DEKALB COUNTY PUBLIC BUILDING COMMISSION
A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND BODY POLITIC ORGANIZED PURSUANT TO THE “PUBLIC BUILDING COMMISSION ACT.” ILLINOIS REVISED STATUTES 1977 CHAPTER 85, SECTIONS 1031 THROUGH 1054 CHAPTER 85, AND CURRENTLY UNDER ILLINOIS COMPILED STATUTES 50 ILCS 20/1 et seq.

MEETING OF TUESDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2007

A regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners of the DeKalb County Public Building Commission (hereinafter “Commission”) was held Tuesday, December 4, 2007, at 8:30 A.M. in Conference Room East of the DeKalb County Government Administration Building, pursuant to written notice of each Commissioner as required by the bylaws.

ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Robert Hutcheson at 8:30 A.M. The Commissioners present were Chairman Hutcheson, Mr. Beryl Smith, Mr. Robert Morrison, Dr. Richard Baker and Mr. Matt Swanson. Also present were Mr. Gary Hanson, Ms. Mary Simons, Mr. Ken Campbell, and Mr. Matt Bickel of Wold Architects and Engineers.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion was made by Mr. Smith and seconded by Mr. Morrison to approve the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday, November 6, 2007. The motion carried unanimously by a voice vote.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A motion to approve the agenda as printed was made by Mr. Morrison and seconded by Dr. Baker. The motion carried unanimously by a voice vote.

PROJECT STATUS - COMMUNITY OUTREACH BUILDING
Mr. Matt Bickel of Wold Architects and Engineers reported that the walls have been erected around the Home Care portion of the building and all underground plumbing and electrical have been installed. The slabs have been poured with the exception of one small area. Com Ed is scheduled to install power to the site on December 17th. The contractors are pushing to complete the masonry block walls as soon as possible and very shortly to get the structural steel and roof deck up to take advantage of working under cover. Mr. Bickel added that since the temperature is running around 20 degrees at night they are currently working with the masonry contractor to install a winter enclosure. He explained that it is important to add heat to obtain the proper quality and curing of the masonry. It is anticipated that the enclosure around the scaffolding will go up very soon. Mr. Bickel said he is continuing to work with Rockford Structures to remove the dirt piles since it is their contractual responsibility to do so. He added that they are perfectly amenable to getting it done. Chairman Hutcheson asked if the question of the color of the structure had been resolved. Mr. Bickel responded that two mock-up panels of the masonry were done. The first one was rejected based both on the color and the way it was put together. The second time all the details were right and they also provided an acceptable color. Dr. Baker asked Mr. Bickel to estimate when the roof would be complete. Mr. Bickel stated the metal decking is scheduled for the end of January. Mr. Smith noted that the doors and windows are scheduled for January 28 and according to that timeline the roof would have to be complete. Mr. Hanson asked if the bike path has been installed and if it also goes around the Supportive Living Facility. Mr. Bickel responded affirmatively. Dr. Baker asked if the structural steel is mainly for the roof. Mr. Bickel stated that it is and added there are very few steel columns since the weight bearing walls are mostly block. Dr. Baker noted that the schedule refers to Friday, January 11, but Mr. Bickel referred to the end of January for the metal decking. Dr. Baker asked if that means we are 20 days behind schedule or are we on schedule. Mr. Bickel stated that he felt we are on schedule barring any unforseen weather complications. Mr. Swanson asked if the masonry is on schedule. Mr. Bickel responded that they did not begin as soon as Rockford Structures would have liked but part of the delay was because the mock-up panels were not right. Mr. Bickel added that since getting the enclosure up is so critical, the contractors are pushing very hard to get that done and therefore are pretty much on schedule.

CHANGE ORDERS
Mr. Bickel explained there are two change orders being presented this week. (Attached as Exhibit “A”) The first one is Rockford Structures Change Order #2. It is the additional amount for the overall subdivision of Windsong Acres and has to do with the bike path previously discussed today, and is for the amount of $62,863.00. Also included is the water main development where Health Services Boulevard had to be torn up requiring the street to be re-paved at a cost of $1,750.00 The total cost of the two changes is $64,613.00. Dr. Baker asked if this has been approved by the County Board and is also a flow through to the PBC as had previously been done. Mr. Hanson responded affirmatively. Dr. Baker made a motion to approve the change order as presented and the motion was seconded by Mr. Smith. The motion was unanimously approved by a voice vote. Mr. Bickel said that the second change order (Attached as Exhibit “B”) is for the contract held by Mascal Electric. Mr. Bickel explained that when this contract was rebid it was decided to scale back from having both power and data outlets on every wall. It has since been determined that this should not have been done in all areas, and three locations need to be reinstated at a cost of $300.00. A motion to approve Change Order #2 for Mascal Electric was made by Mr. Smith and seconded by Mr. Morrison. The motion carried unanimously by voice vote. Mr. Hanson commented that he felt there was some confusion in the numbering system for change orders being used by Wold and requested that the system be clarified. Mr. Bickel stated the confusion is because there are five separate contractors being used on this project; however, he will come up with a better numbering system which will make it easier to track all five contractors.


PAY REQUESTS
Mr. Hanson distributed copies of the pay requests for December, 2007. (Attached as Exhibit “C”) Mr. Hanson explained that he had revised the report for clarification purposes. He stated the report is set up in three sections with “A” representing the Summary, “B” representing the payout schedule and “C”, the contracts. Mr. Hanson said the total request for Pay #2 for December, 2007 is $406,584.00 and asked for approval by the Commissioners. Dr. Baker asked for clarification of how the pay-outs are reviewed and the degree of validation for each. Mr. Bickel explained that the contractors requests are due by the last Tuesday of the month, and the construction meetings are on that Tuesday afternoon. He added that while on site the status of the amount of the pay request and the percentage of completion are evaluated. These calculations include all materials procured and stored on site. The contractors are requested to bring a pencil copy to the meeting in case the requests need to be modified based on our calculations. Mr. Bickel added that Wold then forwards the hard copy of each contractor’s request to Gary Hanson to present to the Commission. Mr. Hanson added that the far right column of Section “A” of the report he presented today reflects the materials on site and the work completed. Mr. Smith made a motion to approve the December pay requests in the amount of $406,584. The motion was seconded by Mr. Swanson and carried unanimously by a voice vote.

APPROVAL OF FY 2008 BUDGET
Mr. Hanson said that copies of the revised FY 2008 Budget were mailed to the Commissioners. He said the cover letter dated November 27, 2007 indicates the changes made. Mr. Hanson said that page B-2 the “Adopted” column should have read “2007" instead of “2006". He added that the interest line item should read $70,000.00 and the expenditure line number 9981, should both be $70,000.00. He stated these numbers do not affect the 2008 budget but are pointed out for clarification. Mr. Hanson added the other change is on page B-5 under the “Proposed FY 2008 Budget”. He explained that line 5901 and line 5939 are reversed. The amount for line 5901 should be $200,000.00 and line 5939 should be $250,000.00. Dr. Baker made a motion to approve the FY 2008 Budget as revised. Mr. Swanson seconded the motion. Mr. Smith asked for an explanation regarding the lowering of personnel costs in the future. Mr. Hanson responded that we will not require additional summer help as we had previously for organization and moving records in the storage areas. He said that the hours for Mrs. Simons will be reduced because two time-consuming projects, the construction of the COB and the reconfiguration of the Circuit Clerk’s office will be complete. Mr. Hanson added that if the jail project is approved, those costs will increase again. Mr. Smith asked about the revenues for the Renewal and Replacement for the Health Facility, and inquired if they are being used to pay off the bonds. Mr. Hanson responded that those revenues are generated from the property tax levies and are being accumulated for major repairs such as roof replacement when the building is 15 to 20 years old. He added that the source of those revenues will expire when the bonds are paid off and will be eliminated; therefore, it is important to build up a fund for renewal and replacement projects. Chairman Hutcheson called for a vote and the motion to approve the budget was passed unanimously by voice vote. Dr. Baker asked if it is required to pass an ordinance to approve the budget. Mr. Hanson responded that an ordinance is required only when taxes are levied, therefore, notation of the approval in the minutes is sufficient. (A copy of the approved 2008 Budget is attached as Exhibit “D”)

PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION OF MINUTES
Mr. Swanson stated that he is concerned about publishing and posting the PBC minutes on the internet prior to approval by the Commission. Mr. Swanson said he is not comfortable with publishing them until they are approved. Mr. Hanson said that the delay in publishing until the next meeting creates a public perception that information is not readily available. He added that in the past they are identified as being in “Draft” form. A general discussion regarding the pros and cons of publishing prior to approval was held by the Commissioners. Mr. Swanson made a motion that the PBC does not publish its minutes until after the Commissioners have approved them. Mr. Morrison seconded the motion. Those voting “aye” were Chairman Hutcheson, Commissioners Baker, Morrison and Swanson. Commissioner Smith voted “nay”. The motion passed.

DOCUMENT STORAGE
Mr. Hanson distributed copies of a letter he sent to Mr. Ron Matekaitis our State’s Attorney, (attached as Exhibit “E”) asking for clarification regarding the responsibility of the PBC for the storage of the County’s official records. Mr. Hanson stated that, as yet, a response has not been received. Dr. Baker expressed his concern regarding the responsibility of the PBC for the storage of different types of items other than routine paper records. He asked if there are higher standards for critical and irreplaceable items such as evidence stored by the Sheriff and the court system. Dr. Baker said his concerns are for the maintenance of such items as crime scene photos, fingerprints, biologicals, and other evidence collected and stored. A discussion followed regarding the responsibility for security and other special requirements for preserving those items. Dr. Baker requested that prior to the completion of the final plans for the storage area at the COB, the Sheriff, the Circuit Clerk, and the State’s Attorney should be consulted regarding their needs and requirements.

ADMINISTRATION BUILDING BOILER PROJECT
Chairman Hutcheson asked if the members had received the copies of the documents prepared by Wold regarding the timeline of events for the problems associated with the boiler installation. Mr. Campbell stated he had not received a copy of the documentation. Dr. Baker stated that he had received 90% of the same documents in a packet from Mr. Campbell, and asked Wold if they had received a copy of that packet. Mr. Bickel said they had not. Dr. Baker then asked Mr. Campbell if he had received the packet from Wold? Mr. Campbell said he had not. Dr. Baker commented that he thought Mr. Campell and Wold should be communicating more with each other. Dr. Baker stated that one item he found to be different from the information already known was an AIA document titled “Certificate of Substantial Completion”. Mr. Campbell stated that an additional problem had occurred last week, and all the piping had to be cut out and redone which was not a minor fix. Mr. Campbell explained that when the recent problem occurred, the contractor had to come out and re-pipe it again because of condensation in the pipe and an additional trap had to be installed. Mr. Bickel agreed that had occurred. Mr. Campbell stated that the problem was resolved immediately and that the project, as of today, is now complete. Dr. Baker asked if the project is “complete” or “substantially complete” as of today. Mr. Bickel explained the condensation issue was related to the repair work that was completed within the last month. Dr. Baker asked for a status report at our meetings scheduled in January, February and March. He also asked to be kept informed of any problems that should occur which are addressed immediately. Mr. Swanson questioned the date of the “Certificate of Substantial Completion” which was November, 2006, and asked if the warranty is for one year, should it be assumed that the warranty has expired. Mr. Bickel responded that the warranty is on performance, not on deficiencies. Mr. Bickel explained that if the work is deficient, the contractor never loses his responsibility for that, and if 10 years down the road it is discovered that something was installed incorrectly, he is still responsible. He added the warranty covers only the moving parts but deficient work is always the responsibility of the installer. Chairman Hutcheson asked if there was a letter that was not included in the litany of documents that Ken furnished before. Mr. Bickel stated there were a couple that were not. Mr. Campbell responded that it was quite possible he missed one since his file is very thick. Mr. Campbell stated that the original problem was more than an air separator since the entire piping system had to be redone. He explained that Weil McLain made a list of seven items. He explained the piping was installed right next to other pipes, but the installation document requires a minimum of a one-foot separation. Chairman Hutcheson stated that some pretty strong statements were made by Dr. Baker regarding Wolds’ handling of the situation. Chairman Hutcheson then stated that if all letters regarding this matter were not included in the packet sent by Mr. Campbell, it would not be unlikely for some other things to be miscommunicated. Mr. Campbell stated that he is very concerned about Wold’s ability to do the engineering on the PSB boilers because the Administration Building boiler is very basic, and the PSB project is very complicated. Dr. Baker stated he was concerned that Mr. Campbell was not informed of the beginning of the rescheduled meeting held on September 7. Dr. Baker said his concerns are about the expiration of the warranty and the possibility the work is still not satisfactory even after the re-piping was done last week. Mr. Campbell said only part of it was re-piped last week. Dr. Baker said that it appears we are on our own unless we can show the work was deficient. Dr. Baker added that the first time the boiler will be under stress is the approaching heating season since it was not installed for a long enough time last season to get really stressed. Mr. Campbell responded that “last winter we babied the boiler and we came in on overtime hours causing me to be over budget on overtime hours.” Mr. Campbell added that his staff would come in at 6:00 a.m. because it was Joan’s office that was cold. He said that “we would have to come in at 6:00 a.m. to bleed the system every morning because there was air in the lines. We also had to spend money to install reheats in Joan’s system so she would not be cold this year.” Mr. Campbell stated his biggest concern was that Wold signed off on the project, and didn’t recognize that we still had problems. Mr. Hanson suggested that at the January  meeting we discuss who we want to use for the PSB project. Mr. Campbell said he would like to choose his own engineer. Mr. Smith asked Mr. Campbell if he would make his recommendation for an engineer at the January meeting. Mr. Campbell responded that he would.

ADJOURNMENT
A motion to adjourn was made by Mr. Smith and seconded by Dr. Baker. The motion carried unanimously by voice vote. The meeting adjourned at 10:05 a.m.





                                                                                                        _________________________

                                                                                                         Robert Hutcheson, Chairman




__________________________________

Mary G. Simons, Secretary