11/14/1984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

860K Chairman Scurlock noted that there is supposed to be a full time project representative agreed upon by both the architect and the county and he wished to know when that is going to happen. Mr. Bail felt that it is important to work on this immedi- ately, and the Administrator stated that staff can start on this as soon as the Board approves the plans. Chairman Scurlock asked if the architect will submit several names and we will advertise and then have a selection process. Mr. Bail believed that some advertising in this area will be necessary. He stated that he will prepare a statement of the necessary qualifications. He noted that basically the architect makes periodic inspections, but he isn't there at all times. Attorney Brandenburg explained that this individual will be working directly under the architect's supervision and be an employee of their firm. He asked if the Architect would have any objections if the county were to advertise and then to pick who they feel ought to hold this position and send this to Frizzell for approval. Mr. Bail had no objections to that procedure; he noted that actually the cost for employing this person will be just what it costs them; there will be no markup. Attorney Brandenburg further clarified that the idea was to make sure this person worked for the architect and wasunder their supervision - not an employee of the county. This was set up so that we didn't get into the finger pointing we did with the County Administration Building where we had our employee versus the contractor versus the architect. Chairman Scurlock believed we will have a completely different situation with new construction as opposed to the renovation carried out at the Administration Building and the Courthouse. Commissioner Wodtke continued to express concern about getting into litigation and the fact that this representative 34 M M