Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Roads Paving Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Select Board hears bid dispute, postpones vote on $10,500 tree‑trimming from road reserve
Summary
The select board on Sept. 16 considered using up to $10,500 from the road reconstruction reserve to pay for roadside tree trimming ahead of paving on three town roads.
The select board on Sept. 16 considered a request to use up to $10,500 from the road reconstruction and paving reserve for roadside tree trimming ahead of planned paving on Green Tree Road, Bessie Road and Strickland Prairie Road. The funding request was made by the town manager to cover preparatory trimming work tied to the upcoming paving project.
The manager said she had collected three informal quotes under the town’s purchasing policy: a low bid at $8,000, a high bid at $16,800, and a middle bid quoted at $14,500 that the manager said, if stripped of two additional services not needed for the three roads, amounted to $10,500. She recommended the middle bid reduced to $10,500 for the specific paving-preparation work.
Board members pressed for detail on the scope and whether the $8,000 low bid covered the same line items. A board member asked that staff confirm whether the low bid is “apples to apples” with the recommended quote before finalizing an award.
The meeting also included an appearance‑of‑conflict question: a select board member disclosed that a bidder shares a familial name. That member said, “I have no financial or any other influence in his business,” but asked the board to consider whether the relationship created an appearance problem. Board discussion emphasized appearance concerns; one member said voting by a relative on a relative’s bid “doesn’t look good.” The board agreed the appearance-of-conflict question should be treated separately from the procurement decision.
A motion to approve the use of up to $10,500 from the road reconstruction reserve for roadside tree trimming was made and seconded. Before the board completed the vote, the chair proposed — without objection — taking up the town treasurer’s comprehensive financial briefing so that staff attending specifically for that agenda item could leave earlier. The motion on the tree‑trimming funds was therefore deferred; no final award or vote is recorded in the public minutes.
Board members directed staff to: confirm whether the low bid covers the same specific distances and tasks described in the recommended quote and report back; and to note the appearance‑of‑conflict concerns for the record. The procurement steps discussed followed the town’s informal‑quote purchasing policy rather than a sealed‑bid process.
