Joanna Leslie, the county assessor, told Boone County officials on Dec. 15 that she is formally rejecting all bids received in a July–August request for proposals for assessment and reassessment professional services. "Due to the 2 bids having a huge price disparity, the major differences in staffing from each bid, and my concern that the bids are not apples to apples, I am rejecting both bids," Leslie said.

Leslie said she will pull the current RFP, work with other affected offices to rewrite it for clarity and scope, and implement a scoring process for evaluating future proposals. "I will also come up with the detailed scoring system for the RFP review," she said, adding that the decision was made "in the best interest of the public and the county to reject all bids."

While Leslie described rejecting the bids as within her authority, members of the meeting sought clarification. An Unidentified Speaker 3 stated they did not believe the rejection required a board vote, and Leslie said she would coordinate with the auditor and treasurer on next steps. The board did not take a formal vote on the rejection during the session.

Leslie also requested the board approve a one-year extension of the current vendor's contract for cyclical and other assessment work to allow continuity while the RFP is rewritten. "This will allow my office to continue getting the necessary work done while I work with the committee to rewrite the RFP for the work needed," she said. Commissioners said they had not all received the proposed contract text; one speaker reported getting the contract only that morning.

An Unidentified Speaker 2 warned that if the county does not extend the contract, the assessor would have a very short window to hire staff, estimating roughly 10 business days to recruit enough employees. That same speaker offered a cost comparison if the assessor hired staff directly, estimating "close to $1,400,000 per year" for 12–13 positions, a figure other members described as a possible maximum.

Board members discussed options: extend the existing contract for one year, rewrite and reissue the RFP in 2026 with clearer scope and scoring, and time the new solicitation to align with budget processes. Leslie said one job description she implemented could cover some treasurer office work as well. A staff member referenced an upcoming deadline: Leslie said mobile home values must be delivered to the auditor by Jan. 25, adding schedule pressure.

The meeting recessed before the board voted on the proposed extension; members noted audiovisual problems and paused to resolve live-streaming and audio issues. Earlier in the session, the board approved minutes from the Dec. 1 meeting, the consent agenda and a 2026 payroll change notification by voice vote.

Next steps identified during the session included providing the extension contract for legal review, revising the RFP with participation from affected offices, drafting scoring criteria, and returning to the item after staff and counsel vet the extension terms. No final decision on the one-year extension was recorded before the recess.