Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Consulting Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Northern Nye County Hospital District denies SixCo consulting contract, directs negotiation
Summary
The hospital district board rejected a proposed SixCo consulting contract citing high monthly fees and ancillary charges, and voted to negotiate revised terms with the company and involve the district attorney.
The Northern Nye County Hospital District board voted 3-0 on Aug. 21, 2025, to deny a proposed consulting services contract from SixCo and directed the chair to open negotiations for revised terms.
Board members said the proposed contract's minimum monthly fee and extra per-contact charges were excessive and risked depleting limited district funds. "They're asking for $3,500 a month minimum," the board chair said during the discussion, adding the proposal included a $62.50 charge "every time somebody texts me or emails me." The chair moved to deny the contract and negotiate; Nancy seconded the motion and it passed 3-0.
The proposed SixCo contract would have covered consulting for financing, regulatory planning, construction and operation of the hospital district's project. Several trustees and community commenters urged renegotiation rather than an abrupt termination because SixCo had provided design‑build consulting in earlier project phases and the district remains reliant on continuity for grant and construction work. One board member flagged a separate $2,000,000 grant tied to ongoing project work and urged caution: "The only reason I haven't caused you more trouble is because of the $2,000,000 grant," the speaker said.
Public commenters and trustees criticized the contract's pricing model and asked the board to pursue alternatives. A resident suggested performance‑based compensation as an alternative: "If these guys think they can get this grant, give him 10% of the grant," a commenter said, arguing that a success fee would align incentives and avoid ongoing monthly overhead without guaranteed results.
After the vote, the chair said he would contact SixCo the next morning and will include the district's attorney, identified in the meeting as Brian Coonsie, in negotiations.
The denial does not terminate any existing SixCo work by operation of the board vote; rather, the board resolved to seek revised terms. Trustees said they want SixCo to consider lower fixed monthly fees, reduced per‑contact charges and possibilities for contracting directly with the SixCo staff member the board has relied on for technical work.
Trustees did not adopt a specific replacement consultant at the meeting. The chair said the board will report back at a later meeting after negotiations with SixCo and consultation with district legal counsel.
