Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Capital Improvement Program topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Milpitas staff present $245 million five-year CIP; council warned of $579-million funding gap

2264700 · February 12, 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

City staff presented a proposed 2026'30 five-year Capital Improvement Program totaling about $245 million and recommended funding 37 projects in FY 2025-26; staff highlighted a multi-year funding shortfall and several large projects that will require grants or bonds.

At a Feb. 11 study session, Milpitas public works and engineering staff presented the proposed five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for 2026'30 and a recommended $38.7 million funding plan for fiscal year 2025-26.

Staff described the CIP as a five-year planning tool that lists projects for streets, parks, water, sewer and storm drain systems. Presenters said the draft CIP includes roughly 148 projects with a combined estimated cost of $245 million (staff later summarized the five-year plan as 149 projects totaling the same amount). Staff proposed funding 37 projects in the first year, with a first-year budget of approximately $38.7 million.

Public Works Director Christian Dorenzo and City Engineer Michael Severa highlighted major cost drivers and funding challenges. Staff identified an estimated funding gap across the five-year plan of roughly $57 million to $60 million, with a particular concentration in fiscal year 2027-28. Staff flagged several large projects that contribute to the gap:

- Replacement of an aging force main (Force Main A), built in 1974, estimated at about $20 million and planned for design and replacement in the 2026-27 period. - A pedestrian overcrossing project (Montague pedestrian overcrossing, adjacent to Penitencia Creek) estimated at about $21 million; design is complete but construction funding is lacking. Staff said the project was submitted for competitive federal grants (RAISE and related programs) but was not selected. - Cardozo Park softball-field improvements, estimated at roughly $7 million; staff has finished feasibility work and will present findings to council in spring, but construction funding remains unfunded. - Community Center roof replacements and Sandalwood Park renovations (estimated $4 million and $2.2 million, respectively) also contribute to the 2027-28 funding shortfall.

Staff described existing and new funding sources: federal and state grants (SS4A, CTC grants, OBAG/MTC, RAISE), gas-tax revenue and local measures (Measure F references in questions from council), parking-impact fees allocated to park improvements, sewer and water enterprise funds and possible bond financing. Staff said the city expects approximately $165 million in projected available funding over five years and anticipates receiving about $22.9 million in combined grant and bond revenue, leaving a large funding gap.

Other projects and program notes discussed at the meeting:

- Streets: staff presented a multi-year resurfacing plan and described a strategic pause on part of the Great Mall Parkway resurfacing to pursue a competitive state grant; staff said about $2 million in in-hand funds would be used this summer for a tape-and-slurry preventive maintenance project while pursuing grant funding for larger work. - Parks: ARPA-funded park improvements (about $4.4 million approved last year) and a $1.5 million bleacher replacement at the Sports Center were highlighted. Staff said the Metro/Tango Park planning and Scenic Park playground design are moving toward construction phases in 2026-27. - Safe Streets/SS4A grant: the city received $2.9 million in SS4A grant funds with a local match requirement of $725,000 for bike and pedestrian safety improvements; staff is finalizing the funding agreement to begin design in 2026. - Library: council previously approved renaming the library; staff recommended a $17,000 monument sign and two bronze plaques (alternative sign replacement options would cost much more), and staff said the monument sign option is within the city manager's authority to proceed. - Storm drain and street deformation: staff described a deformation on Technology Drive caused by soil instability and deteriorated storm drain/sewer pipes; staff recommended about $4.6 million for design and repair. - Public safety and fleet: the fire department requested an urban search-and-rescue replacement vehicle (staff proposed using equipment-replacement funds, estimated about $1.85 million). Fire staff said the current vehicle was purchased in 1999 and is functionally past life expectancy; the department said replacing and consolidating vehicles could produce long-term operational savings. - Wastewater facility contribution: the city will continue to budget its proportionate share of work at the San Jose wastewater facility; staff cautioned that the city's share reflects San Jose's multi-year CIP for the plant. - Technology: staff proposed an initial phase to replace 235 of about 750 city computers and to modernize audiovisual systems; staff noted a multi-year replacement cycle would be formalized. - Pickleball and parks feedback: staff confirmed Hall Park courts were resurfaced in November and said staff will return with a final recommendation in early spring; staff anticipates using $100,000 from the park fund toward the final recommendation pending council approval.

Staff presented a calendar: March outreach to Parks & Recreation and Planning commissions, and an April 15 public hearing and possible adoption of the five-year CIP. Council members asked staff to return with certain clarifications, including: a list of consultant contracts and expenditures for 2024, details on MyMilpitas service-request statistics, a briefing on grant opportunities and grant-writing resources, a report on a proposed solar street-light pilot (Hammond Way), and a cost-benefit analysis for some equipment-replacement items (for example, the urban search-and-rescue vehicle consolidation proposal).

No CIP adoption vote occurred on Feb. 11; the meeting functioned as a study session to gather council feedback and direct follow-up work.