The blame game has entered its third week as jurors listen to a civil suit centering on the construction of the Rowan County Justice Center.

On Monday, jurors heard about crushed sewer lines, materials that didn’t arrive and other problems with the glitch-filled project.

John S. Clark General Contractors of Mount Airy is suing Rowan County for more than $1 million in Rowan County Superior Court.

Attorneys for Clark have attempted to convince jurors that faulty design and slow decision-making by the county and its architect, J.N. Pease Associates of Raleigh, were the reasons the company finished the complex, which covers most of a block, more than a year late.

Attorneys for the county are calling county officials and other witnesses to make their case that Clark caused the delay with poor scheduling and lack of project management.

The $12.5 million project started in January 1993 and was scheduled to be completed by August 1994.

Voters defeated bonds for the project, but the county was forced to proceed after inmates filed suit in federal court charing the county with overcrowding the jail.

Previous testimony indicated the project fell behind from the start because of unsuitable soil, a previously unmarked storm drain, a storage tank and contaminated soil in the area where the footings were to be poured.

Two weeks of testimony detailed how the project went downhill beginning with the discovery of asbestos and progressing to dimensional problems with the building design and equipment.

At times, jurors look like college freshmen covered with piles of paperwork and notebooks. Each has hundreds of pages of plaintiff and defense exhibits, which he or she struggles to lift, sort and manage.

Bob Byrd of Statesville, a former official with J.N. Pease, the county’s architect, was on the stand most of Monday.

Byrd, now retired, said he visited the site twice a week for the three years the project was under construction, from 1993 to 1995.

With 35 years of experience in construction, Byrd talked about the complexity of the Justice Center project, which blended new construction with the renovation of existing buildings. He cited his work in renovating Central Prison in Raleigh and testified at length about the complexity of detention facilities.

Byrd said again and again that Clark never developed schedules or followed through on getting materials to the site, including jail equipment or the pre-cast concrete exterior panels.

At one time, a crane operator arrived to hang the massive exterior panels, but officials determined that the panels had not been manufactured, Byrd said.

He said detention equipment didn’t fit the building because Clark decided to buy the equipment from a company other than that used in the drawings by the Pease architects.

“Consistent scheduling on the job never existed,” Byrd told Roman Pibl, one of the county’s attorneys in this case. “People were performing duties whenever they wanted to.”

Byrd said Clark was not entitled to more time because the contractor caused most of the delays.

During intense cross-examination by David Smith, the contractor’s Winston-Salem attorney, Byrd often said he didn’t recall specifics, because the project is nearly seven years old.

If Byrd was so concerned about lack of a proper schedule, Smith asked, why didn’t he note that in memorandums from weekly construction meetings?

He got little response.

Smith asked Byrd a series of questions about the county’s responsibility related to the other prime contractors, particularly Lorch Plumbing. Clark contends the plumbing company’s failure to adequately staff the job caused extended delays.

Smith cited several letters to Byrd and the county complaining about the delays in getting the plumbing work done.

At one point, Smith asked Byrd about the failure of the plumbing company to have a full set of plans a month after the contract was awarded.

Byrd said everyone should have had the plans and indicated he did not recall major changes requiring new drawings.

Smith and Byrd battled about who was responsible for getting the other contractors to do their jobs.

“Clark had no contract with Lorch?” asked Smith. Unable to get a direct answer, Smith stayed on task. “Clark was not responsible for Lorch Plumbing,” he asked.

“I agree there was no contract,” said Byrd.

Early Monday, County Manger Tim Russell concluded his testimony. He had been on the stand most of Thursday, aggressively defending the county’s position.

County Attorney John Holshouser recalled Russell Monday to discuss problems with the sewer line from the jail.

When Holshouser attempted to introduce several invoices from Roto-Rooter, Smith objected, bringing a conference with Judge Charles Lamm Jr. of Boone.

The judge allowed the jurors to see the invoices. Russell cited repeated problems with the sewage line in January 1993, requiring daily calls to Roto-Rooter.

He testified that finally workers dug up and replaced the line, determining that the contractor had crushed it with a load of brick.

Smith noted that the plaintiffs had been requesting the invoices for the past three or four years but were told they couldn’t be found.

Russell responded that the county writes 10,000 checks a month, and the invoices were filed in general maintenance rather than with the Justice Center project papers.

Smith made the point that one invoice showed that sewage was running into the area where a footing was to be poured.

County officials have indicated they should conclude their case today or tomorrow.

This is the final in a series of suits involving various contractors on the project. All others have been settled.