Board weighs change orders, easement options as wastewater project slides

The Shenango Town Board spent the bulk of its June meeting on updates to the wastewater treatment project, focusing on a Change Order No. 7 and related contract amendments and easement questions.

An engineer provided the monthly project report and flagged Change Order No. 7, which would add concrete and raise piping and valves at five submersible pump stations so operators can work at safer heights. "It's definitely for safety," the engineer said, noting the modification responds to operator preference after the valve installations.

Board members pressed staff for details about schedule and cost. Staff said the work would be funded from contingency and that, for one contract, the contractor has requested a time-extension that would shift the substantial completion date to October 27, 2026, with final completion later. The town is still reviewing that request.

A closely related issue is Pump Station 18 on Popular Hill Road, which was removed from the current project because the town had not secured the required easement or taking needed for funding. "We took it out because we didn't have the easement required in order to get funding," a staff member said, adding that some electrical lines were found in unexpected locations and that locating private utilities may require a private utility‑locating company, because 811 does not mark private lines.

Board members discussed options: pursue a full fee acquisition (a taking), attempt to negotiate an easement, or redesign the electrical servicing to reduce property needs. Staff said they will start with an 811 call to mark known utilities, enlarge the survey area, and collect new quotes for survey and private utility locating as necessary.

Members also debated Amendment No. 5 to the town’s agreement for resident project representation (RPR) services. One member recalled a prior situation where the town paid a large observer/representation bill—about $250,000—and said consultants should bear more of the delay costs when appropriate. Staff explained that Amendment No. 3 established the ratio used to calculate time‑extension RPR charges, and that Amendment No. 4 added unanticipated onsite RPR time. The board agreed to request written input from the project engineer and the town attorney before taking action and to table any resolution on Amendment No. 5 until that review is complete.

Next steps: staff will pursue utility locating and surveying for Pump Station 18, collect quotes, and return with legal and engineering recommendations on Amendment No. 5 at a future meeting.