Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Construction topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tahlequah council rejects single bid for AMPAS concession facility
Summary
City officials voted to reject the lone $1.65 million bid for the AMPAS concession facility after staff recommended rejection and flagged a large cost increase; staff said the project will be revisited with broader city involvement.
The Tahlequah City Council voted to reject the single bid submitted for Bid No. 2025-3, the AMPAS concession facility, after staff recommended rejecting the offer and asked councilors to consider a broader, city-wide approach to completing the project.
City Administrator Taylor Jenkins told councilors the city received one bid for the project at $1,650,000 — about $400,000 higher than an earlier bid even after the city removed a planned second floor — and recommended rejecting the bid. “We do recommend rejecting this bid,” Jenkins said. Council members then moved and seconded a motion to reject; recorded yes votes included Councilors Allen, Carey, Baker and Mayor Suzanne Myers.
The recommendation to reject was based on the unexpectedly high price and the low level of contractor interest. Jenkins said staff had not yet had the opportunity to speak with the project architect about the cost difference and that the city is “a little perplexed” about receiving only one bid. He told the council the administration intends to reassess how to proceed and suggested a city-wide effort that could include internal staff work and public volunteers to reduce costs.
The council did not take additional action beyond the motion to reject the bid. The record does not show a named mover or seconder for the motion. There was no formal direction on a revised timetable, nor a formal commitment to a specific alternative procurement method; Jenkins indicated the administration will work on options and further conversations with the architect.
Background provided during the agenda item notes the $1,650,000 bid is roughly $400,000 more than a previous bid even after scope reductions (notably removal of the second floor). Council discussion focused on the single-bid result and the need to determine cost drivers before reissuing the project or pursuing alternative approaches.
The council moved on to other agenda items after the vote; no follow-up motion or timetable for reissuing the project was recorded in the meeting transcript.
