Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Construction Changeorders topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves multiple Proctor change orders after discussion; roll-call votes recorded
Summary
After discussion about the origin and necessity of four Proctor High School change orders (expansion joint covers, hazardous-materials abatement for lead paint, ductwork modifications, corridor lighting upgrades), the board approved the items by roll-call; attorneys said approval does not waive the district's right to investigate potential architectural errors.
The Utica City School District Board on Aug. 28 discussed and approved four construction change orders related to work at Proctor High School, taking individual roll-call votes after questions about how change orders arose and whether the architect or construction manager should appear to explain them.
Board members asked for explanations for each change order. Facilities staff and a district representative described one change as hazardous-materials remediation for lead paint that must be abated under New York State guidance, another as ductwork modifications, a third as expansion-joint covers where two building sections meet, and a district-requested corridor lighting upgrade to LED to match adjoining renovated space.
Several trustees noted the architect and construction manager were not present to answer detailed questions. The district attorney told the board that approving payments to contractors from existing contract allowances does not waive the district’s right to investigate and pursue claims if architectural or manager errors are later identified.
The board took separate roll-call votes on the four items; each motion passed (recorded tallies were read into the minutes). The board also discussed that the allowance authorizations included at bid day are the initial source for paying these change orders, and that unexpended allowance money remains district funds.
The board resolved to continue the projects while documenting concerns for possible follow-up with the architect or construction manager. No contract termination or withholding was recorded at the meeting; attorneys advised the board retains the right to investigate.
