Hard to explain

This document:


was part of the backup material for a city council agenda item the other day.  The purchasing department was ranking various vendors for the purpose of deciding who to buy from.

I found the awarding of zero points in the category of “Reputation and Quality of the Bidder’s Service” to one of our oldest dealerships interesting.  Further down the page they have the category of “Past Performance” where the city gave the dealership a rating of 5, the highest value that could be given.

The dealership has a good reputation for service.  Their quality has been fine in the past.  Given that no organization is perfect I can see that the city might not have given them the maximum of 20 points on this item.  However the city gave them a zero, meaning to me that the city considers the dealer’s reputation and service quality to be horrible, non-existent, not worth considering.

The dealer offered one of the two lowest prices.  It is interesting to note that the other dealer with one of the lowest prices was also given a zero in the same category.

Could it be that city staff found the bidders prices to be inconvenient?  Would staff have had to give the business to someone that they might not like just because of price?  Did they use low ratings in the reputation and quality category just to knock out the two low bidders?

Also interesting is the “Vehicle Fuel Economy” category.  The dealership that the city has chosen to give the business to received the maximum 5 points that could be given here.  All of the other dealerships were given a zero.

How can that be?  It would seem to me that we would see some other numbers here.  Or is the city saying that the losing dealerships were offering vehicles that used an infinite amount of fuel?

We deserve better


8 Responses to Hard to explain

  1. One has to wonder who did the scoring, and how they were able to do so objectively (that is if they know what objectively means).


  2. Helen Marshall says:

    This strikes me as a subject for some investigative reporting if there is any. El Paso Inc?


  3. Reality Checker says:

    I took a closer look at the sheet. Casa and Southwest Truck both got hosed big time on the scoring. One has to wonder why members of city council did not ask hard questions when they looked at the back-up materials. If they try to dodge it by saying they didn’t review the materials, that too shows negligence on their part. The city manager should have also jumped on this and questonned this before it was submitted to council.


  4. U says:

    Can you let me know the agenda date and item # so I can take a look and research. I’ve been staying away from things that cause stress and now recovering from surgery which has kept me out of pocket so to speak. Can’t stay away from this as if what you say is true then this appears to be a rigged bid.


  5. Reality Checker says:

    Why is it that that everything involving city or county government seems less than honest? And then I read yesterday that a city or county construction project was given to a New Mexico company, which makes no sense.


  6. hunty wood says:

    the dodge must have been battery powered


Leave a Reply -- you do not have to enter your email address

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: