UCIA Walking to LFB

The Union County Improvement Authority (UCIA) will have an item on the Mach 8, 2017 Local Finance Board (LFB) meeting agenda asking to bond for another $8 million to finish the Family Court Building Project and pay the fees and salaries of the people (many of whom may well be ‘walking’ to Washington at this very moment on a taxpayer-funded junket) who screwed up the project so far.

Remember back in February, 2012 when this project kicked off:
.

.
Among the highlights from that LFB application:

FC-1

FC-2

FC-3

FC-4

FC-5

FC-6

Advertisements

3 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by readslikeamofiabook on February 16, 2017 at 7:49 pm

    Will anyone at the LFB ask these UCIA morons why they are not calling the performance bond and WHY NOT? Poorly written contract between the UCIA and original general contractor? If the default is due “in part” on the part of the original general contractor, then who is in default of whatever the other “in part” may be? There are more “parts” here and that needs to be addressed on the part of the taxpayers.

    Reply

  2. Posted by bpaterson on February 17, 2017 at 4:17 pm

    JB1-Reviewing the change order log exh F, it looks like some issues of design failure on the part of Netta architects. He made millions on this contract scamming the county. He actually had no background in design of courthouses, yet the FH gave him via reso 210-512 this $1.8 mill arch contract in a lowball bait and switch scheme to get him this plum since he is for some reason the “favored contractor” of UCGovt. Within the year of initial contract was given out then the freeholders suddenly found they had to increase the construction scope. So netta amazingly had a change order via reso 2011-693 for additional services increasing his contract by nearly 50% to close to $3 million. Now we have the $11 million worth of change orders? Some misc comments on red flags that jump out:

    B-CO#2: smoke evac $1,960k: this is standard design req in public buildings-Netta may have been too dumb to know this up front. Also could be a low ball scam to get the “favored” contractor on board first. They tell him behind door to bid low and the change order he could fatten up to cover his low bid.
    B-CO#5: prosecutor space & door access $990,000: this more than likely should have been picked up in initial design and review not after contract. political hack romakow may have created this fiasco not understanding his office reqs, this or netta missed standard court design.

    B-CO#7: PCO settlements and contingency $1,891,000: this sounds like pure BS or should be covred by P&P bond.
    C-CO#1: VE-Value engg, redesign, rebids $1,810,000: sounds like more BS to scam the taxpyers by Netta. Why redesign?-zero if done rite the first time. Some $ may be legit like VE, not most of it though.
    C-CO#2: LEED, CA services, fiber design, LSRP $890,000: again Netta should have know about LEED-stupid. Fiber design, may be legit. CA (constru admin) services sounds like a scam. LSRP, (hazmat remediation co) minor cost should be up with A-CO#1.

    C-CO#9, 10 plus D —
    D-CO#1, 2, 3: delay of project costs: the total is 285+526+537+551+183=over $2 million: This is majority scam of at least $1 to 1.5 mill as a guess. These numbers get really built up. The questions are who is the construction manager on the project, there is the investigation direction. Also what is a “CDC Stone report”. Could be duplication of costs buried in this. Who reviews the change orders, netta? I am laughing if it is. These change orders are the place to find the abuse and corruption!!!!

    E-CO#1: legal council fees for termination & takeover: $427,000: this needs to be scrutinized, the P&P bond pays for this. The question here is who is the legal council charging this? It depends if they are part of the corrupted system how the cost really is impacted by nefarious accounting.

    Reply

  3. Posted by bpaterson on February 17, 2017 at 4:23 pm

    regarding that extended services delay claim under C&D-this is claims by the arch and construction manager and is simply overhead costs. So $2 million-is a true scam. Since there are other projects all the time, these professionals are NOT being paid to sit around waiting so there is minor to no labor cost. Only other cost really incurred would be maybe a monthly trailer rental, phone and internet. Might be some inflation cost involved by minor. This is why i identify the $2 million as taxpayer abuse and more than likely strait corruption. Hopefully someone responsible will delete this faked costs from any project impacts.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: