The Warwick City Council convened multiple committees and a full council session on May 11, 2026, beginning at 5:05 PM. The meeting covered a wide range of financial, zoning, and charter amendment items. Key actions included approvals for water main design, micro-surfacing, sand purchases, roller skate rentals, seasonal equipment, roof repairs, and commercial supplies. The council also passed first passage of two zoning changes (gas station and condo development), adopted the OPEB ordinance on second passage, and advanced charter amendment resolutions on financial presentations and mayoral appointments. A charter change to expand the school committee was held for further study.
Three test one two three test one two three good afternoon everyone we have um fixed the technical difficulties and let the record indicate it is five oh five p.m and the warwork city council finance committee is called to order okay first item PCR fifty three-26 minutes no minutes first item is twenty twenty-six four seventy-five that is airport road phase one found on page one good evening Jerry Willette Water Department Good evening Director Floor is yours division is requesting to engage stand director could you speak into the mic please get close to it division is requesting to engage with Stantec to complete the design and betting services for replacement of the 20-inch main under airport road stretch of the pipeline particularly in the area of six sixty-seven airport road has been problematic over the last several years division has responded to multiple water main breaks on the age infrastructure Stantec is heavily familiar with the water worwick water infrastructure needs and is familiar with this pending project the department is requesting to move this forward it is expected for this portion of the project to be completed in approximately one year from the official award. There was an optional phase two for geotechnical program of seventy-nine thousand dollars. This request includes that amount should be necessary for the work performed. If it is not needed, then the dollar amount will not be paid to Stan Tech. Thank you for that, Director. So this um seventy-nine thousand right now that's just speculative, right? Uh correctly. So why are you requesting approval to add seventy-nine thousand into this bid as opposed to let's wait and see if we need it, and then you can come back to us for um a change order. Well, that was a thought to try to eliminate the need for a change order. So if we approve this with the extra seventy-nine thousand, that's giving you spending authority for four hundred and twenty-eight thousand, right? Correct. And if we approve it, if we approve this with the seventy-nine thousand, and it's not necessary, that stays into your budget. The money's returned, yes. Returned, what do you mean returned? It's it doesn't get spent. So is that seventy-nine thousand? Does that remain as part of the water department spending authority? Or does it just go away? This is a one short deal. It's we're looking at four hundred and twenty-eight thousand, and the reason that's in there is that mid-project, we don't want to delay it having to do a change order. Um, if if the money's not spent, if it's not required, if they don't have to do the additional borings, no, it doesn't get spent, it reverts back to the project. The overall project, which is in other words, it's spending authority up to 428,000. Yes, okay. Christy, did you have anything to add? No, I just came to make sure we I was just making sure that um we were uh passing along the right information. Okay. Um further on design plans were initially completed by United International Corporation in March of 2007, but the work did not proceed at that time. Um, I know this predates you, but do you know what the cost of this project was back then? No, you don't does Christine know what the cost was back then? Nobody knows what the cost was back then. This is a project that could have been done with COVID money, couldn't it? You're asking me. Yeah. COVID money, I wasn't here for COVID. I'm sorry? I wasn't here for COVID. Okay, let me redirect the question to Christy then or Eric or whoever wants to answer. Could this project which was going it actually goes back to the early 2000s, but known the necessity known back in 2007, when COVID monies came about, this project could have been done with COVID monies? I I suppose it could have at the time, but this obviously somewhere between 2007 and now was not presented as uh a project in the council, so no, I understand that, but um COVID came in like 2020, and I think we get the money in 2021. So I mean, I spoke like I said, I suppose it could have, but I'm not I'm not sure. And um this says also due to the age of the UIC plans, uh nearly 20 years, maintaining an appropriate standard of care for the industry. We will only use um resource documents for design. So what has changed from the asphalt down to these pipes we have to change in all those years that requires a whole new redesign to be done? My understanding is that those plans were drawn up back in 2007 with the Department of Transportation, they were doing some work to the airport, and we just found a set of plans. There was no additional documentation with it. It was it was strictly a uh a set of plans. Um so we forward that over to Stantec just for reference. Um, as far as anything changing, I do not I'm not aware of anything other than the fact that um we've had numerous issues with that with that stretch. So I guess the reasoning to spend um I don't know some 380,000 dollars is because the plans that were done in 2007 uh no longer good or accessible or accurate, correct? I'm looking through these different items here.