Atlanta panel to weigh $1.64 million mowing extension; most funding would go to airport

Atlanta’s City Utilities Committee is scheduled Tuesday, Oct. 13, to consider adding up to $1,641,087 and six months to a mowing-and-clearing contract, with all but $40,000 of the proposed funding earmarked for Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport.⁠[1][2]

Councilmember Andrea L. Boone’s ordinance would waive the city’s procurement source-selection rules to extend the agreement with Genesis Testing Services, Inc., from Dec. 19, 2026, through June 18, 2027. It would be the fourth amendment to the landfill and airport slope mowing-and-clearing agreement—not a new competitively selected contract.⁠[1]

The legislation presents the extension as a bridge to a new long-term agreement. It says Public Works submitted an intake form in May to prepare for a competitive solicitation, and the chief procurement officer issued a 90-day extension in July that runs through Dec. 18. Officials say another six months would allow time to select, award and execute a replacement agreement without interrupting service.⁠[2]

The work includes mowing, clearing and site preparation for Public Works’ seasonal needs, along with maintenance of airport slopes, runways, shops and other operational areas. The ordinance warns that a service disruption could impair the Aviation Department’s maintenance of areas monitored by the Federal Aviation Administration. That is the city’s stated rationale for continuing with the existing supplier.⁠[2]

The proposed spending is concentrated at the airport: $1,230,000 for landside work and $371,087 for airside work, both paid from the Airport Revenue Fund. The remaining $40,000 would come from the Solid Waste Services Revenue Fund for landfill closure and post-closure care. These amounts are additional funding, not a total price for the agreement’s entire history.⁠[1][2]

The reviewed legislation does not establish how far the replacement procurement has progressed or explain the basis for the six-month price.⁠[2]

Ordinance 26-O-1566 is listed for second reading at the committee’s 10 a.m. meeting in the Larry M. Dingle Committee Room. Full Council referred it to the committee without objection Oct. 5; that referral did not approve the spending or extension. The packet lists the committee action as pending, and the proposed amendment would require legal approval, execution, attestation and delivery before binding the city.⁠[1][2]