Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cole County commissioners delay decision on countywide janitorial contract after wide-ranging bids and vendor exit
Summary
Commissioners discussed seven bids for countywide janitorial services that ranged from about $234,000 to $734,000, learned an existing contractor will stop serving the county in roughly a month, and agreed to pause awarding and pursue more information — including possibly soliciting a separate bid for the public works shop.
Cole County commissioners on Sept. 16 deferred action on a countywide general cleaning and janitorial services request for proposals after staff reported wide variation in bids and that a current provider for the public works shop has given notice and will stop in about a month.
The discussion centered on cost, service scope and operational implications. County staff told commissioners they received seven proposals ranging “from 234,000 all the way up to 734,000-plus” for countywide coverage. Staff said the county’s internal cleaning-related spending was about $60,000 in 2024 and could be closer to $70,000 in 2025, and that county maintenance employees currently perform much of the cleaning work in-house.
Why it matters: commissioners must weigh potential budget increases against service improvements and the county’s existing workforce. Several commissioners said an outside contractor would offer a different service mix than current maintenance staff, and they raised concerns about losing maintenance capacity if custodial duties moved to an outside firm.
Key details from the discussion included: staff advising that the contractor currently serving the public works shop is stepping down but would remain until a replacement is found; that a separate RFP for the public works shop may be required if the county rejects the countywide award; and that procurement deadlines in the RFP timeline likely mean a decision is needed soon because the vendor’s notice gives roughly a month before service ends.
Commissioners asked staff to check references and clarify whether proposals included work at secure facilities (juvenile center background checks were noted) and to explore possible cooperative procurement or “piggyback” options for buildings the contractor already serves. Several commissioners asked for a narrower short-list so staff could check references on two vendors and requested more detailed cost breakdowns, including the county’s continued expenses for supplies and maintenance staff.
Outcome: Rather than award or reject the bids immediately, the commission agreed to hold the item for further review and to place it on next week’s agenda. Staff was asked to return with additional information, including whether to bid the public works shop separately and reference checks for shortlisted firms.
Ending: Commissioners did not take a formal vote on contract award; the item will return to the commission with staff recommendations and reference checks.
