You were told that the city was going to take a lot of money out of the pocket of the contractor that took for ever to complete the park. City council members promised you this.
I told you that there was no way that the city was going take a dime out of their contract. The main reason being that city employees cut a deal with the contractor. The contractor had some kind of odd control over city employees starting with their horribly irresponsibly low bid that was laughable at best... but was accepted and the contract was awarded. Then council said there'd be no change orders to compensate the contractor for their irresponsible bid... but yet change orders started flying out the door immediately. It was shenanigans from the start.
KVIA reported HERE that everybody got paid and is happy. Here's what you need to pay attention to in the article:
"deductive change orders" are basically situations where a cheaper product replaces the product originally called for on the plans. Most of the time they simply reduce the contract amount... they don't do as the article say and bill the contractor for the money. I told you very early on that the contractor would have to skimp on the high quality products called for the in plans in order to even come close to breaking even. City staff let them build the park with lesser materials and they did not actually execute deductive change orders in order to achieve this - the contract just decided to go with cheaper materials and only after the fact did the city mention it. (I'll explain how this works shortly).
The $1,000 a day in liquidated damages came out to $264,000. That's saying the project was at least 264 days late. You were told that they would be charged for this. This article makes it clear they were not charged this amount.
Forget the more than $1 million the contractor wanted for "additional work" - that was cooked up to make you think the city was getting a deal by "settling" on the retainage. No contractor performs "additional work" without an approved change order in hand - NO CONTRACTOR BILLS A YEAR LATER FOR "ADDITIONAL WORK" IT'S BULLSHIT YOU SHOULDN'T BELIEVE.
NO DEAL WAS REACHED HERE. The contract was closed out without any penalties or deductive change orders being charged to the contractor. "Retainage" is a percent of the final contract that the city keeps until the job is completely finished. This makes sure the contractor comes back to fix warranty issues etc. At the end of the period, they get that retainage back in a big check. That's exactly what happened here.
The article states that the contractor owed $551,000 to the city. The retainage was $456,884. My math shows that the contractor owes the city almost $100,000 over the retainage amount. The city should have kept the retainage and billed them for another $100,000.
Instead of losing out on the retainage, they had their sins washed away and were given $456,884. Sounds awesome to me.
If you take out all the bullshit in the story it's quite simple. The contractor got his retainage as if the project was executed perfectly. Mentioning liquidated damages and deductive change orders is worthless here because they were not charged or deducted. The contract just ended... that's it. You were lied to and all these dollar figures thrown out in the story are put there to confuse you.
I hope you're excited for the EPISD bond - all the city staff that made this thing crash and messed up the estimating on the QOL bond are all now working at EPISD! It's like a rematch, but with different uniforms.... same team, different uniforms.