[{"_1":2,"_84":-5,"_85":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6110836,"mediaKeyId","2755860-ecad475c457f7f01c13b02fad1eecb57","parentId",2755860,"title","Clay County court approves routine bills, consulting engineer contract and benefit reporting service; flooring bid discussion continued","audioSeconds",439,"startMs",76000,"endMs",515000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2755860-ecad475c457f7f01c13b02fad1eecb57&start=76&end=515","thumbnailUrl","https://d352y6ypj4mjo3.cloudfront.net/AudioPlaceholder.png","articleUrl","/articles/6110836/Clay-County/Texas/Clay-County-court-approves-routine-bills-consulting-engineer-contract-and-benefit-reporting-service-flooring-bid-discussion-continued","mediaUrl","author","Clay County, TX","date","2025-03-25T00:00:00Z","article","Clay County Commissioners Court voted on a series of routine items and agreements during its March 24 meeting, approving hospital and county bills and payroll, entering a consulting engineer arrangement for future subdivision reviews, joining a Texas Association of Counties (TAC) service for Affordable Care Act reporting, and certifying small additional sheriff's revenue.

Minutes and routine bills: The court approved minutes of a prior meeting and voted to pay Clay County Memorial Hospital bills and to approve hospital payroll and county payroll. No individual roll-call votes were recorded in the transcript; the court adopted these motions by voice vote with the customary \"ayes\" and \"ayes have it\" announcements.

Consulting engineer for subdivision reviews: The court approved consulting with an engineering and surveying firm to review future subdivision applications on an as-needed, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) basis. Devin Smith of the engineering firm described the firm as providing land surveying, development design and review services; he said the firm would bill on an hourly basis and would provide a rate sheet for inclusion in the minutes. The court approved the arrangement by voice vote.

TAC benefit reporting: The court voted to participate in the Texas Association of Counties' employee benefit pool service for Affordable Care Act (ACA) reporting. County staff said the TAC service would perform required ACA reporting at no cost to the county because the county's new software does not handle that reporting.

Certification of additional revenue: The court approved a certification of $68.14 to be placed in the sheriff's vehicle budget.

Child welfare contract and hazard mitigation: The court approved the county Title 9(e) nonfinancial child welfare services contract (noted as a recurring seven-year item) and approved an interlocal agreement/resolution and grant management plan for a local hazard mitigation update through the General Land Office (GLO).

Flooring for probation office: Commissioners reviewed two bids for carpet tile to replace existing flooring in the former 97th/90th District probation office and discussed options including cleaning the existing carpet, installing remnant carpet or selecting carpet tile. One bid from Gregory Flooring totaled $2,368.93 (including rubber cove base) and Graham Construction provided higher-end and basic-grade options with incremental differences in cost. A motion to award the work did not proceed to a final vote on March 24; commissioners opted to list the flooring decision on the next agenda and to test-clean a portion of the existing carpet before deciding.

Administrative items: The court approved departmental reports and the auditor's monthly report by voice vote, and discussed courthouse roof progress and safety concerns (nails on site); the roofing work continues, and commissioners said they will meet with contractors for a status update.

What’s next: The court added some items to the next meeting agenda, including the flooring bids and a follow-up decision about the Bridge Street annex after a scheduled walk-through.","mediaType","Audio","parentTitle","Clay County Commissioners’ Court AUDIO held in Henrietta, Texas, County of Clay on March 25, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","At its March 24 special session, the Clay County Commissioners Court approved routine bills and payroll, accepted a consulting engineer arrangement for subdivision reviews, joined a TAC ACA reporting service at no cost, certified a small revenue item for the sheriff, and continued discussion on flooring for probation offices to a future meeting.","taxTitle","Clay County, Texas","taxId",73200,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":50,"_51":81,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":82,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":83,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6110841,"Clay County commissioners flag unfinished Bridge Street annex work, schedule walk-through; consider withholding retainage",479,1064000,1543000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2755860-ecad475c457f7f01c13b02fad1eecb57&start=1064&end=1543","/articles/6110841/Clay-County/Texas/Clay-County-commissioners-flag-unfinished-Bridge-Street-annex-work-schedule-walk-through-consider-withholding-retainage","Clay County Commissioners Court discussed multiple incomplete and potentially unsafe items at the county's Bridge Street annex during its March 24 special session, and agreed to schedule a walk-through next Monday and consider holding retainage while soliciting bids to finish the work.

Commissioner Brenda raised the list of outstanding items, saying the annex still has \"dead outlets,\" \"a dip in the floor\" that people have stubbed their toes on, unfinished vanities and interior doors that do not lock. Brenda said county maintenance staff have performed temporary repairs but the contractor has not completed punch-list items and that the county is still holding a percentage of retainage on the contract.

The court heard that the outstanding retainage is roughly $20,000–$25,000, and that some small retainage amounts (for door frames) are still listed in the project records. Commissioner Jack and others asked whether the county could withhold final payment or pursue alternate contractors; the court discussed getting a firm list from county staff of unresolved items and obtaining bids for completing repairs. Commissioner Ben recommended getting bids so the court could compare the cost to finish the work against the amount of retainage.

County staff reported there has been limited contractor responsiveness. Deputy Eric (county deputy) told the court by message that he had not been contacted by the contractor and that the county has not received retainage payments related to subcontractor claims. Commissioners said they believe the contractor Cunningham Clark has had ample time to complete punch-list items and discussed treating the project as potentially abandoned if it remains unfinished.

The court directed staff to compile a written list of outstanding items and to arrange a walk-through at the Bridge Street annex next Monday; after the walk-through the court said it would consider soliciting competitive bids to finish the work and determining whether to withhold the remaining retainage or pursue other remedies. The matter was recorded as a discussion item; the court did not vote to retain or release funds on March 24.

Commissioners also discussed safety concerns at the construction site, including nails reportedly left near the site and inside the fenced area used by workers. County staff and commissioners said they would raise the issue with the contractor and ask crews to pick up debris to avoid damage to county vehicles and hazards to the public.

Background: the Bridge Street annex project has been the subject of prior walk-throughs and punch-list discussions. Commissioners said portions of the building remain incomplete despite occupancy and that county crews have performed interim repairs. Commissioners asked staff to include a decision item on the next agenda so the court can determine whether to retain funds, hire a different contractor to complete the work, or take other steps.

What’s next: county staff will assemble a written list of outstanding items, arrange a Monday walk-through, and return to the court with bids or recommendations for next steps, including potential use of retainage to fund completion work if the current contractor does not finish the project.","County commissioners discussed persistent construction defects at the Bridge Street annex — including dead outlets, uneven flooring and incomplete doors — and agreed to schedule a walk-through next Monday while exploring holding retainage and hiring another contractor if issues remain.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Clay County court approves routine bills, consulting engineer contract and benefit reporting service; flooring bid discussion continued

Clay County commissioners flag unfinished Bridge Street annex work, schedule walk-through; consider withholding retainage