11/27/1995 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 23, 1995 aggressive to get the pump on line as soon as possible. This is why all bids were above the engineer's estimate. Mills Concrete Restoration is a relatively new firm. Investigation of their references indicates that they have been performing satisfactory work. Although TKDA has had no experience working with this firm, the people who own and operate the firm have been in the industry for some time. Much of the actual work will be completed by subcontractors. All of the subcontractors are known to TKDA. Mr. Johnson recommended that the bid be awarded to Mills Concrete Restoration. Mr. Johnson noted that the pumphouse is the entry point to the Clearwater Creek subdivision. This presents a concern regarding appearance of the lot. The time it would take to maintain the large lot as well as creating a good growing environment for the seeding and sodding process, seemed to indicate a sprinkler system was needed. Mr. Johnson recommended awarding the sprinkler system to Mills Concrete Restoration. Mayor Reinert asked Mr. Johnson to explained why the sprinkler system was bid as an alternate. Mr. Johnson explained that bidding the sprinkler system as an alternate allows the City Council to choose whether or not to install a sprinkler system along with the pumphouse. Mayor Reinert said he felt that a sprinkler system should be part of this improvement but felt that the bid price was very high. Mr. Johnson said that a sprinkler system could be delayed until the landscaping is designed. Mr. Schumacher noted that Mills Concrete Restoration is relatively unknown and asked if there is anything that can be done to insure the project will be completed as designed. Mr. Johnson explained that a performance bond is required to insure completion of the project. Mr. Schumacher suggested that additional inspections would be appropriate. After further discussion, Council Member Neal moved to not approve the bid and investigate Mills Concrete Restoration ftirther. There was no second to the motion and the motion died. Mr. Powell suggested that if the Council was uncomfortable awarding the bid this evening, they could adopt a motion accepting the bids. He also explained that this action would delay the project about three (3) weeks. Mr. Johnson noted that the newspaper ad had indicated that the bids would be acted upon this evening. Mr. Hawkins explained that if the City Council is thinking about rejecting the Mills Concrete Restoration bid, the City Council must prove that the individuals operating the company are not responsible persons. Council Member Kuether moved to approve Resolution No. 95 - 144 awarding the bid to Mills Concrete Restoration without the sprinkler system. Council Member Elliott seconded the motion. Council Member Bergeson noted that posting a performance bond is standard procedure and if a bond cannot be secured by this firm, the City Council would have to reject the bid and award to the next lowest bidder. Voting on the motion, motion carried with Council Member Neal voting no. PAGE 13