The Courthouse Architect, the Commissioners, and a $458 Bill Nobody Wants to Pay
The man who designed Thurston County's new courthouse demands the rest of his fee; the commissioners say he broke his contract and has been paid enough.
Architect Ritchie, of the new court house, is having quite a time in securing his pay for professional services as architect, and he has demanded of the county commissioners a definite understanding in relation to his warrant.
The outcome of the matter promises to be interesting, but the commissioners have decided to take a determined stand. Mr. Ritchie has submitted a statement of his account, demanding the immediate payment of his voucher for $458. The commissioners, on the other hand, claim that he has been paid fully in proportion to the amount of work done, and that he has not complied with the terms of his agreement, in that in addition to furnishing full professional services he also agreed to furnish a superintendent for the work. This he failed to do.
The commissioners contend that Mr. Ritchie was to have had five per cent of the contract price of the court house, which was $107,300, and which would give him $5,363. The architect, however, claims the five per cent on the approximate cost of the building ($114,000), the difference being the cost of raising the foundation. Mr. Ritchie claims for his entire commission $5,700. Of this amount he has already received $4,600, and of the $1,100 claimed yet to be due he demands the immediate payment of $458, which the commissioners refuse, for the reason above stated.
Mr. Ritchie also claims that the terms of his agreement call for the payment of three per cent of the cost of the building upon the letting of the contract, and of two per cent on the estimates allowed the contractors. On the other hand again, the commissioners state that Mr. Ritchie was paid $2,000 when the contract was let, and that no time was specified for the payment of the balance. From time to time, however, he has been paid amounts aggregating $4,600, which the commissioners hold is enough for the present. The architect left the city yesterday in anything but a pleasant humor and has given the commissioners to understand that he desires an immediate and definite settlement.
“The architect left the city yesterday in anything but a pleasant humor and has given the commissioners to understand that he desires an immediate and definite settlement.”
A public building, a cost overrun and a contractor who says he is owed — the fight over the Thurston County courthouse is the same script as every modern public-works dispute. The wrinkle here is the arithmetic itself: five per cent of $107,300 or of $114,000, depending on whether you count raising the foundation.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.