Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Graham Community Building topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
EDTA votes to recommend $250,000 in Fund 68 money for Graham Community Building upgrades, contingent on city review
Summary
Trustees recommended using approximately $250,000 from Fund 68 to cover unplanned electrical, flooring and accessibility work at the Graham Community Building, but amended the recommendation so city council must review Scissor Tail's bid tabulations before funds are released.
EDTA trustees voted to forward a recommendation to city council to use Fund 68 to cover additional phase 1 work at the Graham Community Building, including replacing a sagging wood floor with a concrete slab, upgrading electrical service and adding accessibility improvements.
The recommendation—moved and seconded during the meeting—was amended so the board’s approval is contingent on the city council’s review and approval of Scissor Tail Construction’s bid tabulations and recommendations. Chair (S1) said the amendment was intended to ensure public transparency because the building is city-owned and the funds originate from bond accounts.
Why it matters: contractors discovered site conditions not visible before demolition. The work discussed included: replacing the wooden floor with a concrete slab (estimated about $50,000 for the floor and finish), electrical upgrades that trustees and contractors estimated could run around $100,000–$150,000 to sectionalize and replace breaker panels, and additional banquet-hall and fixture improvements (roughly $69,000). Trustees discussed adding a contingency (roughly $31,000) for HVAC capacity, door work and other unforeseen items, which brought the EDTA request toward a total near $250,000.
Trustees and project managers described the construction-manager-at-risk (CMR) role Scissor Tail performed: Scissor Tail compiled bid packages and managed the bidding process. Several trustees urged that the city council receive and confirm the bid tabulations because the city owns the facility and the funding is public. Committee member (S4) said, “I think it needs to be approved by the city council because it’s city money, city building, and have them approve those bids too.”
Bridget (Main Street director, S6), who presented the design pages and bid summaries, told trustees Scissor Tail had completed a bid process and recommended contractors. She described alternatives considered by the project manager and advised that some work originally planned for later phases would need to be done now to enable necessary plumbing and ADA improvements.
The board voted in favor of forwarding the recommendation with the stated contingency. The clerk recorded affirmative responses. The recommendation will now go to the city council for review before any Fund 68 transfers are finalized.
Next steps: the EDTA will send the recommendation and supporting bid documentation to city council for review and possible approval of the construction contract and release of funds.
