1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERB COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Special Session
Wednesday, August 4, 1999
1:30 p.m.
Commissioners Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
Discussion: Courthouse Renovation Status,
Change Order to Construction Contract
PRESENT: FREDERICK L. HENNEKE, Kexr County Judge
H. A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
LARRY GRIFFIN, Commissioner Pct. 4
ALSO PRESENT: KEITH LONGNECKER, Construction Liaison
MIKE WALKER, County Architect
KEITH STODDARD, Stoddard Construction Co.
c~
Q
2
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
On Wednesday, August 9, 1999, at 1:30 p.m., a Special
Session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in
the Commissioners Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse,
Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in
open court:
P R O C E E ll I N G S
JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. It's 1:30 on Wednesday,
August 9th, 1999. We'll call to order this special
Commissioners Court session. Up for consideration today,
basically, is the status of the renovation of the Courthouse
facility -- status of the construction. So, Keith, tell us
where we are.
MR. LONGNECKER: Well, first of all, I'd like to
thank the Commission for -- Commissioners Court for allowing
us to have this special meeting to review Change Order No. 1.
We all wish that it wasn't necessary, but I'm afraid that
this is what it comes to. In general, Change Order No. 1 is
necessary because of the unique design of the Annex building,
and it's been quite difficult. We have uncovered several
things within the building after construction started that
makes these changes necessary to be part of the -- the
construction cost, and the change in time, as well.
Here today is Mike Walker, the architect, and his
consultants, Keith Stoddard, and his supervisor, and they
will be addressing any questions you may have. And, I might
3
,~-,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
add at this time that this will probably not be the only
change order we have. There are several -- we wanted to
include it all today, but there were several prices on things
that were simply not available at this time because of
subcontractors needing to get theirs together and suppliers,
and it simply just did not make this change order. However,
this change order is necessary if we want to keep the
progress and the construction moving in some timely manner so
that we can finish the project on a timely basis.
That's about all I have to say. I would like for Mike
Walker to review some of the high points in the change order,)
and I'll answer any questions you may have.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Before we do that, Keith, I want toll
open it up to any of the Commissioners who want to speak with
you, as our consultant, as to the status, the progress,
anything that they might want to address to you in your
capacity as the person we've chosen to shepherd us through
the project. So, does anyone have any questions of Keith
before we go into the specifics of the change order?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: First of all, I'd like to
commend you, Keith, on your report that we get from you.
Very detailed. I like it very, very much.
MR. LONGNECKER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Going back a month, though,
there was -- and I think this month's addressed it, something
4

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to do with the urinals.
MR. LONGNECKER: Yes, plumbing fixtures.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, the fixtures, excuse
me. Toilet fixtues. Is that -- has that been corrected?
MR. LONGNECKER: Yes, that problem's been resolved,
uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That was the only thing that
I had been keeping up with, other than I want to commend you
on your reports. I like your reports very much.
MR. LONGNECKER: Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone else have any general
comments or questions that they'd like to --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: The only question I'd like
to ask of Keith is, do you feel comfortable that these are
the changes that should be in this package; that the costs
are -- within your ability to determine costs directly, that
those are proper and adequate? in other words, if you were
signing off on this, would you sign on the dotted line as it
is today?
MR. LONGNECKER: Yes, I believe I would. In one
word, yes, is all I can say.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah.
MR. LONGNECKER: Unfortunately, there are high
prices and things of that nature --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Sure.
5
r
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. LONGNECKER: -- that we're living with daily,
and increase in building costs, et cetera. But, I would say
yes, that I am in agreement with this cost on this change
order.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not sure whether I want
to direct the question to Keith or to Mr. Walker. I would
really like to have some -- some explanation as to Directive
No. 1 -- No. 18, Directive No. 1. Why is there such a
substantial change in electrical'?
MR. LONGNECKER: We're going to let Mr. Walker
address --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, that's fine.
MR. LONGNECKER: -- those changes, mm-hmm.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Jonathan?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You've been trying to give it
to me.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A general comment. This is
really for the other people in the audience, I think,
probably more than the Court. I want to expand on one thing
you said. The primary reason for this is the -- I guess, the
nature of the project, and the fact we didn't have drawings,
as-built drawings --
MR. LONGNECKER: As-built drawings.
6
~..
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- originally. I don't know if
the rest of the Court knew that or not. We never could find
the as-built drawings. I guess they don't exist, or didn't
exist for this building, which is one of the reasons why
we've changed our procedure in the County of keeping track of
some of these things in the future. But, I think, going into
the project, the Court was, you know, aware that, you know,
this may happen. Because we did not know what was going --
you know, what was there, and we weren't going to know until
we got into the actual construction of it, just taking out
the guts of what we had. And I just wanted to bring that up
and make sure that was -- you know, everyone in the room was
aware, and the press, that, you know, the reason for this
large change order is mainly because we didn't know going in
what we had, and because we didn't have the as-built drawings
for that building.
MR. LONGNECKER: In fact, we're also maintaining
occupancy in parts of the building, which also makes it a
little sticky as far as progress on the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. LONGNECKER: Than if we could just move
everything out and so forth. Also, we'd like to mention that
we will have a tour after this. I believe, Frank, you will
be through working at this time?
MR. THOMP50N: I've got a skeleton crew.
7

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
la
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. LONGNECKER: By 3 o'clock or so. So, we are
prepared to let you and anyone else wishing to go through the
present construction when this meeting is finished.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My final comment is, every once
in a while, I catch a memo coming through about people coming
through the project unattended.
MR. LONGNECKER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Have those problems been
resolved to your satisfaction?
MR. LONGNECKER: Not entirely.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are we resolving them?
MR. LONGNECKER: That's something I probably should
mention, too, that I will be circulating another memo. The
contractor doesn't really mind people going through the
building, but what he would like to know is when, and if they
would check in with him at the construction office first.
Because if they go through during construction work, they
will need a hard hat, and he will need to provide someone to
accompany them through building, or through part of it. We
realize that there are a lot of people who are anxious to get
in and see where their space is going to be, and start
thinking about their furniture and how they're going to have
things arranged within their spaces, and -- but there really
is going to be plenty of time for that. Because we want to
just make sure that we keep the safety conditions the way
a
r
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
they should be. It's their liability right now; they're
carrying the insurance on the building, and if something
should happen, then they should be the ones that are
notified.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My feeling really is -- and I
don't know if the Court agrees or not -- that other than the
Sheriff's Department needing to use it for business purposes,
I don't see any reason anyone needs to go up there.
MR. LONGNEKER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, just to go look and seed
is not a reason.
MR. LONGNECKER: Even then, if the Sheriff could
let us know when they're bringing someone through to use the
elevator or someone back dawn from the courtroom, it would
really help tremendously.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I would think, as a matter
of policy, other than those exceptions that you've just
mentioned, that I don't see that there's need for anybody to
go in there just to look at this point, unless there's some
overriding reason that I'm not aware of.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I don't know whether -- can
we just establish that as a policy? I know we can, but, I
mean, can we? Is it possible?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Establishing a policy and enforcing
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
a policy are two different things.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, we certainly wouldn't
want to stop work while somebody just goes and measures their
new office space.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't think we're having that
problem.
MR. LONGNECKER: That shouldn't be necessary. We
I
can -- we can work that in. So -- okay.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: One last thing.
MR. LONGNECKER: All right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Is it correct, one of the
"deliverables" of this contract effort will be a set of
as-built drawings?
MR. WALKER: Yes, sir.
MR. LONGNECKER: Certainly. That's --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I just want to have that on
the record, because --
MR. WALKER: A paper and electronic set.
MR. LONGNECKER: There should be not only as-built,
but a file on submittals and some sort of project manual.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I was sure the answer was
yes, but I just wanted to hear it. A warm fuzzy.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Keith, I also have one last
question. In recent days, we've been inspecting and testing
the sewer lines over there. Where are we? What is the
10
L_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
status of that? I noticed some explosion in the Clerk's
office a couple days ago.
MR. WALKER: He's passed on everything.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry?
MR. WALKER: He told me he's passed everything on
this.
MR. LONGNECKER: He's passed -- yeah, the City
inspector has passed all of his rough plumbing inspections.
In other words, it's now ready for the installation of
fixtures and other smaller fittings and things that go with
the plumbing package.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
MR. LONGNECKER: Mm-hmm. Anything else?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's go to the change order.
MR. LONGNECKER: Okay. Mike?
MR. WALKER: Thank you, Keith. Thank you,
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
Commissioners. I'd like to introduce, if I may, just very
quickly, everyone that's part of the team that's here.
Christina Harris with our office. Stuart Vordenbaum is a
structural engineer, and Rolf Lux, who's the mechanical/
electrical engineer. I brought them all here in case there's
any questions -- detailed questions about their particular
specialty that needed to be answered. I will attempt to go
as deep into this document as you want to. I even have more
backup, but I didn't want to just cover you up with
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
paperwork. So, if you need to know more, you know, please
stop me and say -- say where.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Mike, before we go on, do we have
the -- the right change order here?
MR. WALKER: Okay. I was going to go through it
and then give it to you, but I'l:l glue it to you now.
JUDGE HENNEKE: There .is a new first page.
MR. WALKER: We had to amend it, as some late
information came in from the contractor. So, fold up the
other one and --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you sure there's not
another one? Because this one went up.
MR. WALKER: No. No, this is it. And I will
explain that as -- as we go through here. Let me explain why
-- in very general terms, why you have these before you, and
then what I will do is I'll -- any one you have a specific
question about, like Commissioner Baldwin did a while ago, if
you have a specific question -- or Commissioner Williams, I
will tell you what caused this, to the best of my ability.
Although, there's so many things on this list, I may miss a
thing or two. But, primarily, I want to just -- I want to
try to answer your questions.
I know you've had a little bit of time to look at this,
and so I'll -- I'll simply tell you that when we submitted
the plans initially to the City, the Historical Commission,
12
.~
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and the A.D.A. for all our preliminary reviews, we were given
a tentative "okay" that, yeah, this is all fine. We would
not have taken them into bidding documents had we felt
otherwise. In other words, if there were big questions about
any of these things, we would not be putting them out to bid
so that we could immediately turn around and do change
orders. Contrary to what some people may believe, in change
orders, the owner loses, the architect loses, and the
contractor loses. It's not a good situation to be in, so we
always try to minimize that to the greatest extent available.'..
As you know, as Commissioner Letz and Mr. Longnecker
just said, we find things as we go in the project. The
contractor has a discover clause in his contract where he
finds things that are not as expected, so here's where a lot
of these came in. A lot of them came back from the City.
When the City set came back, they changed a lot of things
from their preliminary -- and they had three preliminary
reviews. And, they came in with more restrictive fire
requirements. I'm not going to kid you; I will tell you that
we knew in the back of our minds that these may be
possibilities, that they would be more restrictive. But,
again, nothing was said in the initial reviews, so we
proceeded on that basis.
Same with the Texas Historical Commission. They came
back after the fact -- when the final plans did go to them
13
.--
. -
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
after it had been bid, they came back with a number of
changes, a lot of them to the -- what is now the District
Clerk -- will be the District Clerk's office upstairs. The
A.D.A. -- again, we had a preliminary review with them, and
they came back with a lot more things than they initially
called our hand on. So, that is a big chunk of the money
that we see here. For example, things that are sort of
plowed into -- into common items, like electrical; there's a
lot of electrical on here. A lot of that was -- they went
back and added -- "they," the City, added exit lights in
numerous places where they had not in their preliminary
reviews. Some of this was staff changing their minds.
And, if I could step back here just a minute, when we --
when we did the initial budget in the previous Court, we
talked about something called Contingencies. And, our
concern -- and we recommended to you, as a bare minimum, that
we keep 5 percent contingencies in there, because this is a
remodel. If it weren't a remodel, if it was a brand-new job,
I would still suggest you have contingencies, but with a
remodel, contingencies are essential. But, to take --
contingencies to take care of things like -- you know, owners
change their minds about things. And, the District Clerk
people, after -- District Court people, after they had a
chance to work in some of the new courtrooms, like, for
example, Boerne, they came back with some changes that they
19

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
wanted to make to these plans. Nothing major. In some
instances, we took things out, but the net effect is we added
things, too, more than we took out.
Let's see. There were -- in order to prepare the lower
level, you know, there was always a question as to what
degree we would have -- of readiness that we would have the
lower level. And, as we've got into it, we've found that,
well, maybe we need to have a little more light in there than
we initially had -- had anticipated. So, in some instances,
where we took the old light fixtures down that are little bit'
ragged, we figured it was better to reuse those light
fixtures than just toss them, and have sort of marginal light
because of the public going in and out and so forth. So,
there was a minor amount of that.
I would also have to tell you that -- that, you know, as
I told you a long time ago, we don't do perfect drawings.
There were items in there that were -- were honest
oversights. Not a lot of them, but there were some. And, in'.
that instance, we'll have to hold up our hand and say, "We
did it." I would also tell you that we watch the contractor
very closely, and we've worked with them long and hard, and
they have done a good job in trying to be very thorough about
these amounts of money. And, we've asked them hard questions
about, "Where'd you come up with this?" and "Where'd you come'
up with that?", and they were usually able to answer it.
15
•--
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
But, my point is this; is that whether it was added out
of necessity, added because somebody changed their mind or
whatever, the owner is still getting that value. I mean,
this -- hopefully, this extra light fixture or whatever is
not -- is a value that you would receive for the project,
anyway. It's not -- these are not uh-ohs, "We've got to do
it over" kind of problems. Let's see. There's all kind of
things like doors that were changed and items like that. A
lot of that had to do with -- with the City and code. I
think that -- unless I missed something, if y'all have
something else, I think those are the major reasons why
things appear on this change order.
The reason that -- it's a little bit hard to follow
this, but the reason we tried to do it this way is we would
-- the way the process works is that we -- if somebody comes
to us and says, "We need to do something," or something is
found, a contractor finds a problem, we were at a directive
to tell the contractor what he needs to do on that. And, in
the process of doing that, we say, "If there's any change in
cost, please tell us as soon as possible what that is, so
that we can determine if we have to have a change order."
They have to go back, then, and in a lot of places it
involves one, two, or three subcontractors. Sometimes it's
just their own forces. But, they have to put all those
figures together. They have to come back to us and then
16

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
we've got to determine if they're reasonable or unreasonable.',
Usually they're reasonable. Then we go back and we -- from I
that, we write a change order. And that's where we are it
today.
So, what I'm saying is that there's a lot of back and
forth on this before we actually bring these numbers to you
and say, "We think this is reasonable." There are instances
-- and we're going to get into one of them in just a minute
-- in which the contractor and the owner's rep, or maybe the
contractor and the architect or the engineers, we don't agree
with the contractor on what his costs are. It is my job,
under the general conditions of this contract, to try to
hammer out a reasonable cost for this, make the contractor
prove to us what it's worth, and then determine whether or
not I can recommend it to you or not.
So, what I'm seeing is that everything we've gone
through here for the last few months is something that is --
that is thoroughly thrashed and important to the job, whether
it is in terms of code enforcement, public safety, usability
-- for example, sound isolation in the courtrooms, so that
they can't hear people going to the restroom next to the
courtroom. Whatever it is, it became something that -- that
was essential. There's -- there's nothing in here frivolous
or whimsical, in my estimation.
Now, may I try to answer any specific questions that you
17
r-
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
have about a specific item, or would you prefer me to go
through the entire list and tell you where it came from?
JUDGE HENNEKE: I'd prefer, personally, for us to
ask questions. Just to get some order, why don't we start in
numerical order? Commissioner Baldwin, you ask your
questions, and then we'll proceed down the line.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Change No. 9 -- I'm sorry,
Change No. 5, the addition. The insurance, bond,
supervision, temporary facility discount, and all that other.
MR. WALKER: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What -- how did that come
about? I mean, surely we knew we were going to have to have
insurance, surely we knew we were going to have to be bonded,
and surely we knew they were going to have to have
supervision. How did that get added on?
MR. WALKER: I apologize. I should have explained
that first one. Okay. These costs were turned in to you --
the first sheet that you have that most of you just
discarded, those costs were turned in to us as the costs to
go into the change order. The contractor brought up, very
late in the process -- two weeks ago, to be specific -- the
fact that, "Hey, I'm getting small incremental bonds,
insurance, overhead figures, attached to each one of these
numbers," but that doesn't cover the fact that we're going to
give them a time extension. And I did not cover time
18
~-.
L-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
extensions, so, excuse me, let me back up just a minute and
To do all of these things right here, the contractor had
a very long period of time submitted to us -- I won't even
tell you how many days it was, but it was considerably more
than 60 -- that if he had to go out and do each one of those
items, it would take him that many days to do it. Well,
obviously, there's overlap, and you can do numerous things at
one time. So, we told him, "Okay, that's fine, but we need a
reasonable number that I can take to Commissioners Court and
say this is an extension of time." So, we thrashed it and
thrashed it and thrashed it, and we came up with 30 days.
He actually had some time that he asked for back when
the asbestos abatement was being done, when the contract
first started. Theoretically, he was entitled to some time
to do that. I asked them at the time, were they going to
submit time extensions? They said, "No, we think we're okay,
we can make it on time." So, that one sort of fell off the
table because they didn't apply for it in time. This one is
more timely. I mean, they haven't done all these things.
They've started, maybe, on a few of these, but they --
they're not authorized to do this till y'all vote on it. So,
from this time forward, they need 30 days added to the
contract, which is 390 days additional to do all these
things.
r
19


i--
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. LONGNECKER: 30 days.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: How many days?
MR. WALKER: 390 plus 30 more days in order to do
this. Okay. Two weeks ago, the contractor said, Whoa, wait
a minute, I want some money for 1=he additional overhead that
I have to do to keep this office open, to have a
superintendent, to pay -- they don't pay utilities, but to
pay telephone, and so forth. That is not an unreasonable
request, okay? It just was not a timely request. It came
after all of this was put together, and I had already issued
the $102,506 to you. And, so, we sat down this morning and
we hashed this over at length, and the contractor agreed to
take -- instead of the 12,000 -- almost 512,000 he was asking
for, he agreed to take 56,000, because this wasn't presented
to us in a timely manner, and as -- as a means of discount or
compromise, he accepted that. Reluctantly, we agreed to put
that on here and submit it to you that way. And, I will let
the contractor explain -- Keith Stoddard and Frank Thompson
are both here, and Keith Stoddard can -- can address that if
you would like more detail, or have I told you enough?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me just -- just a
minute. What did you -- are you saying that we -- initially,
we had 390 days?
MR. WALKER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And now, because of some
20
.~-
~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
changes, we're going to extend that by 30 days?
MR. WALKER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where are we on the -- in
MR. WALKER: Well, unfortunately, we're about a
hundred -- don't quote me exactly, but we're about 180 days
now, right now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 180 days into the 390?
MR. WALKER: And he is 20 percent complete as of
the last application for payment. So, obviously, he has got
to make up a lot of ground in that period of time. So, we
have given him 30 more days, just because of the -- the
complexity of some of these things he's had to hold up orders
for. In other words, he could not order all of his
electrical stuff, and electrical is the lion's share of this.
He could not order all the equipment he needed to, although
he's been doing work all along; he's never stopped working on
electrical, to my knowledge, because of this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question. It's
probably for Mr. Longnecker, but you -- while you're standing
there, maybe you can answer it. Where are we as far as a
schedule is concerned? I mean, are we on schedule? Are we
behind?
MR. WALKER: Well, we do not have a current
schedule, and I'll let him --
zl

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't go off too far, Mike.
MR. LONGNECKER: I have repeatedly, in my reports,
semi-monthly, stated that we are behind schedule.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
MR. LONGNECKER: And, to this point, I don't know
exactly how far we are behind schedule. I'm estimating that
we're 30 days, at least, behind schedule. And, of course, we
keep hoping that the contractor's able to make up a lot of
this. It's something that is -- you know, not being able to
determine what construction procedures are, that's up to the
contractor. He has his 390 days, and it's up to them to
proceed with it. All I can do is take a look at what's done
and then try to project in my own mind where we're at, and
I'd say we're probably four to six weeks behind at this
point.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It seems to me that if we're
four to six weeks behind our schedule, and here we are
talking about going -- we're planning to do 30 days over and
$6,000, that something's out of kilter, as far as I'm
concerned, with that, but that's your job.
JUDGE HENNEKE: How much of the 30 days is
attributable to the additional or the unexpected asbestos
abatement we had to do7
MR. LONGNECKER: Well, actually, in my opinion,
very little. We did have to remove some additional asbestos
2z
,~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
from the second floor, the pipe insulation and so forth.
And, that was out of there and they were able to move ahead.
And, of course, they had other areas that they could be
working on and were working on at the time. So, I -- I feel
like that was actually a very small, if anything, amount of
time that that held us up.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have one more question, if
I could, to Mr. Walker.
MR. LONGNECKER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You mentioned that -- that
this Historical -- or hysterical? -- Historical Commission
had changed -- changed some things. And, don't get specific,
like southeast door, that kind of thing, but did we change
some doors? Windows?
MR. WALKER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All of the above?
MR. WALKER: Walls, yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Since we have had our last
conversation in this room with you in regard to that?
MR. WALKER: Yeah. I don't think you were at that
meeting where we met with the historical Commission.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, I was.
MR. WALKER: Yes, you were.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, I was.
MR. WALKER: Sure you were, you were there. That
•~-
23
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
-- the result of what came out of that meeting is what we
changed. And, I know you may not have been in on the final
word on that, but that's the plan that came across, and those
were the changes they gave as a result of that. It -- it is
too numerous to tell you what they all were, but a lot of --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I remember most of them, but
I also remember us agreeing that they really didn't have the
authority to tell us all that.
MR. WALKER: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. WALKER: But, they also -- remember, they --
they hung the little carrot out there about funds. Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. That was all my
questions, Judge. Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Buster. Bill?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mike, I'd like for you to
address, if you will, and give us a little better insight
into the realities of life with respect to all of the
electrical changes that I see here in Records 1, 2, 3, and 9,
which, if my quick addition is correct, totals something like
$59,000, or better than 50 percent of the change orders --
MR. WALKER: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- of the accumulation of
change orders. Why?
MR. WALKER: Well, I think I touched briefly on
24

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
some of them. A lot of it was -- was required exit lights
that they've changed. I touched on the lower level -- most
of those exit lights, by the way, were -- a lot of that was
on the lower level. I shouldn't say most; probably half of
them. The lighting level was also a problem down there. I
shouldn't say "a problem," but we felt like it might get to
be a problem if it was not -- if we relied on those old wall
sconces that axe down there right now. The -- and I'm going
to let Rolf Lux attempt to answer some of this, too, 'cause
this is really his -- his bailiwick. There were some --
there were some panel changes as a result of what we actually
found in the field, and so that -- I'm going to have to blame
that one on the building and no as-builts. And, that sort of
falls under -- I think those are Directive 3 items, No. 5,
Directive 3.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's as a result of not
having as-builts for the --
MR. WALKER: Part of that. Part of it.
Unfortunately, a lot of these are grouped together, and to
say Item 5 was the fault of one thing, I'd have to sit here
and go through everything that happened on it. But, the --
the City added some exit lights down there, which I still
don't understand. And -- and the rest -- there were some
things about the elevator, and Rolf could probably answer
that better than I can. But, there was -- there was a little
25
..-.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
bit of rerouting, and I do not -- I don't know that we
actually have that electrical breakdown, but it's several
pages long, about what all that involved. Rolf, do you want
to try to address any of this electrical --
MR. LUX: Well, the man that can answer those
things the best is the one that isn't here. He had to go to
the doctor this morning.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who might that be, Mr. Lux?
MR. LUX: Pardon?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who would that be7
MR. LUX: Ed Thompson, the one who did the -- most
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah.
MR. LUX: But, fundamentally, like I said, it's
been -- the fact that when we started to -- when we laid it
all out, everything seemed okay, but there were were a lot of
places where there were black areas, where we couldn't get to
the -- get the information or couldn't reach it until we
started tearing down a bunch of stuff. And, so, some of
these things became a part of that. There was changes -- I
wish Ed were here, because he could tell me. I was not
prepared for this, because I expected him to be here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, let me refine my
question a little bit, because it really kind of concerns me.
It has to do with change -- Directive No. 3, Item No. 5,
i--
26
r~
~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
"Provide power for the wheelchair lift in Court No. 2." Now,
if we knew we had a wheelchair lift in Court No. 2, why would
we need a change order to provide power for it?
MR. WALKER: I'm sorry. Let me try to answer that.
The A.D.A. added -- our theory on that was that the -- that
one courtroom -- and this is what they initially approved --
that one courtroom needed to be handicapped-accessible. And
when we went back through this again, they said no,
everything has to be handicapped-accessible. So, that
wheelchair lift was added to that. We always had the room
for it, 'cause we knew someday that might happen, but we did
not have any power to it because it was not initially
anticipated that that would have to be A.D.A.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The lift wasn't there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand.
MR. WALKER: And we're still not buying a lift.
We're just providing the electrical for that lift.
MR. LUX: I'm -- I have to say that I'm probably
not completely prepared to answer you on some of these
questions, because I had anticipated my cohort to be here
with us. But, I do know that there was a lot of -- of
unexpected things that showed up on that project that had to
be taken care of. There were some complexities, because the
-- in order to try to save some money on the wiring and
things in the building and the panels and things that were
z7
,~-.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
necessary, we did a lot of -- we worked a lot of changes,
keep the panels -- keep the -- so they would be able to use
the old panels and so on. But, it still costs some money for
the -- because what happened is a lot of surprises. A panel
that supposedly would be be capable of handling these loads
turned out not to have those -- have that capacity, and
that's the kind of things -- things up in the ceiling of the
first floor that we could not really get to, but turned out
to be a little different than what we had anticipated, and so
on.
MR. WALKER: If I may try to answer one other thing
here, for example, this -- it's a minor issue, but on No. 1
-- Directive 1, No. 18, there was a -- just a simple little
thing like, you know, adding a push button that had a remote
ring on it for the back door, that's not there now, that I
think Glenn Holekamp or somebody said it sure would be a good
idea if we had some way to do that. Another item is on No.
-- on No. 3, Item 5, there was a situation with the elevator
there. We specified the elevatox according to what the least
expensive elevator we could find, which was a Dover elevator.
We sized everything according to what they told us, but when
the shop drawings came in, they had -- they over -- they made
us kick the power up. Ed had to go through and rebalance.
It was so close that he had to go through and rebalance the
entire setup on that, that electrical. And, so, that -- that
za
,'^-
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-- that added up to a considerable amount in having to redo
that panel.
MR. LUX: There were also places where our -- we
just had to change from one panel to another and try to work
things out so that the -- we didn't end up with even more
costs because of the -- the way the electrical -- the
surprises that's showed up on there. And that's what they --
that's a lot of, basically, work.
MR. WALKER: In overall defense of the electrical,
I can -- I can say this; one of the things that we have
attempted to do is sort out a lot of the electrical problems
that are -- that are in the courthouse in the Annex. And, in
the process of doing that, we approached this as, "Let's do
it the most economical, logical way that we can do it." And,
in the process of trying to be a little -- maybe too
exuberant about accomplishing that, we -- we found that, no,
it's not the way that we thought it was. Again, with no
as-builts, we didn't know exactly, so we made some
assumptions. Those assumptions were not necessarily correct,
and so there had to be adjusting to balance the loads, just
like the business of the elevator, that cost more money.
And, while, yeah, you're looking at almost $60,000, had we
gone through and trashed the entire electrical system and
redone it, it would have been a whole lot more than $60,000.
So, in an attempt to save money, sometimes it -- it comes
29
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
ZO
21
22
23
29
25
back on you, as, hey, it didn't quite work out that way.
But, there was absolutely no attempt to to ignore anything.
It just was matter of that's not the way it was -- the way it,
was wired. And the main thing that I want you to understand
is that when we leave it this time, the system will be right.
The emergency system will work the way it's supposed to be
working. It will be identified so that we know what is on
emergency system and what is not on emergency system. And,
as we say, there'll be an extremely good set of as-builts
that you can rely on until somebody changes them.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else, Bill? Jonathan?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have, I guess, three
questions. The first is relatively minor, I think. Why is
there so much changes in glass thickness from a quarter-inch
to three-sixteenths?
MR. WALKER: A lot of that was because -- part of
that was due to the City review, okay? The City reviewed it,
and we were able to -- we sort of swapped some glass around.
They -- if you know what wire glass is, it's for fire
ratings. We were able to sort of manipulate that around to
where we don't have all that wire glass, and in the process
of doing that, thicknesses changed. Wire glass only comes in
certain thicknesses, and so we -- we manipulated that around
a little bit that -- to try and refine that item. Also,
there were some changes that were relative to the Historical
30
,.-.
.-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Commission changes in glass. There were -- there were
changes relative to the District Clerk's use of the -- you
know, what they now call the jury room, the District Court,
that room in the back. We had to change that glass. There's
any number of -- of glass swaps that we had to do as a result
of either code review or Texas Historical Commission review.
And then there were a couple things where we actually
specified a thicker glass than necessary, and we backed off
of that to try to save a few bucks.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Next, there's a -- I think it
was on Change Order -- Change Directive No. 2, Item 3. And
then I guess its is also referred to in Change Directive No.
3, Item 5, the sump pumps. Why are we having to do so much
work? And, I -- is this the pump that's down in the ground
to keep that area from flooding?
MR. LUX: Yeah. There are two -- there's a pump
for the sanitary, and also a pump for stormwater.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would those -- I mean, were
those contemplated, that we were going to have to do this
much work with that? I wouldn't -- I don't see why we have to
do any work on those pumps. I'm just --
MR. LUX: Well, first of all, they had to be
relocated because of the -- the building, itself. They were
inside -- they ended up inside the building, so we had to
relocate outside. The pumps were all right, but when we had
31
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to make changes, we also ended up with same code violations,
that they are now -- they are now code violations. So, when
they moved them, they had to start adding piping and adding
valves and things that were not required at the time this was
installed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are they going to work?
Haven't we had problems historically with those -- that
system? I mean, is this going to make it better than it has
been?
MR. LUX: Well, the -- like, when you say
"problems," you're talking about the -- the sewer gases?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The sewer gases. Also, I
believe whenever we get zeal heavy rains, they don't pump
water out as quick as they're supposed to sometimes.
MR. LUX: Well, the sanitary is the only thing
operated about once a day. They've had plenty in the past --
COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, sir, could you speak ups
a little bit?
MR. LUX: They are in the storm sewer. If there'd
have been anything seriously wrong with them, you'd have had
some flooding down there, and I don't think you've had any of
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. My last question is --
MR. WALKER: Can I add something to that? Excuse
me just a minute.
32

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ; Sure.
MR. WALKER: The -- this sanitary sump that's just
to the east of the building out here that was moved is only,
like, five, six years old. It was done with that minimum
security addition down there, where the County Attorney and
J.P. 3 are now. Those pumps were fairly new, so we moved
those pumps with the sump over there. Then the City came in
and they started wanting all kinds valves to shut it off
with, which were a little above and beyond, but we didn't
argue with them, although that is a big part of this gate
valve expense that you asked about. The sump pump that's
down at the north end of the building, that pump we're -- we
have no records on it, but everybody suspected that that pump
is over 20 years old, and so we did not want to go back with
a new sump with a 20-year-old pump in it for fear that we --
you would have a problem.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. And, my final question,
going into lighting -- and I think you mentioned a little bit
about lighting on the lower level.
MR. WALKER: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: When we decided to close that
in, the idea was to do a minimum number -- amount of work
down there, and part of that was you do a minimum amount of
lighting down there, figuring that there's no reason to put
lights in if we don't know where walls were going to go.
,~-~
33
,.-
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. WALKER: Right. I
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Have we changed from that?
MR. WALKER: No. Let me tell you what changed
there, and this happened quite a while back. When we went
over everything with Glenn Holekamp and his maintenance
operation down there, he asked us to do some things to that
old narrow office that's down there so they could make part
of that office -- part of it storage. So, we took -- we were
-- we didn't have anything really planned for that, so what
we did is we took down those old fixtures that were lay-in
fixtures, and -- and, you know, we -- we put them in a new
lay-in ceiling up there for him, and then we closed that off.
The door was always in there that we put in there, but we had
to put another wall in there, I think, that he wanted, if I'm
saying that right, and a door. So, we added a few things
there, and that was additional, and that would have been a
really dark, dingy place if we hadn't done that.
There was some controversy that the electrician didn't
really want to use those old lights, and I can't say that I
blame him. I mean, they've blown out and they've rusted,
fallen down on the the ground and everything else. But, we
were able to -- we ran around and counted them, and we
salvaged enough to do it with. Part of our trade-out here is
that we -- we were trying -- you know, that temporary office
that's for Linda down there, we attempted to use -- you know,
39

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
try to reuse some of those fixtures in there. They -- they
basically said, "We'd rather put new, cheap fixtures in
there, and if you tear them out, you haven't lost a whole lot
of money." They do not want to go reballast and relamp all
those old 20-something-year-old fixtures. So, there's a lot
of -- there was some give and take in there, and trying to
balance and work with what we haci. Different people had
different standards.
And, then, I -- I still don't know 100 percent from you
if -- if the District Clerk is going to occupy that office or
somewhere else. But, not having heard anything else, we felt
like we needed to go ahead and make that office ready for
them, and we have not changed that. We could have dropped
that out of that change order and saved some money if we're
not going to put Linda down there temporarily, but we went
ahead with the information that we had at hand. I -- I don't
know if I answered that question.
JUDGE NENNEKE: Keith, I don't think the plan is to
put Linda down below temporarily, is it?
MR. LONGNECKER: At this point, it's still kind of
up in the air. I've talked to Linda a little bit about it,
and she's saying that perhaps she might get by staying where
she is until her new facilities are finished here in the old
courtroom, but we still don't know that yet. So, this -- I
have to let it go by with the change, as if we were going to
35
....
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
move her down there.
MR. WALKER: I think part --
JUDGE HENNEKE: I don't want to be the one who
tells her she's going to have to move down there and then
move back again. I believe firmly that she has the
expectation she's going to stay where she is until the
courthouse is changed -- the existing courtroom is renovated
for her use, and then she can move out of that while her
current offices are renovated for the County Law Library.
MR. WALKER: Well, I think that would be very
difficult. I mean, the contractor relied on the fact that
those people would be out of the second floor and they would
have full rein in this second floor to go in and work. I
don't think they're anticipating having to work around
people, because that -- that was -- that had been their
instructions from the very beginning, that the space would be'
vacated. And, so, what Linda had talked to me about was the
possibility of putting her down in those -- like, the jury
room and those various offices that are down there in the
north end of the second floor of the Annex, to put her there
temporarily. And, I think part of that problem is -- is
probably brought about because we cannot -- that elevator may
not be fully functional yet, and they did not want to be
moved out there and have to go up and down through three
flights of stairs to the courts. The courts will be there,
36
.-.

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
obviously. They have to be out of there before any work can
be done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: She's -- early on, she knew she
had to move twice. She may have forgotten that, but she was
either going downstairs or somewhere into this area, in the
new area after it was completed, and -- and that I remember
from when I was more involved with the -- before we hired Mr.
Longnecker.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I hate to hear us spending money on
a contingency for relocation if it may not happen. That
offends me. If we needed to tie that down before now, we
should have tied that down before now. It's probably too
late now. But, it seems like everybody has a different
concept of what's going to happen.
MR. WALKER: Yes, sir. I mean, I tried to, but I
didn't get a re -- a response to the contrary not to do it.
I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, on your point that
if -- you know, if we can move her up over here and save
money not moving her downstairs, to me, that would be the
preferable way. I mean, I think she would -- from what she's
told me -- and I didn't talk to her in the past few months,
obviously, but previously, if she had to move twice, she
would much prefer to move down near where the courts are
going to be than have to go to the basement.
37
~_
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Keith, let's you and I find time --
MR. WALKER: Because we're spending a lot of money.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's nail that down in the next
few days or so if we can, okay?
MR. LONGNECKER: Yes.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anything else, Jon?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How much would it save if we
didn't have to do anything down on the first floor?
MR. WALKER: I'd have to run that through them. I
don't know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, is it $1,000? $10,000?
MR. WALKER: I don't think it would be $10,000, but
it would save quite a bit of money. Because once we build
that office, we create dark places in there, and that's where
we went back and put those light fixtures in there, lust for
supplemental, because we -- you know, if one of those old
sodiums burned out down there, then it would be dark.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ye+~h. How -- how long will it
be, once the Annex is completed and these people are moved
out and then this area is under construction, before it's
ready to go? In other words, how long is she going to be --
or would she be in temporary quarters?
MR. WALKER: Well, we don't have the final schedule
for the contractor. Do you want to hazard a guess, time
schedule for that?
38
,.-.
r~
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. STODDARD: Say that again?
MR. WALKER: Okay. The new courtroom annex is
finished, okay? It's time to do 3-B and come over and do the
second floor of the courthouse. So, we've got to move Linda
over somewhere so that y'all can come in and do that work.
He's asking what -- what is that time period that she would
be out of her office? What's it going to take you to do this
old courthouse?
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. THOMPSON: That would be hard to answer. Part
of it's going to involve the elevator area, to get this over
here, so I'm sure we're looking at three, three and a half
months. That's a guess. That's a guess.
MR. WALKER: Which is about the schedule that we
talked about, because at this point we're talking -- we're
attempting, if we can get an updated schedule, to determine
if we can move in before the first of the year into the
Annex, which would give us about three months to get this
portion up here done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. That's all.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Larry?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: On that point, we've done
the project with -- with very little margin management,
reserve, or whatever you want to call it. I think the same
thing applies to available office space. I -- if we're
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
fairly well down the road on completing that area that you're
talking about as a contingency area for moving Linda into, I
just have a suspicion -- since we've got everything maxed out
once the whole project is completed, we're already filled up,
I have a suspicion we're going to have some need for some
additional space. We always do. So -- so, unless ft saves
significant money, I, for one, would feel like let's go ahead
and finish that area off, rather than backing up and trying
to save probably minimal money aY_ this point, and then we
don't have any contingency space at all, 'cause we may run
into problems when you get on this side of the building, just
like we had some problems on the other side of the building.
There may be some delays. I -- I feel comfortable having a
little contingency space. That's just my opinion, but I
throw it out for what it's worth.
MR. WALKER: Commissioner Griffin, let me clarify
one thing; that is not going to be finished space. That's --
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I understand.
MR. WALKER: It's still pretty raw.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I understand. That's fine,
but it's a place where we can put something.
MR. WALKER: Right.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And it may even be stored
items. I don't know at this point. Probably none of us do.
I'm just saying that having some relatively finished office
90

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
space wouldn't hurt anything, and probably gives us a little
more slots. On the change order itself, I think there's --
probably in the haste to get this new one done, I think the
$108,000 figure should be also reflected on the bottom column
of numbers, and that just did not get updated.
MR. WALKER: Thank you..
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's my suspicion, so
you'll probably have to redo that. And I don't have any
additional questions that haven't already been covered, but I
would -- I would just like to say, based on my own
engineering experience in a project of this size and
complexity, and some even much larger, and particularly where
you don't have as-built drawings, a 4 1/2 percent growth
factor at this point, which is about what this represents, to
me, is not out of the realm of expectation. Particularly
with -- we probably should have had more reserve than we have
fox the fact that we didn't have as-built drawings. But --
but I think the team has done a pretty good job of trying to
hold that cost growth down, and since the major unknown
unknowns have been rooted out now, I would expect to see much
less cost growth in the future, as with any project as it
matures. So, I don't think all is bleak here at all, by any
means. And, I think -- I think the whole team is to be
commended on trying to hold this growth dawn. I think
they've done a good job of -- there were some unknowns, but
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
it was those unknown unknowns that -- that -- that we didn't
really have a handle on until you tear things out. That's
the way these kinds of projects yo.
MR. WALKER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And I feel pretty confident
that we'll see a leveling off of any cost growth, if any more
cost growth. Even though it's -- even though it's only,
what, 20 percent done at this point, you would expect to see
that completion curve start to climb steeply once you get
past these initial things. That's all I had.
JUDGE HENNEKE: I have a couple small ones which
jumped out at me. Change Order No. 1 -- Directive No. 1, No.
10. Why are we providing a new pair of galanized metal doors
in lieu of refinishing existing door, for an additional
$1,200?
MR. WALKER: When we started looking at those doors
more carefully and the condition they were in, to refit them
with new hardware -- see, that old hardware is not really
code legal. When we got into that, it became an issue of
they're not -- I mean, it would be hard to save them. I
mean, we would -- we could do it. We could patch them and,
you know, they -- they'd be pretty rough. And, how long they.,
would continue to operate with -- with patchwork where
they're not mortised to the hardware that needs to go on
them, I just -- I'm afraid we're just begging for problems
42
r-.
L__
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
later on. I mean, I'll be glad to take it out, but I lust
think it would be a -- a disservice to the County to give
them a pair of doors, particularly as heavily used as those
doors are for loading and things like that. I just think
that would be a mistake. And, so, I guess if you want to
blame that on anybody, it would be us for not banging on
those doors hard enough to find out really how bad of shape
they were in.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Is it the hardware or the doors? I
heard two things.
MR. WALKER: Well, the hardware. Hardware needs to
be changed on it. And, so, when that's done, those metal
doors need to be fabricated for the hardware that needs to go
on them. And, so, you know, I'm not sure what -- we'd have
to put plates on them, and first one thing or another to weld
to them. And, there's -- you know, there's -- the contractor
may well come back to us and say, "These doors are too shot
to use." And, you know, then it would be a question of
acceptability, as to whether or not we could accept those in
the contract. As I said, I'll take it out if you don't want
it, but I really think it would be -- I'm not sure we'd be
doing the County a service to leave those old things on
there. The hinges are all rusted and in bad shape, and we
just honestly didn't look at that one close enough. I
JUDGE HENNEKE: Change Directive No. 1, Item 12, i
93

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
add aluminum Venetian blinds to Window F. Where is that?
MR. WALKER: That was a request -- who made that?
MS. HARRIS: I'm not sure.
MR. WALKER: Somebody on staff wanted a -- that's
an interior window from the -- is it the microfilm room?
MS. HARRIS: Mm-hmm.
MR. WALKER: Out in -- Linda just needed privacy
for that. I mean, we have Venetian blinds on the contract,
so we just added that to it.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We have Venetian blinds in the
contract, we just added one more set of them, is what you're
saying?
MR. WALKER: Yes, sir. They match these that are
in the courtroom.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone else have any questions
about the change order, as presented?
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Before we vote on the change order,
I'd like to address a couple questions to Mr. Stoddard. Mr.
Stoddard, when can we anticipate a construction completion
schedule?
MR. STODDARD: An updated schedule?
JUDGE HENNEKE: A full schedule, taking us through
April the 3rd.
MR. STODDARD: It will probably -- won't be next
94
..~-
~__
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
week; it will probably be the following week.
JUDGE HENNEKE: So, I c:an expect to have one, let's
say, by two weeks from Friday?
MR. STODDARD: Two weeks. That would be realistic,)
yes.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Secondly, I think I want to
echo what Larry said; we appreciate all the hard work you've
done. We want to thank you for the work you've done. I've
been involved in enough construction projects not to be
totally dismayed by the fact that we're now 90 to 95 percent
through the time frame --
MR. STODDARD: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- even including the extension,
and only 20 percent done with the actual work, because I know
once you get past the hard stuff, things move a lot faster.
I will tell you, quite frankly, I'm not happy with the fact
that we're now on our third supervisor. I'm hopeful that
this project has the priority that we hope it does, that we
think it deserves. And, any further turnover in supervisors
like that is going to call into question, in my mind, at
least, how this project ranks in priority. And I want it to
rank very high.
MR. STODDARD: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: So, we're looking forward to a
successful completion. I, myself, have my feet fairly rooted 1,
95
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in concrete on this April 3rd, Year 2000, completion date.
And, hopefully, we'll continue to push toward and be
successful in bringing that -- meeting that time frame.
MR. STODDARD: Only thing I'd like to say is the
change in supervision was totally in the best interests of
the project.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, I can appreciate that. And,
we're always glad that you put people in here to do the job
that needs to be done. But, three supervisors in
approximately four or five months is a substantial number.
MR. STODDARD: Well, yeah. I guess that's because
the original superintendent we brought up here -- and I guess
maybe there was a miscommunication. I don't know if you even
want to hear this, but he -- he was in Boerne, and the whole
intent was for him to oversee somebody else on this project
as a general superintendent, okay? So, the reality of it is
-- is that we, in my opinion, have changed supervision one
time, and it was just the best call that we could make under
the circumstances.
JUDGE HENNEKE: That's your --
MR. STODDARD: Only reason I would change another
one would be in the interests of the project.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- your expertise, and we rely on
you. We've given you our lob to do. We just want to make
sure that you understand that we're anxious to have this
96
.-.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
done.
MR. STODDARD: Sure. '
JUDGE HENNEKE: And done on schedule. And, we look
forward to getting that construction completion schedule in a
couple weeks.
MR. STODDARD: And, you're correct on the schedule.
If you're familiar with schedules, you know they're just
schedules, and they do that occasionally. And, that's --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay.
MR. STODDARD: That's what we're anticipating
happening.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I do have one final
question on the actual money. I guess I'll direct this to
Tommy. Did you generate this?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, I did.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Help me a little bit.
If I follow the Contingency line down here, it started out
with $127,000?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we have a remaining of
$88,000. And they are asking for $108,000, so we're going to
go over there. Where does that :remaining 20 grand --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, those -- if you recall, in
the budget meetings, we anticipated this for --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
47
..-.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
S
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. TOMLINSON: -- for budgeting those funds next
-- next fiscal year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Next year?
MR. TOMLINSON: Next year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're going to vote on this
today.
JUDGE HENNEKE: We're going to vote on the change
order today.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Change order.
JUDGE HENNEKE: This is not a part of the change
order.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is F.Y.I.
JUDGE HENNEKE: This simply updates you on the
status of the construction budget, based on the funds that we
went out and borrowed. But, as Tommy points out, we did talk
in the budget workshop about the need --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right.
JUDGE HENNEKE: -- for additional funds.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When will the changes be
paid for? I didn't mean to interrupt you, I'm sorry.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Go ahead, I'm finished.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When will the changes
actually be paid for?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, as they're applied for, and
when they're approved by the architect and Mx. --
48

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
JUDGE HENNEKE: Most of the work represented by the
change order has not been done. This is not a bill; this is
to authorize the work.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand that.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Also, that's going to -- a
lot of this will be billed in the next fiscal year, anyway.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A lot of this will be --
that's what I was looking for. Is it going to come out of
the budget that we're preparing for next year?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes. I
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. I
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Okay. You're not
going to start on these tomorrow, where we have unbudgeted
money.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, but the money's -- until
we went over this total, the money's there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Once we get to that point.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, it comes out -- if it
did, it could come out of this; the money just comes out of
here?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, I think.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what's I'm saying.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: When that one's gone, we're in
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
trouble. When the big number's gone, that's when we've got
to worry.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Deep kimchee.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any further questions about the
change order or the status of the construction project? If
not, I'd entertain a motion to approve Change order No. 1, as
amended, in the amount of $108,506.85.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Moved by Commissioner Griffin,
seconded by Commissioner Letz, that we approve Change Order
No. 1 in an aggregate amount of 5108,506.85. Any further
discussion? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion was carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. The next item on
the agenda is a tour of the project. Keith, how long do you
all need to get ready for that?
MR. LONGNECKER: Frank? What do you think?
MR. THOMPSON: We just need to be sure the doors
are --
MR. LONGNECKER: Should we go out here?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Where do you want to us meet, or
anybody who wants to take the tour?

50
..-~
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
MR. LONGNECKER: It's ?.: 30 right now, 2:35. We'd
like to go through, you know, and make sure that -- do we
need to wear hard hats?
MR. THOMPSON: No.
MR. LONGNECKER: We don't have anyone working.
JUDGE HENNEKE: What I'm asking -- let's meet in 10
minutes -- or let's meet in 5 minutes wherever you tell us
to, and that will give you time to --
MR. LONGNECKER: At these stairs? Upstairs at the
stairway. We'll have to go up that way, and we'll go in
through the second floor and start at the top of the -- of
the stairs.
JUDGE HENNEKE: In front of the District Clerk's
office?
MR. LONGNECKER: Yes, that will be fine.
JUDGE HENNEKE: At 2:95.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, we have some public
here. I would assume that they ,sre wanting to go on the
tour, and I assume that that's all right? Or what?
JUDGE HENNEKE: If the project is shut down and
there are no hard hats available, anyone who wants to take
the tour probably -- well, not probably -- is welcome to take
the tour.
MR. THOMPSON: Judge, I may have a skeleton crew up
there, but their normal work time is 3:30, and I anticipate
51
.~-~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that's going on after that time. But, there's nothing
dangerous going on today; there's no overhead work. So, no,
hard hats won't be required.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Y'all tell us what you want.
MR. THOMPSON: The public is welcome.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. So, 2:95 upstairs in front
of the District Clerk's office. And, we're in recess till
then. We'll be adjourned afterwards.
(Commissioner's Court in recess from 2:40 p.m. to
2:45 p.m., at which time a tour of the Courthouse
Annex was taken, after which Court was adjourned.)
STATE OF TEXAS i
COUNTY OF KERR I
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners' Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 9th day of August, 1999.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
B Y : l~~~
Kathy B ik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
ORDER NO. ~SS46
KERR COUNTY COURTHOUSE F'HRSE 3 RENOVRTIONS
RUTHORIZE CHRNGE ORDER NUMBER (1) RS RMENDED
On this the 4th day of Rugust iS99, upon motion made by
Commissioner Griffin, seconded 6y Commissioner Lets, the Court
unanimously approved 6y a vote of 4-~-0, Change Order• #1,
as amended, totaling (108,506.85.