Stadium: Architecture, Engineering, and Design AWARDED!

[Dane96]

Thanks for keeping an eye out for the info HAG.

 

For Hag & 96 and anyone else having a guess:

 

Before this design contract being awarded, what were the chances of a stadium, with the info we've had, on a scale from 1 to 10? And now after the design contract being awarded?

 

Sorry for the tardiness of my reply here, but I believe I have addressed that in other threads. As for the "likelihood" of the project, D96 laid out many good points.

 

To interject, I should say this: I work with New York State contracts every day, but my interaction is in fiscal and systems capacities, and not in their development, so while I can tell you what you need to know about spending on a contract, or how the financial systems interact, I will gladly defer to my other colleagues when legal and technical terms are involved.

 

That said, I do know that the terminology in a traditional state contract is generally slanted in the state's favor, meaning that if they decide not to go through with the contract, then exiting from it is much easier for the state than the vendor....This is one of the reasons I will monitor the AED contract to see when expenditures are made against it.

 

There is still a part of me that is comfortable with seeing Heery International win the bid, because I am hopeful that they would not bid unless they thought the project would happen on the near future, but I will still wait to see expenses before getting too excited.

 

The bolded section is called a "termination for convenience" and it is mandated in every contract that uses State or Federal funding. Basically, the only thing the vendor will look to negotiate is ability to get paid for reasonable costs including lost profits on the work already done, demobilization costs and costs for breaking contracts with subs.

[Dane96]

Could be a sub contractor for the engineering work?

 

Or can simply be typical government contract business: not paying or encumbering until a milestone is met. Under most State and Federal contract law, you can only get paid for an actual service. So, they may have a milestone for first payment set for "accepted FDR (final design review)."

 

It can mean a million things. Put it this way, we just received a 12mm dollar check from an agency whose project at a Notice to Proceed in Feb. 2009. It was only our second payment...

[haggyland]

The bolded section is called a "termination for convenience" and it is mandated in every contract that uses State or Federal funding. Basically, the only thing the vendor will look to negotiate is ability to get paid for reasonable costs including lost profits on the work already done, demobilization costs and costs for breaking contracts with subs.

Exactly the more legally savvy information I crave. Thanks.

I checked the AED contract this morning and there are still no expenditures against it; can somebody tell me when to panic?

[Dane96]

Ask for a copy of contract. Milestone payments will have to be listed...even if it is a lump sum project.

[haggyland]

Ask for a copy of contract. Milestone payments will have to be listed...even if it is a lump sum project.

I'm trying to figure out a way to do it without paying for it through the FOIL request...I was hoping they would have a scanned PDF they could just send, but my quest is only still in the infancy stages.

[MRSGDG]

I checked the AED contract this morning and there are still no expenditures against it; can somebody tell me when to panic?

 

 

With the various contracts mentioned I'm not sure which one you're referring to--what's the start and end date of the "AED" contract?

[haggyland]

I checked the AED contract this morning and there are still no expenditures against it; can somebody tell me when to panic?

 

 

With the various contracts mentioned I'm not sure which one you're referring to--what's the start and end date of the "AED" contract?

 

I am thinking a payment will probably end up occurring after a milestone, but then the obvious follow-up question from me would be: Without an advance, how long would a group of professionals work without receiving a payment from the state? Maybe this is why I should really complete the FOIL...

 

As for the question of which contract is the AED (Architectural, Engineering, and Design), that one is with Heery International, with a start date of 1/19/11 and an end date of 1/18/16 and found in post #2 of this current thread: http://bigpurplefans.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6785&view=findpost&p=55532

[MRSGDG]

I checked the AED contract this morning and there are still no expenditures against it; can somebody tell me when to panic?

 

 

With the various contracts mentioned I'm not sure which one you're referring to--what's the start and end date of the "AED" contract?

 

I am thinking a payment will probably end up occurring after a milestone, but then the obvious follow-up question from me would be: Without an advance, how long would a group of professionals work without receiving a payment from the state? Maybe this is why I should really complete the FOIL...

 

As for the question of which contract is the AED (Architectural, Engineering, and Design), that one is with Heery International, with a start date of 1/19/11 and an end date of 1/18/16 and found in post #2 of this current thread: http://bigpurplefans...indpost&p=55532

 

The payment schedule on the contract would describe the dates or milestones in which the contractor would be able to submit an invoice to the state. As to how long a group would go w/o receiving payment--- it all depends because when they sign the contract, they are agreeing to do the work upfront and to be reimbursed based on a payment schedule...and often times they can be large lump sums (full $1.4M). Was this service bid out? The request for bids/proposals often times has a description of what the payment schedule may be...

 

The other thing to note is that it's a 5 year contract. So we could assume the tasks being asked to be performed from this contract would take the full 5 years. But, it should also be noted that most of the time OSC allows the contracts to be 5 years max (and most of those 5 yr contracts don't have no cost time ext language in them--but this one may .... who knows). There could be a chance that the services are intended to be complete over 2 or 3 years, but to avoid the approvals and paperwork they made the term the full five years. Many questions... but unless we see the contract, we'll never know.. good luck with the foil if you do it.

[Dane96]

Last post was pretty much spot on except for a couple of points.

 

Whatever is in the RFP is negotiable after Notice to Award. We negotiate with State Agencies all day long once you get into the nitty gritty regarding scope of work. Payment milestones are usually the last thing negotiated once everything else is set in place. So, you can pretty much toss out a majority of the RFP language as long as the final contract represents the spirit and intent of the RFP.

 

Second, you are 100% correct that the tasks could be for five years...full payment (depending on the wording of the milestones) can actually happen on substantial completion or Final Acceptance depending on the definition of the terms in the contract. This could occur (and likely is) when the majority of the Phase work is complete on the base...not potential option expansion phases.

 

However, it is actually illegal in procurement law to avoid change orders by extending out the time frame for completion when the intent is to get it done in 2-3 years as you describe. That said, again...they get sneaky and could word the contract in such away to actually set up the exact scenario you put forth without it facially being so. Problem is...it is unlikely any contractor would accept such terms because of cash flow issues: THE SURETY COMPANY WOULD NEVER BOND THE WORK AS THEY WANT THE BOND TO BE RELEASED ON PERFORMANCE COMPLETION...AKA ASAP!

 

In addition, because of the unique nature of the design-build...the paperwork to extend/procure would be limited because it is more than likely to be deemed a sole-source procurement.

 

In short...you are correct...the contract will be the only thing that can answer the questions.

[UAalum72]

$312 million Megamillions winning ticket was sold at Coulson's on Broadway this week. Haggy, you buy it there this week?

[uofalbany]

Apparently, the budget was passed late last night.

Does it offer any insight into the proposed stadium?

I've heard more than once that the shovels are hitting ground in "spring 2011", along

with a stadium phase completion by summer 2012.

[UAalum72]

Since they just awarded the design contract, it won't be this spring. They still have to solicit and bid on the construction contract.

 

Per the schedule earlier in this thread, Spring 2012 is more likely. Still plenty of time to put down a field and Phase 1 seating.

[Dane96]

Wait...I thought the contract was a design/build. If so, the Construction portion of the bidding would be pretty quick since technically speaking, it is a subcontract between the designer and the construction company. There would be no real State input other than a stamp.

[dslyank]

So what is the story? Are we breaking ground this spring or not? Does anyone really know? And what about the poor track team; are they ever going to get the deserved upgrades so the UA track team can actually compete at UA.

 

Why can't someone announce we are building in 2011 or 2012 or 2030? What are they afraid of?

[uofalbany]

Again, I asked McElroy for an update on March 11:

 

 

"We will be breaking ground in the Spring of 2011 with a Completion date of Spring of 2012.

Don Ostrom will provide you with greater detail on the project as we move forward.

When working with engineering and architectural firms,the dissemination of information must be accurate and is not always timely."

 

 

Don Ostrom has not contact me.

This was the 2nd time in 2.5 months that I was given this same timeline.