Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sulphur council approves commitment of local match and hires Myers & Associates for Phase 2 of water project
Summary
The Sulphur City Council voted to commit local matching funds for a state water-sector grant and authorized Mayor Danahe to sign a professional services agreement with Myers and Associates for Phase 2 of the FY26–27 system improvements project after public comments urged caution about timelines and finances.
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Sulphur City Council on Nov. 13 approved a resolution committing the city to cover costs above state water-sector program funds — including a minimum 41% local match — for the Phase Two FY26–27 water-system improvements project, and authorized Mayor Danahe to enter a professional services agreement with Myers and Associates to pursue Phase 2 work.
Resident Wendy Wingate told the council she was not opposed to funding but urged caution, saying a collaborative agreement from 2022 "was not actually approved by the council" and that work under Phase 1 missed its October 2024 completion date. "We're over a year later, and we are still only 10% complete on a project of phase one," Wingate said, adding that she had not confirmed whether the city had been reimbursed for Phase 1 work and warning the city could be "leaving money on the table."
Resident Danny DePita said he prepared multiple financial analyses and concluded the project offers a positive return on investment. "If this were my money, I would jump on it in a minute, in a heartbeat," DePita said, urging the council to approve the plan as a future revenue source for the city. Another commenter, identified as Mr. Atherton in submitted remarks, supported receiving sewer waste from West Cal haulers to generate an estimated $2 million per year in revenue.
Kenneth Bellinger clarified a key contingency for the professional services agreement: he said the city's commitment to Myers and Associates is conditional on the state awarding the grant and that, if denied, the city would not be "on the hook" for the contract. The item as read to the council named Mayor Danahe as authorized to enter the contract.
Council members proceeded to a roll-call vote on the resolution to provide local matching funds (Resolution 5225). One council member stated they had concerns about the prior ratification process and intended to vote no; the clerk recorded other 'Yes' responses and the chair announced the motion carried. The council then moved on to consider and approve the professional services agreement authorizing the mayor to execute a contract with Myers and Associates; a second roll-call produced recorded 'Yes' responses and the chair announced the motion carried.
The meeting record shows the resolution text as read: authorization for the city to "cover all costs over state water sector programs funds including a minimum of 41% of the total project cost" for Phase Two, FY26–27 System Improvements (transcript reference: "Resolution 5225"). The professional services item was read as "resolution authorizing Mayor Danahe to enter into a professional service agreement with Meyer and Associates incorporated for water sector program Phase Two, FY 2627 system improvements project" (transcript notation: "resolution 53 to 25"). The attached contract, as described by a public commenter, did not include start or completion dates in the version provided to the council.
Action taken: Council approved the funding commitment and authorized the mayor to sign the service agreement with Myers and Associates. The clerk recorded the motions and announced both motions carried; one member publicly stated opposition to the ratification approach for the earlier agreement. The council did not provide on-the-record details in the meeting transcript about whether Phase 1 reimbursements have been received; a public commenter asked staff to clarify that at a later date.
The special session adjourned after the two votes. The council did not set a specific follow-up date in the transcript; public commenters requested greater transparency on timeline, reimbursement status and the contract terms that were attached to the agenda.

