Auditors hired to investigate $51 million in overruns at Paul Brown Stadium don't know how contractors spent $17 million of it because they couldn't find a paper trail to document where the cash went.

        The audit was prepared by the New York firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers, which has spent the past two years looking at changes in contracts at the troubled project.

        The audit — now in its third and final draft — cost more than $500,000 to produce.

        Evandro Braz, a senior partner for the auditing firm, said change orders — which altered the nature and scope of work — accounted for 18 percent of the project cost.

COST CHANGES

Auditors identified at least 10 major change issues on the Paul Brown Stadium project that increased costs.     • Scoreboard, increased by $6,490,066.     • Camera booths, up $2,924,047.     • Piles, up $804,019.     • Glazing, up $678,320.     • Drains, $625,194.     • Elevators, $546,437.     • Soccer field, $405,924.     • Fireproofing, up $304,156.     • Railings, up $278,147.     • Canopy, $158,407.     • Waterproofing, $49,194.     Total: $13,263,911    Source: PricewaterhouseCoopers

        “Anytime you get over 10 percent, it starts to smell,” Mr. Braz said. “In this case, most of it are claims from subcontractors.

        “Either there wasn't sufficient documentation to show they really spent the money, or the work was done based on conversations in the hallway so there is no piece of paper saying an agreement was made.”

        The audit says that many of the contractor claims were “voluminously documented, (but) did not adequately demonstrate sufficient justification for the claimed impact costs.”

        The report confirms that a tight construction schedule and design revisions pushed the budget higher.

        Paul Brown Stadium was supposed to cost taxpayers a maximum of $287 million. The stadium actually cost $459 million when land, professional fees and other expenses are figured in.

        The audit says that of the $17.3 million with insufficient documentation:

        • $12.9 million involved trade claims that could not demonstrate why the county was responsible for the cost.

        • $1.3 million had insufficient documentation to support the merit of the change or the price of the change.

        • The auditor questioned $1.8 million worth of changes based on their price.

        Another major problem: contractors charging a premium for additional work after being awarded a bid.

        Mr. Braz said most contractors on the stadium project were savvy enough to understand they were bidding on incomplete design drawings and recognized the opportunity to charge higher rates for the subsequent work that was sure to come.

        “Human nature being what it is, if you can identify incomplete design drawings you know you're going to get more money later on,” Mr. Braz said. “This is a very complex project with red flags all over the place — a fast-tracked project, designed right before bids taken and a GMP (guaranteed maximum price) based on incomplete designs.

        “If a contractor sees those red flags, they know there's an opportunity.”

        Carl Stich, a chief assistant prosecutor, said he's not sure how much of the $51 million in overages will be recoverable for taxpayers. But the audit will be used by the county's outside lawyers to figure how much they'll go after.

        Construction manager Turner Barton Malow D.A.G. believes all $51 million should be paid by county taxes.

        “No matter what happens, we'll have to look into this question of what documentation should have been there and see if we can get an explanation of why it isn't there,” Mr. Stich said.

        “The ultimate question is, were those funds properly charged to the county?” he said. “Right now we're in a fact-gathering mode to try and fully understand what happened.”

        Auditors will make a report to Hamilton County Commissioners on Monday.

        County officials and construction managers hadn't read the report on Friday and declined to comment. But project coordinator W. Shelby Reaves provided the county with a written response to the report.

        Mr. Reaves said the audit is erroneous in many respects.

        “The report ignores the considerable scrutiny the contractors' claims have been subjected to, and the resulting reductions in cost to the benefit of the county,” Mr. Reaves' response states. “Many of the items (the auditor) now takes issue with are matters which ... were specifically approved by the county.”

        Commissioner Todd Portune, who is a lawyer, said the undocumented work underscores his position that the county shouldn't have fronted money to cover the overruns.
       
       

Firefighters shed tears, say goodbye to a hero
Audit questions $17 million
Urban team: Adjust goal for city core
Cartoon genius left mark here
No one need feel left out: group hug at local school
HOWARD: Neighborhoods
MCNUTT: Hamilton Mercy
Congressman turns to 'Survivor' star
Derby weekend events debated
Eraser granted another hearing
Foster parents sought in Butler County
Hamilton touts space for work
Homeowners join Deerfield in lawsuit against Mason water tower
Human Services director announces retirement
Lawmakers to vote on back-seat belt buckling
Man in hospital lot kidnapped, robbed
Mistaken baby leads to lawsuit
New hotel planned for Ohio state fairgrounds
Revamped Berry Way to be opened
Snow flurries could decorate weekend plans
Students deny funding for May 4 commemoration
Students played with toxin on bus
Taking page from life
Tiger attack victim talks
Woman is ruled unfit for trial
Tristate A.M. Report