Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Procurement Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council delays RTU-10 HVAC award after questions about bids and purchasing policy

5708834 · September 3, 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

Councilors questioned why a higher-priced vendor was recommended for an RTU replacement and paused award amid wider discussion of the city's purchasing manual and bid-advertising requirements.

The Pryor Creek City Council voted to take no action on awarding the HVAC replacement for rooftop unit (RTU) No. 10 after extended discussion about bidding procedures and whether the city’s purchasing manual complies with state statute.

The recommended award was to Jayco for $62,004.85. Council packet records showed lower bids from Climate Experts and Versapro; councilors and staff disagreed about whether the bids were fully comparable and whether the department followed the city’s preferred procedures.

Council members questioned why the council would accept a higher-priced bid when a lower priced bid was on file. City staff and the department head argued Jayco has a long history with the facility, that Jayco and the Aon unit specified are built for the pool environment (stainless and chlorine exposure) and that Jayco’s experience with the building informed the recommendation. One department head said some bidders did not inspect the site before bidding.

Several council members pressed for stricter procurement controls. They said the purchasing manual should explicitly require two legal notices when state statute requires two newspaper publications, that a non-collusion affidavit be included in bid packets, and that department heads receive procurement training. Council members also said awarding bids during council meetings is not advisable without additional review and subject-matter expertise.

After debate, a motion to award the bid was amended to “no action at this time” and the amended motion passed. Council members directed staff to re-run or re-evaluate the solicitation consistent with the purchasing manual revisions and to provide clearer documentation (including non-collusion affidavits and statutory notice steps) when bids return for council action.