My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/3/1980
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1980
>
12/3/1980
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:48:55 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 12:44:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/03/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
75
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
D • •-� �, ,� 1-�. ; - ,� <br />CHAIRMAN LYONS REPORTED THAT HE HAS RECEIVED A LETTER FROM <br />REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY REFUSING TO PROCESS CHANGE ORDER #4 <br />BECAUSE THE BOARD CHANGED THE WORD "WILL" TO "MAY" IN REGARD TO THE <br />ADDING OF ADDITIONAL TIME TO THE CONTRACT. <br />ADMINISTRATOR NELSON REPORTED THAT HE DISCUSSED THIS WITH <br />MR. SNODGRASS OF REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION YESTERDAY, AND HE FELT THE ONLY <br />THING THE CONTRACTOR WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IS ASSURANCE THAT IF THE WORK <br />TO BE ACCOMPLISHED REQUIRES AN ADDITIONAL NUMBER OF DAYS WITHIN THE <br />TIME FRAME IT STATES ON THE CHANGE PROPOSAL, THAT THE COUNTY WILL <br />GRANT THOSE DAYS. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON FELT THIS WAS OUR INTENT WHEN <br />WE SAID "MAY" BECAUSE WE DON T KNOW AT THIS TIME IF IT WILL, IN FACT, <br />REQUIRE ADDITIONAL DAYS, BUT IF IT DOES AND THE CONTRACTOR WILL INDI- <br />CATE THIS TO US, THEN WE HAVE ACTUALLY AUTHORIZED THE ADDITIONAL DAYS. <br />CHAIRMAN LYONS FELT OUR INTENT WAS SIMPLY THAT WE DIDN'T <br />WANT TO SIGN A CHANGE ORDER SAYING IT IS GOING TO RUN THIS CONTRACT <br />OVER WHEN WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT IS GOING TO OR NOT, <br />MR. SNODGRASS OF REINHOLD CONSTRUCTION STATED THAT HE WROTE <br />THE LETTER IN QUESTION. HE HAD FELT THE IMPLICATION WAS CLEAR THAT <br />THEY MEANT TO SAY THEY WERE ALERTING THE COUNTY THAT THERE MAY BE <br />SOME EXTRA TIME BECAUSE OF THE EXTRA WORK, AND IF THIS WAS S0, THEN <br />THEY WOULD BE PAID FOR THE EXTRA TIME THAT IT TOOK. HE APPRECIATED <br />THE BOARDS CONCERN AND HOPED THEY COULD UNDERSTAND WHAT HE WAS TRYING <br />TO SAY - IF THE EXTRA TIME DOES OCCUR, THEY WOULD EXPECT TO BE PAID. <br />CHAIRMAN LYONS NOTED THAT WHEN WE AUTHORIZED THE CHANGE <br />ORDER, WE DIDN'T KNOW AT THAT TIME WHETHER IT WILL OR WILL NOT CAUSE <br />A DELAY, AND IF IT DOES CAUSE A DELAY AND IT IS DETERMINED TO BE A <br />LEGITIMATE DELAY, THE,.OF COURSE, WE DO HAVE TO PAY FOR IT. <br />ATTORNEY COLLINS WAS MAINLY CONCERNED AT THE GREAT EXPANSE <br />OF TIME WHICH WAS REALLY AT THE SOLE DISCRETION OF THE CONTRACTOR. <br />HE STATED THAT HE WOULD MUCH PREFER TO SEE AN AMOUNT SUCH AS FIVE <br />DAYS, OR SOMETHING FIXED. <br />MR. SNODGRASS COMMENTED THAT THIS WAS BASED ON TIME HE <br />ANTICIPATED BEING REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THIS EXTRA WORK AND THAT IS <br />THE ONLY BASIS HE HAS FOR SAYING IT MIGHT TAKE TWENTY DAYS. IF IT <br />DEC 31990 45 Boa 45 Fe,F 377 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.