In this February 2021 file photo, Hallsville ISD officials break ground on the West Elementary School construction project. District administrators are considering seeking damage payments from the project contractor because work was completed a year after the initial completion date.

HALLSVILLE — Hallsville ISD administrators and the contractor who built the new Hallsville West Elementary School are in a disagreement about whether delays in finishing the school should lead to financial penalties.

School board members discussed a complaint against WRL General Contractors, LLC, during their December meeting.

The construction of the elementary school was completed Jan. 5, 2023, almost one year after the completion date set in the contract between the district and the contractor, said said Eric Muñoz, an attorney with Eichelbaum Wardell, Hansen, Powell & Muñoz, a law firm representing the school district.

Under the district’s contract with the construction firm, the district is entitled to receive liquidated damages for each day that work wasn’t completed by the agreed-upon dates: $2,500 per day until the work is substantially completed, and, if not finished completely by the date indicated in the contract, $500 per day until the work is finally completed.

“This isn’t about opinion, alright? This is about public funds and objective facts,” Muñoz said. “This is a grievance. It can be handled looking at a calculator and looking at a calendar to calculate the number of days that the project is late, which was part of the bargain that was struck between the district and contractor.”

The school board has conducted executive sessions in consultation with legal representatives. The board did not reach a decision on whether to seek damage recovery during its meeting Dec. 18, but members are expected to make a final decision before or during their Jan. 17 meeting.

‘We worked every

single day’

In an appeal to the school board, W.R. ‘Bob’ Leavine, president of WRL General Contractors, LLC, spoke about a letter the district’s lawyers wrote following the completion of the contract. The letter stated the construction company repeatedly refused or failed to supply enough properly skilled workers and proper material, and failed to proceed continuously and diligently with the construction and completion of the work.

Leavine asked board members to consider the circumstances and challenges his firm faced while building the school, some of which resulted from the coronavirus pandemic.

“The worst nightmare of a contract is different conditions,” Leavine said. “COVID was a very upsetting time and difficult as cost increases and material shortages started hitting. Material lead times started increasing.”

Leavine said there was “nothing we could do” about cost increases, which were the biggest issue, he said.

“We worked every single day,” Leavine said.

During the December meeting, board members had information packets that contained daily work logs and man-hour reports from the project.

Leavine compared those man-hour analysis sheets with five other projects of similar size, as well as another school project completed by his company. That project lasted from March 2020 to February 2022, using 176,000 man-hours at 1.93 man-hours per square foot.

Completing Hallsville’s elementary school required 252,000 man-hours for an average of 2.91 man hours per square foot.

“We did everything possible we could to get that school finished,” Leavine said.

Leavine said his firm had difficulty finding contractors following completion of the school because of issues surrounding its construction. He said he objected to being penalized by the board.

“We’ve built over a billion dollars worth of schools in East Texas in the last 30 years, and the worst feeling we’ve ever had was leaving y’all’s school knowing we’ve done a good job, and it was tough, but there wasn’t a word of ‘Thank you’ or ‘Nice job,” Leavine said. “So, we’re asking y’all to consider the facts, not just somebody’s opinion. We didn’t fail to do this.”

‘Nobody forced this date’

Muñoz responded to Leavine’s presentation by outlining the original contract that was signed in December 2020. He said he agreed with Leavine that the complaint was rooted in facts.

Muñoz said the project completion date was part of the contract, and the construction firm agreed to it.

“The first thing I would point out to the board here is nobody forced this date on anybody,” Muñoz said.

He outlined the clauses in the contract that allow the school to recover damage payments if the project isn’t completed on time. He also spoke about a December 2021 change order that moved the completion date to the following April.

Muñoz said the contract allowed the contractor to ask for time extensions.

“The problem here is that I’m not aware that they ever came to us and said, ‘We’re going to be late. We’ve encountered delays, and give us a time extension,’” Muñoz said.

The delay in construction impacted the school district’s operations, Muñoz said. He said the board should seek damages from the contractor because taxpayer dollars were used for the project.

“If a superintendent called me and said, ‘Eric, I’ve got a liquidity damages thing. I don’t really want to enforce it,’ I’d say ‘Whoa. Hold on. It’s not your money to give away.’ So, that’s why we’re here today, and that is why it’s the right and necessary decision,” Muñoz said.

He also told board members that he disagreed with Leavine’s assertion that the contract penalizes his company.

“I don’t like the term ‘penalized,’” Muñoz said. “This is a contract. This is a deal that we agreed to, right? Nobody’s looking to specifically harm anybody or anything like that.”