Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves consent agenda including construction change orders and low‑bid awards; administration recommends Escola for a roof project
Summary
The board approved a broad consent agenda that included multiple travel approvals, contracts (including Cumberland Health), change orders for Central Hardin and Child Nutrition projects, and bids for roofing, tennis courts and a greenhouse; staff recommended low bidder Escola for a roofing/liquid-coating project and discussed a Calcutta subcontractor.
The Hardin County Board of Education voted unanimously to approve a comprehensive consent agenda that bundled administrative reports, contracts and construction-related bids.
Items approved included the annual data security report, the district technology plan, the certified evaluation plan, several student travel requests (FFA, marching band, athletic teams), the Cumberland Health contract for the 2025–26 school year, monthly financial reports and multiple change orders for the Central Hardin renovation and the Child Nutrition project.
Facilities staff updated the board on active construction projects—West Hardin, the child nutrition center, Central Hardin Area D and Area J—and recommended awarding a roofing/liquid coating contract to low bidder Escola. Staff said they checked references and emphasized the importance of identifying a site superintendent; the board discussed subcontractors (Calcutta was named as the low bidder for a liquid‑coating subcontract) and alternate scope items (soffit, fascia, snow guards) that would extend the useful life of the work.
Board members raised questions about weather impacts, cost‑saving alternates (one board member cited approximately $9,000 in savings on a line item) and vendor experience. Administration said some projects were experiencing weather‑related delays but were progressing and that they would continue to manage vendor selection and oversight.
The consent agenda was moved and seconded and approved by voice vote; no roll‑call tally was provided in the record.
The board did not take separate roll‑call votes on each contract; items were approved as part of the bundled consent agenda.
