Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Municipal Services topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Burton council approves routine contracts and budget items; several motions pass unanimously

2772985 · March 17, 2025
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

At its March 17 meeting the council approved attorney bills, pavement marking and multiple contracts, and passed a budget amendment for major streets; votes were recorded by roll call.

The Burton City Council approved a slate of routine administration, public‑works and contracting items March 17, including attorney billing, pavement marking and state/county agreements. Most items passed by unanimous roll call or consensus.

Why this matters: the approvals fund road work, marking and intergovernmental maintenance agreements that affect day‑to‑day public services and capital projects in Burton.

Key approvals and outcomes

- Item 1: Attorney billing (Odette). Motion moved and supported; roll call recorded unanimous approval.

- Item 2: Attorney billing (Miller Johnson). Council discussed billing frequency and the firm’s different billing practices; the item passed on roll call.

- Item 3: Pavement marking program (25‑0007‑PM). Approved by roll call. Council discussed that bids came in higher than budgeted and that pavement marking is split between spring and fall work.

- Item 4: Cost‑share agreement with the Genesee County Road Commission (GCRC) for traffic control/maintenance. Council clarified jurisdictional responsibilities under the maintenance agreement and approved the agreement.

- Item 5: Contract with Roe Professional Service (northbound Grand Traverse work). Approved by roll call.

- Item 6: MDOT contract (North Genesee Road). Approved by roll call.

- Item 8: Budget amendment — Major Street Fund. Council approved a budget amendment to add funds from the major street fund balance to cover higher-than-expected pavement‑marking bids.

A few items drew substantive discussion. Council members asked about higher-than-expected pavement marking bids and whether engineering costs for sidewalks (described elsewhere in the meeting) were unusually large. Administration said material and paint costs have increased and that some projects have separate engineering budgets; council members agreed future budgets will reflect the higher marking costs.

All items above were approved by roll call as recorded in the meeting minutes; specific roll-call tallies were recorded on the record for each item.

The council concluded with plans to continue work on intersection safety studies and to pursue safety grants for larger intersection redesigns.