Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Comprehensive‑plan consultant choice clouds grant submission after higher bid arrives
Summary
Pulaski County staff recommended HWC Engineering for a comprehensive‑plan grant; commissioners were told HWC’s base proposal exceeds the grant/match budget by about $20,000 and must either lower its price or the county must reprocure or delay the application.
Nathan (county staff) told commissioners an interview panel that included the planning administrator and two commissioners had recommended HWC Engineering to prepare an updated county comprehensive plan and that the grant application tied to the selection is due at the end of the week. After the meeting began, HWC emailed options that included a base proposal above the $60,000 grant plus minimum local match budget the county had expected; staff said the overage was roughly $20,000.
Nathan said the interview committee’s scores strongly favored HWC but that the firm’s recent cost proposal presented an unexpected wrinkle. County counsel (Edwin) had advised that the commissioners’ earlier resolution assumed the $60,000 figure and that adopting a higher contract value would require a new resolution, Nathan said.
Commissioners debated options: require HWC to reduce its base price to fit the known $60,000 total, accept a higher local contribution and pass a new resolution, reprocure and select another firm (Kimley‑Horn had been the other finalist), or delay submitting the grant. One commissioner said the county’s current comprehensive plan (adopted in 2009 and executed in 2012) might not require a complete redo and suggested the planning board review current sections and scope to limit cost. Another commissioner said the county should not rush the work and expressed discomfort committing additional funds without attorney review.
Given the fast deadline, staff recommended selecting HWC contingent on its ability to bring the price down to $60,000 without compromising quality; staff said if HWC could not meet that requirement the county could reprocure or skip this round. Commissioners took no final procurement action at the meeting and directed staff to get more information from HWC and confirm procurement and resolution implications with the county attorney.
No contract was executed at the meeting; commissioners agreed to revisit the decision after staff returned with clarifications.
