Orting — The City Council on Wednesday pushed a proposed $247,280.98 amendment to Parametrix’s contract for construction management of the new pedestrian bridge to its Sept. 24 regular meeting after more than an hour of discussion about responsibility for drilled-shaft problems, pending change orders and the city’s remaining contingency.

The amendment covers additional engineering and construction-management work, including shaft repair evaluation, changes to the east stair/pathway and related design effort. Public works committee materials show the requested amount would increase the Parametrix-related total charges to roughly $500,732.99 against the project contingency, leaving about $308,000 remaining in the contingency bucket if the council approves the amendment.

Council members described the item as urgent because construction is underway and Parametrix has performed work to keep the project moving, but several members pressed for more documentation and for staff to pursue cost recovery from the prime contractor where fault exists. “Parametrix does deserve to get paid for the work, but my argument is who’s at fault for the cost,” Council member Moore said during the meeting. “In my opinion, that's Quig brothers” — the prime contractor referenced in council discussion — “has to fix the problem.”

The public works director, Ryan McBee, briefed council members on project status and funding. Staff and multiple council members noted earlier change orders and invoices already paid and pending amounts associated with anomalous shaft conditions on the site. One example discussed at length was the WR‑2 shaft: earlier construction charges associated with that shaft exceeded several hundred thousand dollars; Parametrix’s new amendment carries additional engineering charges tied to shaft investigation and repair for multiple shafts.

Council members debated whether the city should immediately pay the Parametrix amendment to avoid construction stoppage and associated delay costs or hold payment and press the contractor for responsibility. Council member Hogan argued the city needed to pay to prevent work stoppage and additional costs; others, including Moore, said staff should pursue offsets from the general contractor. Several council members also asked for more transparency on the line‑item breakdowns for the $247,280.98 proposal before authorizing payment.

Because several staff members who could answer detailed billing and contractual questions were not present at the study session, the council agreed to defer final action and to list the Parametrix amendment as a standalone agenda item at the Sept. 24 regular meeting. Council members asked staff to provide a clearer invoice breakdown, identify which costs might be grant‑eligible, and explain steps taken to recover amounts from the contractor. The council also discussed the potential budget sources, including previously allocated ARPA transfers moved into the general fund to help cover cost overruns.

The decision to defer will leave the construction team and Parametrix continuing to perform work while the council reviews the documents at the next regular meeting. If the council approves the amendment on Sept. 24, the additional $247,280.98 would be moved from the city’s contingency and general fund transfers as outlined in staff materials. If the council rejects it, members said they expected staff to continue negotiating with the contractor and to return with alternatives or clarifying information.

Clarifying details: the staff memo and discussion identified the specific amendment request amount as $247,280.98; the cumulative pending Parametrix-related amounts discussed in the meeting totaled approximately $500,732.99; council members cited an available contingency and remaining balance in the Parametrix budget of roughly $308,000 after the amendment. Council members and staff repeatedly noted that some previously billed construction costs had been grant eligible while other items would be city‑funded. The council asked staff to provide a detailed invoice and a clear account of which change orders and shaft repairs remain contested or unpaid.

Why it matters: The pedestrian bridge is a major capital project for Orting. Additional unexpected construction or engineering costs and unresolved responsibility for drilled shafts could increase the city’s costs and delay project completion; council members stressed they wanted documented justification for charges and for staff to press for cost recovery where appropriate.

The item was forwarded as a standalone agenda bill for the Sept. 24 meeting; staff will provide a detailed invoice breakdown and a recommendation then.