Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Courthouse work advances; commissioners pause sale of historic retaining wall sections
Summary
Project manager reported two small change orders approved, contingency and interest balances, and unresolved issues including backordered doors delaying occupancy; county declined to sell historic retaining‑wall sections now and will revisit once legal and funding issues are clear.
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Billy Stone, presenting the courthouse update for county staff, said the county had authorized two small change orders (Nos. 81 and 82) totaling $9,303.74 to add privacy film and magnetic locks and to allow remote access from the Justice Center. Stone gave a current owners' contingency balance of $20,904.17 and reported $51,210.92 in accrued interest that cannot be spent on the courthouse and must be used at other county facilities. He said the county remains on schedule to remove the temporary trailer and fence by the end of the month but cannot obtain an occupancy permit until backordered doors arrive and are installed, which he expects in August. Stone also raised the disposition of stored property and a disassembled historic retaining wall. He said bids received when the project was rebid last spring put full reconstruction of the wall in the $300,000 to $320,000 range for material and labor, excluding contractor management and architect fees. Stone told commissioners he had been contacted by a resident interested in purchasing wall sections but recommended against offering sections to private buyers until legal notice requirements and funding options were resolved. Commissioners did not authorize an immediate sale. Stone said departments would be invited to claim reusable items, the county would pursue Indiana Code procedures for disposal, and he would seek counsel from bond counsel before proceeding. He asked commissioners for guidance on whether to respond to the resident interest and said he would return with a recommended approach.

