Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Councilists press Public Works on change orders, bridge load-rating and contractor name-change entries
Summary
During the Feb. 17 meeting, council members questioned Public Works and Finance staff about a report of change orders, an apparent $291,000 cumulative figure, a contractor legal-name assignment and whether engineering firms bear liability for posted bridge tonnage.
Council members on the Hawaii County Finance Committee on Feb. 17 pressed Public Works and Finance staff for clarity on a change‑orders report and on who bears liability for bridge load ratings.
Finance Director Diane Nakagawa and Public Works representatives told the committee that a $291,000 figure shown in the report represents a cumulative total from prior change orders and not a new cost associated with a contractor’s legal-name assignment. “That looks like the cumulative,” Kelsey Kalua Luis of DPW said, explaining that a corporate name change requires assignment paperwork but does not itself create a new change-order cost.
Council members also raised concern about a renovation at a county facility (Richardson’s) where a cumulative change‑order total was listed as $467,000 but the current supplemental agreement reflected $18,645. Nakagawa explained the difference: the smaller number is the current supplemental amount; the larger figure is the cumulative total over the life of the contract.
Members pressed Public Works about bridge assessments tied to a contract originally dated 2022 to perform load ratings. Kelly Thompson, engineering division chief, said the contract is for load‑rating analyses that establish posted tonnage limits. Thompson and Deputy Director Neil Asvio noted consultant delays contributed to timing issues; Asvio said DPW recently reviewed posted tonnage and corrected several bridges where the previously posted limits were inaccurate.
On liability for posted tonnage, staff deferred to Corporation Counsel. Thompson said contracts typically include limited liability provisions and insurance language and that the county would consult Corp. Counsel if an incident occurred; the committee requested follow-up information about liability and contract language.
The committee closed the file on the change-orders communication after the discussion (voice vote recorded as 7 in favor). The committee also asked staff to monitor the use of state monies for bridge projects and to seek extensions as needed so allocated funds do not lapse.
The committee did not take final action that changes contract amounts during this meeting; staff pledged to provide additional documentation at a later date.
