Architect, ETH Trustees At Odds Over Invoices

By John Voket

The architect and project manager for the Edmond Town Hall elevator installation project told Board of Managers trustees this week that their failure to remit payment for invoices is affecting the project. Architect Alan Black told the board Tuesday evening that key support contractors have turned their attention to other jobs, which could further delay the project’s completion.

Discussions over the balance on one particular invoice caused emotions to run high, with the architect accusing one former subcontractor of “blackmailing” the board into paying that engineer directly for services when Mr Black stated that he was to approve and sign off on all contractor remittances.

The architect also provided some documentation supporting work he said he performed on the charge of either one member of, or the entire board, related to planned future improvements to the Edmond Town Hall Theatre. During the last Board of Managers meeting in June, Mr Black discussed an outstanding invoice he said he submitted in April 2005 for services rendered, which was being held up for payment by the trustees.

The bill for $4,275 was to cover time the architect spent in meetings and securing comprehensive estimates for renovations to the town hall theater. Mr Black was requested to prepare the estimates by a building committee made up of trustees, town hall staff, and Legislative Councilman David Brown.

“You asked me to get a handle on what it would take to renovate the theater,” Mr Black told the board in June. “I had to meet with a lighting consultant; I had three meetings with a painting conservation specialist; our work consisted of a comprehensive review of everything in the theater.”

On Tuesday evening, Mr Black presented additional documentation that was requested in June detailing dates and times when he said he worked on, made calls regarding, or took meetings with other professionals to prepare cost estimates for possible future renovations to the 75-year-old hall.

“We went back through our timesheets, the records, and the books to estimate the time of the meetings and the time spent,” Mr Black said. He told the board that when billing for time related to meetings, he included prep time before meetings, transportation from the time he left his office, and follow-up work handling duties like the preparation of memorandums and other related business.

Mr Black said he had multiple meetings with restoration professionals including a paint restoration specialist. At one point in the process, Mr Black said he was engaged in a conversation related to the replacement of theater chairs, and that the meeting led to him eventually selecting and securing a prototype for new seats that is currently being used to aid fundraising initiatives for that part of the theater project.

Charge Made By Board

It was during these discussions that the architect stated he was charged with developing a full-scale plan for the overall renovation project.

“There was a request, I believe, on the part of a board member or the board itself to develop an idea of what the cost would be to renovate the entire theater, which we did,” Mr Black told the board. “So we began researching floor finishes, carpeting, tiling to go underneath the seats, the seats themselves, the lighting, replacement of the screen and a speaker system.”

Mr Black admitted that at first, it seemed like he had just spent a few hours here and there handling work related to the theater renovation, but when he looked back on it, he had put a significant amount of time in on the proposal and that he needed to be compensated for that work.

Trustee Marie Sturdevant said that she never recalled a specific charge being given by the board to Mr Black to commission restoration specialists and perform any other duties beyond researching and securing the prototype theater seats.

“I don’t have any recollection that we ever talked about a new screen or a new sound system,” Ms Sturdevant said. “These were things that were on a wish list, but I don’t remember a charge to you to spend all this time. I’m against paying anything for something that was not an absolute charge to you beyond buying the seats.”

Board member Sandra Motyka concurred that she did not recall a specific charge for additional work, and commented that work on the theater “wasn’t even on our radar screen.” Ms Motyka said she was further concerned that by the time the board was ready to plan and budget for theater renovations, prices prepared by Mr Black would no longer be valid or accurate.

After further discussion the board members agreed to review minutes from meetings earlier in the year to determine whether or not a formal charge was made, and both Ms Sturdevant and Ms Motyka said that if minutes reflected an actual charge for the additional work, Mr Black would be compensated immediately for the work invoiced.

Then attention turned to work on the elevator project. Mr Black told the board that problems related to marble that was improperly cut for the project and had to be returned to the vendor would contribute to further delays on the project.

He presented a new timeline for completion to the project, which detailed plans to install the elevator mechanisms on or about September 1, with an approximate target date for the entire project completion including collateral site work being pushed into mid-November.

Invoice In Question

Mr Black then referred to an outstanding invoice going back to April 2005 for engineering services related to the elevator project. The architect said that the invoice, which included work performed by JP Engineering, was never presented to him for review and approval for payment.

However, Mr Black stated in June he learned that JP Engineering was paid directly for services without his review or approval, and that as far as he was concerned, the outstanding invoice was still due and payable in full.

“We never approved any of this [work] and it’s unfair to pay one engineer at the expense of the architect and all the other engineers,” Mr Black said. “And I’m in a situation now where I haven’t received payments since February and I’ve got other engineers who are wondering where their money is.”

The architect said the failure of the board of managers to remit payments has created a problem because he is unable to compensate a number of other consultants.

“JP Engineering’s invoice was supposed to be approved by my office, and that was never done. The fact is that JP Engineering blackmailed the Edmond Town Hall [board],” Mr Black said. “Drawings had to go to the building department and [a JP Engineering representative] actually called me up and wanted to meet me at my bank so I could give them a check and they would cash it on the spot.

“I refused to do that. I’m a business man. I’m not some kind of criminal and that is not the way I’m doing business,” Mr Black said. “So they went to you folks and basically they blackmailed you. I have no knowledge that the amount given to them was the amount that was due.”

Board Chairman Edger Beers told Mr Black that he was contacted directly by the firm and told that necessary prints would not be released until they were paid for services. Board member Jay Gill added that payment to the engineering firm had been held up for 13 months, which added to the urgency for compensation.

At that point, the board of managers issued JP Engineering a check for $3,350 and the prints in question were released to the board. After further discussion, the board voted to supplement Mr Black the difference between his invoice and the amount already paid to JP Engineering, which amounted to $112.

Mr Black stated that the action was unacceptable, and that if necessary, he would assess interest for any outstanding amounts due past 90 days. He then departed the meeting abruptly.

In a follow-up call to Joseph D’Amico, a partner and vice president with the firm, it was confirmed that JP Engineering, Inc had already legally severed its relationship with its client, Alan Black, when the company sought payment for services directly from the town.

At the time, Mr D’Amico confirmed that certain invoices to Mr Black were outstanding for more than a year, and that is one of the legal stipulations exercised to discontinue the contract. However, Mr D’Amico told The Bee Thursday morning that the firm remains available, and in fact, has continued to consult directly with the town on the elevator project because JP Engineering is the engineering firm of record for the project.

“Despite the negative circumstances [related to the contract with Mr Black], I have remained involved on an ‘as needed’ basis because I am committed to the town and the project as the engineer of record,” Mr D’Amico said. “I’m remaining involved at my own expense with no further charge to the town.”