San Leandro council approves $360,000 design contract for trash‑capture project with up to 25% contingency after heated debate

The San Leandro City Council on Monday authorized a $360,000 contract for design services to install large trash‑capture devices in a flood‑control channel and approved allowing contract change orders up to 10% per change order and 25% in the aggregate (up to $90,000).

The action, taken after more than an hour of questioning about contingency practices, passed 5–2, with Council members Bolt and Simon voting no.

“The original contract is for $360,000,” Jason Amai, San Leandro’s city engineer, told the council. “However, we are authorizing the city manager and staff to negotiate and approve contract change orders up to an additional … $90,000. Each individual change order can be a maximum of 10% or $36,000.”

Council members repeatedly pressed staff about the size and use of contingency authority for change orders. Council member Viveros Walton said she was “concerned around approving contracts with a large percentage of change orders,” and asked for clearer limits. Council member Bolt argued the aggregate contingency meant subcontractors on small scopes could effectively receive large increases; staff clarified the 10% cap applies to any single change order and the aggregate cap stops further change orders once the 25% limit is reached.

City staff said the project is a design contract, not a construction contract, and that the design work must account for coordination with Caltrans and the Alameda County Flood Control District—agencies whose requirements can emerge during design. City Manager Cameron emphasized that pre‑authorizing change orders can speed projects by avoiding repeated trips back to council for minor, time‑sensitive adjustments.

A staff presentation and council discussion said the devices will be installed in a visible flood control channel and will require coordination with Caltrans and the Flood Control District; the design consultant will perform engineering and permit work. Council members asked staff to tighten internal review when change orders are requested.

The council vote followed the council’s removal of the item from the consent calendar for discussion. The motion, as approved, authorizes award of the design contract and pre‑approval for change orders within the stated percentage limits.

Council members and staff said they expect the project to continue through design and permitting; any construction contract would return to council for approval.

Ending: Council members asked staff to return with clearer change‑order controls and reporting as the project progresses.