Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves two annex construction contracts; mechanical bid held over amid bond and insurance concerns
Summary
The commission approved two construction contracts for the county annex remodel but held action on the mechanical contractor after concerns that the low bidder did not meet scope and that the bid-bond and insurer requirements could create legal and scheduling issues; staff will follow up before a possible special session.
The Cass County Commission authorized two of three construction contracts for the annex remodel project and postponed action on the mechanical contractor while staff and counsel investigate bid-bond obligations and an insurance requirement that a contractor says prevents it from continuing without signed contracts.
County staff (S6) presented finalized contracts that close out prior notices to proceed, but Commissioner Breitling (S4) raised a concern that the apparent low bidder failed to comply with bid specifications and therefore the county could pursue relief under the bidderbond. Counsel present (Kate Nauman, S13, introduced earlier in discussion) said the bid-bond question is legally separable from awarding contracts to other bidders but acknowledged she needs to research whether awarding the other contracts would jeopardize any claim under the bond.
A construction meeting attendee (S14) told the commission that one mechanical contractors insurer requires signed contracts before issuing coverage; that insurers requirement means the mechanical contractor cannot obtain the necessary insurance based only on a notice to proceed. Commissioners debated approving the two contractors that had certificates of insurance and leaving the mechanical contract (Peterson Mechanical) pending to avoid delaying parts of the project.
Commissioner Flacco (S3) moved to approve the two uncontested contracts and hold Peterson Mechanical for further discussion and potential resolution at a special meeting; the commission took roll call and the approvals moved forward. Commissioners noted potential legal costs and the possibility of litigation against the first bidder if the county chooses that path, but several commissioners said they preferred not to delay work on the two contractors while the insurance and bond questions are clarified.
Next steps: staff and counsel will follow up with the architect and the parties involved, attempt to resolve the bid-bond and insurance questions before Friday and, if needed, schedule a special meeting to finalize the mechanical contract.
