Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the County Procurement topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Paulding County staff presented $1.99M fire-truck request and multiple utility and road-related contracts

Paulding County Board of Commissioners · July 15, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

County staff asked the board to approve a near-$2 million purchase of two custom pumper trucks and presented contract requests for utility-relocation design ($97,000), annual AMI support ($67,600), a Raftelis financial-model update ($56,285), GDOT lighting agreements for two roundabouts, and a $61,000 installation contract for 700 ft of county-supplied pipe.

County staff used the meeting to present several procurement and infrastructure items that would influence near-term capital and utility work in Paulding County.

Chief Brubaker asked the board to authorize purchase of two heavy-duty custom pumper apparatuses at a projected budget of $1,994,257.74 for fiscal year 2027, to be funded from the fire tax or SPLOST as the board determines. Chief Brubaker said the two units (numbers 649 and 616) are already in production and that ordering now would avoid further manufacturer price increases and long lead times; he described custom pumpers as purpose-built for the fire service and said they typically provide 12–15 frontline years of service.

Staff requested a contract not to exceed $97,000 with Kimberly Horn and Associates for water and sewer utility relocation design to align with the New Hope Corridor transportation project; the requested amount was split into $49,500 for preliminary field-review design and $47,500 for final field-plan review, with funding from the water and sewer renewal and extension fund. Ray Wooten said using the same designer for transportation and utility relocation work should keep the overall schedule aligned.

The board also heard a request to approve a KISS annual service and support agreement with Kendall Supply Company for AMI/advanced metering infrastructure analytics and support in the amount of $67,600 (renewal and extension fund). Miss Pollard presented a separate request for Raftelis to update the water and sewer financial model and produce a five-year rate plan (contract not to exceed $56,285); Pollard said Raftelis performed the county's 2020 model and can benchmark rates nationally.

Miss Parrish described two Georgia Department of Transportation intersection-improvement projects and submitted local government lighting project agreements (LGLPAs) for county review. For a roundabout at SR 61 and Harmony Grove Church Road (PI 001964) and a roundabout at SR 6 Business/Macklin Road/Butler Industrial Drive (PI 0019896), GDOT will provide materials and installation; the county would be asked to energize and assume operation and maintenance costs for the lighting systems after installation. Parrish said the SR 61 project has a tentative GDOT let date in 2029 and the SR 6 Business project was conceptual with a late-2027/early-2028 tentative schedule.

Staff also requested approval to install 700 feet of county-supplied 16-inch transmission main pipe and ancillary materials by Edson Underground LLC for $61,000, with the county supplying the pipe, casing and fittings from inventory (materials valued at $92,048). Staff said Wilson Construction Management will mobilize and that the added scope would not affect project schedule.

The transcript shows these items were presented for board approval, but the record in the provided transcript does not include recorded votes on most of the listed procurement items. The only recorded motion in the excerpt was a motion to adjourn, taken at the meeting's close by voice vote; a formal decision on the procurement items was not captured in the transcript.

What happens next: Each item was presented with a recommended funding source or contract cap and was described as "requested" or "not to exceed." The transcript does not show final board action on the procurement items in the captured portion; staff requested approvals and the board will need to record formal votes in subsequent minutes if approvals are granted.