Chickasaw County opens bids for courthouse window replacement and approves plans, defers award
May 27, 2026 | Chickasaw County, Iowa
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 Chickasaw County Board of Supervisors opened five sealed bids for a courthouse window replacement during its May 26 meeting and approved a resolution adopting the proposed plans, specifications, form of contract and estimated total cost to enable the public improvement to proceed.
Board members opened bids that staff said were timestamped before the 9:00 a.m. deadline. Bidders and lump-sum amounts reported to the board were Elite Glass and Metal LLC (Johnston) $925,000 (bid listed commercial-grade aluminum windows), A and J Construction LLC (Cresco) $974,298, Caro Construction (listed at $872,000), CR Glass (Cedar Rapids) $895,850 (aluminum), and a bid from Misty Construction (Waverly) that the transcript records in an unclear format (appears as “797,55”/“79,755”); the board noted the Misty Construction figure is unclear in the audio/transcript and staff will confirm the exact number in the records.
The board opened a public hearing at 9:13. A resident asked when the existing windows were installed and was told they date to the late 1970s or about 1980; staff also said several windows are broken or have nonworking cranks. There were no written or additional verbal comments from citizens.
After the hearing the board adopted Resolution 526-26-33, which approves the proposed plans, specifications, form of contract and an estimate of total cost for the improvement but does not award the contract. Supervisors agreed the county engineer or project consultant (Roman, referenced in the meeting) should review the bids for responsiveness and responsibility and return with a recommendation for award at the next meeting.
The county attorney and staff told the board that, if all bidders complied with the bid documents, the contract would ordinarily be awarded to the lowest responsive responsible bidder; material choices listed in some bids (aluminum vs. wood) will be clarified during engineer review.
Next steps: staff will confirm the exact bid amounts (where transcript entries were unclear), the county engineer will review bidder responsiveness and responsibility, and the board expects to consider awarding the contract at its next meeting.
Board members opened bids that staff said were timestamped before the 9:00 a.m. deadline. Bidders and lump-sum amounts reported to the board were Elite Glass and Metal LLC (Johnston) $925,000 (bid listed commercial-grade aluminum windows), A and J Construction LLC (Cresco) $974,298, Caro Construction (listed at $872,000), CR Glass (Cedar Rapids) $895,850 (aluminum), and a bid from Misty Construction (Waverly) that the transcript records in an unclear format (appears as “797,55”/“79,755”); the board noted the Misty Construction figure is unclear in the audio/transcript and staff will confirm the exact number in the records.
The board opened a public hearing at 9:13. A resident asked when the existing windows were installed and was told they date to the late 1970s or about 1980; staff also said several windows are broken or have nonworking cranks. There were no written or additional verbal comments from citizens.
After the hearing the board adopted Resolution 526-26-33, which approves the proposed plans, specifications, form of contract and an estimate of total cost for the improvement but does not award the contract. Supervisors agreed the county engineer or project consultant (Roman, referenced in the meeting) should review the bids for responsiveness and responsibility and return with a recommendation for award at the next meeting.
The county attorney and staff told the board that, if all bidders complied with the bid documents, the contract would ordinarily be awarded to the lowest responsive responsible bidder; material choices listed in some bids (aluminum vs. wood) will be clarified during engineer review.
Next steps: staff will confirm the exact bid amounts (where transcript entries were unclear), the county engineer will review bidder responsiveness and responsibility, and the board expects to consider awarding the contract at its next meeting.
Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!
Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.
✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
30-day money-back guarantee
