Skip to content

Fort Scott City Commission OKs $3M Sewer Bond, Tables $126,000 Change Order

Leaders move forward with Davis Lift Station financing while delaying construction cost hike over disputed groundwater issues.

Fort Scott City Commission OKs $3M Sewer Bond, Tables $126,000 Change Order
Garth Herrmann, Gilmore & Bell P.C. (Also Uniontown High School Class of '98)
Published:

FORT SCOTT, Kan. — The Fort Scott City Commission on Tuesday unanimously authorized $3.095 million in sewer project financing while tabling a $126,323.58 construction change order for the same project.

Project Financing

Garth Herrmann, representing the city’s bond counsel, Gilmore & Bell, presented Resolution No. 19-2026, which authorizes the sale of temporary notes for the refurbishment of the Davis Lift Station. Herrmann said the notes would provide the capital needed to pay eligible construction costs as they occur over the next year. 

"This resolution authorizes the sale of those temporary notes... which will provide financing to pay the cost of that project," Herrmann said.

The city will hold a blind auction on June 2 at 10:00 a.m. to award the sale to whichever bank offers the lowest interest cost. Once construction is closer to completion in 2027, the city plans to issue long-term bonds to retire the temporary notes.

Change Order Dispute

Later in the meeting, the commission debated Change Order No. 1, which requested an additional $126,323.58 to install an anchoring system for the project's force main pipe. City Engineer Jason Dickman said the contractor encountered unexpected groundwater that creates a buoyancy force, threatening to float the 18-inch pipe out of its trench. 

Commissioner Tim Van Hoecke led the questioning, asking why testing had not discovered the water issue during the project's planning phase.  He expressed frustration that a large cost increase was being requested just as the $3 million project was beginning.

"And before we've even got the bond approved, we want to add another $126,000 to the bill,” Van Hoecke said. “I just think that somehow this could have been seen ahead of time, and you're right, the amount they're wanting to anchor this down there, it seems a little bit high."

City Public Utility Director Scott Flater broke with Dickman’s assessment, arguing that the water in the trench was likely temporary percolation from recent heavy rains rather than a permanent high water table. He advised the commission to wait for dryer weather before committing to a permanent anchoring solution.

"I really, I'm not a scientist or anything like that, but I think they've just been fighting the rainwater and percolation," Flater said.

Flater pointed out that the project was being executed during the wettest period the area has seen in two years, and suggested that if the contractor moved to a different phase of work and returned in two or three months, the "groundwater" issue would possibly vanish.

Dickman emphasized that as the engineer of record, he was required to calculate a solution once the risk was formally reported by the contractor. He warned that if the commission chose to bypass the anchors and the pipe later shifted, the financial responsibility would shift away from the engineering firm.

"So if it doesn't happen, that's fine, but we just can't be held liable if that pipe ever does float," Dickman said.

The commission voted 5-0 to table the change order and directed Dickman to have the contractor move to another phase of the project until the issue could be revisited during drier weather. 

Technology Debate

A debate over transparency and commission involvement in administrative matters occurred after USD 234 IT Director Stephen Mitchell gave a brief update to the Commission.

Commissioner Tracy Dancer pushed for more specifics regarding service level agreements and details of the one, three, and five year technology plans Mitchell reported that he had been working on with city staff.

In response, City Manager Brad Matkin said that managing the IT department was the duty of staff, not Commissioners.

"Why do the five of you need to know exactly what computer we're going to change?" Matkin said. "All you need to know is how much money we're going to spend on IT stuff."

"That should be my job to manage Steven," he said.

Dancer said his concerns were directly tied to his budgetary duties as a commissioner.

"It comes down to the fiduciary responsibility, right?" Dancer said. "So we are asked to approve the expenditure of public funds, and I have questions about them."

The commission agreed to have a future executive session with Mitchell to address any questions about the city's IT infrastructure without exposing any proprietary information to the public.

Other Actions

In other business, the commission:

More in Government

See all

More from Nick Graham

See all