Now
Fair
81.0°
High
84°
Low
66°

Costly consultants, big budget lead to price tag

Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

By DEENA WINTER / Lincoln Journal Star

Sunday, Oct 26, 2008 - 12:48:12 am CDT

The New York company leading Lincoln’s largest ever public works project isn’t a stranger to high-stakes construction. Or controversy.

Parsons Brinckerhoff was one of two companies that oversaw Boston’s Big Dig — at $22 billion the most expensive highway project in U.S. history and one plagued by massive cost overruns, missed deadlines and faulty construction.

In Lincoln, the company has earned $15 million managing the design and construction of the Antelope Valley Project. Combine that with the $20 million the subconsultants it hired have earned, and it represents 23 percent of the money spent so far on the project.

Related Media

The story so far: Antelope Valley Project

Antelope Valley is the biggest public works project in Lincoln's history. Read more about its background and latest developments. (Laura Meerkatz / Jo...

That’s nearly a quarter of Antelope Valley’s costs spent on consultants — and for rented cars, office equipment, airfare and hotel rooms.

All this while early project cost estimates ballooned. In 2000, for instance, project backers said the first phase would cost $175 million; that figure was revised recently to $264 million.

Parsons Brinckerhoff also has a type of contract that is often criticized for not encouraging cost savings.

Introducing Parsons Brinckerhoff

Parsons got its start when its founder designed New York’s first subway line from lower Manhattan to Harlem and has grown to one of the world’s leading transportation engineering companies.

The company was hired by the city, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and the Lower Platte South Natural Resources District in 1995 to lay the groundwork for local and federal approval of Antelope Valley.

Once the project was approved, Parsons won the contract to manage design and construction, the selection based on qualifications, not because it was the lowest bidder.

Parsons has since awarded no-bid contracts to more than a dozen subconsultants.

But the value of those consultants’ work can be difficult to gauge. One economic development consultant has been paid a quarter of a million dollars since the mid-1990s, largely working to develop an assisted-living facility for minorities that still hasn’t found a location.

Another was paid tens of thousands to draft Antelope Valley design standards, which were shelved and redrawn by another consultant.

Lincoln’s decision to hire Parsons to manage both design and construction of a project is itself controversial — and illegal in some states. It speeds up construction, but design errors can more easily be covered up.

Parsons’ project manager in Lincoln, Jane Jordan, acknowledged controversy over such contracts, but said some clients feel it’s important to have the same firm handle on both phases.

The city’s recently retired Antelope Valley project manager, Wayne Teten, said design questions can be addressed more quickly. “It does expedite things,” he said. “I think it’s up to the project owner to keep tabs on things and sort out whether it is or isn’t a design error.”

But Parsons has the kind of contract presidential candidates rail against. The so-called “cost-plus fixed-fee” contract allows Parsons to get reimbursed for every allowable cost — from leasing vehicles and computers to maintaining first aid kits — plus a profit. But people such as Sen. John McCain have called such contracts wasteful because there’s no incentive to cut costs.

Jordan said if the company didn’t get reimbursed for direct expenses, its overhead would have gone up.

And City Engineer Roger Figard said if a lump sum had instead been paid to Parsons, “This project would have been a nightmare.”

Cost-plus contracts generally demand more oversight to ensure the contractor is spending money wisely. But even though Antelope Valley is Lincoln’s largest public works project ever, only one public employee, Teten, has been devoted full time to monitoring spending. Teten said about a half dozen other public employees also periodically check spending.

Before he retired this month, virtually every dollar spent flowed through Teten. He has not been replaced; instead, a handful of city employees have taken over his duties.

$27 an hour on ‘Antelope Andy’

The Journal Star analyzed hundreds of Antelope Valley invoices, expenditures and contracts, and found:

n A consulting engineering company, Olsson Associates, was paid to help organize public bus tours of Antelope Valley, and received between $27 and $40 an hour (plus overtime, in some cases) for employees to do menial tasks such as typing, preparing name tags and making signs. One employee earned $27 an hour to spend five-and-a-half hours erecting and taking down a cardboard “Antelope Andy” mascot for 2006 bus tours.

n Parsons’ contracts have budgeted up to $3,200 per month to lease five vehicles for their employees — that’s $800 per month (counting gas and oil) per vehicle — $340 per month in phone expenses; $1,550 per month to lease three laptop computers and a copy/fax machine; $15,000 to buy office furniture; $18,500 to relocate employees to Lincoln; $12,000 for 20 airplane tickets; $2,500 for 20 hotel room stays per year; and $100 per diem expenses.

n In 1995, as it was studying the project, Parsons budgeted $450 per month for two furnished apartments and $23,600 for airfare for its employees.

Design standards

done twice

A consultant called RTKL Associates of Baltimore was paid $297,000 to draft design standards for Antelope Valley in 2002. But the city never adopted those standards. They were shelved for four years and, recently, another consultant, Crandall Arambula of Portland, was hired to draft design standards, which the City Council approved this summer. Crandall Arambula was paid more than $100,000.

Antelope Valley spokesman Kent Seacrest — who is paid $280 an hour for his consulting work — said RTKL’s standards were considered too voluminous and out of date.

Teten said he didn’t know if RTKL’s product was what people were looking for.

“RTKL was looking at more broad brush zoning,” Teten said.

Little to show for $250K ‘community liaison’

Rick Wallace, an economic development consultant, has been paid $251,500 to be what Teten called a liaison to the neighborhood and minority populations who live near the Antelope Valley project.

Wallace’s billings indicate he’s spent most of his time working on one particular project that has yet to bear fruit. He’s billed Antelope Valley hundreds of hours — at a rate that started out at $35 an hour in 1995 and grew to $175 an hour now — to work with the Vietnamese community to develop an assisted-living facility that caters to minorities.

Wallace said such a facility is needed because “not every ethnic group feels comfortable going to Lancaster Manor or the Legacy in the golden years of their life.”

He’s studied several locations — including the Malone Center — and is now considering a site in the middle of what he calls the “ethnic enclave” on 27th Street between O and Vine — not exactly in Antelope Valley.

He acknowledges the project has “taken awhile to evolve.”

Teten said when you’re about to plow through a neighborhood with a public works project, it’s wise to have a “good liaison who can help things happen” and prevent the community from rising up against the project. Jordan agreed Wallace’s ties to the neighborhood have been valuable.

“Somebody had to be focused on things other than the roadway and storm channel,” Wallace said.

His billings include 14.5 hours attending 2015 Vision meetings with the public in January 2007. Asked why he billed to attend those meetings, he said because the 2015 private business group’s goals affected Antelope Valley and potential spinoff businesses and jobs.

Jordan defended the expenses and consulting costs, saying they fall within federal guidelines. And the city deferred to Parsons.

“It’s not our job to tell our consulting firm how to run their business,” Figard said.

Reach Deena Winter at 473-2642 or dwinter@journalstar.com.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Local > Back to Top of Story

All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Harry the Antenna Guy wrote on October 26, 2008 1:03 am:
" Great. $35 million on consultants. If this is what we get for premium service, I wonder what kind of mess the low bidder would have left us with. "

Democrat wrote on October 26, 2008 9:55 am:
" Thanks Ms. Winter for your article, but what a way to start a Sunday morning. I almost had a heart attack reading about how the City is spending our taxpayer dollars. No wonder the City hasn't got money for other road projects. Where is the oversight? It sure not from the JAA.
How can the taxpayers trust the City? Will this kind of feasco happen if the Voters approve the arena project? Remember Kent Seacrast is the front man for the 2015 Group. "

Richard wrote on October 26, 2008 10:56 am:
" I work in the construction industry, and these design plus program management services are pretty typical. Design ranges anywhere from 10 to 15 percent of the total project cost and program management can add another 8 to 12 percent. Also, the fees for Parsons and the consultants also includes considerable mark-up; in other words the individual employees take home quite a bit less than what is charged hourly. Bottom line, this article is a bit misleading as these costs are pretty typical with any construction project. "

tom issaquah wrote on October 26, 2008 11:36 am:
" Generally when someone grants "no bid" contracts they are part of a network that has been created to take care of each other. How many of these "no bid:" contracts were awarded to Lincoln or Nebraska based companies or individuals? Can anyone find that information. I would imagine the majority were not from the local area thus the need for rental cars, hotel rooms , and expense reports being inflated!!!! Sounds like some oversight is needed here and in the future expectations should be set that Nebraska companies benefit in the consulting phase of the project.
$35 million dollars??? Sounds like someone has found a cash cow!!! "

amazed wrote on October 26, 2008 12:59 pm:
" Boo on the LJS for creating yet another public uprising over something that has brought millions of dollars to the local community that would otherwise not have been here. Think about it this way, professional services staff, contractors and materials suppliers have enjoyed the opportunity to build $154M of needed infrastructure that created jobs in Lincoln and promoted growth of the University and surrounding areas. Why would that be a bad thing? "

Mike H of Lincoln wrote on October 26, 2008 3:19 pm:
" i said it from the start it will break the city its why you cant drive a street in town with out losing a wheel well at least most streets and what is it all for UNL that's right UNL they had grown to the ghettos edge and needed to do something so freindt and the rest on the council at the time said its ok the tax payers of Lincoln will fix it all "

john wrote on October 26, 2008 4:02 pm:
" Mr. Figard should remove him self from this project. Exactly what is his job? If it not to provide some oversight maybe he should look a another job.
Amazed, should be happy that Ms.Winter looked in to this. "

To Richard wrote on October 26, 2008 8:30 pm:
" You're right on--I appreciate your comment. This is going to be a week of articles when the LJS doesn't fully understand the big picture AND what it takes to put together a project of this magnitude. "

Fiscal oversight wrote on October 27, 2008 9:39 am:
" $1,550 per month to lease 3 laptop computers and a fax/copier machine??? Ha ha ha! Any fiscally responsible business would lease each laptop for $20/month (no more than $25/month). That must be one hefty copier/fax machine... "

Dewey Cheatem Howe wrote on October 27, 2008 9:37 pm:
" One piece of research conspicuously missing from this article is how the "unreasonable" consulting fees stack up against what other professionals with the same knowledge and experience charge. For example, good luck finding an attorney of Mr. Seacrest's caliber who charges materially less than $280 an hour! Also the pound-foolish criticism of
Parsons Brinckerhoff's contract for not encouraging "cost savings" overlooks the necessity for professional competence when safety is so vitally important. If you pinch too hard, "cost savings" becomes "cutting corners." "