Courthouse remodel hits snag

Alexis Barker
NLJ Reporter
 
The second-floor remodel of the Weston County Courthouse is nearing completion, with the district court returning to its original office on the second floor, but lingering issues plague the project. 
On Feb. 19, the county commissioners discussed multiple issues with the project, including a change order for carpet at a cost of $30,000 that was implemented before the commissioners gave approval and the lack of courthouse security money used during the project. 
“Explain to me why we have $175,000 in the courthouse security grant if we have run the match account almost dry and we have obviously gone over on our building and grounds maintenance,” Commissioner Marty Ertman asked. “Why do we still have $175,000 in courthouse security grant monies?”
Ertman’s question was a response to a question by Deputy County Clerk Mona Wineteer about where to list and charge a pay request from Michael’s Construction, the project’s contractor. Wineteer said that the grant match line item was down to $19,000. 
“At this point, I need to know what you want to do,” Wineteer said. “We have gone over the limits in the resolution.” 
That resolution, approved by the commissioners before the project start, let the State Land and Investment Board know where the remodel money was going to come from. 
According to Brooke Weigel, the county’s administrative assistant, her research shows that the entire project was being paid out of mineral royalty grant funds and not from the courtroom security grant from the Wyoming Supreme Court. The courtroom security monies were given to the county for safety and security upgrades to the courtroom, sparking the second floor remodel project. 
“We have $175,000 in courtroom security money, and the reason we were at the point of jumping on board as quickly as we could for the project was because we would run out the grant money,” Ertman said. “We have that much, $175,000, we are going to have to give back to the state because we can’t spend it, because it has parameters on it.” 
Ertman said that the blame has to be put on someone and that the resolution submitted to the SLIB board was a lie because the money spent on the project did not necessarily come from the sources listed within the resolution submitted to the board on the remodel project. 
“We have to get to the bottom of this. We have to go to the SLIB and ask for some of those payments out of the general fund. We have to figure out a way so we can use those monies,” Ertman said. 
According to Ertman, she was bothered from the project’s start and had expressed concerns about the resolution, the amount of money the project was going to cost and about other projects needed at the courthouse. 
According to Weigel, the county might be able to move specific line items from the mineral royalty grant to the courthouse security grant. 
“The SLIB office is aware that we took everything out of the MRG grant instead of charging to the courtroom security grant,” Weigel said. “We need a draft of what the grant request would look like if we had submitted it properly. My recommendation is for the board to contact the SLIB office and break out an invoice with Michael’s Construction on what could be charged separate.” 
“This should not have happened,” Weigel said. “We had enough information to do this correctly; the problem is we didn’t.” 
She noted that the resolution was not correct at all and that the county did not account for the matches when determining where money would come from for the project. 
“We could have never used the full amount of the grants (both the MRG and Courtroom Security Grant) based on the match funds we had,” Weigel said. “In the future we need to focus on what the match would be to use the full grant.” 
Wineteer again asked where the charge for the Michael’s Construction pay order should go.
“This still has to be paid. I think it can be done, and as far as what Brooke brought up about the security money, that is another issue past this,” Wineteer said. 
The commissioners directed Clerk Becky Hadlock and Weigel to work with Michael’s Construction to break out the work that could be charged to the courtroom security grant. Weigel suggested that the clerk reach out to the SLIB to discuss the situation. 
“As far as this pay application, we did commit to a cash reserve amount of $110,000. In the interim, it seems to me that we need to have a budget amendment hearing and move that into the grant match,” Chairman Tony Barton said. “I think the contractor needs paid.” 
The commissioners set a budget amendment hearing to move the funds for the regular commissioners meeting on March 19 at 10:00 a.m. Meanwhile, the county will work with the state board to determine if the county can use the money from the courtroom security grant so it does not have to be returned to the state. 
The commissioners also voted 3-2 to pay the change order for carpet. Barton also noted that a policy will have to be put in place that requires commissioners approval before change orders are completed.