Henderson has gotten hitched up with EE&T, an engineering consulting firm out of Newport News, Virginia.
Do not expect wedded bliss from this union. The problems with this and other consulting engineering firms is a well-documented and ugly picture of the way Henderson has done business.
There are all kinds of rocky roads that the city has traversed in its dealings with engineers. All of this could have been smooth traveling, however, if the city had just followed its own law and hired a professional engineer to look after the interests of the city.
If you go to college and graduate to become a teacher, doctor, lawyer, or accountant, you must then take and pass an appropriate board examination. The same goes for an engineer; that is, if he or she is a Professional Engineer (PE) and is licensed to offer their services to the public. Why should Henderson not have a qualified person with expert knowledge overseeing our needs?
Henderson has used every excuse in the world to avoid hiring a professional engineer. For years now, as far as I know, the city has never even had anyone with an engineering degree on staff. In June of 2006, the city council was so frustrated at the city for stonewalling on hiring an engineer that a motion was passed unanimously instructing the manager that, “…no consultants or consulting expenses for any engineering is to be considered or hired by the city until the Director of Public Utilities position is filled.” (This position was for a PE.)
And where do we find ourselves today as we manage the water for the entire region? We are still without an engineer. Why would the city be so resistant to having a professional, knowledgeable, and informed engineer on staff? At the very least, the city should have on retainer the services of an engineering firm that deals in municipal matters. Without experts on the city staff, our city could be tempted to cut corners, could be sold a load of unnecessary goods, and/or could end up hatching ill-planned (and consequently costly) projects.
Let’s look at just one slice of EE&T’s past history with the city in the June 12, 2006 Henderson City Council Minutes:
“EE&T has been paid — perhaps it should not have been paid, but it has been done. Flaws with the electrical and questions about their competency re inspections were one reason we switched to EarthTech. But arguably neither the contractor or the City were proactive to warn the contractor about the delay by EE&T to move on.”
Now to give you an idea of how much we were paying consulting engineering firms while having no one on our city staff as an engineer to oversee them, consider the following:
That is a lot of money going out to firms that tell the city what they need to do, then design the project, bid it, and finally oversee the inspection. Where is the arm’s length between them and the city? And who do you think they are looking after? Of course, there were major projects going on that required engineering, but the city had no one guarding our hen house.
There are questions about the Denver Street Outfall project and the Franklin County Emergency Bypass, but let us look at the more recent concerns with consulting engineers that the city employed.
City council minutes of January 8, 2007: “…Ms. Yount said she has asked since 10/06 to rationalize the $57,000 expense of 500 hours for 1 man for 1 month…she requested to see work product to back up invoice….Yount noted an outstanding overage on contract of almost $70,000.”
When questioned about invoice #38530 for $78,991, the reply from the consulting engineer stated that on this invoice “the hours noted for every employee were incorrect.” On this same invoice, the city was charged over $50,000 for inspections over a short period of time. However, not one person who had billed for inspections had signed in on the log book as entering the building where at least some of the inspections had to occur.
You cannot tell me that if the city had a professional engineer looking after our needs that this kind of business would occur.
You might ask why am I bothering now to bring this up after all this time. First, this has bothered me greatly as our city was very slack in its business dealings with consulting engineers. To continue without an engineer is to be left at their mercy. Second, the situation and relationship with the engineers and staff was too cozy for my liking, especially with all the failing business practices revealed.
Now, after attending the Kerr Lake Regional Water Advisory Committee meeting on Monday of this week, I learned that the city is back to doing business with EE&T, and that is unacceptable to me as a taxpayer, considering past records.
Stay tuned. There is lots more on this story.