A Tiffany Dome for City Hall

December 3, 2012

I wrote in another post about how the city spent $94,993.76 to replace 17,000 square feet of ceiling tile on the 10th floor of city hall last year.  I sure hope they did not have to pay much for the warranty since the building might soon be torn down.

City staff claims that this amount was obtained through a competitive bid process.  In other posts I have said that is not so.

Let’s look at the numbers.

Using Google one can find the exact tile they used for less than $10,000.  Let’s add 20% for profit.  We are now at $12,000.

The city evidently wanted new grid.  I don’t know what was wrong with the old one, but let’s assume they need to tear down the old one and put in a new one.

In writing this I was going to go off and research the individual costs.  Then an idea came to me.  I wonder if the city has actually done other ceiling projects?  Well as it turns out they have right here.  Wander down to items 17, 18, and 19.  To save you the arithmetic their first recommended bidder wants $1.33 per square foot to tear down and install acoustical ceilings (without materials).

This was a 2011  award the city made through another buy board (our local Region 19), just not the buy board that lets us send 4% of every purchase to Houston.  By the way Region 19 rebid this in 2012 and the low bidder for tear down and install was at 70 cents (down from $1.33)–but we will use the 2011 numbers since they were available at the time.

We have:

  • $12,000 for the ceiling tiles (available to you and me on the web, who knows what you could get them in volume for)
  • $22,610 for labor to tear down the old grid and install the new one
  • $10,000 for the materials in the ceiling grid

That brings us to $44,610 and even that number is just a price survey (not a competitive bid–which would be lower).

In the construction business they refer to site conditions–things that make the work more or less expensive.  Could the extra $50,000 that we spent be because the workers had to work on the 10th floor of city hall?  Did the contractor determine that it is a cesspool filled with snakes?  I don’t know.

Humor aside, here we have a situation where we paid twice as much as we should have.   Why would they use a buy board out of Houston when an El Paso buy board was half the price?

We deserve better!

3 Comments | City government, Purchasing, State Government | Permalink
Posted by jcurrey

Service

December 2, 2012

My distinguished elder M. T. Cicero hints that he thinks the posts this week were a bit heated.

Out of respect for his feelings I offer today’s post.  However I must wonder if we don’t have the pot calling the kettle black with him feigning fear of Brutus’ knife after he had the allegedly traitorous Cataline conspirators strangled, thus putting Roman citizens to death without a trial.

Some would say that Brutus simply imposed term limits on Caesar, the “dictator for life”.

Enough.

Is the Internal Revenue Service a service?  The guys at Oxford define it here.  Some would say that common usage makes it so.  Once again, precedent does not make principal.

Try calling the IRS.  They do have 800 numbers after all.  Tell them that you don’t think you want their service this year.

Then make room for the auditors.

We all know what they are.

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

Leave a Comment » | Federal Government | Permalink
Posted by Cato

Pro Brutus

December 1, 2012
I ran into Brutus yesterday and let me tell you, he is in a tirade. He was in front of Baskin-Robbins carrying a placard which read “Down with the Cone of Silence”. He sure gets disturbed and I’m afraid with his reputation that he might stab me in the back one day. Fortunately, I only have to worry about that in March.
 
Well, in either case since our efforts are mostly concerned with the City Government, I asked him what he thought of changing our Mission Statement to “How to fight City Hall…… when it is demolished“.  He suggested we wait until the implosion. I’m hearing however, it may not happen.  The ELP Times reported that petition to place the demolition on the ballot by the “Crazies” was finally accepted. But Brutus informed me that shortly, Joyce and Cortney are will have the “Crazies’  rounded  up and required to take the “Mini Mental Status Examine“.  I told him I thought that it wouldn’t work and they could easily pass the test.
He responded “IN RUSSIAN“?
 
Have a nice weekend and start looking for a part time job to pay your upcoming property taxes
 
Arcus Senilis

1 Comment | Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by M.T. Cicero

More Of Our Money For Houston

November 30, 2012

Next Tuesday’s City Council agenda has an item to award a 4 million dollar contract for construction work without a real competitive bid.  Read the item here.

I have written about the non-competitive issue before.  You should read Saying It Does Not Make it So.

The company in question put a new roof on city hall last year to the tune of 694 thousand dollars.  Yes, the city hall that they are about to tear down.  Read There They Go Again for the gory details.

Remember that four percent (that is 160,000 dollars) goes to the Harris County Department of Education because the city is buying off of a buy-board!  I would think that we could use the money.

I sense that we may be seeing the old two-step here.  I have no evidence yet, but I suspect that they are up to something more.

Remember that the city has been telling us that it will take about two million dollars to tear down city hall.  That’s the city hall with a new roof, and a new chiller, and a whole bunch of valuable emergency communication equipment that they say will be imploded into the rubble (click here to see $63.9 million and climbing).

Last year the city issued a contract to this same firm for 750,000 dollars.  Why the big jump to four million dollars?

Is it possible that the city will use this new contract to get away with tearing down city hall without a real bid?  There is probably real value in the salvage.   Are they going to claim that they do not have enough time to conduct fair bidding?  How long have then been planning to tear down the building?  Four percent of 2 million dollars is 80,000 dollars.  How much money could we save by conducting  a bid with existing city employees?  How much would it really cost to tear down city hall if we let the market work?  Is there real value in the salvage and are we going to get it or is some contractor going to get it?

So far we have not seen any bidding activity from the city where they are trying to find a contractor to tear it down.  The city says it takes about 60 days to run a Request for Proposals.  Have they decided to use this new contract?  Hide and watch.

Call your city representatives!  Be careful not to tell them what to do.  Incredible as it sounds that appears to be illegal.  Read Cone of Silence by clicking this link.

I wish that we could get the El Paso Times cover these stories.  I know that they have to fight cost issues, but it seems to me that they could bring real value to this situation.

We deserve better.  Maybe we will get it in the next election.

2 Comments | City government, El Paso Times, Purchasing, State Government | Permalink
Posted by jcurrey

Cone of Silence

November 29, 2012

As unbelievable as this sounds, it appears to be  against the law for you to talk to your city representative about a proposed purchase or project until the item is placed on the agenda or during a public meeting.

The city ordinance is number 16300, you can read it here.  It was later amended (but not the part I am addressing).

Let’s say the city publishes a Request for Proposals (RFP) to buy a new chimney sweeper for our local smokestack.

You think that is an unwise use of our money.  Do not contact anyone at the city and tell them what you think–it looks like it is against the law.

Section 2.94.090 D reads:

  • “During the period of solicitation for requests for proposal (RFP), qualifications (RFQ), highest qualified bid (best value), source selection, or the giving of a notice of a proposed project, which shall begin on the day that it is advertised and end on the date that the notice of the award has been sent to the City Clerk for placement on the agenda, no person or registrant shall engage in any lobbying activities with city officials and employees.” (emphasis added)

Section 2.94.020 G defines lobbying as follows:

  • “”Lobby” or “lobbying” means the solicitation of a City official, by private interview, postal or telephonic communications, or any other means other than public expression at a meeting of City officials open to the public under Chapter 551 (Open Meetings Act) of the Texas Government Code, directly or indirectly by person in an effort to influence or persuade the City official to favor or oppose, recommend or not recommend, vote for or against, or take action or refrain from taking action on a municipal question” (emphasis added).

Section 2.94.020 J defines a municipal question:

  • “”Municipal question” means a public policy issue of a discretionary nature pending or impending before the city council, a legislative review commitee of the council, or any board, commission or committee set forth in Section 2.94.030 of this code, including but not limited to a proposed or proposal for an ordinance, resolution, motion, recommendation, report, regulation, policy appointment, sanction, bid, a request for proposal ...” (emphasis added)

Section 2.94.120 defines the penalty:

  • “A person who knowingly or intentionally lobbies in violation of a provision of this chapter … shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.” (emphasis added)

The City Charter defines the penalty in Section 1.08.o10:

  • “Whenever in this code or in any ordinance of the city an act is prohibited or is made or declared to be unlawful or an offense or a misdemeanor, or whenever in such code or ordinance the doing of any act is commanded or the failure to do any act is made or declared to be unlawful or an offense or a misdemeanor, the violation of any such provision shall be deemed a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars.”

What is with these people?  Since the agenda is published late Thursday afternoon and the City is closed on Friday, that only leaves you Monday to speak your piece before the City Council meeting.  Try getting a meeting with them on Monday without prior notice.

The people down at city hall call this “The Cone of Silence”.  Reminds me of the idiocy of Maxwell Smart and his special room that you can read about here if you are too young to remember.

You think that they would not use this to their advantage?  Think again.

This is the kind of thing that I wish the El Paso Times would look into.

So if you have something to say wait for the City Council meeting.  All I can offer you is “good luck”.  Watch any City Council meeting and see how they disregard the public.  Heck, they even disregard each other.

Unconstitutional! you say.  It takes a judge to make a ruling.  In the mean time:

We deserve better.

2 Comments | City government, El Paso Times, Open Government | Permalink
Posted by jcurrey

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »