HVAC improvements for the Office of the Circuit Clerk are now in the contractual stage after needing to readvertise for the project back in November due to not receiving any bids.
The advertisement drew a single bidder the second time around and much discussion was had about the contract before it was approved by a 3-2 vote of the Washington County Board of Supervisors during their regular Monday meeting.
Board attorney Willie Griffin advised there were items in the HVAC contract the board needed to “specifically approve” and one that needed to be omitted, which was an arbitration clause.
“There’s an arbitration in there and arbitration provisions are prohibited by Mississippi law,” Griffin pointed out to the board.
He had also sent a memorandum to each supervisor that notified them of another provision in which the contractor would be subject to pay $50 for every day that exceeds the completion date.
“I wanted to point that out to you because that does not sound like much,” Griffin said. “I would recommend $250 at least.”
The final item Griffin brought to the BOS’ attention was the one year warranty.
BOS President Carl McGee noted the HVAC improvements were a $200,000 project and said typically, if the deadline is missed, $500 per day is the penalty “for work of that magnitude.”
County engineer Lorenzo Anderson advised the BOS to consider a more “reasonable number” as local contractors provide a price reflective of their liability or the timetable to acquire materials and equipment, especially given the current state of manufacturers’ supply chain.
District 1 Supervisor Lee Gordon reminded fellow BOS members as to why his initial vote for the contract was in opposition.
Gordon thought the price to be too much for just one bid and asserted his vote would likely be “no” on the contract, which it was.
His recommendation, however, was stipulating $100 a day, as opposed to $50, per $100,000.
Griffin highlighted with respect to late penalties, the BOS essentially has the latitude to accept or reject a contractor’s offered explanation as to why the work performed exceeds the completion date.
“There has to be a penalty to justify them wanting to do your work and getting it done in a timely manner,” he reiterated.
“If the contractors fail to get the job done in time, they need to know what’s in there because they’re going to turn to the lawyer and say ‘Why didn’t you tell us this $50 was in there.’”
District 4 Supervisor Mala Brooks’ opinion differed in that she felt it was not “realistic” to have contractors incur additional fees if the project runs behind schedule due to reasons related to supply shortages.
McGee affirmed the attorney’s recommendation of increasing the $50 to a more substantial amount.
“This board has the ability to waive that fee depending on the reason for the delay. If the contractor comes in and presents a reason for the delay then you have the discretion to grant that release forward,” he added.
Brooks made a motion to move forward with the $50 in place, excluding the arbitration clause of the contract.
The motion passed 3-2 with McGee and Gordon voting opposed, while District 2 Supervisor Tommy Benson, District 5 Supervisor Jerry Redmond and Brooks voted “aye.”
