This is a other contracting contract with GADBERRY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. to deliver “BRUSH SQUARE - O. HENRY MUSEUM RESTORATION CIP ID 7553.005”. The city authorized spending up to $850,321, and $611,955 has been paid so far (72% of the ceiling).
These are transparent signals, not judgments. A large unspent balance may be a legitimate multi-year ceiling or indefinite-delivery contract.
Funding source is read from the fund each check was drawn on. It tells you who is accountable: voters & Council for bond/general-capital money, ratepayers & utility commissions for enterprise money, Council for the General Fund.
Grouped from the city’s own line-item descriptions. Vague or generic labels are themselves a transparency signal worth questioning.
Linked via the contract number appearing as a payment’s source document (rf_doc_id = 20080700966) in the Austin checkbook. See all payments to this vendor →
We couldn’t automatically match this contract to a City Council vote (the voting-record dataset starts in 2023, and older or consent-agenda items may not match by name). Most contracts are approved collectively on the Council consent agenda — so accountability runs through the managing department above and the Council vote on the award date, not an individual sponsor.
Search solicitation CLMB331 (CSP) to open the original scope of work, bid documents, and the executed contract.
Assessing delivery vs. commitment: Austin doesn’t publish structured project milestones, so we can’t auto-verify that the work matches the contract. What we can do is show what the money was invoiced for (above) and link the approved scope — then, where it matters, dispatch a Spotter to confirm the work on the ground. Contracts whose purpose is well-documented vs. vague is exactly the signal that tells us where to look first.
Contract number 20080700966 (CT) · Department 6100 · Managed by Contract and Land Management Department · Alt Proc Method (252)
From snapshot 2026-07-28.