Laserfiche WebLink
TUESDAY. FEBRUARY 25, 1997 <br /> <br />request approval for the project from the State Board of Corrections <br />and does further agree to meet other requirements specified in Title <br />53.1 of the Code of VirQinia which would entitle the City to receive <br />the State's twenty-five.percent reimbursement for capital costs of this <br />project. <br /> <br />Council considered accepting a proposal and awarding a contract for an <br />interim jail facility. David Reeves stated the Staff was recommending <br />the acceptance of a proposal from Frith Construction Company for a pre- <br />engineered metal building, at a cost of $281,484. Fencing, furniture, <br />fixtures, equipment, and a contingency made the total project cost <br />$400,000. In response to a question from a member of Council, Sheriff <br />Steve Draper commented on the positive effects of the direct <br />supervision model of corrections which would be put into place with the <br />interim jail facility. Mr. Reeves demonstrated the City would save <br />between $1 and 1.6 million over the three year maximum use period with <br />the construction of the interim facility versus continuing to house <br />prisoners at other localities' 3ails. Upon motion, duly seconded and <br />by unanimous vote, Council authorized the City Manager to execute a <br />contract with Frith Construction Company for the interim 3all facility. <br /> <br />Council considered appropriating $25,000 for construction and <br />renovations to the lower level of the Municipal Building. City Manager <br /> <br />Earl B. Reynolds, Jr. noted the proposed <br />general purpose room, four storage rooms, <br />ceiling tile, floor tile and drywall. Mr. <br /> <br />construction included a <br /> <br /> a new mechanical room, <br /> <br /> Reynolds recommended a <br /> <br />contract be awarded to Cahill Construction Company, which submitted a <br />low bid of $21,450. The remainder of funds will be used for painting <br />and other miscellaneous items. Council Member Dallas expressed <br />opposition to spending money on this pro3ect as opposed to spending it <br />on homeless persons. Upon motion, duly seconded and by a vote of 4-1 <br />(Council Member Dallas opposing), Council approved the supplemental <br /> <br /> <br />