Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Debris Removal Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Court moves to unit-price road work; awards single-response bids and plans special call for more contracts
Summary
Fiscal Court approved a lone bid for a debris contractor, discussed moving from hourly emergency rates to per-unit procurement for road repairs, and scheduled further procurement via a special call; court also discussed scope limits that currently limit work to emergency bridge blockages.
Letcher County Fiscal Court took several procurement and contracting steps intended to accelerate debris and emergency road repairs, the court said during its March session.
The court approved a single responsive bid for a work package (identified in the packet as project list 4663/4) and awarded that package to Greg Hale after staff said the solicitation had been sent to more than 30 contractors and posted for two weeks. The judge called for a motion and the court approved the award by roll call.
Separately, staff explained the county must shift from hourly emergency rates to unit (per-unit) rates for road and culvert work as the response moves from immediate emergency response to longer-term restoration that FEMA and state programs expect to be priced by unit. Staff said this is required because auditors and reimbursement rules consider long-running hourly contracts less reasonable beyond a short emergency period.
To move procurement faster, staff proposed convening a special-call meeting before the end of the month to award additional unit-price contracts; the court discussed possible dates, with staff referencing a tentative “20 seventh or 20 eighth” as candidate dates. Staff said the special call would allow award of unit-rate contracts for specific roads so work does not have to wait the 6–8 weeks of standard procurement timelines.
Court staff also reported that the work scope currently approved by the relevant state/federal authorities is limited to emergency debris in, on or under bridges and culverts — not broader stream excavation — and that monitoring and approving work will be governed by those scope definitions. That scope limitation, staff said, constrains which creek and stream cleanup items are eligible for federal reimbursement.
Court members expressed frustration with the scope limits and urged staff to keep pursuing additional funding and approvals. Staff reminded the court this emergency work is an initial step and additional projects (including NRCS and other FEMA-funded phases) can follow.
The court also approved a procurement for monitoring under the state master contract (reported in a separate action) and said monitoring is necessary before some contractor activities may begin.
Clerks recorded motions and roll-call votes approving the single-bid award and the move to develop unit-price procurement; staff said they will release additional project lists for bidding and schedule the special-call meeting to allow timely awards.
