Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Aldermen direct payment to contractor for Country Club Park work amid dispute over pond overflow
Summary
After a dispute over whether a contractor completed work at Country Club Park, the Board of Aldermen voted to pay the contractor while noting concerns about runoff from a nearby pond owned/managed by Schubert Mitchell; council recorded one member opposed to the payment and directed staff to pursue other remedies.
The Carl Junction Board of Aldermen voted July 1 to authorize payment to a contractor who said he completed contracted work at Country Club Park, despite council questions about whether the work matched the bid specification and concerns that pond overflow from adjacent property damaged the field.
A contractor who identified himself at the meeting said he had completed the job three times and that significant pond overflow from property associated with Schubert Mitchell repeatedly washed away the work. He said he had personally paid for seed and hauling dirt and asked to be paid roughly $25,000 (amount quoted by the contractor during public comment) so he could recover expenses.
Council members expressed differing views about whether the work met the bid terms. The council discussed the bid language (which described work over a 112,500-square-foot area at a 2-to-3-inch spread) and whether the contractor’s deliveries matched that scope; the contractor said he delivered five or six loads and that the city administrator had told him that number would suffice. City staff said the contractor performed work but noted that subsequent pond overflows and lawnmower damage have left the field in poor condition.
The city’s staff reported they had contacted Schubert Mitchell when pumps were observed moving water off the pond and said staff asked the contractor to stop pumping so no further water would flow onto the field until engineers could assess the plat and drainage. Staff said a final plat approval and engineer letter may be 90–120 days away before new work there could proceed.
Aldermen debated whether to withhold payment pending further investigation or to pay now and pursue recovery from Schubert Mitchell or insurance. One alderman said withholding payment would be unfair; another said it was “outrageous” to pay for work that council believed was not properly done, and noted federal funds were involved. The motion to pay the contractor passed; the chair later summarized the vote as having one member opposed and the remainder in favor and directed staff to proceed with payment and to pursue other remedies, including discussions with Schubert Mitchell and potential insurance claims.
