Coryell County officials flag $427,000 construction overrun, request audit of change orders

County officials told the commissioners court that a county construction project has exceeded its original guaranteed maximum price (GMP) and that multiple change orders and payments require review.

County leaders said the project’s original GMP was $8,016,114.53 and that the current contract total is $8,443,583.37 — a budget overage of $427,468.84 attributed to signed change orders. The judge reported “to date expenditures are approximately $10.3 million,” and said additional bills remain outstanding.

The judge (identified in the transcript as the meeting’s primary presenter) said he had reviewed nine of 11 signed change orders and found none bearing his signature. “I can assure you that I have not delegated my signature authority on any document, without direct verbal confirmation,” he said. The judge also said portions of architect fees and other project costs appeared not to have been budgeted in the current year and that some change-order spending had not come before the court.

Officials named the architect of record, Mr. Heffelfinger of Southwest Architects, and the firm Butler Cohen as parties tied to the contract documents presented to the court. The judge said he understood the architect had submitted a final invoice for construction administration and that Butler Cohen had forwarded summaries of project expenses to the court. The judge said the court had not consistently retained any percentage of payments for the architect as a holdback and expressed concern that some payments appeared to have been made in full.

Because the court’s review showed “several hundred thousands of dollars of expenditures” that had not been reviewed by the full court, the judge said he would work with county staff to procure “the services of an outside auditor to go back and review all of the receipts and all the billing.” He framed the step as a response to what he called a failure in project administration.

Court discussion noted several construction deficiencies at the project site, including leaning entry gates and site-cleanup issues. The judge and other officials said they were working with the project engineer and contractor to address those items; no firm schedule for repairs was given in the meeting record.

The court tabled a separate agenda item that would have authorized further actions to support construction projects until after a scheduled executive session. Several related budget items (a proposed budget amendment transferring funds into the capital improvement fund) also were tabled for later consideration.

The county judge said he would provide commissioners copies of the change orders he had reviewed and would pursue the next steps with county staff and outside counsel as needed.

Ending: Commissioners did not vote on new construction funding during the open session. The court directed follow-up work, including an administrative audit and further discussion in or after executive session.