And we're ready. At this time, I'll call to order the City of Georgia Public Service Committee meeting for December 1st, 2025. We'll start with roll call. Councilwoman Rarodin. Here. Councilman Mugren. Here. Councilman Hugg. I am here. Next item is the public service minutes from the November 17th, 2025 Public Service Committee meeting. Any changes or edits or discussion? No. Motion to approve.
I have a motion and a second to approve.
the public service meeting minutes from November 17th, 2025 as presented, all in favor?
Aye.
Opposed?
Showing none, we can move to citizens to be heard on agenda items.
Are there any citizens who would like to speak on an agenda item?
Seeing none, we'll move right into contracts.
630, award of contract, a precision truck center for the engine rebuild and
I have a truck Fire Department 779 in the amount of $28,454 and $54 cents.
One of the Fire Department Ladder Trucks was having issues with its engine.
After review it was determined that it would need to be replaced or rebuilt.
Reviewed this determined that a rebuild was probably the better option and a little bit more cost effective.
We saw quotes from three companies that could rebuild it.
Precision truck center was the provided the low bid.
Actually, this was just originally about a $23 or $24,000 bill.
So it would not have required a council action.
But when they got in there and started working,
they determined that there was some additional work that need to be done.
So it pushed it just over $28,000.
So that's why we're bringing it to council for approval.
Questions, comments?
Yeah.
What year is that fire truck?
I don't know that off the top of my head.
I can find out though.
But we anticipated being in service for a number of years.
That's why we're doing the review.
But there's no warranty left out of this.
No, no.
All right.
Next item will be 631.
A word of contract for the 2025 roadways be servicing contract A
to PT for construction company in the amount of $516,142.58.
Yes, so this is our annual resurfacing project that we went out for this year.
We had 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 bidders on this.
PT Farrell was the low bidder at the amount specified there, which was about 10 and a half percent below the engineer's estimate.
PT Farrell's been around for a long time here, so we would like to see this move to council for approval.
Questions or comments?
632 approval of purchase one purchase of one compact electric sweeper from Brown equipment company in the amount of $342,523.
The 2025 budget included funding for the purchase of a small sweeper for the Ottawa Street deck in the downtown area including the new city square.
We reviewed a number of different options, including a diesel option, determined that the electric
sweeper would be best because of the parking deck has a limited height to operate, it's an
older deck with lower ceilings, and also some concerns with fumes and noise as well as fueling
concerns, getting the fuel to the sweeper, this is a smaller sweeper like driving it to
would be a challenge so we would have to deliver fuel there.
So we went with the electric sweeper, it is available via source well pricing,
which if you remember is a consortium that bids all kinds of competitively bids, all kinds of products.
We are also eligible, well we will be reimbursed, $100,000 with an energy efficiency grant,
by purchasing an electric sleeper, which will reduce the cost, and we are recommending moving forward with the purchase at this time.
Question for examine.
So it's reducing the cost from the $342,000.
That's right. There'll be $100,000 off that.
Okay. Okay.
And as far as the plaza, which is open, I get the deck, is there a reason we can't use standard sweepers on the plaza?
No, the thought was if we had, we wanted one of these for the deck for years.
finally got in the budget. The thought is it would be multi-purpose. You can also add
attachments to this so we could potentially do like plowing, snow plowing on
sidewalks or it's no removal on sidewalks with a broom brush and things like
that. So it's got multi-function possibilities. And as far as like using a full
side street sweeper, I think they're probably too heavy for the you know the plaza
area generally.
All right 633 the word contract is a district meter area chamber installation
project to PT for construction construction in the amount of $267,550. So what this contract
is related to is as we are expanding our meter zone areas like our district meter so our water
Our main network is 650 miles and we're splitting it into smaller zones so that we can monitor
the water loss in real time.
We do have a handful of zones in action right now that's giving us actionable information
that we can see.
Oh, not only water is up in this area, let's look for leaks and stuff.
So that's been great and this is to expand that.
We also have, concurrently in another path, we have something in council order approved
that we're implementing now, is this xylem view software that's going to be in concert
with this and give us like dashboarding and real-time data, like so that on a daily basis
we'll be able to do a, to see what the difference is between like water pumped into zone versus
what's built so we really get, and start getting really granular on that tracking down water
loss. And so to get to that point we have to basically put valve vaults around the water
mains so that these meters can go into the water main. And that's what this project
is for. This is to put in 12 additional, yeah 12 additional valve vaults on the water
main. And then another vendor will be putting the meters in. But with that we had six bidders
from 268,000 to 790,000 on the bids.
A little biter it was PT Farrow,
and recommend they do lots of work like that for us,
and we're recommending a war to PT Farrow
for this project.
Questions or comments?
I'm thrilled that that's expanding.
That's great.
That's really a light at the end of the tunnel
for figuring out this water loss issue.
Can you say?
Yes, yeah.
And then in a month or two,
we'll have a larger presentation
for the service committee on everything that going out behind the scenes with that.
I look forward to it, thank you.
I want to real quickly before we do voting.
I want to go back to the sweeper.
What does the other sweepers cost when we buy them?
Like a full size sweeper?
About $500,000?
Yeah, like say $450,000 to $500.
And this seems awful after this, it's a very limited use, right?
Yeah, it's a smaller sweeper, for sure.
But again, we've wanted one for the deck for a number of years to clean the salt and other debris out of there.
You know, it is a smaller sweeper, but it has different functionality.
In the back of the day, we used to have two decks.
Now, we only have one, yes, and we might get rid of that eventually.
If somebody comes along, I'm going to have a John Bayes Jr.
I will let the council make that decision.
So, and just doing it for them seems like a lot.
You know, I'm going to separate that one out, unless there's an objection.
You could separate it, you like?
Okay.
So, we can do the other three then.
I have a motion and a second to move items on a contract 631 and 633 to the full council
with committee recommendation to approve.
All in favor?
Aye.
opposed showing none you'd have to deal with 632 also to Greg was this in the
original estimate for the plaza no this was a separate item in the capital
budget and I understand you know when people say it's in the budget the
matter if we can put anything we want in the budget sure so can stay up on me they
can put more than we can afford in the budget and still would be in the budget
sure so okay all right then let's let's do item 632 then I'll
second I have a
motion in a second to move item on the contract, item number 632, to the full council with committee
recommendation to approve. All in favor?
Aye.
Opposed? No. It passes 2-1 recommended to the full council to be purchased.
Change orders passed and final payment 634. Approval of amendment number 1 to the professional
services agreement for engineering design services for the Displanes River Tunnel Cross and
Rehabilitation Project for the Water Main Replacement Program to Jacobs Associates.
doing business as DELF underground in the amount of $268,630.
So this is for the design of one of the Waterman replacement projects.
We've been going the route of doing a preliminary design and then a detailed design because
these projects are larger and sometimes more intricate so we get agreement going so that
you can figure out the exact scope and then go and then have a detailed design contract.
So Council already proved, and the project's pretty much done for preliminary design engineering of what the project is, is the replacement of the water main going under the tunnel.
So that's kind of one of the things, rehabilitation of the tunnel itself.
So in the preliminary engineering, we did an assessment of the tunnel.
So we pumped it down, inspectors went in there, all that good stuff, a report was generated as to what needs to be done in the tunnel to rehab it.
Just kind of some fun facts so the we have two water mains in there and then there's a couple of banding gas mains
And they're all on like this plank decking material and then there's a bunch of like other stuff that's in there, too
so
Surveying was done to get the exact dimensions of everything and
And so now we're going into detailed design to get into the weeds of putting the bid set together for what needs to be done
So everything that's in there is going to need to come out then the tunnel will need some like touch up
Then everything has to go back in and so that this is generally the scope of that
So with that this contract this design contract will bring that work to a biddle project and the construction of that will start in like the summer
Issue of next year. So that's that we're looking forward to bring this detailed design contract
to correct, awarded to Delve Underground,
to full council.
Questions or comments?
Just a question to, so would we say money,
if we didn't do the preliminary,
we just put it all on the detail?
You know what I'm saying?
Why would you like?
Sure.
Yeah, so if we do that, what happens is consultants
have to be conservative as to what the design is,
because the tunnel itself, they didn't even know
what condition it was in.
you couldn't because it hasn't been accessed in some time, so it's the short answer is that it saves the city money to do it like this because then a consultant or contractor doesn't have much risk on them to do their due diligence to figure out what needs to be done so they don't give you like a loaded proposal with extra fluff in it so this lets them sharpen their pencil on the first one could be like oh here here's our price to get into this thing figure out what needs to be done and then we can give you a detailed scope for just that.
as opposed to if we ask them for an all-in contract right off the bat they have to
assume the worst conditions like all right we have to assume extra time for
this extra time for that so it does help us and then it also helps us do
these projects a little faster and then with time-value money nowadays too with
how much bid prices go up every year it lets us kind of just get into a
groove on this. For the preliminary engineering is done without actually going in
The preliminary engineering was to figure out what the detailed scope would be, so the preliminary engineering did get them in the tunnel again.
Got them in the tunnel, they did their assessment, so now they know the condition of it, and this detailed design, I don't believe they need to go in again.
Now they are designing like the details of what the tunnel rehab will be and all that.
Okay. I mean, what would change between going into the tunnel and going back to their
office due preliminary, as opposed to they have all the, I mean, they're not gathering
new information for the detail. Right. So they have all the information already. Yes.
In the tunnel. Yeah. So the preliminary engineering got them all the information they needed
to be able to go in detailed design. So like, one of the deliverables they had for preliminary
engineering was getting all the surveying done. So they have all that. They're able to put
But the base sheets together, but now for detailed design, that includes things like putting the bid documents together.
And to specify what work needs to happen in the tunnel now.
Okay, 635, you guys don't have anything to do on that now, you know, thank you.
It's 35 approval, change on number one for the 2025 sanitary sewer cleaning and inspection program.
to pipe view America and the amount of $82,779.94?
Yeah, the, this memo is for twofold.
One is to add, sorry, so we ordered a contract
to pipe view to do our annual sewer cleaning and televising.
And this change order is to do two purposes.
One is just kind of balancing quantities
from what that original project was and then two, we're adding some work to it and that is
We're doing some lateral locating for the for the water main program. It's on the city's
Cities on the hook for locating the laterals so that the contractors know where they are so they don't dig through them
And then the other thing that we're adding is the southeast Juliet sanitary district of which we
The last couple of week
Council Sessions, we've had some awards for that.
The city has taken over the southeast
really at Sanitary District from the county
and the county's giving us funds to maintain it
and rehab it.
These additional funds are all money that we're getting from getting back from the county to do the additional work for the Southeast
Juliet sanitary district there. A small amount of that is city money for the the lateral locating, but the big chunk of this is the the sewer
televising and cleaning for Southeast Juliet sanitary district at the county is paying for reimbursing us.
So are they reimbursing us with the 83,000?
92, 92,000.
And they're also paying for the 528,000 original?
No, just the 92,000 is what the new work being awarded to.
Just the work that's in the South.
Correct.
Okay.
All right.
638 approval of change or number two to the claim field road from theodore street to black
road water main improvements project to Austin Tyler construction incorporated for a decrease
in the amount of $1,735,236.11 cents and pay estimate number 11 and final in the amount of $564,960
and $68.
Great.
Yes, so this memo is to close out this project as the original award was for about 9.5 million
I see that there's a bit of a sizable
Decrease on here and a final amount and a big chunk of that ends up being for I guess no pun intended is the less chunks of rock than on the
In the bids we put in we have soil boring's done in advance and we figure out what the rock elevation is
You know, we want to have a little extra fluff in there
So we're not coming up for another additional funds and so with that and some of the deducks
We were able to not have to use in the project that ended up being a credit or a deduct of about that 1.7 million dollar amount
So that's item one and then the item two was that there was a change order for a time extension to give the contractor
Some more time to deal with field changes in staging for restoration. So with that we'd like to see this move forward council for approval
questions or comments? Yeah one question on the item right before that too. Is this
$82,779 but the reimbursing of 92,000 roughly right? Yeah so what it is is
that the $92,000 is the cost for the Southeast Joliet Sanitary District
televising and then we're getting a credit back for unused quantities from the
original bid. That's why it's less than the 92 if that answers the question.
All right, that's the final item on a changeover of pay estimates and final payments.
Okay, under change orders, pay estimates and final payments, I'd like to make a motion to move items 634, 635 and 638 to the full council with this committee's recommendation to approve.
I have a motion in a second that the items under change orders, pay estimates and final payments 634, 635 and 638 will be sent to the full council with committee recommendation to approve.
All in favor?
Aye.
I oppose showing none we can move into ordinance and resolutions 648 resolution
approving an easement agreement for water delivery structure by the by and
between the city of Jolia and the Grand Prairie Water Commission.
Right so as we've discussed before there's going to be various delivery
structures throughout the city at four locations that will be the transition
point where the Grand Prairie Water Commission provides the water to the city.
So the first one of these is going to actually be starting construction in March.
The Grand River Water Commission is owning and operating and paying for the construction
of that delivery structure, but the city have to provide the land for it.
And so we have purchased property.
This is for the one on strike or avenue, and we just need to provide the easement to the
water commission so that they will have access for constructing owning and operating this
delivery structure. So this has been reviewed by the city's legal department and
recommending that the full council approve this easement.
Questions, coming?
No.
647 resolution for the surface transportation program local match commitment to the
Theodore Street east of Brighton Lane and Illinois Route 59, railway widening improvement
project.
So, yes, this is basically the city's applying for a SCP grant that will help improve the
Theodore Street, basically widening lanes and some modifications at the intersection
of Illinois 53, or I'm sorry, Illinois 59.
Basically the application submitted for the Phase II B section as we call it and it's resolution
The position required that the city is capable of paying our side of the funding if or when we would get the grant, which is an 80-20 split.
So, the project right now is estimated about just shy of 2.85 million with the 20% being roughly 570,000 in the city side.
We plan on using the MFT funds for that if awarded, and at this point in time, again, this is just a resolution saying that we have the capability of paying the match for
or the program in the given year, so we'd like to see this move to council for approval.
Questions?
One quick question.
We're not widening at the intersection of the ador.
I don't know where we have all the term leads and stuff, right?
You mean at 59?
Yes.
For the most part, there is some modifications that you need to be done for safety improvement wise,
but it'd be more west of that that the widening be done.
All right.
Thank you.
That's the.
Oh, come on.
Yep.
That's the second item.
the last item under ordnance and resolution
second I have a motion and a second for the two items under ordnance and resolution 648 and 647.
Let me send to the full council with committee recommendation to approve, violent favor.
Aye.
Opposed, showing none. We can move on to new or old business, not final action or recommendation.
Report on utilities maintenance activities.
Okay, so since the last report, which was at the November 3rd Public Service Committee,
we've repaired 25 hydrants.
Usually I report what percentage is out of service, but the app that we use, the hydrant
repair app wasn't working when this report was prepared, so I don't have that information.
Three valves were reset or repaired, and the thing to note for Warnbridge is billing
had two. And I don't know the last time we had a monthly report where we only had two
water main breaks. So I think it's we've been talking about this internally. I'm sorry
you've come really noticeable that our water main breaks are starting to decrease. So we're
about halfway through our water main replacement program. So hopefully we continue to see that
trend.
Any questions or comments? Is there any other new or old business? All right. I'm
going to move on to public comment. Is there anybody from the public would like to comment?
Seeing none we'll move on to adjournment motion to adjourn I have a motion a second to adjourn all in favor. I opposed showing none were done. Thank you everyone