The committee of the whole listened to Davidson’s presentation on Aug. 16 as he described how the project took four weeks longer than anticipated to complete.
Davidson also stated that the on-site inspector had spent additional time on the site. He felt that additional costs were incurred in order to stay within the "tight budget" for the project.
He suggested that the additional costs be paid out of the contingency costs provided in "soft costs" for the project.
Because there were not enough funds available to complete the full length of the road in the original design, it was shortened.
Davidson inferred that this, as well as other unexpected developments, increased the engineering cost of the project. He also said that because of extra time he spent negotiating lower prices related to other aspects of the job, he felt the additional fee was warranted.
Municipal clerk-treasurer Brian Holland pointed out that in the original proposal the company promised to pay significant attention to quality, cost, and scheduling, which specified 28 days.
Holland also listed bills presented for site inspection, which didn’t coincide with Davidson’s figures.
Davidson offered the following explanation.
“Basically what happened was as you start to go down through time, we billed whatever time was put in by myself, the Cat operator, and the site inspector.
“What happens is when that comes up in the total contract amount, he stops billing,” said Davidson.
The matter of the extra billing will be discussed in a closed session with the municipal solicitor on Aug. 23