THE GAZETTE
Wednesday, April 9, 2014 d
Page A-9
Committee seeks ways to curtail costly project overruns Report outlines possible steps council might take
n
BY
RYAN MARSHALL STAFF WRITER
Almost anyone who has ever had work done on their home knows that few projects come without some unexpected problems. But in an effort to avoid expensive cost overruns — such as the ones at the Silver Spring Transit Center — the Montgomery County Council is looking at ways it can reduce the number of changes made to the facilities the county builds while they’re under construction.
The county builds projects such as libraries, police and fire stations, and recreation centers very well, but it tends to run into trouble when it tries to address unusual projects in the usual ways, said David Dise, director of the county’s Department of General Services. “We do what we normally do very well,” Dise said Thursday at a meeting of the council’s Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee. The committee was discussing a report from the Office of Legislative Oversight on the effect of change orders — directives that require a contractor working on a project to change a portion of the work specified un-
der the contract for the project — on county construction jobs. The report included three recommendations for the council to take action on: • To ask that General Services develop a process to assess the risks of capital budget projects. • To ask that General Services use different ways to manage the procurement and contracting process on projects that carry a high risk of expensive changes. • To encourage General Services to continue to collect and monitor data on change orders on projects to identify trends and factors that increase the chance of cost increases and delays.
Change orders can be caused by a variety of factors, according to the legislative oversight report. On one project, a construction contractor the county had worked with on other projects went out of business while it was working on a county project. In another case, a previously reliable vendor provided the county with faulty building materials, while on another project the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission changed code requirements while a capital project was being built. The transit center project in downtown Silver Spring wasn’t mentioned at the hearing, but the project has been crippled by
Executive candidates debate budget Leggett fires back at attacks on transit center n
BY
RYAN MARSHALL STAFF WRITER
Democratic county executive candidates sparred over budgetary issues at a forum Sunday in Silver Spring. Councilman Philip M. Andrews (D-Dist. 3) of Gaithersburg said the county government should not fund the public school system above the amount required by state funding minimums, as a way to control county spending. Current County Executive Isiah Leggett said staying at so-called maintenance of effort for any extended period of time would be a “recipe for disaster” by lowering the quality of the county’s school system. Former county executive Douglas M. Duncan criticized the law for providing disincentives for counties to fund more than the required amount because they’ll have to provide at least the new amount from the next year and in future years. The Womans Democratic Club
of Montgomery County hosted the forum. Republican candidate Jim Shalleck of Montgomery Village was not at the debate, and said he had not been invited to participate. Leggett’s proposed fiscal 2015 operating budget provides funding forschoolsatabout$26millionabove the maintenance of effort level. Leggett said he would love to see the law changed, but funding schools only at the basic level until it is wouldn’t provide the school system’s current students with the resources they need, Leggett said. Andrews said while education is an important service that the county provides, so are libraries, fire, police and other items that get crowded out of the budget by education spending. Duncan promised as executive to work with the county’s delegation to the General Assembly, the County Council and the school board to change the law so it rewards counties for providing increased funding. Duncan continued his attacks on Leggett for the troubled Silver Spring Transit Center project, asking when the facility will open, what it will cost and if it will be safe.
He accused Leggett of forming a secret committee to prepare a report on the long-delayed project in downtown Silver Spring. The comment drew a heated response from Leggett, who repeated his answer from earlier events that the facility will open when it is determined to be safe. “All this talk about some secret commission. What are you talking about?” Leggett asked. Andrews also reprised one of his favorite lines about the transit center, pointing out that both Duncan and Leggett have had opportunities to get the facility open as county executive and have failed to do so. He said perhaps Duncan could get some information on when the transit center will open from the project’s general contractor Foulger-Pratt, who had done some consulting work for Duncan. Duncan used the forum to promote his “Leadership In Action” plan. The plan includes policy proposals on a variety of issues, including education, job creation, infrastructure and the environment.
delays and problems. The county released information in November that the project had been subject to more than 400 proposed change orders, included approved orders worth $10.8 million. The Department of General Services is already doing some of the steps recommended in the report, Dise said. For instance, the department reviews project sites to try and identify potential problems with sites before a project starts. Renovations and rehabilitations cause more of a problem in this area because crews aren’t able to test an area as much as they could with a site that doesn’t already have a building
on it, Dise said. Dise said the county does evaluate things such as the safety record, payment histories and the number of modifications that previous projects have needed when it’s looking for a company to work on a project. It also talks with jurisdictions that have worked with the company, he said. After about an hour of discussion, committee Chairwoman Nancy Navarro (D-Dist. 4) of Silver Spring said she would like the committee to have some more discussion on the issue before it makes a recommendation to the full council on action to help avoid the need for change orders on projects.
Council favors local businesses n
Measure gives county companies a leg up when bidders tie BY
RYAN MARSHALL STAFF WRITER
When it comes to bidding against companies from outside Montgomery County on county projects, local businesses will now officially receive a leg up. The Montgomery County Council voted unanimously Tuesday to approve a bill that would require the county to give preferences to county businesses in the event of a tie with a company from outside the county. The bill actually codifies what already is in county procurement regulations, with some additions, said bill sponsor Councilwoman Nancy Navarro (D-Dist. 4) of Silver Spring on Tuesday. Council members have long heard from business owners that the county’s procurement process is too long and involved, said Council Vice President George L. Leventhal (D-At Large) of Takoma Park. He said he supported the bill but asked Department of General Services Director DavidDiseifitwouldcomplicatetheprocesseven further. Dise said he didn’t expect it to. Government procurement can provide some challenges to businesses because of
the need to take measures to protect public money, Dise said. But in other jurisdictions that already have similar rules in place, a policy to break ties doesn’t usually provide an extra burden, he said. Councilman Philip M. Andrews (D-Dist. 3) of Gaithersburg asked Dise if he thought the bill could hurt Montgomery companies trying to get contracts in other jurisdictions. The bill establishes a way to break ties for similar bids, not a preference for Montgomery companies that submit a higher bid than a competitor, Dise said. The bill defines a county-based bidder as a company that “has its principal place of business in Montgomery County” and has “operated through an office, distribution point, or facility in the county for at least six months immediately prior to submitting a bid in response to a formal solicitation issued by the county,” and one that owns property taxed by the county. In fiscal 2013, 28 percent of contracts awarded by the county, worth more than $233 million,weretolocalbusinessesworkingasthe primary contractor or subcontractor, according to a Feb. 20 letter from County Executive IsiahLeggett(D)expressingsupportforthebill. Council President Craig L. Rice (D-Dist. 2) ofGermantownmadehelpinglocalbusinesses a priority when he became council president in January.
1890378