City commission delays senior recreation center bond; construction manager RFP to move forward

At its Jan. 14 meeting, the Birmingham Parks and Recreation Board heard that the City Commission declined to place a bond measure for a new senior recreation center on the May ballot and that staff will solicit construction manager services to help refine cost estimates and programming.

Board member Pam Graham said the commission "does not feel that the issue is ready for a public election in May" and that, under Michigan election timing, a bond could move to a special election in August or the regular November ballot.

That decision shifts the timetable for any bond from a possible May vote to August or November 2025. Graham said the commission authorized issuing a request for proposals for construction managers; the managers would work with the architect and city staff to estimate project cost and to help “keep the cost at our budget,” she said. Graham described the construction manager role as negotiating a fixed price and working with the architect early in schematic design so the building is “right sized” and flexible for programming.

Graham and other board members also discussed a new public survey being prepared. Graham encouraged residents to respond on Engage Birmingham, saying prior surveys focused on renovating the YMCA building and that the current survey is being rewritten for a new-build community center and broader programming questions. She noted the survey allows free-text responses for additional comment.

Board members asked whether the new facility would be a cost center and whether residents would pay different fees. Graham said the expected model is that the city would own the building and rent space to two nonprofit partners to provide programming, naming the YMCA and Next as likely program providers; she said some programs would remain fee-based through those partners while certain community benefits would be available outside membership. Graham added that specific fee details were not yet available and that the city manager was expected to report back in roughly two weeks.

Next steps identified by staff and board members include issuing the construction manager RFP (staff estimated about a month before a manager would be on board), completing an updated public survey and awaiting further presentations to the City Commission on program and financing options.

Board members emphasized the need for continued public engagement and for the architect, construction manager and agencies to define room counts, occupancy, program schedules and accessibility during schematic design.