Riverside County Banning District Attorney (DA) Building Flood Mitigation and Restoration Project

On July 17, 2025, a ruptured water supply hose caused significant flooding at the Riverside County Banning District Attorney Building located at 135 North Alessandro Street, Banning, California, prompting an immediate emergency response by the Facilities Management Maintenance Division. Staff arrived on-site the following morning and initiated prompt mitigation efforts, including water extraction and drying, to stabilize the facility and prevent further damage or environmental hazards. Under the authority of Resolution 2003-23, an Emergency Declaration was issued to expedite restoration activities and ensure the uninterrupted delivery of critical public services. The project, officially titled the Riverside County Banning DA Building Flood Mitigation and Restoration Project, was designated with solicitation number 28761 and is governed by categorical exemptions under the California Environmental Quality Act, specifically Sections 15301 and 15061(b)(3), which collectively affirm that the work involves maintenance of an existing facility, does not expand its use, and poses no significant environmental impact. Restoration efforts are focused exclusively on returning the interior spaces to their pre-loss condition with no physical expansion or alteration of the building’s function. The place of performance is confirmed as the Banning DA facility, and the project was formally noticed as exempt under CEQA on August 27, 2025. No detailed contract pricing, payment terms, evaluation criteria, or procurement methodology such as LPTA or best value were documented, suggesting the response was executed under emergency authority without formal competitive bidding. The Senior Environmental Planner and Facilities Operations Manager for Riverside County, Mike Sullivan, served as the primary point of contact and signatory for the Notice of Exemption, with no formal designation of a contracting officer, COR, or COTR identified. There is no evidence of standard FAR clauses, federal acquisition documentation, invoicing systems, packaging requirements, or offeror certifications, indicating this is a locally administered emergency restoration under state environmental law rather than a federally regulated procurement.