Board approves furnace‑room and tennis‑court contracts after extended questions about bidding process

The Ridgewood Board of Education on May 19 approved two construction contracts — the combined furnace‑room renovations at Ridge and Glenn schools and a full replacement of the Ridgewood High School tennis courts — after board members repeatedly questioned the procurement process and small bidder turnout.

Board member questions centered on the procurement timeline, pre‑bid turnout and whether the district could have gotten more competitive pricing by changing the scope or delaying the work. Architectural lead Gian Ficaro told the board the two projects were publicly advertised on March 21 and March 29, with pre‑bid meetings on April 6, addenda on May 17 and bid openings on April 28. “The advertisements went out … the 21st and the 29th of March,” he said.

Board members noted the furnace‑room project received only two bids and asked why the district had not delayed the work until more bidders could respond. Mr. Matthews, the district business administrator, said the district had initially sought in‑house or change‑order options that proved too costly and that calendar timing was intended to return renovated spaces to staff by the start of the school year. He also described technical complications in the furnace‑room work — including 8‑foot voids under planking that require jackhammering and new slabs — that he said made the project more complex than surface‑level renovations.

Discussion about the tennis courts focused on scope and classification language in the bid documents. An addendum clarified that no synthetic turf or track work would be required, changing the required specialty classification for bidders; legal counsel ultimately deemed one low bid nonresponsive because it lacked the required 060 specialty classification for tennis courts, the board heard.

After the discussion, the board voted to award the furnace‑room renovation contract (vote recorded as three yes, one no, one abstention) and to award the tennis‑court contract (four yes, one no). The business office said the furnace work bid totals were within the resolution’s 'not to exceed' limit and that architecture/engineering fees were included in the award package.

The board also approved an increase to its grounds‑management contract with Manello Landscape Industries to cover extraordinary snow removal and related work; the motion passed with one no vote. During that conversation board members and administrators noted a FEMA reimbursement request had been submitted for storm costs and that the business office had negotiated partial concessions with the vendor.

The board’s discussion highlighted two recurring themes: timing and classification in public procurement and tradeoffs between completing work during the summer and seeking more competitive contractor response. Several board members said they wanted the district to consider scheduling or scope changes in future procurements when specialized classifications narrow the bidder pool.

The board’s actions are final pending routine contract documentation. Several members asked staff to prepare a short follow‑up memo explaining the bid outreach timeline, plan‑holder lists, addenda distribution process and any post‑award change‑order limits to inform the June meeting and future procurement planning.