Burton council directs staff to seek bids for mosquito-control pilot after company outlines one-year plan

Burton City Council members agreed to open a bid process for a one-year mosquito-control pilot after Ben Sego, general manager of APM Mosquito Control, outlined a phased approach emphasizing disease surveillance and targeted standing-water treatments.

City officials said they want staff to draft specifications that would allow multiple vendors to bid on the basic public-health scope — disease testing, standing-water treatment and targeted spraying in parks and other high-traffic public-use areas — rather than immediately adopting a higher-cost, “Cadillac” program.

The move follows a presentation by Sego describing how APM would structure a first-year contract to gather baseline data: unit pricing (per spray mile, per acre treated, per catch-basin treatment, per disease pool sampled), disease sampling for West Nile virus, and targeted truck spraying of about 100 miles per week. Sego estimated the city’s likely program costs would be in the six-figure range if it attempted comprehensive spraying citywide; he said many programs start smaller to gather a year of data before expanding. Sego also offered to provide material for DPW to treat catch basins at APM cost but said exact quantities depend on the city’s number of catch basins.

Council members asked about timing and the state approval process. Sego said outreach plans and prior-notification procedures must be submitted to the Michigan Department of Agriculture (referred to in the meeting as the Michigan Department of Ag) and that approvals typically take about a week once the application is complete. He recommended starting standing-water treatments in April and having outreach and approvals in place by early March if the city wanted spray operations to begin in spring.

Council discussion focused on (1) whether to purchase a one-year contract from a single provider to “kick-start” the program or (2) use that provider’s work to help develop a bid specification to be issued to the market. Council members repeatedly emphasized fairness to companies that help draft bid specs; one council member proposed offering a modest preferential consideration (a 5% local preference) if the company that assisted with specifications later submitted a competitive bid.

Administrators and council members discussed funding options. Sego cited comparable municipal programs: Fenton Township’s program budget of about $160,000 and Montrose Township’s budget near $89,000. He estimated main cost drivers would be spray miles (about $45 per mile) and catch-basin materials (cases of briquettes he described as roughly $1,200 per case). City staff said the general fund could likely cover an initial one-year pilot and that later funding options could include a resident fee or a millage vote.

Council direction was to have staff prepare bid specifications keyed to basic public-health objectives, invite competitive bids, and return to council with parameters and ballpark estimates for first-year costs. Council members also asked staff to consider a one-year general-fund appropriation to cover an initial pilot while data are gathered.

Sego said his company would not demand a consulting fee for preparing bid parameters but would be willing to help prepare specifications. Council members asked the administration and the city attorney to advise on any compensation or procurement issues if a company assists with bid specification work.

Council president and administration said staff would bring a draft specification and budget estimate back to a future meeting so the council could authorize a formal bid and meet the state-notification timeline.

The discussion took place during the meeting’s administrative report and audience-participation segments and drew extensive council back-and-forth before a consensus directive to prepare a bid specification for a limited health-focused program.