Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities Stormwater Bond topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Township asks West York Area SD for 10% surety on Sunset Lane stormwater work; trustees seek legal briefing
Summary
West York administrators told the board the township requires a surety bond equal to roughly 10% of the stormwater system value (about $270,000 on a $2.7 million estimate). Trustees asked the solicitor for a legal briefing and to negotiate whether the township can reduce or alter the requirement.
Get email alerts on the Facilities Stormwater Bond topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District officials told the board that West Manchester Township conditioned a recent approval on the district posting a surety or performance bond equal to roughly 10% of the stormwater-system value. Administration cited a 10% figure on a $2,700,000 estimated stormwater value, which would equal about $270,000; the district described the amount as not originally included in the project’s soft costs.
Officials said they are exploring options: negotiate with the township to reduce the percentage, seek a contractor-provided bond that might eliminate the need for duplicative bonding, ask for an extension on the township deadline, or place the cash equivalent in escrow while counsel seeks clarification. The district’s solicitor, Eric Hume, and project consultant Brian Bingaman of TTC were identified as parties administration will ask to negotiate terms and clarify township authority and typical practice.
Board members voiced concern that the township’s requirement appeared redundant because general contractors customarily provide performance bonds as part of construction bids. Trustees asked administration and legal counsel to prepare a legal briefing before the board signs any acceptance of terms; staff said the board must respond to the township’s notice by May 2 unless an extension is negotiated. Administrators said they are working with their surety broker to obtain estimates and emphasized they would seek to limit the district’s out-of-pocket costs.
A board member proposed convening a short legal briefing (virtual or in-person) with the solicitor to review township authority, whether similar projects in the township received the same requirement, and options the district can pursue before the May deadline. Administration said it would attempt to schedule counsel’s briefing as soon as counsel and the township can be consulted.

