Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Pool topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ridgecrest council awards $19.4 million contract for Sergeant John Penny Pool complex; restores most alternates
Summary
Ridgecrest City Council voted 4–1 (one absent) to award a construction contract to AMG and Associates to build the Sergeant John Penny Pool Memorial Pool Complex, approving a $19.122 million contract and authorizing up to $19.4 million with contingency while removing only the Hawk pedestrian signal pending grant pursuit.
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Pool topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ridgecrest City Council voted to award a construction contract for the Sergeant John Penny Pool Memorial Pool Complex to AMG and Associates after a lengthy public discussion and staff presentation.
Staff reported that AMG and Associates was the lowest of three bidders and recommended awarding the base contract with selected alternates removed to bring the project within the Measure P budget. The contract package presented to council listed a base/alternate total of roughly $19.12 million with a construction contingency that could raise the maximum approved commitment to about $19.4 million.
Council and staff walked through the alternates removed from the award to meet the budget: a Hawk pedestrian crosswalk (staff said this alternate could be pursued through a highway safety grant), an outdoor area adjacent to the senior center, a covered trellis walkway on the entry, and some interior tile work. Staff said the alternates not chosen in the initial award could be added back before award or during the contract if the council so directed.
Public speakers voiced both strong support and concern. Several residents urged the council to "do it right" and restore design elements between the pool and the senior center to avoid leaving a blighted area; others questioned the growth in estimated cost from earlier public numbers and asked for clarity on long‑term operations and staffing costs. City staff and the finance director said funding for the project is available from Measure P proceeds, an existing bond and reserves, and that the budgeted contingency was reasonable given the site (staff said the site is clean ground and predictable compared with demolition projects).
On the record motion, the council directed staff to add back the outdoor area, the trellised walkway and selected interior work but to omit the Hawk pedestrian signal while pursuing a HSIP grant for that crossing. The council recorded a roll call vote with Council Members Blades, Rajaratnam, Hayman and Gorman voting yes; Council Member Endicott was absent. The motion carried 4–0 (1 absent). The contract award and accompanying resolution will be revised to reflect the alternates the council approved and to show the Measure P and bond/reserve funding plan.
Staff estimated construction could begin with a groundbreaking by December (following award and scheduling) and that the contract term is roughly 18 months, with an optimistic opening in summer 2027. City staff said there is roughly $20 million available for the project in Measure P funds, bond proceeds and reserves; restoring the chosen alternates would increase the contract by about $277,000 and staff said those amounts can be accommodated without drawing on the general fund if no additional items are added.
The council directed staff to return revised contract documents and an updated resolution reflecting the council’s selections at the time the contract is executed. The council did not set a new public hearing on the award; the approval will be memorialized in the contract and amended resolution.

