School bus contractor disputes county decision
A school bus contractor is trying to appeal a contract going to a new provider for some of Anderson County’s bus routes.
The dispute involves how the people in charge of evaluating contractors look at experience.
David Landreth, president of Andersonville Bus Lines, made the appeal.
He laid out his case at a work session of the Anderson County Board of Education, explaining that experience doing the specific routes in Anderson County should count more than experience doing routes elsewhere.
As stated in official documents, contractor SCU received 13 contracts for routes with competitive bids, including six on which Andersonville also bid.
Anderson County Law Director Jay Yeager said in an interview March 18 that the county planned to decide on this appeal within 10 days.
At the March 18 County Commission meeting, Landreth joined many others in disputing the contract decision process, making Room 312 of the Anderson County Courthouse standing room only during the time for public comments.
It was not, however, a matter on the County Commission’s agenda for the meeting.
“A lot of people out here for you all to look at,” he said. “They’re all bus drivers. Can’t everyone be a bus driver. They’re special people.”
“We love our kids we haul, and we want to take care of them,” he said in an earlier interview with the Courier News.
At an earlier meeting, however, Anderson County Director of Schools Tim Parrott said the low cost of the new contractors was a factor in them getting the job.
“There’s only so much you can do when the low bid is that much lower,” he said.
Similarly, Anderson County Mayor Terry Frank said the decision to award the bid for routes previously driven by other contractors to SCU will save the county $171,907.65.
Frank stated in an email the bus contracts for 27 routes including the ones to be taken by SCU expire June 30.
“The schools provided the RFP for the Purchasing Office to post on Vendor Registry. The Purchasing Office publicly opened the four RFP responses on Feb. 22 at 2:30,” the email said. “Copies were provided to the Director of School Transportation to be dispersed to the Evaluation Committee. The three members of the Evaluation Committee independently scored all vendors using the criteria and points listed in the RFP. Their scores (also attached) all resulted in the same recommendations for each route. The Director of School Transportation returned the recommendations to the Finance Department. The Deputy Purchasing Agent reviewed the evaluations and recommended to the Finance Director that the RFPs be awarded according to the Evaluation Committee’s selections.
“The decision was posted on Vendor Registry,” Frank said, explaining the process in this case and in general.
