Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Sewer Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates 2025 scattered lateral sewer contract after concerns about contractor history; motion to delay
Summary
City staff recommended awarding a $1,867,580 scattered lateral replacement contract to a low bidder; councilors raised concerns about past contractor issues reported in other municipalities and moved to table the award for more information.
City staff recommended the 2 Rivers City Council award a $1,867,580 contract for the 2025 scattered lateral replacement program but several council members raised concerns about the low bidder’s past work and asked for more information before awarding the contract.
The recommendation, presented by Matt (staff member), described the project as replacement of water services and, where feasible, sanitary laterals while crews are working in the public right-of-way. Matt said contractors performed camera inspections before bidding and that the work is intended to extend the life of the sanitary system without full open-cut reconstruction.
The recommendation drew questions from councilors about a contractor the staff had prequalified. Adam (councilmember) asked for more background after reports that a municipal client in Sheboygan had experienced problems with that contractor; Matt said he had contacted several municipalities and a developer and that “overwhelmingly, the consensus was, they are a good contractor,” while acknowledging Sheboygan had reported issues that were addressed. Matt also noted the bidder had passed the city’s prequalification procedures, demonstrating financial and technical capacity.
Because the city must execute certain contracts promptly to meet Department of Natural Resources (DNR) grant and program timelines, staff urged timely action. Council members expressed concern about on-site execution details, possible prior problems with water service flushing, and the practical effects of doing just lateral maintenance rather than full reconstruction.
Adam moved to table the award until the next meeting so staff could collect more information about the bidder’s past projects and any unresolved issues; a council member seconded the motion and the council called for a roll-call vote. The transcript records the motion and roll call being taken but does not include the vote tally or final disposition.
The staff recommendation and the contractor’s $1,867,580 bid remain on the record; councilors said they would revisit the award after receiving the additional municipal references and documentation.
