Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Engineering Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee recommends approval of engineering contract amendment for two pond-dredging projects
Summary
Members recommended approval of Amendment No. 2 to an engineering services contract (referenced in the meeting as Rainmaker/Raymaker and Associates) to provide design and construction administration for Spring Hill Pond and Middleton Hills Southeast Pond dredging; the amendment was added to the packet that afternoon and some members said they were not notified.
The committee recommended approval of Amendment No. 2 to an engineering services contract to provide design engineering, construction administration and oversight for dredging at Spring Hill Pond and Middleton Hills Southeast Pond. The firm named in the discussion appears in the transcript with inconsistent spellings (Raymaker and Rainmaker and Associates); committee remarks recorded both forms when discussing the amendment.
Speaker 3 asked for clarity about the contractor and the reference to "201-107A," noting the packet did not explicitly say the amendment was for Spring Hill Pond dredging. Speaker 2 clarified that the amendment is with Raymaker/Rainmaker and Associates and that the firm will handle dredging-related design and construction oversight for both projects. "So the amendment to the agreement is with, Raymaker and Associates ... they will be kind of doing construction administration and oversight for the dredging of both projects," the speaker said.
Speaker 3 also noted the amendment was added to the packet that afternoon and that they had not received prior notification. The motion to recommend council approve the amendment was made by Speaker 3 and seconded by Speaker 1; the committee approved the recommendation by voice vote.
The agenda reference for the work includes a contract identifier appearing in the discussion as "20 one-107A," tied in the transcript to Spring Hill Pond dredging, though the packet wording was not explicit on that point. The committee directed staff to proceed with the recommendation to the full council.
