Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Martin appreciated that the County was in a difficult <br />position; it was not really the County's fault, but a design <br />problem. But his position was more difficult; he was out a <br />quarter of a million and unable to get compensated. He believed it <br />failed because of a design problem which was out of their control. <br />He felt it was not in the best interest of the citizens of the <br />county to prevent them from doing work for the County, because they <br />were a good contractor and it was a unique problem. <br />In response to Chairman Macht's request, General Services <br />Director Sonny Dean described what occurred to cause the County not <br />to accept the work and require the second installation. He stated <br />that there has been no problem with the second installation. The <br />size of the aggregate was changed, and also there was geogrid <br />placed on top of it. <br />Attorney O'Brien reiterated that we don't know who is to <br />blame, he just wants to bring all the players into court and let <br />the court decide. He reminded them that the motion for declaratory <br />judgment was still alive and had survived a motion to dismiss. <br />Attorney O'Brien responded to additional questions from <br />Commissioners concerning the court process. <br />Commissioner Adams felt it was very unfair to hold this <br />problem against Martin on future bidding. <br />Discussion ensued, whereupon County Attorney Vitunac suggested <br />asking the other side why they would not go to court and insisted <br />on arbitration. <br />James Cummings, owner of James A. Cummings, Inc., thanked the <br />Board for the opportunity to address them. He felt it was odd how <br />two versions of the same occurrence could be so different. His <br />company has had no litigation and hasn't been involved in an <br />arbitration in 20+ years. It really incensed him when he read the <br />memoranda because the parties were so far apart in what they <br />thought happened. He voiced his objections to the symbolic <br />sword/shield simile in Attorney O'Brien's letter and in his opinion <br />the stonewalling was coming from the County, not the contractors. <br />He saw two basic problems why the matter couldn't be settled. <br />First, there was no continuity of the contracts. His contract <br />contained the standard arbitration clause, which calls for those <br />with technical expertise to resolve the problem. He had asked for <br />a copy of the architect's contract and found that the arbitration <br />61 Boa 95 ew 761 <br />July 18, 1995 <br />