Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Contracts And Change Orders topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board discusses $33.5 million CP1 change-order settlement and seeks clearer reporting on outstanding claims
Summary
Staff told the board a $33.5 million settlement resolved a $57 million claim from a CP1 design-builder; directors pressed staff for more transparency on outstanding change-order claims and how delegation of authority is applied.
Get email alerts on the Contracts And Change Orders topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The board was briefed on a $33.5 million settlement resolving a $57 million claim from an RCP1 design-builder related to additional design services and prolonged design review processes. Jamie Matalka, chief financial officer, said the claim was reduced by 41% from the original amount and that the settlement had no impact on the substantial-completion date. Several directors asked for more transparency on outstanding change-order claims and how the authority applies delegation of contracting authority. Director Escutia and Director Camacho requested access to the list of significant contractor change-order submissions; board discussion noted that change-order submissions are not invoices and that the authority and contractors often negotiate amounts before any payment is made. Board members discussed the current delegation framework: the CEO may execute amendments up to thresholds set in the board's delegation policy and must report to the board when contingency or contract amendments exceed specified thresholds (the CFO said the reporting threshold for CEO reporting had been triggered for the $33.5 million item; the board discussed the $25 million and $100 million thresholds). Some board members expressed concern that splitting claims into multiple smaller amendments could be used to avoid board review; staff said that practice is not anticipated under the new leadership and that the board member could request a private briefing with the CEO for more detail. No board vote was required; the board requested follow-up conversations about delegation language and asked staff to return with clarifications and, if needed, proposed policy changes.

