Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cmar Rfq Boa topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Purchasing committee opens CMAR RFQ submissions for BOA/forensic center and defers selection for staff review
Summary
Rutherford County purchasing staff opened nearly a dozen responses to a Construction Manager at Risk RFQ for the BOA/forensic center project, listed the firms that submitted, and the committee voted to take the submissions under advisement for detailed staff review; staff noted one bidder’s license had expired.
Rutherford County purchasing staff opened and listed responses to a request for qualifications (RFQ) for a Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) to support pre-construction and design-phase services for the BOA/forensic center project. Committee members were read a list of firms and the committee voted to take the submissions under advisement for staff to vet qualifications and compliance.
Staff emphasized the RFQ covers pre-construction services (qualifications and certain service costs) rather than the final construction contract. The committee heard that the procurement will proceed in two steps: (1) pre-construction services to assist cost estimating and design, and (2) later contract award for construction, expected months after pre-construction work.
The record lists firms that submitted qualifications including Century Construction; Arcee Matthews; Rach Young; Cadell; an American firm that previously did public health and safety buildings; Solomon (Nashville); Tucker Group; Carter Group and others. Staff said they will analyze submissions, check compliance with submission requirements, and produce a ranked recommendation for the committee ahead of the next meeting. During the committee’s deep-dive discussion staff flagged that one respondent’s license had expired; members agreed to take the packets under advisement for a later decision and further review.
A motion to take the RFQ submissions under advisement was made, seconded and passed by voice vote. The committee scheduled follow-up review and possible action at a reconvened meeting on March 17.
The RFQ opening and deferral reflect procedural procurement steps; the committee did not take final selection votes at this meeting and directed staff to return with recommendations and a compliance review.
