Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
EDA presses selected mowing contractor to accept 30‑day opt‑out or award contract to runner‑up
Summary
The East Grand Forks Economic Development Authority directed staff to ask the board’s selected mowing contractor to accept a 30‑day termination clause and per‑lot price reductions tied to lots sold; if the vendor refuses, staff was told to offer the work to the secondary proposer, Sanger and Sons, which proposed a $250 reduction per sold lot.
The East Grand Forks Economic Development Authority debated changes to a recently selected mowing contract and directed staff to pursue alternatives after a vendor pushed back on a requested 30‑day termination clause and on price reductions tied to lots sold.
Board members said the selected contractor objected to a clause that would allow either party a 30‑day written termination and did not include a mechanism to reduce the contractor’s payment if lots are sold and the Authority has fewer parcels to maintain. Staff said one alternate proposer, Sanger and Sons, offered the same base seasonal price and a $250 reduction for each lot sold.
The board asked staff to contact the primary contractor and request the termination clause and a per‑lot reduction; if the contractor will not accept those terms, the board instructed staff to move forward with the secondary proposer. A board member framed the choice as weighing contractor loyalty and institutional knowledge against cost and contract flexibility, noting mobilization and fixed costs limit dollar‑for‑dollar price adjustments.
The board discussed contract length (options of two versus three years), the operational effect if only a few lots remain, and whether the city could assume mowing when parcel counts fall very low. The discussion concluded with a directive for staff to (1) reopen talks with the primary contractor about inserting the 30‑day notice language and a proportional lot‑reduction arrangement and (2) report results back at a future, publicly noticed agenda item; no final contract award was recorded at this meeting.
Why it matters: The contractor terms affect how much the housing/EDA fund pays for maintenance as lots sell and the Authority’s ongoing obligations shrink. The board sought to balance cost certainty against vendor continuity.
Speakers (selected): Chair; Daniel (board member who moved to proceed with the second proposer if necessary); Staff member (procuring staff who will contact vendors).
