Aransas County, contractor Teal debate window fixes, masonry and remaining costs as courthouse work nears completion

Aransas County officials, representatives of contractor Teal and the courthouse design team spent the Feb. 21 Commissioners Court workshop debating who must pay for and approve fixes to the nearly‑finished courthouse, with the most attention on leaking windows and exterior masonry work.

The dispute centers on whether water intrusion and finish discrepancies are defects in Teal’s workmanship, design errors by the architect, or consequences of permitted substitutions that required redesign. Teal representatives said they have tested a repair for the windows that passed independent tests and asked the county and the architect to allow the same test protocol used by the City Hall project; county staff and the architect’s representatives said the architect of record must approve a testing and warranty plan before the county accepts remedial work.

Why it matters: The disagreements affect when county offices and courtrooms can occupy the building and who will pay for further testing, corrective work and outstanding contractor claims. Teal provided a list of remaining base‑scope tasks and a figure the contractor says would allow completion and turnover; the county and design team questioned parts of that accounting and pressed for more documentation and formal instructions.

Teal counsel David Paden, who opened public remarks for the contractor team, said the window leaks are a design/installation interface problem and that a solution from consultant David Nicastro has passed multiple tests. “The solution has been tested multiple times, and it is passed every time,” Paden said, adding Teal awaits formal approval from the architect and the owner to proceed. Teal and its engineer…