HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09171996 - C18 r
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, as governing body of Contra Costa County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District
FROM: COUNTY COUNSEL
DATE: September 11, 1996
SUBJECT: Settlement of Litigation
Drainage Area 40A Storm Drain Improvement Project, Martinez Area
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. APPROVE settlement of Novo, dba V & M Construction/Backhoe v.
Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation
District involving construction contract claims filed on the
above-described project.
2. AUTHORIZE County Counsel's Office to execute settlement
agreement and take all steps necessary to finalize the agreed
settlement.
FISCAL IMPACT
No impact on General Fund. Settlement would require release of
$38, 696.51 in liquidated damages previously withheld by the
District.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
In July 1994 , the District awarded a construction contract to V &
M Construction/Backhoe ("V & M") . The contract, which was for
$407, 168. 00, involved the installation of storm drain pipes,
drainage inlets and manholes at various locations in the Mountain
View area of Martinez.
The project work was scheduled to be completed on December 21,
1994 . V & M failed to complete the contract work on time. In
September 1995, the Board terminated V & M's rights under the
contract and authorized the hiring of another contractor to
complete the remaining punchlist items. At that time, the Board
approved the assessment of $53, 500. 00 in liquidated damages (107
days x $500/day = $53 , 500. 00) .
On November 16, 19950, V & M filed suit for construction contract
claims against the District Michael V. Novo, dba V & M
Construction/Backhoe v. Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water
Conservation District; Contra Costa Superior Court Case No. C95-
05124 . The suit sought additional compensation of $158,582 .93 for
various items of extra work and release of the liquidated damages
withheld by the District.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE
/J.Ait�.rtAAA,C�
_RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON I� APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER_
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) SUPE SORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
AYES: NOES: /'7� 9 9 fo
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST : PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Contact: David F.Schmidt,(510)335-1816
cc: CAO
Public Works
County Counsel ` +
County Auditor-Controller BY DEPUTY
1 ,
Following a court settlement conference held on July 23, 1996, a
settlement was reached with V & M, which would involve the release
of $38, 696. 51 in liquidated damages previously withheld by the
District. As part of the settlement, the above-described lawsuit
would be dismissed with prejudice and V & M would agree not to bid
on County jobs for a period of five years.
The County Counsel's Office has discussed the settlement with the
Public Works Department, which administered the construction
project. Considering the potential exposure to the District from
the construction contract claims, as well as imminent trial
expenses if the lawsuit is not resolved, both departments believe
that the settlement is in the District's best interest and
recommend that it be accepted.
CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION
The lawsuit would proceed at additional expense to the District,
with a jury trial scheduled to begin on November 25, 1996. Most of
the District's expenses would not be recoverable, even if the
District wins the lawsuit. If it is determined that the District
is responsible for the construction contract claims, the potential
exposure could exceed $150, 000. 00.
-2-