Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Vernon County emergency management building design approved; funding and RFP next steps discussed
Summary
Design for a new 5,000-square-foot emergency management storage facility received state approvals; committee discussed a $350,000 cap set by finance, likely higher bids, existing account balances and next steps for RFPs and funding.
Vernon County emergency-management staff told the Local Emergency Planning Committee the design for a planned storage facility has been approved by state reviewers and the county can begin formal bidding.
“The storage facility is still in talks. Still planning on 5,000 square feet,” Brandon, the county’s emergency management director, said. He reported the county received confirmation from state inspectors and that Department of Safety and Professional Services sign-off allows the county to issue requests for proposals and bids.
The county finance committee earlier set a $350,000 cap for the project, Brandon said, but county staff and contractors' estimates suggest the final cost may be closer to $400,000. Brandon said the county has about $60,000 in a state asset account (quarterly funds tied to the county’s Type 3 state-team designation) that could be used toward equipment and IT needs for the building, although those funds also pay payroll and maintenance for hazmat gear.
Committee members discussed which items should be included in the county’s initial RFP: the core building shell, concrete work and framing versus interior IT, fire alarm systems and security. Brandon said the $350,000 cap included allowances for Wi‑Fi, cameras and a fire-alarm system but not sprinklers; adding IT and cameras would likely consume a substantial portion of the budget immediately.
Participants also discussed construction approach and timing. Brandon said the current plan is a post-frame (post-and-beam) structure, roughly 50 by 100 feet, to be sited near the dog park entrance and highway salt sheds; staff will decide whether to bid the project as a single package or as multiple subcontracted trades. Committee members noted a phased or split-contract approach could lower costs but complicate scheduling.
On funding, Brandon said some costs may be covered by quarterly state funds tied to the county’s Type 3 team status and by grants; the county will seek bids and finalize financing before committing to construction. The committee did not vote on funding at the meeting but asked staff to return with RFP timing and updated cost estimates.
Committee members also raised internal staffing and insurance considerations if the county pursues subcontracting versus county-managed construction. No formal motion to alter financing was made at the meeting.
