ILNews

I-69 developer's missed payments ignites dispute

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A southern Indiana mayor blamed Republican Gov. Mike Pence's administration on Wednesday for allowing a private developer to fall behind in payments to subcontractors, leading to a work stoppage on a new section of the Interstate 69 extension project.

State officials have threatened to find I-69 Development Partners LLC in default of its contract to upgrade 21 miles of the current Indiana 37 route between Bloomington and Martinsville, saying it owes more than $9 million to construction companies.

Bloomington Mayor John Hamilton, a Democrat, called the situation "a debacle" and said state government "hasn't kept its end of the bargain" on the project, which state officials touted two years ago as an innovate way of financing construction rather than having the state directly pay the cost.

"The road is built with tax dollars, it belongs to the public, the government has the ultimate responsibility to make sure it is built safely and efficiently," Hamilton said. "It is far past time for this administration to step in, ensure payment and get the road completed as soon as possible."

The Indiana Finance Authority issued a notice of non-performance to I-69 Development Partners on Tuesday in the dispute that has seen Crider & Crider Inc., the contractor responsible for the project's earth-moving operations, stop work in recent days over claims it is owed some $2.3 million.

"The state expects contractors working on this project and all projects to be paid on time," Indiana Public Finance Director Dan Huge said in a statement.

I-69 Development Partners issued a statement saying it has met all of its obligations and "stands ready to exercise "its contractual rights" with independent subcontractor Isolux Corsan to ensure other subcontractors return to work. I-69 Development Partners hired Isolux Corsan to design and build the Bloomington-to-Martinsville segment.

"We are doing everything within our power to ensure that this construction project continues to proceed in a timely manner and is completed within the allotted contractual period," the statement said.

Democratic gubernatorial candidate John Gregg called the project's troubles a failure by Pence and Lt. Gov. Eric Holcomb, who has taken over as the GOP candidate since Pence became Donald Trump's vice presidential running mate.

"Now, thanks to this gross mismanagement, I-69's completion will be delayed, more tax dollars will be wasted and Hoosiers will be forced to contend with more traffic jams, unsafe road conditions and other inconveniences," Gregg said.

The governor's office said state officials were acting to hold the project developer accountable.

"Any accusations to the contrary are just a sad attempt to score political points," Pence spokeswoman Kara Brooks said.

Holcomb said the I-69 project was vital for the state's economic development and that he was committed to making sure it was completed.

"It was responsible Republican leadership that took the much-needed extension of I-69 from an idea to reality," he said.

The Indiana Finance Authority selected I-69 Development Partners — led by Dutch-based Isolux Infrastructure Netherlands — to build the Bloomington-to-Martinsville section, with the state paying $80 million up front and making annual payments of $21.8 million a year for 35 years, with possible adjustments for inflation.

Work started in 2014 and was originally slated for completion by the end of 2016. State officials had already pushed back the expected completion date until June 2017 before the new work stoppage, which Hamilton said could push back the section's completion to 2018.

Don Conard, superintendent with Crider & Crider, said the company stopped work last winter and in March over missed payment deadlines.

"All our equipment is lined up," Conard told The (Bloomington) Herald-Times. "None of it's running."

About 95 miles of the I-69 extension have opened since 2012 between Evansville and Bloomington through southwestern Indiana. The total cost of the I-69 extension is estimated at $3 billion. The cost of the final leg from Martinsville to Interstate 465 has not been determined.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It really doesn't matter what the law IS, if law enforcement refuses to take reports (or take them seriously), if courts refuse to allow unrepresented parties to speak (especially in Small Claims, which is supposedly "informal"). It doesn't matter what the law IS, if constituents are unable to make effective contact or receive any meaningful response from their representatives. Two of our pets were unnecessarily killed; court records reflect that I "abandoned" them. Not so; when I was denied one of them (and my possessions, which by court order I was supposed to be able to remove), I went directly to the court. And earlier, when I tried to have the DV PO extended (it expired while the subject was on probation for violating it), the court denied any extension. The result? Same problems, less than eight hours after expiration. Ironic that the county sheriff was charged (and later pleaded to) with intimidation, but none of his officers seemed interested or capable of taking such a report from a private citizen. When I learned from one officer what I needed to do, I forwarded audio and transcript of one occurrence and my call to law enforcement (before the statute of limitations expired) to the prosecutor's office. I didn't even receive an acknowledgement. Earlier, I'd gone in to the prosecutor's office and been told that the officer's (written) report didn't match what I said occurred. Since I had the audio, I can only say that I have very little faith in Indiana government or law enforcement.

  2. One can only wonder whether Mr. Kimmel was paid for his work by Mr. Burgh ... or whether that bill fell to the citizens of Indiana, many of whom cannot afford attorneys for important matters. It really doesn't take a judge(s) to know that "pavement" can be considered a deadly weapon. It only takes a brain and some education or thought. I'm glad to see the conviction was upheld although sorry to see that the asphalt could even be considered "an issue".

  3. In response to bryanjbrown: thank you for your comment. I am familiar with Paul Ogden (and applaud his assistance to Shirley Justice) and have read of Gary Welsh's (strange) death (and have visited his blog on many occasions). I am not familiar with you (yet). I lived in Kosciusko county, where the sheriff was just removed after pleading in what seems a very "sweetheart" deal. Unfortunately, something NEEDS to change since the attorneys won't (en masse) stand up for ethics (rather making a show to please the "rules" and apparently the judges). I read that many attorneys are underemployed. Seems wisdom would be to cull the herd and get rid of the rotting apples in practice and on the bench, for everyone's sake as well as justice. I'd like to file an attorney complaint, but I have little faith in anything (other than the most flagrant and obvious) resulting in action. My own belief is that if this was medicine, there'd be maimed and injured all over and the carnage caused by "the profession" would be difficult to hide. One can dream ... meanwhile, back to figuring out to file a pro se "motion to dismiss" as well as another court required paper that Indiana is so fond of providing NO resources for (unlike many other states, who don't automatically assume that citizens involved in the court process are scumbags) so that maybe I can get the family law attorney - whose work left me with no settlement, no possessions and resulted in the death of two pets (etc ad nauseum) - to stop abusing the proceedings supplemental and small claims rules and using it as a vehicle for harassment and apparently, amusement.

  4. Been on social security sense sept 2011 2massive strokes open heart surgery and serious ovarian cancer and a blood clot in my lung all in 14 months. Got a letter in may saying that i didn't qualify and it was in form like i just applied ,called social security she said it don't make sense and you are still geting a check in june and i did ,now i get a check from my part D asking for payment for july because there will be no money for my membership, call my prescription coverage part D and confirmed no check will be there.went to social security they didn't want to answer whats going on just said i should of never been on it .no one knows where this letter came from was California im in virginia and been here sense my strokes and vcu filed for my disability i was in the hospital when they did it .It's like it was a error . My ,mothers social security was being handled in that office in California my sister was dealing with it and it had my social security number because she died last year and this letter came out of the same office and it came at the same time i got the letter for my mother benefits for death and they had the same date of being typed just one was on the mail Saturday and one on Monday. . I think it's a mistake and it should been fixed instead there just getting rid of me .i never got a formal letter saying when i was being tsken off.

  5. Employers should not have racially discriminating mind set. It has huge impact on the society what the big players do or don't do in the industry. Background check is conducted just to verify whether information provided by the prospective employee is correct or not. It doesn't have any direct combination with the rejection of the employees. If there is rejection, there should be something effective and full-proof things on the table that may keep the company or the people associated with it in jeopardy.

ADVERTISEMENT