The Rockingham County Board of Commissioners on July 31 approved several procurement actions across facilities and the sheriff’s office, awarded at least one low bid for facilities work and directed staff to reissue two requests for proposals that county staff said did not meet specifications.

The board voted to award a refractory replacement project (listed in the meeting as “bio refractory replacement”) to INFAV Refractories, Inc. for $15,595, the county said. Commissioners also approved awards for dishwashing and laundry chemicals that were split across vendors: $1,105 for a corrections hand soap item to Imperial Bade, up to $9,285 for other Department of Corrections items and up to $23,985 for environmental service items to W.B. Mason, as reflected in the staff recommendation presented at the meeting.

Why it matters: Those contracts fund routine maintenance and inmate- or facility-facing supplies; the board’s actions allow staff to proceed with purchases and to reissue solicitations that county reviewers determined were noncompliant.

County staff presented several motions asking the board to authorize staff review and recommendation on vehicle and equipment proposals for the sheriff’s office and for facilities. The board approved motions to allow the facilities or sheriff’s review teams to evaluate proposals for a Champion air compressor, a Dodge Durango pursuit vehicle, fiscal-year 2026 vehicle equipment outfitting, and a Motorola equipment purchase for the sheriff’s office. The motions were approved without recorded dissent.

In two instances staff asked the board to reject awards and republish RFPs. Commissioners voted to reject the electric utility vehicle RFP responses and to republish that RFP after staff reported a bid lacked proper specifications and another included no pricing. The board also vacated an award for a hay tedder and authorized republishing that RFP after staff said the originally awarded unit had factory problems and would not be available in the expected timeframe; a local vendor was reported to have an in‑stock machine but staff recommended reissuing the procurement.

Commissioners recorded that two bids were received for the refractory project and that the low bidder matched available budget (staff said the project was budgeted at $16,000 and the low bid was $15,595). On the chemical contracts staff said the recommended vendors represented the lowest evaluated bids for the goods.

The motions were moved and seconded by board members and recorded as approved by unanimous voice vote. No member requested additional public hearings on the awards.

The board also approved routine consent‑agenda items, including minutes and payroll, during the same session.

The approvals let staff proceed to finalize contracts and to republish the two solicitations so the county can receive compliant, comparable bids.