|
AGENDA REVIEW SESSION JANUARY 21, 2016 13
<br />The Agenda Review Session of the Board of Public Works was convened at 10:34 a.m. on
<br />January 21, 2016, by Board President Gary A. Gilot, with Board Members David Relos,
<br />Elizabeth Maradik, Therese Dorau, and James Mueller present. Also present was Attorney
<br />Michael Schmidt. Board of Public Works Clerk, Linda Martin, presented the Board with a
<br />proposed agenda of items presented by the public and by City Staff.
<br />Board members discussed the following item(s) from the agenda.
<br />- Award Bids
<br />Mr. Jeff Hudak, Equipment Services, stated both 4X4 truck bids are for replacement of aging
<br />vehicles. He stated the utility vehicles will be CNG. He noted they will move the ones being
<br />replaced down the list and gut rid of the worst three (3) vehicles.
<br />- Request to Advertise— Miscellaneous Vehicles
<br />Mr. Hudak stated all of these bids will offer the opportunity to bid CNG as an alternate. Mr.
<br />Gilot questioned if without CNG should be the alternate. Attorney Michael Schmidt stated the
<br />language in the specifications allows an award with the alternate, even if it is not less expensive
<br />than without the CNG. Mr. Gilot asked if the truck for Code Enforcement will allow the drivers
<br />lifting of equipment. Mr. Hudak stated no, these are smaller for access in alleys, and only have
<br />room for small pick-ups like tires.
<br />- Award Proposal — Fuel Management System
<br />Mr, Matt Chlebowski, Central Services, informed the Board his department did an analysis on
<br />CNG and found the City is averaging $1.52 per gallon less on the compressed natural gas
<br />compared to liquid fuel. He slated they used about 58,000 gallons. Mr. Chlebowski stated a
<br />group made up of himself, Purchasing, and information Technologies reviewed and put together
<br />a scoring analysis and found B&K Equipment to be the highest scorer. He added they put
<br />together all the information relevant to the award of the request for proposals and asked how to
<br />proceed to get all of the information distributed to the Board, or determine what information the
<br />Board needed to review prior to the award. Mr. George King, Purchasing, stated he would work
<br />with the Clerk of the Board on what material needs to be on file. Attorney Schmidt stated when
<br />there is a request for proposals, the data used for the award should be available. Mr. Chlebowski
<br />noted five (5) people reviewed and scored the proposals. Mr. Horvath stated the Board can't take
<br />the price only; that is just a small percentage of the scores.
<br />— Special Purchase
<br />Lieutenant Chris Voros, Police Department, stated the Police Department has a current credit for
<br />$16,562.10 with R&B Car Company. He noted they went there to look for trucks to replace an
<br />aging one and found two (2). He noted based on the NADA report, they chose the one with the
<br />highest value, adding the funding is from their non -reverting asset forfeiture fund. Mr. Gilot
<br />questioned why they we purchasing fleet; adding why isn't Equipment Services doing the
<br />purchase? Mr. Eric Horvath, Director of Public Works, questioned if this even falls within the
<br />criteria of a special purchase. Attorney Schmidt stated he had not seen the paperwork on this, but
<br />had reservations about this as a special purchase. He addedhe looked at it as a significant
<br />savings, but based on the availability of other tricks to fit their needs at a lower cost without the
<br />special trim package, this does not appear to be a true comparison and he was not slue this meets
<br />the significant savings criteria. Mr. Horvath questioned how the Police Department had a credit.
<br />Lt. Voros stated it was from a trade-in of another SOS unit. He added it will probably be a
<br />couple of years before there is a need for any more vehicles. Mr. Chlebowski stated Equipment
<br />Services did some research, and the truck needs to be replaced, but not with this one, He added it
<br />has a lot of fancy details, and is not comparable with what is available. Mr. Chlebowski noted
<br />they could probably buy a brand new truck for the same price with a five (5) year warranty,
<br />adding this one is five (5) years old. He stated if there's a credit, they need to look at how to do
<br />this. Mr. Horvath stated he was still confused on how there is a credit, noting when you trade-in
<br />a vehicle, you use the credit. Lt. Voros explained when they traded in the SOS vehicles, they
<br />didn't need as many so that left a credit on the account. Be stated they thought they would be
<br />using the credit eventually, but the program was canceled so they don't need them. Mr. Gilot
<br />stated he was uncomfortable with this and asked Lt. Voros to work with Legal and Equipment
<br />Services on this. Mr. Horvath agreed, and added they need to make sure they are following the
<br />proper procedure. Ms. Dorau questioned why they are in the plowing business. Lt. Voros stated
<br />they operate twenty-four (24) hours and have to be able to get patrol vehicles in and out at all
<br />times. Mr. Gilot stated when it's fleet, it should be done through Central Services. Lt. Voros
<br />stated he wasn't trying to go behind their back, he had been talking to Mr. Hudak about it and the
<br />only issue that came up was the special trim package. Mr. Hudak agreed and added also the
<br />plow; there is no plow on the truck. Mr. Horvath informed Lt. Voros that if it's critical, if they
<br />
|