The water system questions below were posed to Jim Davis by Elizabeth Polasek. His answers are of interest to all SFTR property owners.
Who is the new contractor? What is his/her experience and follow-through with work?
The new contractor is Robert Nelson. Robert is a former OPEC employee who worked on the construction of our water system for nearly the entire process. He is a heavy equipment operator who was involved in the trenching and laying of water line and telephone lines on the Ranch, dealt with excavation problems OPEC ran into and not only knows the entire path of the line, but has a very good idea of where potential leak areas are. Robert was brought here from Montana because of his experience laying pipe and lines. He was offered a job with OPEC at another location, but left them because he wanted to stay here (he got married and has a family now) and because he had become at odds with OPEC's general work ethic, their on-site management style, and their general corporate attitude. He has started his own company here and we will be his SOLE focus and priority. Although he does not have all the equipment and water experience Pete's firm does, he offers equally important advantages, being price, basic knowledge and experience and uninterrupted committment.
I thought Schrepfer Industries was doing the QA on the underground pipes and the minutes say that there is no ETA because we don't know the condition of these buried pipes?
Pete Schrepfer has offered his continuing services as well as those of his most experienced manager, Wade Stalker, to us and Robert Nelson any time the need arises. He is willing to do this at no fee. Robert's knowledge of the pipeline connection locations is something Pete's people didn't have, so we are not losing anything in that area by changing. Once Robert gets into the ground in the next week, his progress will give us a good idea of the "ETA". He has speculated three months, which is in the same time frame Pete projected, given the opportunity for an uninterrupted work schedule.
How much money has been spent on Schrepfer and what work has he done?
Through last fall, Pete continued to work, although we didn't have the money to pay him until we were able to secure our loan. He actually "carried" us to the tune of $68,000 +. We are very grateful to him for that consideration. During that time, they were able to check, and fix where needed, 80% of the connections at each lot and were able to accomplish a good deal of testing and repair of the main lines on the north end of the Ranch. The Water Committee has not found any fault with the work Schrepfer Industries has done. In fact, the work they have accomplished, the errors they have fixed and the photos, documentation and evidence they have collected will all be very helpful to us in our litigation with OPEC and their bonding company.
Why are we no longer contracting with Schrepfer?
Pete's company is a large company that typically does large jobs for large clients. His acceptance of our project was more of an accomodation to us than a money making venture that would sufficiently cover his overhead.Consequently, during the course of his work for us, he received a number of larger jobs, which required the availability of his more skilled workers and supervisors. This would take away their availability to us, and leave us with less experienced workers, but the same hourly rates. We both tried to work with this, with respect for each other and also because the winter set in with frozen ground and what snows we did have. With respect to our tight budget, we had all mutually agreed that we wouldn't have workers out on the job if they couldn't really accomplish any meaningful work. After Bob Scott and Mike Shelton volunteered to join the Water Committee and act as construction overseers, they soon advised the Committee that we should revisit what we were doing, and looking forward, sit down with Pete and address our mutual concerns, especially given the general construction season is fast approaching. In a meeting with Pete recently, it was mutually decided that a change would be advantageous to both concerns. As a result, he can go on with his normal business and we can get the uninterrupted time committment and lower cost basis that will enhance getting the job done. Plus, we still have Pete and his company's experience available when we need them.
I hope this answers your questions. If not, I would be happy to clarify any area of confusion or concern, as would any other Committee member. Thanks for your interest and concern.
Jim Davis
SFTR Metro District