Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Park board approves moving forward with uniform signage procurement using cooperative contract
Summary
Moorhead Park Advisory Board voted to proceed with hiring a sign vendor through a cooperative purchasing group, approving staff recommendation to pursue that procurement path and earmarking budget planning across 2025–26.
The Moorhead Park Advisory Board voted to move forward with a park signage project and recommended using a vendor affiliated with an approved cooperative purchasing group.
Forrest (staff member) presented options after staff concluded that existing park signs lacked cohesive branding and some newer parks had no signs. He told the board the city had considered three procurement routes: select a vendor in a city‑approved cooperative purchasing group; issue a new request for quotes; or develop a full in‑house park signage plan. Staff recommended the cooperative purchasing option as the most efficient and practical path to keep the project moving.
Forrest said staff had previously solicited quotes in November 2024 and received responses in December 2024, but evaluation of those submissions produced widely varying options. He said developing a full signage plan would require significantly more staff time. Paul (staff member) provided budget context and said the 2025 budget included $50,000 from the park amenities fund and staff expected a similar allocation in 2026 to reach required funding levels for the full replacement program.
Board member Aaron Gillum moved to proceed with the signage project; Mitch Havig seconded. The board voted unanimously in favor and the motion carried.
Board members discussed timing and implementation: staff indicated some work could begin in 2025, but much of the program would be staggered and depend on procurement and design choices. The proposed sign designs include modular icon panels and the option to brand river‑corridor parks with a river corridor logo for wayfinding and placemaking.
The board also discussed potential drawbacks of the cooperative procurement option; Forrest said no significant downsides had been identified, noting the contracts used by the cooperative have been vetted and that the route tends to yield competitive pricing while providing latitude to refine designs with a selected vendor. The board instructed staff to proceed with the recommended procurement approach and return with further details.
