Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Sewer topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

McMinnville committee approves $839,001.76 CDBG sewer-rehabilitation bid, contingent on state concurrence

2757886 · January 24, 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

The McMinnville Water and Wastewater Committee voted to approve the low bid for contract 124-2023 for sewer rehabilitation in several residential streets, with the award contingent on concurrence from the Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development.

The McMinnville Water and Wastewater Committee voted to approve the total bid award for contract 124-2023, CDBG Sewer Rehabilitation, to Portland Utilities Construction LLC for $839,001.76, contingent on concurrence from the Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development.

Committee Chair called the meeting to order at 6:15 and introduced the bid award. A staff member summarized the funding: “And this has a $630,000 grant, $70,000 match,” and said the project covers sewer rehabilitation on Lynn, Walnut, Hill and Locust streets. The staff member also said the city would absorb any amount above the $630,000 grant.

Committee Chair moved to approve the low bid; another committee member seconded the motion. With no further discussion, the committee voted and Committee Chair announced, “Hearing none, motion carries.” The award is contingent on concurrence from the Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development, as noted in the motion.

The committee discussion was brief and procedural. Staff said they had worked with Portland Utilities Construction LLC to try to lower the price as they had on a prior project, and emphasized the need to approve the low bid to proceed. No amendments or conditions beyond the state concurrence were proposed during the meeting.

Implementation details such as a start date, contract execution timeline, and which city department will administer the work were not specified during the committee meeting.