Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Brownfields topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gadsden commissioners approve brownfields study award after debate over procurement method
Summary
The Board approved selection of a firm to lead a $500,000 brownfields assessment grant after a lengthy debate over whether to use a Construction Manager At Risk (CMAR) RFQ or a traditional bid process; commissioners asked staff for procurement clarifications before voting to proceed with the recommended award.
The Gadsden County Board of County Commissioners voted to approve the recommended selection for a $500,000 brownfields assessment grant after extended discussion about procurement method and timeline.
Supporters of moving forward said the chosen approach — a qualifications-based solicitation for a CMAR-style contract — would identify an environmentally qualified firm able to conduct site investigations and prepare projects eligible for cleanup funding. Procurement staff told the board five firms responded to the 30‑day RFQ and the review committee recommended Ayers Associates.
Commissioners pressed staff on why the county used a CMAR/RFQ rather than a traditional invitation-to-bid or request-for-proposals. A county attorney explained the board could reject all bids and reprocure under a different method, but that making a different choice now could expose the county to claims from interested firms. Several commissioners said there was no urgent need to fast‑track the contract because the grant process may take multiple years, but others said starting now would position Gadsden to pursue cleanup funds more quickly.
After a motion to approve the recommended option, the board carried the action; the tally reported in the record was three yes, one no and one abstention. The board directed staff to provide procurement documentation to commissioners who requested more detail about scoring and qualifications.
What happens next: staff will finalize the contract negotiations and return any contract for board approval before funds are expended. The county attorney advised the board that if it changes procurement direction it should document reasons for rejecting responses to avoid procurement disputes.
