RICHMOND — At a meeting Wednesday night, selectmen and residents discussed how the town will proceed now that it has received 11 bids to design and build a new Umberhine Library.
The bids ranged from $372,475 submitted by a Bowdoinham construction company to $634,250 from a West Gardiner firm.
Now, a panel will conduct a formal review of the bids. All three of the selectmen present Wednesday agreed to take part in the bid review process. Chairwoman Tracy Tuttle and Selectmen Daniel Dunton and Clarence Cummins attended Wednesday’s meeting.
An audience member suggested Wednesday that the Planning Board should review plans for the library before money is sought at a town meeting, and that the town should be careful about building a structure that might require additions in the future to comply with evolving needs or safety codes.
Tuttle agreed that more specific plans will likely need to come from everyone. Tuttle noted that the firms that submitted bids included no blueprints or proposed floor plans, so “There’s still a lot to do… I don’t think that we’re anywhere near being able to ask for x amount of money.”
“That makes two of us,” Cummins added.
Town Manager Marian Anderson said the town’s codes enforcement officer has been on the panel working on the bids and has been communicating with the Planning Board chairman.
“Obviously, the town would never build anything that didn’t conform to the land use ordinance,” Anderson said.
Town staff keep a record of correspondence with the bidding firms. She characterized this bidding process as a work in progress, “understanding that the town was criticized by library folks because we’ve had this all this time and we’ve done nothing.”
After lengthy debate at the June 2010 annual town meeting, Richmond residents voted to have town government assume operation of the Isaac F. Umberhine Library. Prior to that change, an independent board managed the library, which moved from a dilapidated building at 86 Main St. to rented space at 164 Main St.
Recognizing the need for a new facility, the independent board had launched fundraising and studies to built a new library at the 86 Main St. site.
“This was our best attempt to move it forward,” Anderson said Wednesday. “If there are folks who believe that you’re not ready to go forward with any borrowing at this year’s town meeting, that’s certainly fine. The town office has no position on it. We were just given guidance from the ( Board of Selectmen) as to move it forward, to do the best we could with what we had.”
Anderson said the panel’s next task will be to select three bids that might work for the town, and have conversations with those contractors. She added that the public works department has offered to do as much of the site work as possible.
Dunton said he feels this is not something selectmen should rush to town meeting.
“This is a huge project for the town and has a lot of implications all the way around,” he said. “If we have to have a special town meeting in September when we have everything figured out, we have a special town meeting … We had to have some bids in and see what we’re looking at, because we were all over the place.”
Audience member Michael Grizkewitsch asked selectmen about the possibility of putting a non-binding question before voters at a town meeting now that taxpayers have some real numbers to consider, to help give selectmen some direction. Tuttle agreed this may be a good way to go.
Anderson said the panel that will review the bids will meet within the next two weeks.
The Times Record Sustaining Sponsor
We believe a community must be informed to thrive. bowdoin.edu
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less