Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cape Coral council rejects construction‑manager contract for fleet facility after debt, scope concerns
Summary
Council declined to approve Resolution 7‑26, a construction‑manager‑at‑risk contract for the city’s fleet maintenance project, after members said they lacked a full financing presentation and clarity on whether the property‑management facility was included; motion failed 3–5.
The Cape Coral City Council on May 20 voted down Resolution 7‑26, which would have authorized a construction‑manager‑at‑risk contract connected to a fleet maintenance facility project, after an extended debate about scope, schedule and the decision to use debt financing.
The motion to approve the resolution — which staff said was originally written to cover both a fleet maintenance building and an adjacent property‑management facility — failed on a roll call vote, three in favor and five opposed.
John Stark, the city’s facility projects manager, told council the city’s Request for Proposals covered both facilities but that the award under consideration was “specifically for the fleet facility only.” He said the selected construction manager would speed the bidding process and provide preconstruction services. “The RFP that we put out there for the C‑MAR was for both the fleet facility as well as the property‑management facility,” Stark said, adding the current award is limited to the fleet building.
Several councilmembers said that explanation was not sufficient. “I’d like us to look at the debt before we piecemeal this thing together,” Councilmember Long said, arguing the council should see the full funding picture, including debt service projections and alternatives to financing. Long said he would vote no without a separate, detailed presentation on financing and the project’s total cost.
Council members also questioned a published schedule of 260 calendar days for construction and whether the project budget had been updated. Staff replied that plans were at 90% and that a later guaranteed maximum price would return to council. After the roll call, the city manager agreed to put the item on next week’s committee agenda for further discussion.
Outcome: Motion failed (3–5). The council directed staff to provide additional briefings and to return the item to committee for a fuller fiscal presentation before another vote.
