Boone County Commissioners rescind $1.95 million fuel-station approval after staff analysis shows long payback

Boone County Commissioners voted to rescind their prior approval of PCOR 81R — a $1,948,532 construction contract for a county fuel station — after staff presented new fuel-bid calculations showing expected savings far short of earlier assumptions.

A staff member who presented the analysis said the project’s original justification — an estimated $130,000 a year in fuel savings that would yield a roughly 15-year payback on the construction cost — no longer held when the county used the 2025 fuel-bid results. The presenter said the updated bidding produced an estimated savings of about $24,000 per year and that including design and an assumed $10,000 annual operating cost would push the payback to many decades. "At a savings of $24,000, it would actually take about 80 years to break even on that $1,900,000 number," the presenter said.

Commissioner Donnie and other board members questioned the methodology, with Donnie and another commissioner noting fuel-market variability and management options tied to bulk tanker deliveries. The presenter said this year’s bid structure separated pump prices and delivery prices and produced three bidders, enabling a clearer comparison between tanker-delivered and tank-wagon-delivered fuel. The presenter said the largest current county tanks top out at about 1,500 gallons, which limits the county’s ability to accept full transport (semi) deliveries.

After discussion, the presenter moved to rescind the prior approval of PCOR 81R; the motion was seconded and carried. The minutes record the motion as carried; the commission’s formal entry reads: "Rescind the approval of PCOR 81R in the amount of $1,948,532." No additional directing motion (for redesign, rebid, or new study) was recorded at the time of the vote.

The discussion also included comparative examples from Clinton County, where a smaller above-ground system had reportedly cost roughly $90,000 all in, and operational distinctions such as canopy and tank sizes. Commissioners noted concerns about proximity to the sheriff’s office and above-ground tanks’ exposure. One commissioner said the county’s design and estimated construction costs were substantially higher than the Clinton County example.

The rescission returns the matter to a status where the previously approved construction contract is no longer authorized by the commission. The transcript does not record a new formal direction to staff to pursue an alternative design, further market analysis beyond the presented bids, or an immediate rebid.