Jeff Galt, president of Maritime Park Development Partners has responded to the memo from CMPA chair Judge Lacey Collier. He does think that the Chairman’s memo quoted a portion of the Development Agreement out of context to infer that MPDP had missed a deadline for providing a bond commitment when, in fact, that deadline did not exist due to the delays in approving a general contractor for the project and the subsequent delays in the negotiation of a design-build contract.
He believes that there may be some misinterpretation of Section 4.08(c)(11) of the Development Agreement as it relates to MPDP’s requirement to provide the bonding commitment.
According to Galt, that section is simply one of 12 terms and conditions required by the Development Agreement to be included in a design-build contract if the Developer (MPDP) is chosen as general contractor.
“Since we have not yet been approved as the general contractor, there is currently no design-build contract. Consequently, there is no default or missed deadline on the part of the Developer.
“Should we be approved as the general contractor, the bonding commitment date to be included in the to-be-negotiated design-build contract will need to be revised since the previous deadline came before there was a design-build contract.â€
In other words, there is no bonding commitment until the Developer is made the general contractor and a design-build contract is negotiated.
Galt says that MPDP first requested to be approved as general contractor in writing on Dec. 7, 2009. It is on the agenda for Friday, Feb. 26.
