Glenarden council hears contractor briefing, agrees to pursue police-station feasibility study

Glenarden City Council members heard a presentation on Monday from Gordian and Nichols Contracting about using a Maryland Department of General Services job-order contracting vehicle and moved to advance a feasibility study for a new or expanded police station, with additional work proposed for an elevator and renovations to the city nutrition center.

The presentation opened with Robin Merhut, Gordian representative, describing the state contract vehicle and its benefits for municipalities. “We invented job order contracting in the 80s,” Merhut said, explaining the umbrella contract model and a preset task catalog that Gordian administers for the Maryland Department of General Services. Jerry Robinson, account manager for Nichols Contracting, outlined that Nichols had prepared a rough-order-of-magnitude cost and a baseline feasibility proposal for the police-station project and identified elevator and nutrition-center work as related scopes.

The council sought clarity on scope and cost. Robinson said the proposed feasibility study is conceptual and intended to determine what the city can afford and what is feasible on three candidate lots, including infrastructure, soil, parking and code constraints. “That’s actually the point of the feasibility study, is to find out exactly what you can afford and then build to that,” Robinson said. He told the council the study’s deliverables do not include final architectural construction drawings and that construction prices remain unsettled until designs are developed.

Council members pressed several budget questions. The packet shows roughly $100,000 for the feasibility study as a baseline figure discussed at the meeting; the study’s price was described as a small portion of overall project cost, with construction likely to run into millions depending on final scope. Council members noted a $1,000,000 capital set-aside in the city budget and a $400,000 state grant that is reimbursable and has not yet been drawn down. Several council members cautioned that Maryland recently reported a multi‑billion‑dollar budget deficit, which could reduce available state funding; staff and contractors reiterated that the feasibility study is intended to narrow options to what the city can realistically afford.

Robinson and his team explained additional items discussed in the packet. Nichols’ elevator estimate included line items for structural work, electrical and HVAC tie-ins, and an illuminated backlit sign; TKE was listed as one of the elevator manufacturers Nichols might buy from. Robinson said elevator warranties and final warranty lengths would be set at contract buyout and that some warranty responsibilities would rest with subcontractors. He also said Nichols would assist with necessary permitting if the council authorizes the work.

Councilmembers and staff discussed process and oversight. The council president said staff would prepare a resolution to authorize the feasibility study for the next council vote; staff confirmed the feasibility item is expected to be presented for a vote on Tuesday. Council members asked that results, specifications and permitting status come to the full council rather than being handled only by a subcommittee, though some members proposed forming a subcommittee to review designs before full-council consideration. Staff indicated they would try to use the reimbursable state grant in support of the feasibility study so the city does not risk losing the grant if state budget cuts are enacted.

No formal contract award for construction was made at the meeting. Nichols and Gordian framed their roles as providing design‑build and job‑order contracting services intended to speed procurement, reduce negotiations and limit change orders by using preset price catalogs through the Maryland DGS vehicle. Staff said a formal resolution and contract documents would be circulated to the city attorney for review prior to any execution.

Council members asked staff to locate any prior studies and historical drawings referenced by the public and previous administrations; staff said it had not located a prior feasibility study in the city’s records. The council directed staff to include clear budget parameters with the forthcoming resolution and to return to the full council with the feasibility-study scope, estimated cost and proposed funding sources before any construction drawings or buyouts are approved.

The council adjourned with the feasibility study scheduled to return for formal consideration at the next business meeting.