Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Services Rfp topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee takes mental-health transport and armed-guard RFPs under advisement, schedules May 28 special meeting

Rutherford County Purchasing Committee · May 12, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Purchasing Committee took a mental-health transport RFP and an armed security guard services RFP under advisement, asked staff to verify requirements and references, and scheduled a special meeting for May 28 at 3:30 p.m. to finalize medical insurance and related purchasing decisions.

Deputy Chief Spence told the committee that the county's prior mental-health transport contractor ceased operations about three weeks ago and staff opened multiple replacement bids. Bidders included First Call Ambulance (mileage $11.20 per mile), Wet Enterprises LLC (mileage roughly $3.25 per mile), Team Mobile Healthcare (mileage $9.33 per mile) and Aquilla Protective Services (per-trip and hourly rates listed in the bid packet). Spence asked staff to ensure the RFP packages meet requirements; the committee took the mental-health transport item under advisement and asked staff to return with a vetted recommendation at the next meeting or at a special meeting on May 28.

Spence also noted that last year the county performed about 1,800 transports and that many trips go out of county and sometimes cross state lines, which affects mileage and staffing. Committee members asked staff to calculate approximate deputy hours and mileage impact to understand overtime and manpower effects; staff agreed to provide that analysis.

The armed-security guard services RFP produced numerous bids with hourly regular and special-assignment rates (examples in the packet ranged from the high $20s to mid-$40s per hour for regular rates, higher for special assignments). The committee took the security RFP under advisement to verify references and specialty-rate usage and to consider whether a special meeting should include that item.

Separately, the commission asked the purchasing committee not to pursue a previously-discussed third-party appraisal-audit RFP after the property assessor corrected issues identified by the comptroller; the committee voted to stop pursuing that RFP. The committee scheduled a special purchasing meeting for May 28 at 3:30 p.m. (risk-management and insurance discussions were scheduled earlier that day).