Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Food Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ohio County Board approves Gordon Food Service through Mountaineer cooperative
Summary
The board accepted a recommendation to join the Mountaineer cooperative food-service contract, selecting Gordon Food Service (GFS) for a 329-item market basket after staff cited lower pricing and rebates; the motion passed unanimously.
The Ohio County Board of Education voted April 13 to accept staff’s recommendation to contract with Gordon Food Service through the Mountaineer cooperative for district food items. Board members were told the cooperative procurement covered 23 counties and a standardized 329-item market basket, and staff said pricing comparisons showed a significant savings for the district.
Dr. Miller and procurement lead Renee Griffin explained that the RFQ produced two responsive proposals; staff used identical item lists for fair comparison and noted GFS’s discount programs and summer-order rebates. Griffin said the initial cooperative total was listed as roughly $13,057,001.27 across participating counties, but she clarified that figure covers all 23 counties and is not the district’s individual obligation. Croft and other board members asked for assurance that district logistics — including minimum cases per delivery to the central warehouse — would not penalize Ohio County; Griffin said the district’s single-delivery site avoids minimum-order problems.
Board members pressed on details including local spend history and how absent cooperative members would affect pricing. Griffin responded that the RFQ allowed individualized county participation and that several counties already approved the cooperative; she noted a pricing gap of roughly $140,000 when comparing the top proposals on identical items.
With those clarifications, a motion to accept the recommendation to award food-service purchasing to GFS was made and seconded; the board approved the contract unanimously.
The board did not set a single local contract value in the public discussion; the cooperative total cited in presentations covers multiple counties. The district indicated it will continue to use its central warehouse and kitchen and that vendor logistics were compatible with current operations.
The board’s action was procedural approval to enter the cooperative pricing arrangement; staff will return with any final contract documents and implementation steps as needed.
