The Dayton City Commission voted Wednesday to approve a $1,400,000 contract modification with A. H. Sturgill Roofing to continue emergency stabilization and roof replacement work at 34 North Main, a large downtown building damaged in March. The approval followed extended questioning from multiple commissioners about prior emergency payments, funding sources and whether the work should have been bid earlier.

City Manager (name not specified) told commissioners the project began as an emergency response after a parapet wall fell in March and that the city proceeded quickly to stabilize the building. “This is an emergency work. No. This does not bring in PLA because there’s not the time to go through the process,” the city manager said, explaining why the project was not initially procured through a standard competitive process.

The commission’s action matters because the work combines different funding sources, including HUD funds, and the use of HUD funding triggers prevailing-wage requirements. Steve Gaughn, director for Planning and Neighborhood Development, said the roof work and stabilization are intertwined and that Sturgill is the prime contractor with multiple subcontractors (crane, masons and others). “We knew the roof would be about at 1 and a half. We did the same position be in about 1 and a half,” Gaughn said, adding that the city applied prevailing wage because of HUD involvement.

Commissioners pressed staff on several issues: whether the first contract covered the same scope; why the roof and stabilization work were not presented to the commission together in June; whether insurance claims had been filed; and what the end use of the building will be. Commissioner Fairchild asked for a follow-up memo on the insurance process and specifics of the work. The city manager said the land bank currently holds the property and the city provides oversight and maintenance; the land bank is participating in insurance conversations and will be part of attracting development.

Commissioner Shaw and others questioned whether the first contract should have covered roof replacement and stabilization together and suggested tabling the item until staff could supply clearer documentation. The mayor directed that the item be pulled and voted on separately; the commission subsequently approved the item with an abstention noted on the record by a commissioner who said the requested information had not been fully provided.

Gaughn and the city manager said staff declared an emergency in March and began work to prevent further collapse while engineers assessed the structure. Gaughn said the roof had two components (concrete deck and rubber roof) and that the parapet failure exposed roof elements, increasing urgency. He said some engineering, asbestos remediation and scaffolding work occurred before the full, detailed scope was finalized.

No formal developer commitment or final redevelopment plan was adopted at the meeting. Staff said a request for proposals to attract development investment will be issued. The city manager and Gaughn said the goal of the stabilization and roof work is to create a viable property envelope that will allow the city and land bank to attract private redevelopment rather than demolish the building.

Commissioners who spoke emphasized both fiscal caution and the building’s significance to downtown: Commissioner Gelsa commended staff for emergency response and said the building has “great potential” for future use; other commissioners argued the packet timeline and the timing of questions meant some issues could have been resolved earlier.

The commission’s vote approved the contract amendment to continue work on 34 North Main; staff were directed to provide follow-up documentation on insurance claims, the contract history and the scope completed to date.