Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Senior Center Boiler Replacement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Finance and Taxation Committee approves $45,005.94 contract to replace senior center boilers
Summary
The Finance and Taxation Committee approved a $45,005.94 Homeland Heating contract to replace aging boilers at the senior center after debate over a like‑for‑like installation versus a reconfigured two‑boiler system; the vote was carried by voice and roll call.
The Finance and Taxation Committee voted to approve a $45,005.94 contract with Homeland Heating to replace the boilers that heat the city’s senior center.
A committee member introduced the item and said the building is heated by a hot‑water system fed by five boilers (four currently operating) and that one unit was taken out of service after a basement flooding incident. “It’s basically gonna replace what’s there with the modern version of what we’ve had,” the committee member said, describing Homeland’s like‑for‑like proposal as an updated version of the existing equipment.
The committee member said they had obtained two competing bids: Homeland’s like‑for‑like quote for $45,005.94 and a different proposal from Mallard Plumbing (the transcript also references the name as Mahler/Mueller in places) that would have used a two‑boiler configuration and required additional plumbing work. The committee member said the alternate system might cost more once plumbing changes were included and that the apparent lifespan of the alternative was not longer than the existing equipment, which supported recommending the like‑for‑like option.
Chair (name not specified) asked whether the contractor could install two boilers instead of replacing four. The committee member replied that while switching to a two‑boiler system was possible, it would involve different equipment, new plumbing configuration and likely more labor, and could end up costing more overall.
The chair moved to approve the Homeland Heating proposal; the motion was seconded. The clerk called the roll. Alders Toman, Schaefer and McGuire each responded “aye” during the roll call; the chair also voiced “aye.” The chair announced the motion carried.
After the vote there was no further substantive business; the chair moved to adjourn, the motion was seconded and the committee adjourned by voice vote.
The committee did not specify a project start date or contract award procedure during the discussion; any next procedural steps were not stated on the record.
