Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Grants And Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners authorize GLO mitigation grant application, set $600,000 engineering cap after contract errors and fee debate
Summary
The court approved submitting a GLO mitigation grant application for a proposed shelter project and authorized engineering and grant‑administration contracts, setting an engineer fee cap of $600,000 after finding page errors and an incorrect 25% figure in the draft contract; grant admin fee will be 8%.
San Jacinto County commissioners voted to authorize the submission of a Community Development Block Grant Mitigation (CDBG‑MIT) application to the Texas General Land Office (GLO) for a proposed shelter project and to advance procurement of professional services. The court also approved an engineering contract subject to an engineering fee cap determined by the court at no more than $600,000 and approved a grant‑administration contract at an 8% administration fee.
Staff explained the grant application is being prepared for the Local Communities Program and that the county had considered two project concepts (a shelter building and, earlier in workshops, a communications tower). Commissioners emphasized they need not accept the full $5 million if awarded and discussed possible project sizing based on need, site constraints and deed restrictions on parcels under consideration.
During contract review, commissioners and staff discovered drafting errors and inconsistent page numbering in the proposed engineering agreement and noted a fee cap mistakenly typed into the draft at roughly 25% — higher than the GLO’s usual cap. The judge and other commissioners pressed staff and the engineer on acceptable percentages. After discussion, the court voted to approve a negotiated engineer fee cap equivalent to approximately 12% of construction (represented as a not‑to‑exceed engineering fee of $600,000 in the contract) and directed staff to have the contractor correct the draft (page numbering and fee language) before final signature. The court’s motion to approve that cap passed unanimously.
Separately, the court approved a grant‑administration contract with a fee not to exceed 8% of any award up to $24 million (6% above that threshold). Staff noted typical grant work for a building project will include environmental review, labor‑standards compliance and monitoring; commissioners asked that procurement documents, milestones and the proposed fee structure be clarified in the revised contract materials.
The court recorded that the application is due imminently but is not required to be filed before contract corrections are completed; staff said they would submit the application as permitted and return corrected contract pages for the court’s signature. Commissioners asked for clear, corrected contract language, accurate page numbering and a final cost‑breakdown to be presented at the next meeting.
