Dayton City Council — Transcript
Tuesday, September 8, 2026
Engineering Firm Selection for City of Dayton
Votes (1)
Discussion and Guidance on Engineering Services Contract Award
Dissent: While there was no formal dissent, Council Member Dave initially leaned towards retaining Hoisington&Anderson due to the existing relationship and familiarity, advising 'if it works, don't fix it.' Another council member expressed a slight preference for WSB, citing its perceived deeper resources and municipal focus, to address past challenges with Stantec.
The primary focus was on comparing WSB and Hoisington&Anderson, as Bolton&Menk was largely excluded due to significantly higher project costs. Debates centered on Hoisington&Anderson's existing relationship with the city through engineer Jason versus WSB's deep internal resources and strong municipal focus. Cost differences, particularly the higher monthly retainer for Hoisington&Anderson ($4100 vs. $1200 for WSB) and slightly higher project hourly rates for WSB ($198 vs. $164 for H&A), were a major point of contention. Council members also raised concerns about potential resource gaps in specialized areas like GIS and water management if Hoisington&Anderson were selected. No formal decision was made, with the council providing guidance for staff to conduct further cost analysis and contract negotiations with the top two firms.
Notable Quotes (5)
I would say that each of us has a different perspective on things, and that's why we appreciated having a committee and a different council here. Um, I've been very open and honest with all of them. All of them will meet our needs now and in the future. It really won't be different from any other companies at this stage, or as if they were the same. Um, if I had to rank them, and this has nothing to do with anyone sitting in this room or who I've worked with in the past, I would choose WSB as my best company to choose at this stage.
For me, I need a good, reliable water department, which Stantec has lacked for the past few years. Um, so that's very important to me, and a strong Geographic Information System (GIS) department to build our system, which has also fallen behind in the last few years. So, um, these two things are very important to me.
The most important thing about Bolton&Menk that we looked at overall is the project costs compared to the other two companies, and that's what made me rule out Bolton&Menk, because their project costs are much higher than WSB and Hawkins&Anderson. They, you know, charge about $100 more per hour on projects. And what that means for us is yes, of course, it's cheaper in terms of general engineering, but when you want to execute a project, that's where you pay the price.
I'll give you a number. It was $4100 a month for Hackett & Anderson. It was $1200 a month for WSB. Yes. Wow. That's a huge difference. For a monthly fee. That's what I mean. It's three and a half times the value.
I mean, the financial value, but you can't reasonably give it to us. And this is the problem. You said you could do a hypothetical scenario of what it would cost to do a project we've done historically. The problem is that information is already there. So the financial amounts for the engineering work are there. But, but every project is different.
Ordinances & Resolutions (5)
Request for Proposal for engineering services, which initiated the current selection process.
A survey presented to the engineering firm applicants.
Specific questions posed to the three shortlisted engineering firms.
Dayton's existing robust plan for road maintenance, discussed in the context of how the new firms would integrate or enhance it.
The future contractual agreement for engineering services, with a specified end date of June 30, 2027, as part of the RFP.