Skagit County pauses award of Marches Point landfill remediation contract after bidders raise responsiveness concerns

Skagit County commissioners pulled the agenda item awarding the Marches Point/Whitmarsh Landfill remediation contract after contractors questioned the county's determination that several bids were nonresponsive.

Commissioner Lisa Janicki opened the discussion by noting the county had received written comments from bidders; Cameron Bell, who identified himself as representing one of the bidders, told the board his company believed it had been the “low responsive and responsible bidder” and that supplemental qualification materials were submitted within the contract timeline. Bell said his firm and colleagues — Jason Strule (estimator), Brett Barillo (company owner) and Chris Tully (general superintendent) — were present to explain why they believed the county's nonresponsive finding was incorrect.

Steve Falkquist, Deputy Prosecutor for Skagit County, told the board the county was awarding the bid but had not yet executed a construction contract and explained the county's view of the bid protest timeline: “It’s premature for them to even be submitting protests at this time because it’s really not until we execute the contract that we need to provide notice,” Falkquist said. He described the award step as distinct from contract execution and said the county would provide the required two days’ notice to other bidders before placing the construction contract on a future agenda.

County procurement staff (referred to in the meeting as Margo) told commissioners that supplemental materials were received but that they arrived after the bid opening, which staff said rendered the bids nonresponsive under the bid specifications. The contract language read aloud during the meeting requires the apparent low bidder to submit by 12 p.m. on the second business day following the bid submission deadline a written statement and supporting documentation demonstrating compliance with any supplemental criteria.

Several bidders raised concerns about how the county evaluated apparent low bids. Cameron Bell said the bidder ultimately identified as the low responsive bid — Strider Construction — submitted a bid “just over $10,000,000,” which he said was “about $2,000,000 higher than what we bid the project for,” and expressed concern that the county might not be protecting the county’s financial interests by awarding to a higher-priced contractor if the lower bidder were wrongly deemed nonresponsive.

Commissioners said the dispute raised new information and unanswered questions. Commissioner Wiesen suggested pulling the item so staff and legal could review the submission timing and documentation. By consensus the board removed item 36 from the consent agenda and held it for further review; the item will return to a future agenda only after staff completes the procurement review and any required notifications.

The board also noted that the county would follow the procurement and contract-notice requirements before placing any construction contract on a future agenda. The consent agenda item for the Costco Health Solutions personal services agreement (item 47) had already been pulled earlier in the meeting and remained off the consent list.

Why this matters: The award covers remediation work at a county landfill site and involves multi‑million-dollar bids and a construction schedule county staff said they prefer to keep. Competing accounts about whether supplemental qualification material was submitted on time have delayed the award; commissioners moved to pause final action while procurement and legal staff clarify the record.

Next steps: County procurement and the prosecuting attorney's office will review the submission timing and documentation; commissioners did not set a specific deadline during the meeting but said staff would return with clarification before any contract is executed.