Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County committee debates final change order for two water treatment plant projects after cost overruns and liquidated damages
Summary
Public Works staff presented a final change order to close two water treatment plant projects that included additional costs and assessed liquidated damages; committee members asked for further debate and negotiation before final acceptance.
County staff presented a final change order to close out construction at two water treatment plants, citing multiple unforeseen conditions that increased costs and negotiations over liquidated damages.
Staff told the committee the project encountered several costly items: an as‑built water main that was 24 inches rather than the 20 inches shown on a 1978 set of plans, problems with PVC glue that led to replacement of some piping with stainless steel, and unsuitable soils that required replacement. Liquidated damages of about $146,000 were assessed against the contractor. After negotiation, staff said the net change figure under discussion was approximately $386,949.83 (as read into the record), and staff recommended approval of the final change order.
Committee members expressed concern about the amount and the duration of the work. One member said liquidated damages are contractual but difficult to enforce and that the county could continue negotiation or send the matter back to staff. The committee motioned to send the item to debate, and a second was recorded; the transcript shows debate was requested and a motion to move to debate was made and seconded.
Why it matters: The change order affects the final project cost and the county’s capital spend for critical water infrastructure. Committee discussion highlighted the operational and contractual complexities of large construction projects, including design changes, differing subsurface conditions and the application of liquidated damages.
Next steps: Committee members voted to move the item into debate (procedural motion). Staff said they had been negotiating with the contractor since last August and were at an advanced point in discussions; staff also said litigation could follow if the parties did not reach agreement.
Ending: The committee moved the issue to debate for further consideration and potential negotiation; the transcript does not record a final acceptance vote on the change order.
