Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Construction Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council sends proposed on‑call construction‑management contract back to committee after concerns over scope and cost
Summary
Council discussed a proposed on‑call construction‑management agreement with KBA that included a draft cap and an aggregate ceiling; members worried about broad tasking, high hourly rates and potential $2,000,000 cumulative cap in the draft. Council asked staff to reword the agreement and return it to committee for limits tied to specific projects.
Council considered an on‑call construction‑management professional services agreement offered by KBA intended to provide independent inspection and project management support on an as‑needed basis.
Staff said the contract is a master agreement under which individual task orders and projects would be negotiated separately; the draft included language describing a maximum potential aggregate compensation figure that several council members found confusing. One council member said the draft’s “anticipated maximum total compensation” figure and the hourly schedule could quickly add up and expressed concern about an open two‑year agreement with a $2,000,000 cap in the documents. “I can't vote for something like this because I have to fully grasp the financial picture,” one newly elected member said.
Council members debated alternatives: hire an additional staff inspector to provide continuous oversight, attach construction‑management services only to specific projects (for example, Kansas Street) with defined scopes and ceilings, or proceed with a narrowly worded master agreement that requires council approval for task orders above procurement thresholds. Several members said the purpose of the contract — to create an independent set of eyes separate from the engineering firm of record — was sound, but they wanted firmer limits on use and clearer billing controls.
Outcome: Council directed staff to return the item to public works committee to redraft language that specifies project‑by‑project tasking or tighter financial controls and to invite the consultant to present and answer questions before approval.
Next steps: staff will revise the agenda bill and proposed agreement, add clarity on who authorizes task orders and present the contract language and options to the committee and council before any authorization.
