Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Landscape Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council weighs $246,932 landscaping contract and possible budget tradeoffs
Summary
Public Works proposed contracting out landscape maintenance for high‑visibility public spaces under a three‑year, $246,932 per‑year contract; staff proposed reallocating $104,000 and asked council to consider adding $144,000 in the next budget to cover remaining cost.
Public Works asked the council on Jan. 21 to consider outsourcing much of the city’s routine landscape maintenance — parks, large fields and some institutional sites — under a three‑year contract estimated at $246,932 per year with two one‑year extension options and a 3% CPI escalation clause.
Preston told council the contract would free limited in‑house staff to focus on higher‑skill tasks such as thermoplastic crosswalk work, sign retroreflectivity maintenance and specialty infrastructure. “Right now the bid we’re looking at approving, if you guys would like to go that direction, is $246,932,” Preston said.
Staff proposed reallocating $104,000 from existing line items and asked council to consider adding roughly $144,000 more in the upcoming budget to cover the full first‑year cost. The proposal would not eliminate all in‑house landscape work: city crews would keep specialty tasks (large ditch mowing, certain equipment‑intensive work and some capital projects) while contractors would handle routine mowing, edging, weed control and beautification in high‑visibility locations.
Why it matters: maintenance has implications for public safety (fire hazard reduction on large fields), downtown appearance, parks usability and regulatory requirements for pedestrian facilities. Staff said the contract would allow timely mowing of fields (noting a July‑4th standard for some sites) and improved maintenance of playground and park areas. They also said contractors could better meet peak seasonal demand without adding full‑time staff.
Councilors expressed concern about budget tradeoffs. Several members said they supported the idea in principle but asked staff to identify where the additional $144,000 would come from and to confirm which specific sites would be outsourced. Councilor Torgerson and others asked for reporting back with precise line‑item changes and for a plan that prioritizes downtown and pedestrian safety if resources are constrained.
Preston said staff had solicited bids statewide and locally, receiving three to four proposals. He said the apparent competitiveness of the low bids reflects prevailing market rates, that some local firms declined to bid, and that the city had contacted both large regional firms and smaller local vendors.
Ending: The council gave general direction to include the landscaping contract ask in the upcoming budget package for further study, asking staff to return with exact bid documentation, a site list, and potential budget offsets.
