Council rejects high bids for labor-exchange building and directs lower-cost redesign, explores triangle parcel alternative

Councilors moved to reject the high construction bids for a proposed Malibu Community Labor Exchange facility and directed staff to return with lower-cost options.

Staff presented seven bid results and identified the lowest responsive bid at approximately $1.51 million for construction, with a total project estimate near $1.98 million once design and contingencies were included. Staff told the council the project currently uses a mix of a community development block grant (CDBG) allocation (~$140,482) and a previously approved general-fund allocation; if the city cancels the project this fiscal year it may need to return used CDBG funds unless an extension is negotiated with the grant manager.

A local contractor who spoke during public comment urged value engineering and said the cost seemed high for the proposed scope: “we're talking about a 700 square foot box with a couple of doors and a toilet,” the contractor said, and asked staff to pursue cost reductions and possible schedule extensions for the CDBG award. Council members voiced concern about spending more than a modest additional general-fund amount on the project and asked staff to examine cheaper prefab or repurposed modular options. Several council members asked staff to evaluate whether a smaller, lower-cost solution could be delivered on the site or whether temporary facilities or the Triangle parcel might be better short-term options.

Council direction and limits: The council voted to reject the current bids and asked staff to redesign and re-bid lower-cost alternatives, with a cap on new general-fund exposure of $250,000 beyond already-allocated funds; staff also was directed to explore using the Triangle parcel as an alternate location or temporary parking/structure solution. Staff said it will also pursue a possible CDBG extension and report back with value-engineered alternatives, precise cost estimates and any funding gaps.

Why it matters: The Labor Exchange has served as a place for local labor matching and services; council members said they want to preserve the function but not at the cost of a large capital commitment when less expensive modular or temporary options may suffice. Council emphasized that any return to the agenda must include a realistic, lower-cost option and transparent funding sources before any award of construction funds.

Next steps: Staff will pursue value-engineering, seek a CDBG timing extension if possible, and return with specific lower-cost alternatives, revised budgets and an evaluation of the Triangle parcel as an alternate location.