Regional Mobility Authority says Pelicano widening may restart after bankruptcy rulings; interim fix bids received

The Camino Real Regional Mobility Authority told the El Paso County Commissioners Court on Jan. 23 that it expects a court ruling soon in a bankruptcy dispute over the Pelicano widening project and that a surety company has solicited bids to complete an interim portion of the work.

Raymond Reyes, principal with the Camino Real Regional Mobility Authority, gave the update. Reyes said the original contractor stopped work at roughly 50% completion, the RMA declared the contractor in default and the RMA pursued a claim against the contractor’s performance bond. JER Concrete later filed for bankruptcy; the case converted from Chapter 11 to Chapter 7 and a trustee was assigned. Reyes said the RMA filed a declaratory-judgment action in the bankruptcy court to determine whether the default was proper and that the judge split the case into several segments and has held “mini trials.”

Reyes said a bench trial concluded Jan. 13–15 and the RMA will file a post-trial brief next Wednesday, with the trustee’s brief due two weeks later. "I feel ... once the briefs go in ... he would be able to rule fairly soon thereafter," Reyes said.

Reyes described an "interim phase" the RMA has discussed with the surety: repackaging the unfinished work into a smaller contract so the surety or a takeover contractor can complete a portion now while the larger litigation proceeds. He said the contractor had completed the roadway from Loop 375 heading east to about Ercoupe; the interim phase would complete the north section from Ercoupe back to Loop 375 and could relieve congestion for most residents, businesses and schools along 375. Reyes said the RMA calculated roughly $10–$11 million of construction funds are available but currently inaccessible pending takeover work.

The surety has put the repackaged interim scope to bid and "they are forwarding those bid results to us today," Reyes said. He added the surety has indicated it will include the RMA in selection discussions for any takeover contractor and that county and RMA staff would meet with the surety as soon as next week to evaluate the bids. Reyes cautioned variables remain — including final court rulings that could alter the approach — but said the process is "moving" and the RMA is hopeful about near‑term progress.

Commissioners pressed for timing and quality assurances. Reyes said the bankruptcy judge has repeatedly acknowledged the project’s community impacts and that the judge “recognizes the impact that it's having on the community.” On quality, Reyes said federal funding covers roughly 92% of the project and federal oversight will require the same standards and materials in any successor construction.

Court members asked whether the RMA would participate in selecting a new contractor; Reyes said the bond terms permit the RMA to approve or reject a takeover contractor and that the surety’s claims vice president told him the RMA would be part of those discussions.

Commissioners also asked what would happen if the judge ruled against the RMA on the default question. Reyes said the RMA had drafted takeover language so that if the surety stepped out following an adverse ruling, the RMA could inherit the interim contract and access funds to continue the work. He said the RMA would return to court with options if the ruling was unfavorable.

The court asked the RMA to return with another update after the surety’s bid results are reviewed and when there is more clarity on the judge’s ruling.

Ending: The RMA’s presentation did not include a formal vote; commissioners signaled they wanted a follow-up update when more information was available.