Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Storm Debris topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Duplin County reports $757,275 in apparent low bids for storm‑debris work, staff to scope feeder creeks

Duplin County Board of Commissioners · November 18, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

County staff told commissioners that apparent low bids for six river sections and three creeks total $757,275.50 of an earlier $1.25 million appropriation; staff will ask Soil & Water to evaluate feeder channels and present options to bidders before proceeding.

Duplin County staff reported that apparent low bids for removing storm debris from six sections of the Northeast Cape Fear River and three feeding creeks total $757,275.50, leaving roughly $493,000 unspent from a previously appropriated $1,250,000.

"The apparent total for all 6 sections and the creeks was $757,275.50, which leaves approximately 493,000 for continued improvements on the river," said Brian Miller (county staff member), who reviewed the bidding process and schedule. Miller said bids were solicited separately for each section and that the county’s soil and water conservation team, led by Billy Ivy, was nearly finished with the process.

Why it matters: The appropriation was made at an earlier emergency meeting to address storm damage and protect property along the river. Commissioners asked whether the contracted work would include mechanical snagging, hand work, or pinning, and whether feeder channels could be cleared while crews were mobilized.

Miller said the methods under consideration include ‘‘snagging and pinning’’ and that the county will rely on soil and water staff to assess how far upstream the crews should go. He recommended that soil and water prepare scenarios and coordinate with apparent low bidders for each section rather than immediately expanding the work without a new scope and bid confirmation.

Commission discussion centered on prioritizing property protection, cost containment, and letting technical staff determine which creeks require additional work. One commissioner asked whether it would be cheaper to address feeder channels while equipment is on site; Miller said the soil and water team would evaluate and bring recommendations back to the board and to the bidders as needed.

Next steps: Soil and Water will meet to formally approve bids and then issue a notice to proceed. The county will not expand the scope beyond what the bids cover until staff returns with costed scenarios and a recommendation.