Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facility Maintenance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves $1.206M change order for MRAC upgrades after debate over procurement and scope
Summary
The Moab City Council approved a $1,206,621 change order under the existing state‑cooperative McKinstry contract to complete mechanical, controls and lighting upgrades at the Moab Recreation & Aquatic Center. Several council members raised concerns about using a change order for a major scope rather than issuing a new contract; the motion passed 3–2 after debate.
Council debated and then approved a $1,206,621 change order to McKinstry’s existing state cooperative contract to deliver 13 facility improvement measures at the Moab Recreation and Aquatic Center (MRAC), including exhaust fans, copper domestic hot‑water piping replacement, glycol flush and refill of the ground loop, controls upgrades to an open‑protocol system, LED lighting retrofits and commissioning with staff training.
McKinstry representatives described expected outcomes: lower energy use, improved controls and remote alarm notifications, replacement of failing relays and lighting with dark‑skies‑compliant LEDs, and commissioning with staff training and follow‑up sessions. The contract spreadsheet included $37,400 in owner contingency and applied about $80,000 of unspent contingency from earlier phases to reduce new charges. City staff and McKinstry said the state cooperative purchase process set standard markups and that subcontractors had been competitively selected under the state procurement.
Several council members voiced concern that the work now totals multiple phases and asked whether the city should have solicited a new contract rather than a change order. The city attorney explained that staff attempted a new contract but encountered legal/contractual differences and recommended a change‑order approach as legally defensible and faster. As one councilor summarized, "I think it's my position that we should be doing our best to find ways to make these projects more affordable," signaling preference for a competitive bid process. The attorney replied that state cooperative procurements are authorized under city code and that the markups follow the state contract.
After extended discussion about transparency, scope and the trade‑off between speed and competitive bidding, council moved the change order. A roll call recorded two nays (Miles and Caitlin) and three ayes; the motion passed 3–2. The contract includes a 12‑month workmanship warranty, manufacturer equipment warranties where applicable, and commissioning training for city staff.
