West Baton Rouge Parish — The parish council unanimously denied a $4,000 change order on the Court Street Sidewalk Project on Thursday, Sept. 10, after a councilman who works in construction challenged the costs line by line — then learned the same engineering firm had made a separate $72,000 calculation error on the same project.

The change order, submitted by GIS Engineering, LLC for work on a driveway near KO Storage on Court Street, asked for $4,000 and two additional contract days to replace a rebar grid. The contractor discovered the existing driveway used No. 5 bars on a two-by-two-foot grid rather than the DOTD standard detail, and the parish agreed to replace it to match what was originally there.

Councilman Alan Crowe, vice chairman of the parish council, who works in the construction industry, said he went out to the site and measured the driveway before the meeting.

"We're talking about a total of $500 worth of rebar, and that's for the entire grid," Crowe said. "I am a contractor, so that's what I do for a living."

He called the two-day time extension "ridiculous" and said the work was a small part of a larger ongoing project that already had equipment on site.

"I could pour out an entire section of concrete for less than $4,000," Crowe said.

GIS project manager Jessica Chatelain told the council she initially thought the change order was fair, but acknowledged after Crowe's breakdown that the numbers didn't add up.

Crowe also questioned equipment charges included in the change order, noting the project already had equipment on site and that rebar is placed by hand.

"You don't need equipment to put down rebar," Crowe said. "You carry it down and put it down by hand and tie it with a wire twister."

He asked whether the state had approved the change order. It had not — the parish was the first step in the approval process before it would go to DOTD.

The council voted unanimously to deny the change order.

Same firm, same project, different problem

Minutes later, Council Chairman Carey Denstel introduced a second change order on the same project — this time for $72,021.

Brandon Bourgoyne, the parish's director of public works, explained the change order was correcting a quantity error on riprap — the rocks placed near the pedestrian bridge. According to the change order document, the engineering design called for 189 square yards of riprap, but the project actually required 873 square yards. The reason code on the change order listed the cause as "incorrect quantities" in the consultant's design.

"So it made a $72,000 mistake," Councilman Carey Denstel said.

"Who made the $72,000 mistake?" Crowe asked.

"GIS was doing the engineering design for the project," Bourgoyne confirmed.

As with the first change order, the work had already been completed before the council voted.

"Same as before — work's done, shouldn't have been done," Crowe said.

The council unanimously approved the second change order because the unit prices matched the original bid — meaning the quantity was wrong, but the per-unit cost was the same as what the contractor originally bid.

Crowe contrasted the two change orders.

"Funny that they put down $72,000 worth of riprap with no additional days of contract, then they can't put down $500 worth of rebar with extra days," Crowe said.

Process questions

Hotard laid out the standard procedure for change orders: RFI, response to RFI, quote, approval for quote, then work. In both cases Thursday night, the work was done before the council approved it.

"The procedure is RFI, response to RFI, quote, approval for quote, work done," Hotard said. "We didn't give approval for quote yet."

Chatelain acknowledged the process needed to change. "Y'all are the parish who is paying for this project," she said.

When asked about the approval process, Chatelain said she was not sure how it worked on the parish side.

"You say you don't know is not an acceptable answer," Hotard told her. "You're the project manager representing this parish and this state."

"That's taxpayers' money," Council Chairman Denstel said.

Crowe pushed back on the repeated characterization of the project as an 80/20 state-parish cost split.

"It's not 80/20, guys," Crowe said. "It's 100% taxpayers' money. We are on the hook for the whole thing."

The Court Street Sidewalk Project, officially State Project No. H.014944.6, is the LA 76 Multi-Use Path and Sidewalks Phase 1 project. GIS Engineering, LLC serves as both the project engineer and submitted both change orders.