[0:02] We will call to order the special meeting
agenda for the Board of Commissioners on
[0:07] September 21st, 2026, at 5:02 PM. Thank
you, Chuck.
[0:10] First item on the agenda, uh, with all 5
commissioners here, we do have a quorum.
[0:15] The next item on the agenda is citizen
comments.
[0:18] I have no one that has signed up for
citizen comments for our special meeting
[0:23] agenda, but if you would like to speak,
now is the opportunity.
[0:27] Seeing none, we will go to item 3,
unfinished business.
[0:31] A, first reading of Ordinance 26-21, an
ordinance to amend Title 15, Chapter 1,
[0:35] Miscellaneous, Chapter 3, Speed Limits,
and Chapter 6, Parking,
[0:39] Nolensville Municipal Code. Is there a
motion?
[0:42] Motion to approve. Second.
[0:46] Any discussion on Ordinance 26-21?
[0:50] Is there any feedback from staff,
[0:53] or are we completely comfortable with—
[0:57] Just very simply, the ordinance contains 3
different provisions.
[1:01] The first is an amendment to the Municipal
Code that addresses the rules of the
[1:06] road. If you recall,
[1:07] there was some input provided that we
needed to try to find a way to capture all
[1:12] needed to try to find a way to capture all
of
[1:12] the various provisions in Tennessee Code
Annotated.
[1:15] That particular provision was modeled very
closely after the City of Franklin's And
[1:20] then also you have a no parking and a
speed limit provision where we're adding a
[1:25] couple of different street sections,
[1:27] and those are described in detail for your
consideration.
[1:30] Happy to address any other questions you
might have.
[1:33] Okay, any discussion for ordinance—
[1:36] first reading of Ordinance 26-21?
[1:39] All in favor signify by saying aye.
[1:43] Aye.
[1:44] All opposed? Motion passes unanimously.
[1:47] The next item on the agenda is Resolution
26-104,
[1:50] a resolution to reject bids received and
to reissue issue a request for proposal
[1:56] to reissue issue a request for proposal
for
[1:56] Rocky Fork Road-Newcomb Lane intersection
project. Is there a motion?
[2:01] Motion to approve.
[2:02] Second.
[2:03] We have a motion and competing seconds.
Who's it going to be?
[2:07] No, it's going to be— no, I got the last
second. He got— I'll take it.
[2:09] All right, we'll give this one to
Commissioner Carpenter.
[2:13] Any discussion for Resolution 26-104?
[2:16] Any feedback from staff or anything that
we need to state for the record as part of
[2:22] the vote?
[2:22] As we have discussed with a couple of
members of the Commission,
[2:27] there are 2 different ways that you can
progress with this.
[2:31] One obviously would be to go with the 3rd
low apparent bidder.
[2:35] We could proceed with that,
[2:37] negotiate a contract and have that back in
front of you all for the November formal
[2:42] meeting. Or we can go through a rejection
and a rebidding process.
[2:47] Fair questions that have been asked so far
is, you know,
[2:51] can we see a reduction in the bid amounts?
[2:54] And there is no way to guarantee with any
certainty, you know,
[2:58] what that is going to look like.
[3:00] We think because of the very competitive
nature of the bids that were received,
[3:05] we think there will be continued interest
in the project and hopefully They'll
[3:11] approach it with a sharp pencil in terms
of the rebid.
[3:14] But again, there's no guarantee of what
that outcome will be.
[3:18] Some things obviously that may affect
cost.
[3:21] You've got a lot going on globally and
nationally right now.
[3:25] There's no way to really nail with any
certainty how construction costs,
[3:30] price of oil, diesel fuel, things like
that,
[3:33] they're all escalating right now in cost.
[3:36] But we built a pretty good bid package
around unit costs and so on.
[3:41] So I think we've got a, A very tight
package from which contractors can
[3:46] package from which contractors can
respond.
[3:46] Obviously, in that we put certain budget
contingencies,
[3:50] basically the amount that was not
allocated for the actual bid itself.
[3:55] We would recommend that that be set aside
as a budget contingency for the project.
[4:00] Obviously, with unit costs,
[4:02] if there's a particular piece of material
that the quantities are off a little bit,
[4:08] then we make that up.
[4:09] But all of that's reviewed very carefully
as part of the cost management approach
[4:14] from staff's perspective.
[4:16] So I guess to summarize, you have 2
different ways you can go.
[4:20] One is to reject and rebid, which is what
the resolution reflects,
[4:25] or if you choose not to support that,
[4:27] then provide staff with clear instruction
that you want to see the 3rd low apparent
[4:33] bidder.
[4:34] Thank you.
[4:34] And we'll proceed accordingly with
negotiating a contract.
[4:37] Any discussion on approval of
[4:42] Resolution 26-04? All right,
[4:46] all in favor?
[4:48] Uh, I do have some. Okay.
[4:51] Um, I'm kind of surprised nobody else
does.
[4:56] Um, I just have concerns of rejecting
bids.
[5:01] I guess the question I just thought of is,
what—
[5:06] is there a rule of thumb for how different
bids tend to be
[5:12] for this type of thing?
[5:15] So $50,000 may seem like a lot, but it may
not be based on—
[5:21] I think for a project of the valuation
that The range we were dealing with was
[5:26] that The range we were dealing with was
very
[5:27] tightly bid. And I think that showed that
there was a very strong interest in the
[5:32] project. All of them had in common a
subcontractor that was going to be used
[5:37] subcontractor that was going to be used
for the
[5:38] signal installation. So we think there's a
constant there.
[5:42] If we rebid, we've been in touch with our
consultants.
[5:45] We've identified some measures that we
think will simplify The rebidding process
[5:50] think will simplify The rebidding process
in
[5:51] terms of documentation, including
electronic submittal on the bid tabulation
[5:56] electronic submittal on the bid tabulation
forms.
[5:56] The fact that this is fresh on their
minds, having just submitted,
[6:00] we think will be a plus to continue their
interest in the project.
[6:05] But again, there's just no guarantee how
it's all going to land.
[6:09] And don't want to give you all any kind of
false assurance that we're going to see a
[6:15] better price. There's always risk when
you're going to bid that you may not.
[6:20] So the cons here with rejecting the bid,
[6:24] the potential cons here are that we could
get a different
[6:31] price, so it could go up.
[6:34] Um, it puts us back another month,
correct?
[6:39] And is there, is there a way to minimize
the Well,
[6:45] we've given the contractor—
[6:48] if you are familiar with the bid package,
[6:51] we can certainly share that with you if
you'd like.
[6:54] But we gave the contractor basically 1
year to finish,
[6:57] which is suitable for a project that
involves the complexities of a traffic
[7:02] involves the complexities of a traffic
signal
[7:03] system. And as we all know,
[7:04] there's a number of long lead items that
are required for that— mast arms, poles,
[7:10] cabinetry, controllers. A lot of things
that go into that.
[7:13] The fact that you're in the late paving
season,
[7:16] there's probably not going to be a lot of
significant headway being made on the
[7:22] project through the winter months.
[7:24] So they're going to be looking for more
favorable weather,
[7:27] probably in the early spring, to be able
to really launch into construction.
[7:32] But that also gives them time to acquire
the necessary materials.
[7:37] And hopefully be in a position that can
very succinctly line up the sequence of
[7:42] construction and hopefully wrap it up well
within that 1-year timeline.
[7:46] As far as opportunities,
[7:48] we've done the best we can at identifying
a rebid timeframe that we think provides a
[7:53] reasonable timeline for contractors to
respond to the solicitation,
[7:58] but also giving us sufficient time to be
able to identify the low apparent bidder.
[8:03] Confirm that they meet all the
requirements and then move forward very
[8:07] requirements and then move forward very
quickly with
[8:08] getting a contract in front of you all for
consideration.
[8:12] So a process question for a follow-up.
[8:15] So if you open it up for rebidding,
[8:18] the applicants who had insufficient
applications where there were errors or
[8:25] whatever, do you communicate that to them,
[8:28] or is it Is it just you open it back up
and hope that they get it right this time?
[8:35] Given the nature of the errors,
[8:38] we have gone back to our bid package and
made it very clear what the requirements
[8:45] are. And if they elect to repeat their
error again, that's on them at that point.
[8:51] We've done all we can to make sure that
they submit the the proper information.
[8:58] Okay, that makes sense.
[9:00] And that's a— that would be a generic
expectation for any and all that
[9:04] might bid on the project. They have to
conform with state requirements.
[9:09] Thank you.
[9:11] It was your— it was Jarrell's
recommendation, though,
[9:15] that because 2 of the 4 responses were
rejected, that it be rebid.
[9:20] Is that accurate?
[9:21] That's part of the reasoning, yes.
[9:24] Okay, any other questions about Resolution
26-104 rejecting the bids and reissuing
[9:30] the request for proposal for Rocky Fork
Road new Semolina intersection project?
[9:36] All in favor signify by saying aye.
[9:39] Aye.
[9:39] All opposed? Motion passes unanimously.
[9:42] Uh, is there a motion to adjourn our
special meeting agenda for
[9:47] September 21st, 2026? So moved.
[9:49] Second.
[9:50] All in favor of adjournment signify by
saying aye. Aye. All opposed?
[9:53] Motion passes unanimously. We are
adjourned.