HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommission_Chambers4
25
Mr. l\IIays: Mr. Mayor, I'll yield to Jim, because I was probably going to ask him
a question.
Mr. Wall: I guess I would like to clarif erha s somethin tl1at Ms. Sams said,
because the questjon was aske, whether or not this is the way we've always done it, and I
. dIffer -- not sure how she interpreted the question but I would respond to that question
<liffurentl~' Several years ago, we did break down the bid process mto a Section A and a
Section B. There is no dispute about that process at this point. A lot of the arguments w::e-
used to have concerning uniforms, and we've had arguments about Sheriffs Department
uniforms for years. I think everybody probably is aware of that fact. The bids that are
before you are the not the fITst bids that came in for this year's uniforms. The first ones,
the first bids that came in, it was my opinion that there was not a basis for making a
determination and they were sent back out. That methodology was different from this
methodology. This methodology is different than we've ever used before, so there has
b~en a .2ifferent metho9 for the last two bids th~t have gone out. yefore Whaf we did, we
bid..-it strictly on unit prices. One item, what is the cost of it, total up those single items
through the Section A, and whoever was the low bid would get that. The bids that went
out in December and subsequently the bids came in, had estimated quantities. But the
estimated quantities, it didn't indicate whether the bid would be awarded based upon an
extension of those estimated quantities that would be purchased or whether it would be
based upon the unit prices. And depending upon how you interpreted the award, that's
what you would come up with. As a result of that, there, was discussion among several
Commissioner~, Mr. Kolb, who I think had probably been on the job one day or certainly
less than a week, and I would included and l\IIs. Sams was included, and I believe the
Sheriff was there, concerning~ome type of weighted average. And the goal was to have
a weighted average process to award the bIds, so that you would look from an historical
standpoint, look at the number of each sizes of the uniforms that were purchased, and
base it on that. That was not my recommendation. My recommendation was to go back
to the original process of which you looked at price~, and you don't know how much, the-
quantity of any item that you were going to use. But if you were going to do it on an
historical basis so that over a period of time you looked at that, then you would have
something to base it upon. The problem here is that this is not historical data. This is the
\ast urchase order that wa · ued as far . .es are concerned. According to
my review of the quantities that are down there, according to w at I've been told by the
Purchasing Department. And so what you have is the last purchase order, those
quantities have been carried forward. Wh~ou look at the dollar amounts that are down
the Ii ill see that onl in three cate ories does Command have the lowest perltem
cost. That's in men's trous~rs, women's trousers, and then I be Ieve it's the em lerns, the
third item. I think looking at that that you, based upon the mstoncal data of the quantities-
.,4.. ~
that have been ordered, yqu are ~oinQ: to save money by awarding the contract to
Sidney's, and that is the basis, I think, of the Administrator's recommendation, becaust: --
~enyou look down that list, recognize that only in the men's trousers, the women's
trousers and the emblems is Command the lowest, and because of the quantities from an
historical standpoint have been ordered in the other categories, the true lowest cost to the
government is going to be through ordering from Sidney's under their pricing structure as
~~~
~r-4