Board of Aldermen 8-11-2020 Page 12
So | would hope that the Aldermen, when you have a question on things, that you ask the question ahead
of time because | think that it prevents things from ....
Director Cummings
| talked to Jette yesterday on the phone at length about multiple things, he never even brought this up.
Mayor Donchess
Madam President?
President Wilshire
| am going to call on the Mayor and then Alderman Kelly.
Mayor Donchess
| want to clarify what | said before because the Finance Committee approved this, | think —| think a year
ago and the project has been in the works for a long time. So | am trying to rely on memory about this. But |
misspoke when | said this will realize an $800,000.00 savings. It is $800,000.00 less than the bonded
amount, but we may have other contracts which add on to this one. So | want to correct that. This isn’t
necessarily an $800,000.00 savings, but the contract was approved by the Finance Committee | believe
sometime last Summer. And then in the course of the intervening year, we arrived at this guaranteed
maximum price, which is $800,000.00 less than the bond authorization but there might or will be additional
work required. | think that in the future, in a situation like this, if you want to get an explanation, I’d be glad
to provide it for you. | mean it’s not like we were trying to hide it, the project is so longstanding, it has been
going on for years. We were before the Committee a year ago and it just seemed, this has been through
Legal, and it just seemed like it was or there wouldn’t be any issues.
Now given what Alderman Jette has raised, if this happens again, we would be glad to come back, you
know, no problem. In fact, we’ve got three other contracts on here, the one about the Realty Services has
gone to the Committee and been discussed. The others have not except in concept with the Board and the
subsequent two regarding the Riverfront. Those have been discussed in concept with the Board you know
as a whole and also with Infrastructure. But given this discussion, we’d be glad to bring those to the
Finance Committee and discuss them in detail. So | am asking you to defer those contracts so we don’t
have this same discussion. But | think in the future, we would be glad to come back. In this instance,
unfortunately there is some time pressure because Public Health can only be out of that building for a year.
Certainly we would be glad to come to the Finance Committee and justify the $2.8 million, no problem. But
to hold it up for a month, would be a problem or could be a problem because then we don’t finish and then
you know then we don’t have a place for them at the end of the lease. Anyway, | apologize for the
confusion.
Alderwoman Kelly
Thank you, | don’t know if I’m too dark, | thought my arm was getting tired there, the lighting in here. Thank
you. So | had a couple of comments just for the conversation here. | think that the reason that this is
coming up is there have been other instances in which we have suspended the rules and it hasn’t gone to
Committee. And so | don’t want to speak for the other Aldermen here but | do feel that has happened a few
times and it feels like we are not doing our due diligence having those conversations. In this case, as we
have been assured the actual scope has not changed, | think we should move this forward. But | think we
continue to bring these things out, because there were a couple of things said, Oh just because it costs less
we should go forward with it. But we don’t know why it is costing less, we don’t have any understanding
fully about what is going on with this and sometimes costing less means we are cutting corners and that
may not be the best way to handle a project.
