Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Efficiency Nyserda topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rhinebeck board selects C+G for design and implementation support under $600,000 NYSERDA grant
Summary
Trustees voted to proceed with a $91,000 proposal from C+G (identified in meeting as 'C and G') to deliver a passive-house–oriented audit and architectural design work tied to a $600,000 NYSERDA-related grant; the selection was framed as a means to speed reporting and phase-two implementation.
The Village of Rhinebeck board voted to award the initial contract work on a $600,000 NYSERDA/federal-funded project to the firm identified in the meeting as C+G (referred to in meeting text as "C and G"). The board recorded the selected proposal cost as $91,000.
Board members said the $91,000 proposal includes more than a passive energy audit: it also provides architectural design services and project-management capacity that the village expects will help with subsequent implementation (phase 2) and with meeting NYSERDA and federal reporting requirements. Trustees discussed two lower-cost proposals in the competitive process: one firm quoted approximately $38,000 and another about $51,000; a third listed bidder was substantially lower in reported cost but the recommended firm was advanced because members said it offers experience in municipal projects, Passive House–style work, and capacity to support the village through design and implementation phases.
Why it matters: board members said time is limited to meet grant deadlines and that choosing a firm able to manage reporting and phase-2 implementation could avoid a second RFP process and speed execution. One trustee said the recommended firm works with a local engineering firm in Rhinebeck and has NYSERDA experience.
Board discussion: trustees and staff compared the proposals’ prices and scopes. The $91,000 proposal was described as the most complete: it includes architectural design work, updates to the village’s prior FlexTech audit with current cost assumptions, and potential full-service project management through implementation. Supporters said the additional scope justified the higher price given time constraints and reporting burdens. A trustee asked about sequencing work such as envelope improvements versus HVAC replacement; staff answered that the selected firm would help prioritize work and design an implementation plan within the $600,000 budget.
Votes and outcome: the board approved proceeding with the C+G proposal by voice vote. The transcript records “aye” votes; no roll-call tally was provided.
