“If you get to round three, I can honestly say I hope Roscoe Construction has enough on their plate that we can pass it up,” Roscoe Construction vice-president Kevin Roscoe said.
Kings County council voted against awarding the construction contract for the proposed new municipal complex in Coldbrook at a special meeting Jan. 10.
Roscoe said he didn’t know whether to feel relieved by council’s decision or disappointed that his company won’t get the job. While it would have been a big job employing lots of local tradespeople, he wasn’t comfortable moving forward based on what he witnessed from council.
“As a taxpayer, I’m disappointed in the funds spent to date,” Roscoe said.
Howard Little Construction was previously awarded the site preparation contract, which Roscoe said would hopefully add value to the property. However, he said the new council should have put an immediate halt to the work after the election in October. He doesn’t think the county can recoup the money spent to date if the decision is made to move away from the Coldbrook Village Park Drive location.
Roscoe Construction’s bid for the new municipal complex was $5,699,000 plus HST, the lowest bid received from the seven companies that bid on the contract. The previous council set a $7.5 million budget for the project.
Halt or move ahead?
Mayor Peter Muttart told council there were two options: award the contract or cancel the request for proposals. Coun. Pauline Raven moved to cancel the RFP, which eventually passed with a 6-4 vote.
Raven drew attention to a communication from municipal staff received the day before, highlighting 11 issues with the proposed building they’re unsatisfied with.
Coun. Jim Winsor pointed out a lack of public parking spaces, adding that the location poses a problem for staff and public accessibility.
“The area is one of the most severe choke points for traffic in the county,” Winsor said.
Coun. Brian Hirtle – who was in favour of moving ahead with the project - said it’s “morally and no doubt legally wrong to move in another direction,” adding the county had invested too much to “throw it to the wind.” He said council should strive for compromise to deal with deficiencies and pointed out this would be a black mark against dealing with the county in the future. The previous council already cancelled one request for proposals after bids came in over budget.
Muttart said the prior council passed a motion for the chief administrative officer to proceed with a 25,000-square foot building, but the proposal before them was less than 20,000 square feet. Council never approved the reduction in space, he said.
Muttart said there was no consultation with the public, staff or potential partners and he’s concerned over spending millions more “on a bad project that falls short on so many fronts.” The current municipal complex in Kentville is available for the next two years, he said, so there isn’t an urgent need to vacate the premises.
The municipality sold the current municipal complex in Kentville to the province for use by the Department of Justice. The municipality has a sharing agreement with the province for the expenses of the building, which also houses the justice centre, and pays about 60 per cent.
The county will have to cover provincial payments in lieu of taxes to the Town of Kentville to stay in the current complex, approximately $160,000 per year.
Controversy surrounds motion, vote
Controversy arose when Coun. Pauline Raven was the first councillor to put her light on to speak at the meeting. She made a motion to withdraw the request for proposals for the new complex. Coun. Bob Best, who represents Coldbrook, believed he was first to get his light on and wouldn’t take Muttart’s word that it was Raven.
“I was going to award the contract to the lowest bidder,” Best said. “I had my light on when you started talking.”
Municipal solicitor Jonathan Cuming confirmed through the electronic voting system that Raven was first to activate her light.
Controversy arose again when it came time for the vote. Although Muttart had already voiced his intention to vote in favour of the motion, when the vote was taken, Muttart didn’t hit his button to register his vote.
The result showed to be five in favour, four against. Best insisted that this was actually a tie because an abstention is considered a negative vote. A tied vote results in a defeated motion. However, Muttart ruled that this would only be the case if he had intentionally abstained from voting, which he did not. The motion carried with a vote of six to four.
“I’m not changing my mind, I’m pressing my button,” Muttart said.
What they said
“I understand and I’m prepared to say publicly that you (council) have had legal opinions that we will be at a large legal liability on this if somebody decides to hold you to task.” – Gerry Fulton, Somerset
“Changing the spelling from trials to trails is actually the only thing that has been accomplished, as the tender package went out without a follow-up meeting and we, the citizens, did not know what was presented to the contractor.” - Nancy Denton Peck, Black River Road
“I want to assure the councillors who wanted to vote for this building, we have done you a huge favour.” – Pierre Clouthier, New Minas
“After hearing Mr. Roscoe’s talk, all I have to say to everyone here is amen.” – Dick Killam, Hall’s Harbour
“This building has to perform, it’s functionality and form have to be right for the design life for this council to conduct it’s business for the people of Kings County.” – Warren Peck, Black River Road.
“This was a poorly conceived vote. How we can say the traffic situation in Kentville is better than it is in Coldbrook is beyond me…this is obviously a political vote based on a very small group of people, not about based on good planning of a building.” – Daryl Fraser, Coldbrook
“In many ways I think it would be fair to say this evening that there are no winners - yet. That has to be determined by how this process goes forward.” – Linda O’Neill, Medford
