Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Towers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County weighs replacing tower lights; low bid proposes full LED upgrade for about $8,004
Summary
Commissioners reviewed three bids to relamp a county radio tower and discussed replacing four tower lights and three mid‑level fixtures with LEDs; staff recommended doing the full LED conversion to avoid repeated climbing costs, and a low bid of $8,003.65 from Mott’s Electric was highlighted.
Carlisle County officials discussed replacing aging lights on a county radio tower and focused the conversation on whether to repair individual bulbs or replace all fixtures with LED technology.
During the Jan. 9 meeting Timmy (road/maintenance staff) and others reviewed three bids: Motorola (repair two bulbs for $4,002.40; full LED replacement quoted at $23,002.40), World Tower (repair two bulbs at $36.45; full LED conversion at a larger figure in the transcript that was unclear), and Mott’s Electric (repair two bulbs halfway up for $23.20; full LED conversion quoted at $8,003.65). Several speakers cautioned that replacing only lower bulbs could require another climb soon if the top lamp later fails; installers typically charge a climbing fee that would be incurred again for future work.
Sheriff/road staff and county members argued in favor of converting the entire tower to LEDs to avoid repeated labor and climbing costs. Josh (ambulance staff) and other county speakers said the LED option would likely be more durable; one participant referenced another water-tower LED conversion that had lasted more than 15 years.
County staff said parts for the existing halogen fixtures are becoming hard to find and that the existing system had been in service for a little over 10 years. The bidders’ written estimates were reviewed and the low comprehensive quote from Mott’s Electric—$8,003.65—was discussed as the most cost-effective option given the climb and labor costs.
The court discussed timing and asked staff to confirm warranty/replace terms with the bidder before final approval. The record shows the discussion concluded with agreement to get additional details and proceed with planning; the transcript does not record a signed contract or specific appropriation vote during this segment.
(Clarification: bid amounts and vendor names are taken from the meeting transcript. Some figures in the audio were garbled; the article uses the amounts as spoken and flags unclear figures.)
