City staff recommends CMGC delivery for new digester at Bend Water Reclamation Facility

City staff told a Bend subcommittee that they recommend using construction manager/general contractor (CMGC) delivery to build a fourth digester and associated hauled-waste facilities at the Bend Water Reclamation Facility, arguing the approach better manages schedule and operational complexity than other procurement methods.

The recommendation was presented by Jason (city staff project lead), who described the project as an urgent set of upgrades driven by aging equipment and an expiring hauled-waste contract. "We do recommend the use of construction manager general contractor, CMGC for short," Jason said, adding that the delivery method allows work to begin on completed design packages while other elements are still being finalized.

Why it matters: the plant is operating on decades-old equipment that staff say needs replacement and modernization. Dave (city staff) noted the plant has a 40-year-old electrical service and boilers older than 45 years, and that some control-system components have not been updated. "We're operating on equipment that's 40 years old," he said, and staff described conditions that complicate construction, including live piping and instrumentation that must remain in service during tie-ins.

Staff argued CMGC offers practical benefits for this work: earlier contractor involvement, closer collaboration with plant operators during surgical tie-ins, and the ability to negotiate prices on staged construction packages. Jason summarized the tradeoffs: "One of the biggest aspects here is schedule flexibility...and [CMGC] does offer us more involvement in that process." He also cautioned that the method provides less early price certainty and requires robust owner oversight.

Funding and compliance implications were part of the staff rationale. Jason told the subcommittee that CMGC is an allowable delivery methodology under Oregon Department of Environmental Quality programs and keeps the city eligible for Clean Water State Revolving Fund financing, whereas progressive design–build currently is not recognized by that funding source.

Timing and next steps: staff said they will present findings and a recommendation for CMGC adoption to the full city council on June 3. The schedule staff outlined calls for advertising an owner's‑representative request for proposals in summer, awarding an engineer‑of‑record contract and advertising for CMGC in the fall, and targeting overall project completion in winter 2030. Staff also said they expect to use guaranteed maximum prices (GMPs) during project delivery.

Council members asked detailed procurement and cost-control questions. A councilor asked whether the RFP process will require respondents to disclose original and final contract prices from prior projects to assess cost- estimating accuracy; staff said that is standard practice and that reference checks and explanations for any final-price deltas would be part of the evaluation.

Rate impacts: councilors pressed staff on how the multi-year project would affect utility rates. Staff replied that rate modeling will incorporate the project and that immediate rate changes were not expected; rather, impacts would be considered in upcoming rate discussions and work sessions, including a utility-rates work session referenced for June 24.

What did not happen: the subcommittee did not take a formal vote on CMGC at this meeting. A routine motion to approve the April 10, 2026 minutes passed by voice vote; staff said the CMGC recommendation will return to council on June 3 for formal action.

Looking ahead: the council meeting on June 3 is expected to include a formal staff recommendation and the opportunity for a vote. Until then, staff will refine procurement documents, advertise for an owner's representative and continue design and cost refinement.