Some $72K in change orders OK’d for public safety complex

River Vale Township hired Settembrino Architects to design the New Public Safety Complex. Then firm says online, "The surrounding site caters to several neighborhoods on both Rivervale Road and Prospect Avenue, Settembrino Architects has approached the Public Safety Complex to have a more residential feel to fit within the neighborhood’s context."

RIVER VALE—Since the start of construction in mid-2023, the contractor on the new public safety complex—Dobco. Inc. of Wayne—has submitted at least eight change orders totaling nearly $72,000, about 10% of the $750,000 contingency fund reserved for contract revisions and unanticipated expenses.

Moreover, four of the change orders that total approximately $40,000 were approved together at the Sept. 9 meeting. Those resolutions were No. 4, No. 5R, No. 6R and No. 8. The original contingency fund started at $750,000 and was estimated to be at $678,160.00, although other change orders not yet included appeared to lower that further.

Officials noted previously that change orders would not change the project’s total price, unless they went beyond the $750,000 allotted for such changes.

When Pascack Press sent a public records request for all the change orders, we received four specific change orders, and a copy of a new township OPRA request form.

Some of the change orders we received contained multiple attachments and blurry or unclear copies of invoices. There was a Change Order No. 10 for $1,014.00 to supply labor and material to build a chase for plumbing in the armory. 

Also, Change Order No, 12 noted reframing a wall for a bathroom partition change at a cost of $955.20. Another change order was for $1,013.75 for another partition/chase wall added.

Also, a Change Order No. 4 was for a $1,581 laminate color change; and a Change Order No. 5 was for $4,380 for a revised drawing for a new inlet structure and LF of storm piping around storage shed area. 

Oddly, it appeared there was also another Change Order No. 4 that listed $34,447 for replacement of vestibule glass and dispatch glass due to new specifications. We did not find some change orders that would have followed sequentially; it was not clear why.

None of the resolutions approved by council Sept. 9 and on two other dates, April 29 and June 24, spelled out details of what exactly the changes were for.  It was also not clear if the change order resolutions were discussed at the meeting as the council does not livestream or videotape their meetings for later broadcast or archiving.

Meeting minutes are generally approved at the next regular meeting and made publicly available sometime after that meeting.

To get more information, residents would be required to file an official public records request under the state’s Open Public Records Act, a bureaucratic process that could take one or two days or more before receiving the public information.

We reached out to town administrator and CFO Gennaro Rotella for clarification on the change orders but did not hear immediately back.

In nearby Washington Township, residents recently pushed to keep updated on change orders for the township’s new $5.3 million emergency services building. Some residents—and one who is a current councilman—pressed the council to keep track of change orders on the newly constructed Emergency Services Building. The new building was estimated at $5.3 million, but increased by more than $200,000 due to change orders.

In March 2022, we reported the cost of the new emergency services building had increased by at least $216,785, or slightly over 4% above its original estimate. That’s according to public records detailing 16 construction change orders since work had begun in 2020.

In addition, the cost of the building as a joint home for the town’s volunteer firefighter and ambulance corps units had come under fire by residents over cost increases, its height and scale, the lack of an available project budget, and officials’ lack of transparency on construction progress. 

Also, nearby residents scolded councilors over the lack of public notice about building construction.

Following criticism, during one lengthy meeting the township council had to go back and individually approve nearly 20 change orders by separate resolutions, after failing to previously do so. Residents also regularly questioned the project architect’s competence and oversight of the project.