Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Timber Sales topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Ashland County committee awards timber-sale contracts, approves one-year extensions and discusses bid-bond policy

2655897 · March 14, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Ashland County Forestry Committee approved five timber-sale awards, voted to extend several existing sale contracts by one year and discussed changing the bid-bond requirement; DNR staffing changes and contract-administration details were also reviewed.

The Ashland County Forestry Committee voted to award five timber-sale contracts after opening bids and approved one-year extensions for several existing contracts, the committee heard at its recent meeting.

Committee members discussed the bid process and deposit requirements during the meeting. Committee members confirmed that successful bidders must post a performance bond (referred to in the meeting as a performance or bid bond) and a down payment: the committee described a 15% performance bond requirement and a 10% down payment due when a sale begins; the bid bond submitted with bids is held until contracts are awarded and either returned to unsuccessful bidders or converted into a performance bond on contract execution.

The committee approved a motion to accept the new bids and award contracts to the highest bidders. A roll-call exchange recorded named ‘‘yes’’ responses for Gary, Bill and Marty; the chair stated the motion carried. Later in the meeting members voted to grant one-year extensions on a list of expiring contracts, citing last winter’s lack of workable conditions as the reason for the requested extensions. A committee member moved to extend the contracts; the motion was seconded and carried by voice vote.

Members discussed bidder concerns about the administrative difficulty of obtaining bid bonds, especially for nonlocal companies with corporate surety processes. Several members said other counties have removed the bid-bond requirement and instead use corrective policy measures, such as prohibiting winners who refuse to sign contracts from bidding for a defined period. One member noted that state statute allows the county to adopt its own system for managing bid security; committee members asked staff to draft a policy for future agenda consideration.

Staff described the contract timeline: successful bidders sign contracts after a short preparation period (the committee noted a 10-day window to sign), at which point a bid check can be converted to the performance bond. Shane (staff) explained that the county holds unsuccessful bidders’ checks and returns them with a letter; a performance bond is cashed when a contract is signed.

Committee members also reviewed timber-sale market conditions and bid competitiveness: the committee reported five sales received bids, with one sale drawing a single bidder. Members said they were pleased to see multiple bidders on many sales even though some regional sales remain weak.

The committee was briefed on forthcoming administrative steps: staff will prepare a formal policy language about bid bonds for a future agenda, and the committee approved awarding the recently opened timber bids so work can proceed.

Ending: The committee did not set specific dollar figures in the meeting for changes to the bond requirement and directed staff to bring a drafted policy and any statutory references back for formal action at a later meeting.