Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council discusses engineering capacity, project budgets and a vacuum-truck question for storm drains
Summary
Councilors reviewed general engineering budget assumptions, discussed in-house engineering work (Wes) versus contract use, questioned whether to buy an $800,000 vacuum truck or continue contracting for culvert cleaning, and considered whether project-earmarked pass-throughs reduce flexibility elsewhere in the budget.
Councilors and staff reviewed engineering and capital project funding lines and the relationship between project-specific pass-throughs and the city's general budgeting.
Staff and council praised in-house engineer Wes for reducing third-party engineering costs and noted prior budgets had carried general engineering line items tied to Horrock's historical numbers. The draft includes a $75,000 "general engineering" budget (city projects not billed to developers), though councilors noted the actual spend-to-date was lower (about $40,000 last year). Members suggested moving the draft to a lower baseline (for example $50,000) while retaining flexibility for project demands.
Council also discussed storm-drain and culvert-cleaning services. The draft contains a substantial recurring contract-services line for culvert cleaning; at the same time staff proposed budgeting for a new vacuum truck (figures around $700,000 to $800,000 were discussed). Councilors asked whether owning an expensive vacuum truck duplicates the current trailers and whether the city can continue renting or contracting cleaning work at lower cost. Staff said the decision hinges on utilization hours and long-term program needs: if the city can justify enough in-house hours, purchase may be warranted; if not, continued contracting is more economical.
Members also reviewed development-review pass-throughs (engineering review fees and similar revenues and expenses). Staff explained that pass-through accounts are ear-marked: projected developer revenue is matched to review and reimbursable engineering expenses so estimates must be aligned to expected development activity.
Ending: Staff will return with a recommended general-engineering budget based on recent experience, scenarios comparing continued contracting versus purchasing a vacuum truck (costs, rental break-even), and clearer alignment of pass-through projections to expected development receipts.
