The North Kingstown Policy Advisory Committee voted to return a rewritten purchasing-procedures draft after members identified discrepancies between the district draft and the town ordinance and requested clearer rules for emergency procurements and vendor contacts.

Members opened the discussion by confirming access to a shared draft and explaining color-coded edits from different reviewers. Ken(ney) Dubhe, identified in the transcript as superintendent, and other staff noted the town ordinance’s purchasing thresholds had changed and that the draft should mirror the ordinance "so we're updating our policy" to reflect the new amounts, including a construction threshold cited in the meeting as $22,026.24.

Committee members pushed staff to use the ordinance’s mirror language where applicable and to cite the specific town ordinance reference in the policy so future ordinance updates are visible. Several participants raised practical concerns about the district’s requirement to obtain three price quotations for purchases. One attendee noted the town ordinance includes contingency language for emergencies — commonly phrased as "if time permits" — and said the superintendent should be allowed to act during true emergencies without obtaining three quotes. Staff agreed and suggested adding emergency authority language already used elsewhere in district policy, consolidating it into the purchasing-procedures document.

The committee also reviewed sole-source exceptions. The ordinance lists exceptions A–C, while the district draft incorporated older, expanded categories labeled D–G. Members recommended condensing the language and aligning the sole-source form with the ordinance for consistency, keeping any explanatory detail in the form (not the policy) to help staff complete it.

Members asked staff to clarify insurance and liability language for RFPs and to coordinate with the district’s insurer/trust to set appropriate insurance limits, rather than prescribing fixed amounts in the policy. The committee also discussed vendor demonstrations before RFPs are issued: members said staff may hear product pitches but asked that the policy require transparency — for example, documenting early contacts, sharing ranking sheets and scoring criteria publicly, and maintaining conflict-of-interest safeguards so demonstrations do not create a perception of preselection.

Staff and committee members agreed to a near-term rewrite: produce a cleaned draft that (1) mirrors town ordinance language where appropriate and cites the ordinance, (2) consolidates emergency procurement authority into the purchasing policy, (3) tightens sole-source language and aligns the form with policy, and (4) adds guidance on insurance limits and vendor-contact transparency. That revised draft will be returned to the committee for review at the next meeting.

The committee did not take a formal vote on the purchasing policy at this meeting; members instead instructed staff to bring back an edited draft addressing the points above.