Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Suamico approves $1.18M road‑reconstruction contract amid debate over extending water service
Summary
The Suamico Village Board voted 7–0 to award contract S‑2601 (2026 roadway reconstruction) to MCC Incorporated; trustees debated whether to bundle water‑service work now (which would require rebidding and likely special assessments) and asked the comprehensive plan/public‑works committee to map where water should be extended.
The Suamico Village Board voted unanimously to award contract S‑2601 to MCC Incorporated for the 2026 roadway reconstruction project, a bid the administrator said was within the village budget. The motion carried on a 7–0 roll call.
Administrator Kaker told the board two bids were received and that the lowest bid fell within the allocated funding. He also explained that the Local Road Improvement Program (LRIP) is a state program that provides money to Brown County, which allocates funds to municipalities using a formula tied to population and total road mileage. That LRIP funding and the village's road reconstruction fund were cited as sources for this award.
Several trustees urged the board to consider whether water mains should be installed at the same time as road work on certain streets (examples included Maple Grove, Worthington Court and Wellington). Staff and trustees warned that adding water now would likely require rebidding the contract, delay the work into a later season, and could trigger special assessments against property owners. Public‑works staff noted the pacer road‑rating documentation dated Sept. 16, 2025 guided selection and that Part A of the project represents about 26% of the contract schedule.
Trustees asked the comprehensive plan and public‑works committees to identify which streets are the highest priority for future water and sewer extension so residents would have advance notice about possible assessments. Board members also noted the village has limited budget flexibility for enterprise funds and that major infrastructure expansion often depends on targeted outside funding (trustees discussed congressional appropriations as an example of a one‑time funding source that can be used for large projects).
The contract timeline given in the meeting was that work would likely start in June with typical completion by late summer, though the administrator did not provide a firm completion date. The board approved the award by roll call and did not amend the contract at the meeting.
