Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Water topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Engineer reports low TMF grant bid; residents question exclusive use of Spicer engineering
Summary
Spicer gave a two-month update, reporting a low bid of about $131,564 for a TMF lead service-line project and urging grant-scoped additional work; public commenters questioned why Spicer repeatedly handles the village's engineering work and cited engineering fees they said total roughly $314,000 annually
Austin Alexander Spicer, an engineering consultant, reported to the Village of Saint Charles council that bids for a recent TMF (Targeted Municipal Funding) lead service-line removal project opened with a low bid around $131,564 from a company identified in the bid opening.
Spicer said the low bid allows the village to consider adding additional scope within the grant dollar limits so the village does not return unspent grant funds. He described contractor techniques intended to limit driveway disruption, saying, “they literally have these trucks that come in and they just do a puck,” and that work on a given service could take “5, 10, 15 minutes.” Spicer said the contractor is expected to be on site for about seven to eight weeks to complete the grant-funded work.
Residents during public comment pressed council members about the village's repeated use of Spicer for engineering and asked whether the village solicits other engineering firms. One commenter said the village has paid Spicer engineering roughly $26,249.33 per month for six months, which the speaker extrapolated to approximately $314,000 over a year, and asked why the village does not competitively bid that work more often. Council and staff replied that Spicer has submitted winning bids on some items and lost on others; staff also said many of the recent project dollars are grant-funded rather than paid from village taxes.
Why it matters: The TMF project will replace or test for lead service lines and is grant-funded; contractor selection and engineering oversight determine project costs, timing and how disruptions to residents are managed. The public questioned procurement practices and sought documentation of competitive bidding and fees paid for engineering.
Spicer also noted other pending projects: a Safe Routes to School resubmission that triggered a State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) tribal review on potential archaeological concerns and an Ithaca Road water main extension estimated at about $150,000 to serve five houses. Staff said the Ithaca Road extension could be funded by petitioning property owners and spreading costs over 15 years if neighbors agree.
Ending Council accepted Spicer's updates. Residents asked staff to provide clearer documentation of bid solicitations and engineering expenditures; council said staff would continue to solicit grants and present details at future meetings.
