Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Contracts Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves exterior repairs at Dinwiddie Elementary after contractor underbid is resolved
Summary
After staff negotiated written consideration under state procurement rules with a bidder that underbid the project, the board approved exterior repairs at Dinwiddie Elementary with the contractor (PBI Environmental) agreeing to reduce profit so the job can proceed for about $1.098 million.
The Dinwiddie County School Board approved moving forward with exterior repairs at Dinwiddie Elementary after staff reported that the apparent low bidder substantially underbid the project and later sought a large price increase. Administrators said they obtained legal advice and negotiated written consideration so the procurement modification complied with state procurement rules.
According to facilities staff, the contractor originally bid $522,000 but later said it could not perform at that price and proposed roughly $1,000,000; staff and the contractor negotiated a final figure staff recorded as about $1,098,704 after the contractor removed an estimated 8% profit margin so the work would be performed at or near cost. Staff said the contractor, PBI Environmental, accepted responsibility for the bidding error and offered written consideration; the district’s procurement manager participated in discussions.
Administrators described the work as specialized exterior restoration—masonry, window sills, timbered decorative detailing historically installed by the Works Progress Administration, lintels and other facade elements—and noted water infiltration is compromising the building. Because of the specialty nature of the work, there are few qualified bidders, staff said, and the second‑lowest bid was significantly higher than PBI’s negotiated figure.
Board members asked whether the contractor had worked with the district previously and raised concerns about future change orders. Staff said the company had not worked for the district before but that the company’s president personally met with staff, took responsibility for the earlier mistake and committed to the timeline; staff said the contractor could begin June 2 and complete the work as scheduled. A motion to approve proceeding with the project was moved and seconded and carried on a voice vote.
The procurement discussion referenced the Virginia Public Procurement Act and the district’s lawyer advised that, for modifications beyond the standard permitted increase, written consideration from the contractor is required before moving forward.
