the option is still alive.
I should have known it was you. "
al da long wrote on Aug 5, 2008 10:32 AM:
yes D English laid it out. So didnt the board kybosh Victor rd.? so what are you chirping about? Did you tighten your sack too tight? Dont want to write an Op/ed piece for the LNS? If all you have is the truth, then let be known, but if its B>S, then all will know you full of it. So to quote you, Time to sack up. "
WY wrote on Aug 5, 2008 9:35 AM:
WE have homeless people everywhere. Children that need a meal. Oh my God,
What are we doing? "
JF wrote on Aug 5, 2008 8:39 AM:
DeltaEnglish wrote on Aug 4, 2008 9:58 PM:
http://www.deltacollege.org/bondmeasure/ballot.html
Below is the "escape clause" in the ballot language that allows the board to cancel projects it promised to the citizens of the college district. This is only an excerpt; use the link to get the full text of the ballot statement.
--------------------------------
The bond program is designed to provide facilities which will serve current and expected enrollment. In the event of an unexpected slowdown in development or enrollment of students at the college, certain of the projects described above will be delayed or may not be completed. In such case, bond money will be spent on only the most essential of the projects listed above. The District will work with the Citizens Oversight Committee on prioritizing those projects in the event factors beyond the Districts control require that project be reconsidered. "
al da long wrote on Aug 4, 2008 9:17 PM:
JF wrote on Aug 4, 2008 8:29 PM:
Your no friend of mine, dont profess to know anything about me unless you put your name on the post, coward! The facts are what they are and the trustees have blown it ten times over by being dishonest to the voters who gave them the money in the first place. "
al da long wrote on Aug 4, 2008 6:19 PM:
And Saying delta better sack up or what? Oh wise one, run for the board, that bud, would be sacking up! Maybe even write the LNS with your OP/Ed piece, and lay it all out and let everyone know your Jerrytail. "
JF wrote on Aug 4, 2008 5:48 PM:
JF wrote on Aug 4, 2008 5:45 PM:
JF wrote on Aug 4, 2008 5:38 PM:
commonsense1 wrote on Aug 4, 2008 4:08 PM:
commonsense1 wrote on Aug 4, 2008 3:59 PM:
JF wrote on Aug 4, 2008 11:52 AM:
JF wrote on Aug 4, 2008 11:50 AM:
JF wrote on Aug 4, 2008 11:43 AM:
DeltaEnglish wrote on Aug 4, 2008 9:25 AM:
bondprogram@bond.deltacollege.edu "
DeltaEnglish wrote on Aug 4, 2008 9:15 AM:
If I knew of ways to reduce the cost of the Cunningham Building, I'd share them with you and with Lee Belarmino, the new Bond Executive. I believe the current cost of the project is $82 or $83 million. One way the college has reduced the cost of the new science and math building is $29 million grant from the state. The compelling reason to build the new Cunningham is the need for more lab space, so students don't have to wait a couple of semesters to get the lab classes they need. However, it's also true that the college would have to return the grant if the project is cancelled. Here's my (admittedly limited) understanding of some of the reasons why the construction is some expensive. Cunningham, like all the buildings on campus from the early '70's has asbestos insulation, so there are hazmat costs associated with knocking it down. Renovation would involve hazmat costs, too, and (I'm told) is actually more expensive than razing the building and starting from scratch. "
Al da long wrote on Aug 4, 2008 8:37 AM:
JF, Blight your community, Does Delta's main campus blight stockton? Stick to your myopic thoughts and keep dreaming about jerrytale land. "
Al da long wrote on Aug 4, 2008 8:28 AM:
JF wrote on Aug 4, 2008 8:23 AM:
JF wrote on Aug 4, 2008 8:21 AM:
T&C wrote on Aug 4, 2008 8:14 AM:
commonsense1 wrote on Aug 3, 2008 10:12 PM:
Al da long wrote on Aug 3, 2008 9:54 PM:
commonsense1 wrote on Aug 3, 2008 9:53 PM:
DeltaEnglish wrote on Aug 3, 2008 8:09 PM:
Thanks. If people inform themselves, they won't be satisfied with this board, and they'll vote to change it. "
Observer wrote on Aug 3, 2008 6:02 PM:
t&C wrote on Aug 3, 2008 3:33 PM:
t&C wrote on Aug 3, 2008 3:31 PM:
Observer wrote on Aug 3, 2008 3:21 PM:
T&c wrote on Aug 3, 2008 1:25 PM:
commonsense1 wrote on Aug 3, 2008 10:23 AM:
KenH wrote on Aug 3, 2008 5:24 AM:
DeltaEnglish wrote on Aug 2, 2008 10:01 PM:
Commonsense--Lodi did get shafted and nothing about that makes me cheerful. I'm a native Lodian, and I taught in a public high school in Lodi Unified for 20 years. I taught lots of bright decent kids, and there are lots of good kids coming up behind them.
Al--the board often ignores the advice of top administrators. Check out the accreditation report and the grand jury report. "
DeltaEnglish wrote on Aug 2, 2008 9:42 PM:
1. The Delta College Board of Trustees made decisions which have caused serious problems and wasted millions of dollars of Measure L funds. The District needs capable trustees who are able to meet the task of bringing Delta College into the 21st century.
2. This Grand Jury found that the Board of Trustees of Delta Community College was ill prepared to handle the Measure L Bond funds. At the time the bond measure was proposed, the Board of Trustees knew that they would not be able to obtain the amount of money necessary to cover all of the proposed needs as listed on the ballot. There appears to have been no clear path to fulfill student needs for the future.
6. The Board of Trustees did not heed nor follow their staff recommendations or the recommendations of consultants, hired by this Board. This Grand Jury finds that making these decisions prior to having been given all facts and pertinent information has caused this Board of Trustees numerous problems. "
DeltaEnglish wrote on Aug 2, 2008 9:40 PM:
sjdcwatch.blogspot.com
I'd like you to check up on me and see whether I'm quoting out of context. "
DeltaEnglish wrote on Aug 2, 2008 9:38 PM:
Below are some excerpts from the Accreditation report which placed college on probation.
--------------------------------
--Unfortunately, numerous interviews with students, faculty, staff and administrators reinforced the perception that the Board is not focusing on policy, but has devolved into a group reduced to infighting and micromanagement of college operations.
1. The team recommends that the Board of Trustees develops a systematic process to review and revise existing Board Policies, establish and adhere to an acceptable code of ethics (Standards IV.B.1; IV.B. 1.a; IV.B.1.b-h.).
2. The team recommends that the Board of Trustees establish and monitor itself as a policy-making body, reaffirm delegation of operational authority to the Superintendent/President, and actively support the authority of management for the administration of the college. (Standard IVB; IVB.1.e). "
Al da long wrote on Aug 2, 2008 9:07 PM:
KenH wrote on Aug 2, 2008 9:03 PM:
commonsense1 wrote on Aug 2, 2008 6:05 PM:
KenH wrote on Aug 2, 2008 3:31 PM:
I'm hopeful that these dates are true # Date construction is expected to start: Sept. 18, 2009.
# Length of construction: 24 months.
# College moves into the building: June 30, 2012. "
DeltaEnglish wrote on Aug 2, 2008 12:06 PM:
Ironic--yes, but sad, too. "
Bob Hussein Loblaw wrote on Aug 2, 2008 8:58 AM:
journey wrote on Aug 2, 2008 8:54 AM:
DeltaEnglish wrote on Aug 2, 2008 8:34 AM:
KenH wrote on Aug 2, 2008 5:24 AM:
Comments on this story are now closed.