My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/19/2012 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2012
>
06/19/2012 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/29/2016 2:11:04 PM
Creation date
9/25/2015 5:16:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/19/2012
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Archived Roll/Disk#
4054
Book and Page
142, 573-612
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
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
a sand supplier, and to Ranch Road Lake , LLC (Ranch Road) as a sand producer and processor. <br /> He informed the Board that the County had paid in full the fuel adjustment surcharge to Ranger <br /> as general contractor, and according to Ranger, the proper amounts had been distributed to their <br /> subcontractors , including Ranch Road . Mr. Gray said that Fischer maintains that Ranch Road <br /> did not distribute the portion of the fuel adjustment surcharge attributable to Fischer ' s dredging <br /> and processing work ; therefore , Fischer ' s claim is $ 60 ,299 . 55 , which includes $ 50 ,437 . 94 worth <br /> of the fuel adjustment surcharge, and $ 9 , 861 . 61 in interest charges . He recalled that during the <br /> May 15 , 2012 Board of County Commissioners Meeting, the Board requested that all parties <br /> meet to try to resolve the fuel adjustment surcharge issues prior to this meeting , and on June 15 "' , <br /> staff met with representatives from Ranger, Fischer, and Ranch Road , but no resolution was <br /> reached . <br /> Attorney Polackwich provided background and reported that staff had made payments to <br /> Ranger because they are the County ' s general contractor . He went on to explain that Fischer had <br /> a dual role in this project - they were a subcontractor of Ranger and also a sub - subcontractor to <br /> Ranch Road . He said the County paid the full surcharge to Ranger, and in-turn, Ranger <br /> distributed the full amount to Ranch Road, which created the problem, because the funds did not <br /> downstream from Ranch Road to Fischer, due to a dispute . He believed there would be ongoing <br /> litigation between Fischer and Ranch Road relating to disputes over this project . Attorney <br /> Polackwich thereafter presented three possible options for the County : ( 1 ) to not pay out <br /> anything until the dispute is resolved; (2) withhold $ 60 ,299 . 55 and pay the balance to Ranger; or <br /> (3 ) release the funds to Ranger and leave Fischer to its private remedies of a claim on the <br /> payment bond or a civil lawsuit against Ranch Road, which is what he recommended . <br /> Commissioner Flescher felt the County has the obligation to ensure that all the <br /> subcontractors are paid . <br /> June 19 , 2012 23 <br /> j X42 PG 605 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.