On Monday the Chronicle ran a story about Metro’s attempt to get its new light rail lines back on schedule and on budget through a process called “design-build”:
Under design-build, a prime contractor hired through bids or negotiation oversees all phases from preliminary design through construction. The contractor guarantees a price, covers any overruns and deals with the subcontractors.
It’s a controversial method and would require Legislature approval for Metro to do it. Currently there are two bills in Austin addressing Metro’s desire to get around a traditional construction method.
In the story, Rad Sallee added a sentence that caught my eye:
Metro has proposed paying for two lines itself if the FTA will fund the other two.
Uh, no. That was Metro’s original plan that got the agency into hot water and inspired much Chronicle hyperventilating directed at Reps. Culberson and DeLay. So, I wrote to Sallee questioning that sentence. He kindly replied saying he agreed the sentence was probably wrong, and today’s paper carries this correction:
A story on Page B2 of Monday’s edition misstated the Metropolitan Transit Authority’s current proposal for funding its next light rail extensions. Metro initially proposed that the Federal Transit Administration pay for the North and Southeast lines if Metro would pay for the later Harrisburg and Westpark lines. This plan was rejected and now Metro is seeking 50 percent of federal funding for the North and Southeast lines. Metro has no current proposal before the FTA for the other two lines.
Thank you, Mr. Sallee.
