The January 29, 2013 city council agenda (here) has some interesting items on it.
Items 6B, 6C and 6D deal with issuing contracts to install school zone flashers and pedestrian ramps for the disabled. It looks like there are three separate items because of the quantity of work to be done. They appear to be similar but each deals with different schools.
The backup material tells us that the bids were due October 3, 2012 and were then evaluated by October 15, 2012. Evidently it takes 12 days to evaluate bids that affect the safety of our children whereas we all know that a ballpark or new city hall needs to be evaluated in a day, maybe even in hours.
Items 6C and 6D are being recommended for award to company A (El Paso based) — after all it was the low bidder.
Item 6B is being recommended for award to company B (Arizona based). Company B was not the low bidder. Company A was the low bidder.
Why don’t they want to give the business to company A? According to the backup material company A is not “responsible”. The city could have said “responsive” but since the public is considered to be “crazies” what’s the harm in some slander?
Let’s see why company A is not “responsible”. According to the recommendation:
- “The proposal is on a form other than the official proposal forms issued to the bidder or bidders”
- “The bidder modifies the proposal in a manner that alters the condition or requirements for work as stated in the proposal”
What? Company A bid on the other two projects at the same time in a manner that was evidently acceptable to city staff. Did they use the wrong form on this particular bid? Somehow city staff was able to analyze the offer, even if it was on a different form, and conclude that company A offered the lowest price. Company A did not use the right form? Oh! The humanity of it! What a horrible inconvenience.
It appears that Company A also had the audacity to suggest different requirements. They are in the business of doing this type of work. Were they trying to tell the city that there was a better, more effective way of doing the work? If so, and the city for some reason felt compelled to follow the bidding laws (a bid should be analyzed against published, set, specifications), why did the city not cancel the bid and redo it with better specifications? There was plenty of time. After all the city has been busy feathering their nest.
This stinks. The city probably has other reasons, but it must be inconvenient to share them with the public.
I doubt that Company A will complain. They got two out of the three jobs. They will probably keep their mouth shut rather than risk the wrath of the city. Who would listen to an irresponsible company?
The fact that it took more than four months to approve something for the safety of our children while city staff can approve building moves for their own convenience in a matter of days tells us a lot about where staff’s priorities are.
We deserve better
Brutus
elpasospeak 
You do realize that the signs the city is posting now allow police to ticket you any time? They don’t specify that the school zone speed limits are when school is in session. This means that you’re breaking the law any time, school days, weekends, holidays and police can ticket you if they want. What maroons.
LikeLike