Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Udo Consultant Claim topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Owen County redevelopment commission delays payment on UDO consultant invoice, seeks written return-to-work commitment
Summary
The commission agreed to keep a previously tabled $43,000 consultant claim for the county’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) on hold and asked staff to seek a written commitment from the consultant to return and finalize work before any portion of the invoice is paid.
Get email alerts on the Udo Consultant Claim topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Owen County Redevelopment Commission on Tuesday delayed payment on a $43,000 outstanding invoice from a consultant hired to assist with updates to the county’s Unified Development Ordinance and asked staff to seek a written commitment that the consultant will return to finish and codify requested changes before any payment is released.
Commission members said the consultant’s earlier work produced draft sections and citations to state law, but several commissioners said the firm has indicated it considers its work complete. "She said, 'I've done my job. I'm not doing anymore,'" said Bill Purcell, a member of the county planning commission, summarizing his conversations about the firm’s response. Commissioners said the planning commission would like the consultant to be available for questions during final editing and to help codify changes into ordinance language at the project’s end.
The commission recalled that roughly $86,000 of the engagement has already been paid and that $43,000 remains unpaid. Commissioners discussed options ranging from holding the full invoice as leverage to negotiating a partial “goodwill” payment if the consultant agrees to return. "If you aren't satisfied with what you've received and you don't believe she's satisfied her obligations, then I don't think you're obligated to make an additional payment at this point," said one attorney advising the group.
Before directing payment, the commission asked staff to confirm whether the consultant — referred to in the meeting as Deborah — would return to work with the planning commission and to obtain a written commitment describing what the consultant would do and on what timeline. Commissioners agreed to remain in communication and to allow Tony, the county attorney, to authorize staff to open talks if he confirms it is appropriate. A motion to permit that communication and to keep the item tabled until the commission receives further information passed unanimously.
Commissioners emphasized that the planning commission must complete the chapter-by-chapter review before final codification work can proceed and that the county’s leverage is limited to any outstanding invoice if the firm refuses to cooperate.
The commission did not set a dollar amount for an immediate partial payment; members said they preferred to secure a written obligation from the consultant and review the original engagement contract before discussing negotiated settlement offers.
The item remains tabled pending written confirmation that the consultant will return and staff review of the contract and work product.

