Commissioners open Dana Demolition bids; contractors flagged asbestos addenda and request fair-bidding review
November 06, 2025 | Vermillion County, Indiana
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
Joseph (bid officer) read bids from several excavation firms. Sample bids read aloud included Maguire Excavating and Trucking (Division A: $47,710; Division B: $47,710), Ezell Excavating (A: $100,000; B: $45,700), McCullough Excavating (A: $104,205; B: $52,400), S & G Excavating (A: $99,000; B: $40,000), Renaissance (A: $96,000; B: $76,000), and Doran/Dore Associates (A: $38,700; B: $38,700).
During opening, several local contractors had previously told a commissioner that addenda posted late in the process changed how asbestos in the buildings would be addressed. A county representative explained the addendum split the buildings for clarity: asbestos in two buildings could be left in place during demolition but the third building required a different treatment because of structural collapse risk. Contractors said they had limited time to review the latest addenda before bidding. "They felt like they didn't have time to review that," a commissioner summarized.
Highway staff told the board they will review all bids for required documentation and permit low bidders the opportunity to withdraw within the allowed period if material omissions are found. Staff noted unusually low bids and said they will verify completeness; bidders have time to withdraw if they omitted costs such as asbestos abatement. Commissioners discussed public-safety urgency because one building on the south end of the street is structurally dangerous and urged not to delay the project longer than necessary.
No award was made at the meeting. Staff will verify documentation, consult redevelopment (the project applicant), and return with a recommendation. The commissioners discussed the option to reject and rebid if fairness concerns remain, noting rebidding would add advertising and staff costs.
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meetingSponsors
Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Indiana articles free in 2025
