At the start of public comment, resident John Crotty of 356 Sunshine Drive urged the Village Board to solicit multiple bids and an independent needs analysis for the proposed new building rather than proceed on a perceived fast track with a single general contractor identified in his remarks as “Keller.”
Crotty said he has experience in residential remodeling and reviewed public materials and previous meetings. He told the board he had found a comparable project in Jackson where an independent firm handled needs analysis and the project was bid as a lump-sum at roughly $11.6 million for an approximately 48,000-square-foot public building. "Cedar Corp will do a needs analysis…they bid it out as a lump sum," he said.
Crotty criticized cost-plus arrangements and guarantees with broad exceptions, arguing they can create weak incentives for a general contractor to limit costs: "When the big box people do a cost plus deal…they'll let the GCs get 30% of the savings…you incentivize the GC to actually save you some money," he said, and contrasted that with a contractor who would be paid on a small percentage fee where "there is no incentive for them to save money."
The board did not act on procurement policy at the meeting; Crotty said he would be willing to help review alternatives and provide contractor references. Staff did not present a procurement item or request at the meeting related to the construction contract; no votes were taken on selection or procurement strategy during the session.
The resident’s remarks joined other public-comment items but did not trigger board direction recorded on the agenda; the transcript shows the board accepted public comment and moved to the next agenda item.