Parks & Rec to re-bid audiovisual equipment

Submitted by Suanne Z. Thamm
Reporter – News Analyst
June 23, 2017 4:47 p.m.

 

What initially looked like a matter of routine business turned into anything but that at the June 20, 2017 Regular Meeting of the Fernandina Beach City Commission (FBCC). Commissioners were asked to approve an award of bid to purchase and install audiovisual equipment at the Atlantic and Peck Auditoriums in the amount of $33,388. After considerable discussion and apparent lack of satisfactory answers from city staff, commissioners voted 4-1 to reject all bids and direct Parks and Recreation Department to rebid the project. The only commissioner who did not support the vote was Roy Smith, who wanted to make a different motion.

In explaining the item, City Attorney Tammi Bach said that the city had received a bid protest on the award.

The Invitation to Bid (ITB) stated:

“Work consists of the design and installation of new audiovisual equipment at 2500 Atlantic Avenue, 516 South 10th Street and an alternate bid for 1200 Elm Street. Installation of the new A/V equipment will upgrade the amenities offered at our rental locations and allow for renters to provide quality presentations and performances.”[Emphasis added.]

Minimum specifications were listed for the Atlantic Avenue Recreation Center and the Peck Center.

Two (2) bids were received and opened on May 11, 2017. The lowest bid received was from CCS Presentations with a base price of $32,756.59. After review of the bids, researching the components and checking references, staff recommended K&W Audio Visual based on the bid criteria and the City’s Code which references in Sec. 2-428(f)(1) factors to be considered such as efficiency of the bidder and quality of references. The difference in the bids is $631.41.

The price did not include the alternate bid for the MLK Center on Elm Street.

CCS Presentations filed a bid protest pursuant to Sec. 2-444 of the City Code, which provides that the City Commission must settle bid protests when the contract value is $20,000 or more.

Part of the bid protest

In explaining what led up to the bid protest, City Attorney Bach said that Parks and Recreation had decided not to proceed with the bid alternate which would have provided equipment to the MLK Center, largely on the grounds that the equipment would not be used as much at that facility. When the bid alternate was removed, the difference in bids was $631. Initially Jay Robertson, a Parks and Recreation Department Manager, justified selecting the higher bidder because that company had better warranties than the low bidder. Bach said, “Later that turned out not to be the case because warranties were not a criterion for the bid.” Bach recommended ignoring that factor, but there were other factors, such as time to install the equipment, that resulted in the recommendation of bid award to K&W Audio Visual.

Bach reminded commissioners that under its policies, the city is not required to award to the low bidder.

The bid protestor did not attend the meeting.

Commissioner Roy Smith asked if the bidders had been quoting on exactly the same equipment.

Jay Robertson, who fielded questions on the bids, replied, “Not exactly the same brands, but there was a minimum specification [on power, screens, etc.].

Following Robertson’s explanation, Smith asked, “So why didn’t you give it to the low bidder?”

Parks & Rec Director Nan Voit (l) and Jay Robertson (c) respond to Commissioner Smith.

Robertson said, “There was the warranty to take into consideration. The one group had a very specific product list, the other was kind of vague and had an $8,000 integration cost that wasn’t really spec’ed out. So realistically we didn’t know what we were getting out of that cost …”

Commissioner Roy Smith

Smith interrupted, “Did you ask them what it was for?”

Robertson responded, “No, sir.”

Smith said, “See, I have a problem with this. I’m not picking on Recreation, but it seems to come out of that Department. We are terrible at putting bids out. … This should never have happened. This is crazy. And how many times do we hear this stuff? I don’t know which [firm] was better, but what was in the request with respect to warranty?”

Robertson said there was no minimum.

Smith became even more agitated. “See that’s the problem,” he said. “You shouldn’t be asking them [after the bid has been received]. When you bid a job, you put out what’s required. We do this all the time.”

Vice Mayor Len Kreger

Mayor Robin Lentz recognized Vice Mayor Kreger, who agreed with Smith. “Without the requirement to select the lowest qualified bidder, the process becomes subjective. And that’s asking for trouble. … It smacks of favoritism, whatever … especially if you didn’t have the warranty issue in there and you didn’t ask both of them.”

Mayor Lentz recognized Janice Mote, a Parks and Recreation Department staff member who works at the MLK Center. She asked for clarification as to why the MLK Center had been eliminated from the project scope. Bach said the Parks and Recreation Department had opted to exclude the MLK Center, which was a bid additive, because of the total cost of the project.

Janice Mote, MLK staff member

Mote said, “I would just like to say that quite often, since I have been employed at the MLK Center and living in the community, the MLK Center is always overlooked. We have just as great a need for these articles. We are quite often considered an afterthought. We have children and after school programs, same as Atlantic; we have summer programs, same as Atlantic. Items are budgeted for Atlantic, but not for MLK. We are often told that it’s because there is not enough money in the budget. I am suggesting that we plan our budget a little bit better to include MLK, and keep it from looking like our neighborhood is not important in this community, because it is. We had to fight to get our floors repaired; we had to fight to get our restrooms upgraded … Instead of having to fight it would be so wonderful if we would be considered part of the community and that the MLK Center Director be included in the budget planning as well.”

Commissioner John Miller asked, “In the future, do we see the same type of programs at MLK as well?”

Robertson responded that recent purchase of portable equipment had been made for the MLK Center. “Over 70 percent of the space rentals at MLK are for family reunions or repast situations where equipment is not required.” Robertson said he could not speak to whether the addition of equipment might increase rentals of the space, but said that there is a definite need/demand at the Atlantic Center.

Commissioner John Miller

Miller asked Robertson if the city was fulfilling needs at MLK with the portable equipment. Robertson said that “he did not want to say that there was not the possibility of offering other things” but he did feel that the portables were able to handle current needs, adding that capacity at MLK limited event size.

Miller asked that as the city moves forward, it have the same standards for all centers.

Miller objected to previous comments from commissioners characterizing Parks and Recreation contracts as ‘crazy’ and ‘terrible.’ “I would disagree with that,” Miller said, directing his remarks toward Robertson and his department director Nan Voit. “I think that’s an overstatement. I don’t think it’s terrible. There is always room for improvement; it’s a learning experience. But I want to go on the record as saying I don’t think you are doing a terrible job in your budgeting, and I thank you for all the work you are doing in Parks and Rec.” Miller is a former employee of the Parks and Recreation Department.

Janice Mote returned to the podium and said that the reason the A/V equipment is not used at MLK is because it is not available. “If you look at the rental agreement,” she said, “it is available at Atlantic, but not MLK.” She added that the Center Director sometimes brings in equipment from his home to use for children’s programs. They have also relied on donated, used, televisions. “If we had the equipment available, I’m sure people would be willing to use those things.”

Smith asked how much the bid alternative was to include MLK in the equipment purchase and upgrades. Robertson said that CCS (the low bidder) had offered a price of $7440, and K&W (the selected bidder) had put in a bid of $15,000.

In responding to Mayor Lentz’ question on why the difference, Robertson said it was difficult to say because CCS had only included 4 elements, while K&W went into more specifics.

Smith asked Robertson if he had gone back to CCS to ask for clarification on what was included. Robertson said that during the pre-bid meeting CCS had said that microphones were included, but the other items were not listed.

Smith said that he still had a problem with the bid and wanted to offer a motion. But Miller and Poynter had previously moved and seconded a motion to approve the award. Poynter declared that he was removing his second from the motion to approve. He asked Miller if he was willing to change his motion from approving to tabling the item or putting it out for a rebid “because this is screwed up.”

Miller said, “There’re probably some issues here that we could do better, but I don’t want to say it’s ‘screwed up.’ But yeah, I think we can do better.”

After advice from the City Manager and the City Attorney, Miller made a motion to reject the bids received under ITB 17-05 and rebid. Poynter seconded the motion.

When the vote was taken, all but Commissioner Smith voted in favor. When asked after the meeting why he opposed the motion, Smith said that he wanted to offer another motion to include the bid alternative for MLK and award it to CCS as the low bidder for the entire project.

The project was budgeted for funding under Parks and Recreation impact fees. Bid totals, including the MLK Center, were $40,196.59 (CCS) and $48,548 (K&W). Excluding the MLK Center, CCS remained the low bidder, but by a smaller amount: $631.

Editor’s Note: Suanne Z. Thamm is a native of Chautauqua County, NY, who moved to Fernandina Beach from Alexandria,VA, in 1994. As a long time city resident and city watcher, she provides interesting insight into the many issues that impact our city. We are grateful for Suanne’s many contributions to the Fernandina Observer.

 

 

2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

John Goshco
John Goshco (@guest_49110)
6 years ago

These are the same geniuses who can’t design and bid a simple airport terminal.

And you wonder why it takes 15 years to come up with a plan to improve the waterfront.

Dave Lott
Dave Lott(@dave-l)
6 years ago

Someone who is experienced in preparing bid documents needs to conduct a final review of such documents before they go out to prevent situations like this. There was a process flaw in some poorly designed wording as well as a political flaw in the “secondary” treating of the MLK Center even though there might have been a perfectly legitimate reason for having them as an option. If equipment is truly “portable”, how often is there a requirement at both Atlantic Avenue and the Peck Center at the same time? If it happens enough, then multiple systems would be required, but if not, why not obtain a single system.
A bid document needs to be as specific as to requirements as possible without being too specific in requiring certain brands, etc. or selecting requirements that only one vendor would be able to meet. At the same time, a bid document can include some “additional factors” that would support the selection of a bidder other than the low-dollar bidder as long as the weighting of those factors were agreed upon by the evaluation group prior to the bids being opened.