Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Spokane County commissioners approve new janitorial contract after 3-2 vote; bid timing and transparency draw objections
Summary
On May 13, 2025 the Spokane County Board of County Commissioners approved a new janitorial services contract after rejecting a one-week deferral. Commissioners split 3-2 on both the deferral and final approval amid concerns about limited public review and praise for a competitive procurement that produced a significantly lower bid.
The Spokane County Board of County commissioners voted 3-2 on May 13, 2025, to approve a new county janitorial services contract after declining a motion to defer the item one week for additional review.
The proposal drew debate over process and public transparency. Commissioner Waldorf moved to delay the vote, saying the county had been briefed on the contract that morning and that commissioners needed more time to review evaluation materials and receive public input. “It's a fairly large contract. It's almost a million dollar contract,” Waldorf said during discussion.
Commissioner French opposed the delay and defended the procurement process, saying staff followed the county’s request-for-proposal procedures and the winning contractor’s bid was substantially lower than competitors'. “The outcome is yielded a contractor at a price of almost $400,000 less than the second bidder,” French said. French added he was comfortable both with the process and the outcome.
After the deferral motion failed 3-2, Commissioner Kearns moved to approve item 4(i) as presented; that approval passed 3-2. Commissioners French, Kearns and the chair voted to approve; Commissioners Waldorf and Jordan voted no. Commissioner Waldorf said his “no” reflected a desire for more time to review, not a claim that the procurement was flawed.
County staff said the contract went through the standard RFP process, that responses were scored before cost was revealed to evaluators, and that the selected vendor offered the required scope of services at the lowest evaluated cost. Board members praised the facilities and purchasing teams for conducting the procurement.
No changes to the contract terms or award were recorded in the meeting minutes. Commissioners who sought delay cited the limited public window for written comments and the compressed timeline when the briefing occurred the same day as the afternoon consent vote.
The board directed no additional immediate actions during the meeting; staff will proceed with contract implementation per the awarded procurement.
