Council approves $161,808 for courthouse spindle replacements and cleaning after commissioners' quotes

The Vermillion County Council on June 9 approved an additional appropriation of $161,808 from the general fund to pay for courthouse exterior work, including replacement of balcony spindles and cleaning/sealing of limestone surfaces.

Commissioner R.J. Johnson and county maintenance staff explained the project and the procurement process. Johnson said the effort began last summer and that staff (identified as Terry in the meeting) solicited companies; only a limited number of contractors were willing to quote work on a historic courthouse. The materials and scope include: replacement of spindles on three balcony locations, a north elevation option, and a cleaning/water‑repellent sealing of limestone with joint repair where needed. One contractor's posted estimates in the packet showed a cleaning and sealing estimate of about $78,333 and separate spindle‑replacement totals that varied among quotes; a combined full replacement plus cleaning could total roughly $168,829 per materials in the packet, depending on options and final scope.

Council members pressed for clarity on quotes, options and timing. Some members suggested lower‑cost cleaning products as a temporary measure; staff and contractors cautioned that ad‑hoc cleaning or pressure washing can damage limestone and that joint repair and careful masonry work were necessary. The contractor warned of falling fragments from deteriorated spindles and advised either stabilizing or replacing railings near public walkways for safety.

Misty (auditor/finance staff) confirmed the building and structure account had roughly $27,000 remaining in the current budget, which the commissioners said could cover a roughly $7,000 shortfall between advertised additional appropriation and contractor totals if the council chose to proceed. Councilman Weir moved to approve the additional appropriation; Mr. Bose seconded. The council approved the appropriation by voice vote, with the motion framed to require that the contract match the specifications presented and that any changed totals be presented to the council.

Council and commission representatives noted contractor availability was limited and that, if work could not be completed in the current year, the county would need to re‑advertise or carry the appropriation forward into the next budget cycle.