Bonneville County advances 49th North widening contract though two reimbursements remain unsigned
May 13, 2026 | Bonneville County, Idaho
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Bonneville County public works committee voted to accept the notice of award and to approve the contract and notice to proceed for the 49th North (49th North/45th East) widening project, with recorded affirmative votes and the motions carrying.
Staff told the committee the project contract was awarded and presented a reimbursement breakdown that, if all third‑party agreements are obtained, would return roughly $6.4 million to the county. An agency official summarized the vehicle of reimbursements: “county $1,768,000; Falls Water review reimbursed accounting $1,261,000; School District 93 about $1,077,000; state center $544,000; Rockwell/Liberty Homes frontage $858,850; Peach's Corner Commercial approximately $917,000.” The official said those totals would amount to “about $6,400,000” if all parties sign agreements.
The official later said written agreements already exist with some entities and that he had secured verbal agreement that morning from School District 93 and a church representative but that Liberty Homes and Peach's Corner Commercial had not yet signed. “The bottom two are still a question mark as of today,” the official said. The committee recorded that the unsigned items represented roughly $1.7–2.0 million of potential reimbursement.
The Chair asked for a motion to accept the notice of award; a committee member moved and another seconded, and the board recorded affirmative votes and the motion carried. The board then approved the notice to proceed and, later, the contract on the understanding that staff had verbal commitments and would follow up to finalize written agreements. When a committee member raised concern that future items should arrive with written agreements in hand, the mover acknowledged that would be preferable going forward.
On the record, staff noted the county's portion would be covered even if the two reimbursements did not materialize, but the agreements were expected to reduce the county's net cost. Staff said they would prepare contract documents and send them to the parties for signature and requested to be cc'd when the agreements are returned.
Next steps: staff will prepare the written contracts and forward them to the third parties for signature; the committee moved into routine right‑of‑way and parcel approvals for the same project later in the meeting.
Staff told the committee the project contract was awarded and presented a reimbursement breakdown that, if all third‑party agreements are obtained, would return roughly $6.4 million to the county. An agency official summarized the vehicle of reimbursements: “county $1,768,000; Falls Water review reimbursed accounting $1,261,000; School District 93 about $1,077,000; state center $544,000; Rockwell/Liberty Homes frontage $858,850; Peach's Corner Commercial approximately $917,000.” The official said those totals would amount to “about $6,400,000” if all parties sign agreements.
The official later said written agreements already exist with some entities and that he had secured verbal agreement that morning from School District 93 and a church representative but that Liberty Homes and Peach's Corner Commercial had not yet signed. “The bottom two are still a question mark as of today,” the official said. The committee recorded that the unsigned items represented roughly $1.7–2.0 million of potential reimbursement.
The Chair asked for a motion to accept the notice of award; a committee member moved and another seconded, and the board recorded affirmative votes and the motion carried. The board then approved the notice to proceed and, later, the contract on the understanding that staff had verbal commitments and would follow up to finalize written agreements. When a committee member raised concern that future items should arrive with written agreements in hand, the mover acknowledged that would be preferable going forward.
On the record, staff noted the county's portion would be covered even if the two reimbursements did not materialize, but the agreements were expected to reduce the county's net cost. Staff said they would prepare contract documents and send them to the parties for signature and requested to be cc'd when the agreements are returned.
Next steps: staff will prepare the written contracts and forward them to the third parties for signature; the committee moved into routine right‑of‑way and parcel approvals for the same project later in the meeting.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
