(Note: This story was originally published in The Star-News in May 2004. It is reproduced here to provide perspective on the current dilemma the city of McCall is facing over the J-Ditch sewer case.) - the Star News Publication
Three jurors who recently ordered the city of McCall to pay nearly $5 million to builders of the city's winter wastewater holding pond said the case was complex but the decision was easy because of the way the city handled the project.
Jeff Kidd of Boise, Daniel Bachini of Eagle, and Franklin Kimura of Caldwell made up one-third of the nine-person U.S. District Court jury that found in favor of St. Clair Contractors of Boise and Employers Insurance of Wausau of Wausau, Wis.
The case stemmed from the construction of the city's 268-million gallon storage lagoon, commonly known as the J-Ditch Pond.
St. Clair and Wausau worked on the lagoon in 2000 and 2001, but neither finished the work to the satisfaction of the city, which fired St. Clair in February 2001 and fought with Wausau over the quality of its work for months.
The companies eventually sued the city to collect unpaid bills and business damages, and the city counter sued the companies and claimed the project was not built to specifications in the construction contract.
The case culminated in a 27day trial that ended May 4, 2004, with a $4.95 million judgment against the city.
Outcome was obvious
McCall City Council members were shocked that day to learn the news, but the three jurors said the outcome was obvious to those on the jury.
Bachini said jurors carefully went over their instructions, but that all agreed the city was more culpable.
"We all agreed on who was to win. That was unanimous," he said. "It was really fast. No one took the city's side."
Kidd said the decision was made primarily because jurors felt the city did not take enough responsibility for the successful completion of the project.
"We saw fault on both sides, but we felt the city was most at fault," said Kidd, who acted as jury foreman although no formal leader was chosen. "It was obvious St. Clair wanted to comeback and finish the work when they were fired."
Kidd said the biggest problem jurors had with McCall's handling of the case was the city's decision not to stop St. Clair when it saw what it considered to be unsatisfactory work. "The city claimed St. Clair was doing shoddy work, but the contract stated that if the city or its representative (JUB Engineers of Boise) saw anything wrong they needed to go in and tell them so they could get it corrected," Kidd said.
"We never heard that from the city," he said. "They had just as much responsibility as the contractor."
Kidd said the testimony from JUB and the city was not helpful to the city's case because it appeared that side was shirking its responsibility for the project.
"JUB had seen defects but never told anyone. They just blamed St. Clair," Kidd said. "We saw them pointing their fingers at St. Clair all the time rather than taking their responsibility."
Kimura voiced a similar view. "Both parties didn't follow the contract, but the city should have been more on the ball," he said.
Unimpressive testimony
Bachini also was not impressed by some of the testimony from project engineer Matt Uranga of JUB.
Uranga see med to "talk down" to the jury and he seemed "with glee" when St. Clair encountered problems on the site, he said.
Both Kidd and Bachini said the preparation and analysis by St. Clair and Wausau's expert witnesses was stronger than that of the city's expert witnesses. Both said the city's witnesses presented one-sided testimony that hurt their case.
"The city's experts only analyzed one side of the case and did not perform a comprehensive study. They didn't take into consideration both sides of the case," Kidd said. "We felt the other side's testimony offered more valid information."
Kimura and Bachini each said they felt St. Clair was not given enough time to do the work and was treated unfairly by the city after the contractor missed a
Nov. 2, 2000, deadline to finish the project.
"There just wasn't enough time to do the job because the weather was so bad in September, October and November," Kimura said. "The city should have extended the contract, and their attitude shouldn't have been to fire the guy. He didn't quit, he just couldn't do the work."
JUB not impartial
Bachini also said he thought JUB, which was hired to act as a liaison between the city and the contractor, should have been more impartial while handling the project rather than siding with the city.
"JUB is supposed to be independent, but they weren't almost from the beginning," Bachini said. "I'm not saying St. Clair was perfect, but it would have been hard to be perfect in the conditions they were under."
Kidd and Bachini said the jury's award of $1.6 million to St. Clair for"business devastation" was to help the contractor get back on track after the months of unpaid bills by the city nearly knocked the company out of business.
"We wanted to help get St. Clair back on its feet as best we could," Kidd said. "We wanted to help them go out and buy equipment and get the money they were owed."
Bachini noted that St. Clair's construction employees who testified seemed honest on the stand, while McCall city officials who testified seemed to be "completely in the dark" on the project.
He also said the settlement process seemed "one-sided" because the city was unwilling to negotiate, and he likened the long, drawn-out case to a bad break-up.
"There was just something that wasn't right with the whole thing," Bachini said. "It was like a nasty divorce that went on too long and got worse over time."
