Commissioners approve $5,000 tower change order and authorize bids for jail communications contract

5855688 · September 2, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board approved a $5,000 change order for the Hubbard Valley radio tower project to address an easement issue and authorized advertising and award for a jail inmate communications contract to Smart Communications.

The Medina County Board of Commissioners on Sept. 2 approved a $5,000 change order related to the Hubbard Valley radio tower project and authorized the county administrator to accept proposals and award a contract for inmate communications at the county jail.

County Administrator Matt Springer presented six resolutions including a change order valued at $5,000 (Change Order No. 2) tied to the Hubbard Valley radio tower project and a resolution to accept proposals and award a contract for the Medina County Jail inmate communications system to Smart Communications.

Why it matters: The tower change order addressed an easement recorded in the 1970s that required a minor design reconfiguration before concrete work, avoiding an encroachment; the inmate communications contract will change services at the county jail and may affect detainee communications and billing arrangements.

Springer explained county staff had pulled required federal permits but discovered a recorded easement belonging to the Muskegon Watershed Conservancy District. Avoiding the encroachment required a $5,000 change order. Commissioners noted the cost was small relative to the potential problem if concrete had already been placed and suggested performing title work when acquiring other properties in the future.

The jail communications item authorized accepting proposals and awarding the contract to Smart Communications, following the procurement process described by the county administrator. The meeting record did not include contract dollar amounts or implementation timelines.

Both items were approved by roll call. Commissioners discussed the easement discovery and emphasized procedural improvements for future property transfers; no formal amendments were made to the change order beyond the approved $5,000 amount.