Independence council advances city hall security upgrades; bathroom addition to be scoped separately

The Independence City Council on May 13 advanced a plan to install security upgrades at City Hall and agreed to place the ordinance on the consent agenda while asking contractors to return with a formal cost proposal for an additional restroom.

Contractors from Mills Gold Group presented the project and told council they received two responsive bids for the work and recommended Millstone/Mills Gold Group as the lowest responsible bidder for the lobby security renovations, which include hardened entry glazing, new doors and associated electrical and millwork work. Project managers Tyler Hoover and Corey Wallace described roughly six months of work including a preconstruction phase and a three-month construction period and said they would stage work to minimize disruption to the reception area.

The council’s tech services director, Dave Schneiderburn, said the project estimate prepared by GPD Group and technical services was about $370,000 (he noted his own earlier estimate was about $250,000) and that the recommended bid came in well under GPD’s estimate. Mayor and councilors asked questions about disruption to the police side of City Hall and were told the work will be confined to the public side of the building and will not impact the secure police area. Hoover said the work will include new reception configuration, millwork, electrical channeling through the floor and bullet-resistant glazing and frames.

Several council members and the presenters also discussed adding a bathroom that would be accessible from the lobby. The contractor said adding a restroom would require sanitary connections and excavation and estimated an additional $40,000; the presenter said the city has roughly $427,000 available in the related fund and suggested including contingency money in the budget. Council asked the contractor to return next month with a formal proposal and package for the bathroom so members could consider amending the work or funding.

After discussion about lead times for materials and the desire to order long-lead items, the mayor asked whether there was any objection to placing the security ordinance on the consent agenda for adoption; council agreed and the ordinance was placed on the consent agenda. The council clarified that the security ordinance on the consent agenda did not include the bathroom item, which will be presented separately when the contractor provides a formal package.

Council members emphasized minimizing downtime in the reception area and asked that the contractor provide schedules and material delivery plans. The record shows council approved first reading and consent placement for the security renovation legislation and directed the contractor to prepare a formal bathroom proposal for next month’s meeting.

The ordinance and contractors’ presentation drew multiple clarifying exchanges about scope, site access, pricing and sequencing; no final construction contract was signed in the meeting.