Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews multiple water-project contract amendments as member questions city shortfall
Summary
Council members reviewed three contract amendments for irrigation and water-treatment projects totaling design and inspection requests; Director Sarah said the changes are within project budgets while one council member questioned approving additional spending amid a reported $6 million shortfall.
City staff presented three professional-services amendments tied to ongoing water infrastructure work and described the projects' status and justifications.
Director Sarah asked the council to approve Amendment No. 4 with RH2 Engineering for design and construction-administration support on the Process Water Reuse Facility Phase 4 irrigation upgrades for approximately $54,303. She said the amendment assists staff with inspection and construction-administration while the contractor continues work on site.
Council Member Pales questioned the timing of amendments given a reported $6 million shortfall and asked whether the city should 'scale back' rather than approve additional spending. "I had a hard time approving these things when if we're not getting any better with the deficit and this not really going to help us," he said.
Director Sarah responded that the amendments are within each project's budget and that pausing inspection support while a contractor works poses risk; she said timing is critical because the work is already underway.
Staff also presented an amendment to Jacobs Engineering for design and piloting work tied to the Butterfield water treatment improvements (approximately $2 million in design scope as part of a $15 million project) and a separate RH2 amendment (~$74,890) to investigate corrosion signs in newly installed Process Water Reuse Facility infrastructure; Sarah noted some corrosion-related costs might be reimbursable by the operator, Burnham, depending on findings.
Council did not take formal votes during the workshop; several members asked for more fiscal context before final approvals and staff said they expect to return as projects move to final phases.
