Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Municipal Contracts topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Votes at a glance: Madera council approves CDBG/HOME amendment, infrastructure contracts, senior-center fencing and local agency funding requests

2339759 · February 5, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At its Feb. 5 meeting the Madera City Council unanimously approved a group of routine and capital items: an amendment to the CDBG consolidated plan to accept HOME funds, awards for sidewalk and water/sewer projects, a construction agreement for Frank Bergon Senior Center fencing, and the Madera County Economic Development Commission budget share.

MADERA, Calif. — The Madera City Council on Wednesday approved a set of administrative and capital items ranging from a HUD-related consolidated plan amendment to construction contracts for sidewalks, sewer and water mains and a senior-center fence project.

Votes at a glance

- CDBG/HOME consolidated plan amendment (Item A1): Council approved an amendment to the 2019–2024 Consolidated Plan to add HOME funds of $372,064.92 and a required one-time city match of $127,935.08 (total allocation approximately $500,000) to support HOME program project development. The motion passed unanimously.

- Sidewalk improvements, City Project R94 (D1): Council awarded the sidewalk-improvement contract (bid package 3, phase 2) to Seal Right Paving and Grading (dba Seal Right) in the amount of $2,056,522 and authorized a 15% contingency for change orders to account for retrofit uncertainties. The project is funded through the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) grant tied to the Esperanza Village development. Motion passed unanimously.

- Clinton Street sewer and water main replacement, City Project R97 (D2): Council awarded the contract to United Pavement Maintenance, Inc. in the amount stated in the staff resolution ($776,246.75) and approved a budget amendment to add additional CDBG funds for construction and related city construction engineering costs. Motion passed unanimously.

- Frank Bergon Senior Center fencing (D3): Council approved a construction agreement with Juarez Brothers (local vendor) to install perimeter fencing at the Frank Bergon Senior Center to address security and program disruptions. The vendor quote was approximately $437,000; council adopted a related fiscal-year budget amendment of $237,000 to cover the work. Motion passed unanimously.

- Madera County Economic Development Commission basic service-level budget (E1): Council approved the city share of the MCEDC 2025–26 basic service-level budget as submitted. Motion passed unanimously.

How the council described the votes

Staff consistently described these items as required to implement previously awarded grants or routine contractual services: the AHSC sidewalk project is part of grant work tied to Esperanza Village housing; Clinton Street work implements a prior sewer and water condition-assessment recommendation; the senior-center fencing addresses repeated security and encampment-related disruptions at a city facility; and the HOME allocation requires an amendment to the consolidated plan as HUD condition for funding.

Financial and procurement details

- The sidewalk contract award was the low responsive bid; staff recommended an above-normal 15% contingency because retrofit work frequently involves unexpected conditions such as tree/utility conflicts.

- The Clinton Street project received multiple bids (seven received) and came in below the engineer’s opinion of cost; funding combines CDBG awards and water-utility contributions.

- Juarez Brothers, a Madera County firm that previously completed local recreation work, is the selected contractor for the Frank Bergon perimeter fencing; staff cited prior good performance and local availability when recommending the firm.

Public comment and council discussion

Council discussion of these items was brief and mostly technical. The public made no substantive objections to the contracts during the meeting; staff answered clarifying questions about funding sources and project timelines.

Ending

All items on the capital and budget agenda were approved unanimously during the Feb. 5 meeting. Staff will proceed with contract execution and monitor work to meet grant timelines; council members asked staff to keep the council informed of any material changes to scope or budget that would require additional authorization.