Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Park Project Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee weighs donor funds and procurement steps to close small shortfall for Mackle Park phase 2
Summary
Staff reported a roughly $268 shortfall to complete phase 2 at Mackle Park and identified an $8,000 pool of funds held through the Collier Community Foundation; members discussed donor designation, procurement rules and whether to rebid or hold an August meeting to authorize spending.
Staff told the beautification advisory committee that phase 2 work at Mackle Park is nearly funded but still short about $268. The staff member said the project bid totaled $7,075.87 while the committee had $6,807.29 remaining from prior funds, and asked the committee to signal whether staff should pursue a donor‑holding account identified by the grants administrator to cover the gap.
"I would like to change that request to them now for the full amount of the $7,075.87," the staff member said, asking for members' general assent to pursue the identified funds. Committee members pushed back on classification and use: some described the money as donor‑directed—"Deb Henry money," as one speaker put it—meaning the funds were given by individuals for tree plantings in particular places and might not be fungible for other beautification uses.
Committee members also noted procurement constraints: staff said shifting scope or reassigning that work could require new competitive bids under the city's purchasing rules. The staff member said she would ask the vendor whether the work could be done for the lower amount and, if not, whether a rebid would be necessary. Members emphasized the planting window runs through Sept. 30, so staff should move quickly if the vendor will accept the lower amount; otherwise the committee agreed to schedule an August meeting to take a formal vote.
The committee did not take a final vote during the workshop. The staff member committed to clarifying whether the funds are donor‑restricted or grant funds, whether the vendor will accept a revised scope/price, and whether procurement rules require rebidding. The committee asked staff to circulate an update by email and, only if necessary, to call an August meeting for a formal decision.
