Macomb County roads department approves paving, MDOT contracts and budget shifts to buy trucks and fund projects

The Macomb County Department of Roads presented and the committee recommended approval of a set of 2025 contracts and a budget amendment that together aim to fund pavement markings, multiple MDOT bridge and rehabilitation projects, limestone cost‑share agreements with townships, and an accelerated purchase of tandem truck chassis.

The committee voted to recommend approval of a contract with PK Contracting for the county's 2025 Special Pavement Marking Project in the amount of $597,740.01. The department described the work as annual replacement of special pavement markings (arrows, crosswalks, stop bars) rather than longitudinal lane lines and said the program is one part of its pavement‑marking portfolio. The motion to recommend the contract passed by committee vote (recorded as 11-0).

The committee also recommended sending to the full board a bundle of Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) preventive maintenance and rehabilitation contracts, covering multiple road and bridge locations and funded primarily by federal 80/20 programs. The presentation said the regional MDOT awards include federal funding for superstructure repairs and rural pavement preservation; individual items include the MDOT project for 14 Mile from Kelly Road to Gratiot Avenue, Romeo Plank Road rural preservation, and other bridge superstructure repairs. The committee vote to forward the MDOT items was recorded as passed (11-0).

Separately, the committee recommended cost‑share agreements with several townships for the county's local limestone program (three‑ to four‑mile segments) and a preliminary engineering cost share with Macomb Township for the Broughton Road extension. The department said local matches vary by program (for example, a 60/40 local/roads split for local road preliminary engineering). The committee recommendation on the cost shares was approved (11-0).

On a consolidated budget amendment, the Department of Roads requested authority to transfer and reallocate several internal account balances and to add capital purchases. The amendment described a transfer from a legacy internal general liability line that held $5,278,963. The department proposed: (a) setting aside $1,000,000 back into a liability reserve; (b) estimating $554,047 to pay upcoming liability insurance premiums; and (c) transferring the remainder into roads revenue accounts for use on roads and bridges. The presentation said auditors and county finance were consulted and that the liability internal service fund would remain open but with a $0 balance presented on the books while an internal $1,000,000 reserve would be preserved for future needs.

On retiree health care (an OPEB trust through MERS), the department reported the trust is currently 170% funded. The presenter and the department's finance director recommended using the trust to pay retiree health care obligations that had been coming from the roads operating fund; they said moving those payments into the trust would free $3,676,605 for roads uses. The department stated its actuarial assumptions include a 6.75% investment return and that current amortization shows contributions are not required at present, though that could change if assumptions shift.

The department also requested approval to accelerate a fleet purchase: an additional 20 cabin chassis at $3,974,270 to supplement 10 chassis already budgeted for the year. The department said supply‑chain delays with prior vendors had caused a backlog, the chassis will arrive and be stored until up‑fitting can occur (up‑fitting capacity limits mean only about 10 vehicles can be up‑fitted this year), and older tandem trucks will be surplused at auction when replaced.

Combining these items, the presenter said the net increase to the roads fund from the proposed adjustments is $1,851,565. Committee members asked for clarifications about how MDOT construction contracts reflect only construction cost versus total project costs (which include preliminary engineering, right of way and construction engineering), the structure and oversight of the retiree health trust, where new trucks will be stored and up‑fitted, and the plan to continue a 10‑year vehicle replacement cycle going forward. The committee recorded support for the budget amendment and related motions; the motions were forwarded to the full board with committee approval.

Why it matters: the packet of contracts, cost‑shares and the budget amendment together reallocate legacy reserves and OPEB trust resources to fund immediate road projects and to address a multi‑year fleet backlog. The moves accelerate vehicle replacement and free funds for paving and bridge projects, while raising questions about trust governance and long‑term funding cadence for the capital replacement plan.

No formal amendments to statutes or ordinances were proposed at the committee; the items advance as contract approvals, cost‑share agreements and budget adjustments to be considered by the full board.