Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ishpeming council approves change‑order work for Payne & Dolan on DWSRF project
Summary
The council approved Change Order No. 2 to the DWSRF contract with Payne & Dolan authorizing additional water‑system work within the contractor’s scope and recorded a not‑to‑exceed authorization; staff cited a contract contingency and scheduling concerns tied to the state budget timeline.
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Ishpeming City Council voted to allow additional water‑system work under Change Order No. 2 to the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) contract with Payne & Dolan, after city staff described timing and workforce concerns tied to the project schedule.
Bill, the city administrator, told the council that contractors should not remove asphalt before or after Oct. 1 because of quality concerns and recommended allowing Payne & Dolan to perform remaining water‑system tasks this year so the firm could keep crews employed into November. He said the contract still had an unused contingency (‘‘I believe it’s 1,200,000.0,’’ he said) and asked the council to authorize a not‑to‑exceed dollar amount for an upcoming formal change order.
The record shows two different figures discussed during the presentation: Bill said he was asking for authorization for a ‘‘dollar amount not to exceed $29,290,000’’ while the motion made and recorded by the council authorized a not‑to‑exceed $290,000 for Change Order No. 2. The council voted in favor of the motion.
City staff also told the council the Payne & Dolan bid lines are roughly comparable with another contractor (Lindbergh) and that the scope being proposed would stay within the contract’s water‑system work. Council members asked clarifying questions about whether Lindbergh was part of the same contract and were told Lindbergh holds Contract 1 and is not part of Contract 2.
The council’s action was limited to approving the not‑to‑exceed authorization as recorded in the motion; the formal change‑order paperwork and any final dollar amounts are expected to appear with staff paperwork at a subsequent meeting.

