A few years ago, city officials, faced with a daunting load of projects for which voters had approved borrowing some $95 million, decided to farm out some supervisory work for bringing those projects to fruition.

The volume was likely to overwhelm the existing staff in the city’s

General Services Administration. And the desire to move the projects quickly was fueled by a couple of important factors.

For one thing, the city had pledged to voters that the projects would not languish for years as unfulfilled promises, as many skeptical voters felt had happened too often in the past with significant city projects.

Moreover, inflation in the construction field was rampant, as rapidly industrializing, once-underdeveloped nations such as China were putting enormous demands on construction materials at the same time the United States economy was still booming in what turned out to be a housing and commercial construction bubble.

So the city farmed out projects to construction managing companies, bundling small projects at times to make a project sizable enough to entice a company such as Skansa.

For a time, that seemed a wise strategy. It proved especially beneficial in completing projects as sweeping and complex as the Durham Performing Arts Center.

But times change, and so they have in the past few years in the construction field.

City Manager Tom Bonfield and his recently hired general services director Joel Reitzer think the time has come to bring projects back under direct supervision by city workers. Both have come on board since the economic picture shifted dramatically. Now construction companies are eager for work, inflation has slowed to nearly zero and consultants have helped beef up general services’ supervisors skills for overseeing projects.

So as the city begins to undertake bond-financed projects to repair three city recreation centers, the city will cut out the “construction manager at risk” intermediary, and will handle the bidding, contract awards and construction oversight itself.

Administrators think that will save $1.2 million, stretching the bond money over more badly needed repair projects.

We applaud the flexibility of the city in identifying the opportunity and adroitly shifting gears to the new focus. Just because another method was an important adaptation to the needs of a few years ago doesn’t mean it is the method for today.

Indeed, recognizing that what once was a solution has become, under different conditions, a problem is an important part of management.

Especially with city finances tight — and belt-tightening taxpayers looking for every indication government officials are being frugal stewards of their money — the cost-savings on these projects, and those we can expect going forward, are welcome.