Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Emergency Supplies Container topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nehalem council backs purchase of 40‑foot emergency supplies container
Summary
The Nehalem City Council reached consensus to buy a new 40‑foot storage container for emergency supplies, estimated at $4,800 including delivery; staff will return with site‑preparation cost estimates and security plans before purchase.
Get email alerts on the Emergency Supplies Container topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Nehalem City Council agreed Jan. 13 to purchase a new 40‑foot storage container to hold the city’s emergency preparedness supplies, Mayor Phil Chick said. City Manager Lori Longfellow told the Council the city has about $12,000 allocated for emergency preparedness this fiscal year and recommended buying a new container rather than an older used unit.
Councilor Dave Cram said a larger container with double‑door access would help with inventory rotation and recommended adding solar motion‑sensor lighting for security. Public Works Director Brian Moore said the previously selected park site may be too far back for good visibility, that blackberries must be cleared, and that access might require gravel or a temporary road; for a foundation he suggested a rock base with 6x6 beams or concrete blocks. Kate Skaggs offered a planning guide developed by the Hatfield Marine Center and volunteered to share the link with staff.
Mayor Chick said the Council consensus was to purchase the 40‑foot container at an estimated cost of $4,800 including delivery. He directed staff to prepare cost estimates for site preparation and to research how other communities secure and position similar containers; the goal is to complete the purchase before the end of the budget year so future budgets can focus on stocking the container. City Manager Longfellow said staff will return to Council with refined site and cost information before executing any contract.
The Council’s action on the container was recorded as a consensus rather than a formal vote; no ordinance or appropriation change was adopted at the meeting.
