Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Barnstead board chooses Advance for paving after interviews; vote 3–1
Summary
After interviewing three closely priced bidders for a roughly $600,000 paving project, the Barnstead Selectboard voted 3–1 to award the work to Advance following deliberations about schedule, equipment and material quality.
Barnstead Selectboard members voted 3–1 to award a roughly $600,000 paving contract to Advance after interviewing the three lowest bidders and weighing schedule, equipment ownership and material quality.
The board began by noting the three low bids were within about 1% of one another on a project of this size and decided to bring the firms in to evaluate which team would be the best fit. Chair (role: Chair) told the board, “It’s not even about the price at this point in time. It’s truly about who’s the best fit and the best company gonna be for the town to do the paving for us.” The board heard presentations and answered questions from representatives of Advance, Continental and a smaller operator, R & D.
Matthew Dubril, identified in the meeting as “president and owner” of R & D (speaker 3), described his firm’s local experience and said his crews and supervisors would be present on the town’s project. “We want them to feel comfortable, safe,” Dubril said, describing the company’s approach to communication and scheduling.
A technical presentation from another bidder emphasized material quality. A company representative (speaker 6) told the board, “The liquid asphalt is — that’s the money. That’s what you’re paying for. That’s what leads to good compaction,” and explained how small changes in liquid‑asphalt percentage affect life‑cycle costs and cracking.
After questions and deliberation the chair announced the board’s preference for Advance and recorded a 3–1 vote in favor of awarding the contract to Advance. Board members said the decision reflected more than price: they cited past local performance, timelines, and the firms’ ability to meet specification and traffic control needs.
The board did not provide the signed contract during the meeting; staff were instructed to complete administrative checks and finalize the award paperwork. The Selectboard also noted one member had indicated earlier in the meeting that they would abstain from a vote if a conflict existed on certain items, but the paving award recorded a 3–1 result in favor of Advance.
Next steps: staff will prepare the contract documents and confirm a start window with Advance based on municipal scheduling and the contractor’s existing obligations.
