Loading...
SR-04-11-1978-6HW APR 1 1 1978 Santa Monica, California, April 3, 1978 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Staff SUBJECT: Recommendation to award Bid for Water Meters. Bid No. 1335. Introduction This report concerns award of bid for thirty -five hundred (3,500) water meters in the maximum amount of $83,141.10, including applicable tax, durina the current fiscal year; and award of bid, subject to the availability of funds, for forty -two hundred (4,200) additional meters during Fiscal Year '78 -'79, in the maximum total amount of $110,091.60, including appli- cable tax. Funds for purchase of the initial lot are available in job order number 64110 -030, Maintenance of Meters, for which $114,729.00 is budgeted. Background The proposal form supplied to all bidders called for 3,500 meters to be furnished out of current stocks and an additional 4,200 meters to,be delivered after July 1, 1978, if approved as a budget item. In response to published Notice Inviting Bids to furnish meters in accordance with specifications, bids were received and publicly opened and read in the office of the City Manager on February 9, 1978. Proposal forms were mailed to seventeen (17) potential suppliers and notices were advertised in accor- dance with City Charter and Municipal Code Provisions. Five (5) bids were received, including one (1) containing an alternate, as listed on the attached two -page summary. APR 1 1 1978 To: Mayor and City Council -2- April 3, 1978 Unit costs and trade -in allowances proposed were: Because the number of meters to be returned for credit will depend upon the number of meters retained for rebuild or for other City purposes, the amounts recommended are the maximum that will apply. It is the opinion of the General Services Department that reliance on a single product would not be advisable and that purchase of both brands would contribute to the greatest cost effectiveness. The reasons for this follow: 1. In view of the high incidence of meter glass breakage due to vandalism in certain areas of the City, the Staff conducted a field test between the Badger and Neptune Meters to determine cost of subsequent glass replacement. This test indicated that time to replace was virtually the same for both brands but that the parts required for a Badger replacement cost $6.80 while the Neptune cost is $.60 each, a cost trade off of approximately $2,674 per year in favor of Neptune. 2. Meter companies at times have had problems with their meters due to design, and although the meter companies warranty the meters, this warranty does not extend to the labor it would take to replace Each Trade -in Net Badger Meters, Inc. $ 22.41 $ 4.40 $ 18.01 Gamon - Calmet, Inc. 28.30 3.13 25.17 Neptune Meter Co. 23.08 4.50 18.58 Rockwell International 28.25 4.25 24.00 Hersey Products 25.94 3.50 22.44 Hersey Products (Alternate) 28.10 3.50 24.60 Because the number of meters to be returned for credit will depend upon the number of meters retained for rebuild or for other City purposes, the amounts recommended are the maximum that will apply. It is the opinion of the General Services Department that reliance on a single product would not be advisable and that purchase of both brands would contribute to the greatest cost effectiveness. The reasons for this follow: 1. In view of the high incidence of meter glass breakage due to vandalism in certain areas of the City, the Staff conducted a field test between the Badger and Neptune Meters to determine cost of subsequent glass replacement. This test indicated that time to replace was virtually the same for both brands but that the parts required for a Badger replacement cost $6.80 while the Neptune cost is $.60 each, a cost trade off of approximately $2,674 per year in favor of Neptune. 2. Meter companies at times have had problems with their meters due to design, and although the meter companies warranty the meters, this warranty does not extend to the labor it would take to replace To: Mayor and City Council -3- April 3, 1978 the meters which is about 1/3 the cost of the meters. The purchase of two types of meters would reduce the City's cost if this occurs. 3. If only one meter is purchased, future competitive bidding would be in jeopardy because repair parts would have to come from one source, with possible inflated prices. 4. The City presently has approximately $2,500 of parts in stock which could be used on the Neptune meters The above four reasons are balanced against Badger's lower initial cost and lower anticipated future maintenance costs. Recommendation It is recommended that the award for Item One be made to Badger Industries in the maximum amount of $83,141.10, and for Item Two, subject to the avail- ability of funds, to Neptune Water Meter Company in the maximum amount of $110,091.60. Sales tax is included in both amounts. Prepared by: Ed Lash Stan Scholl R. N. Aronoff /cs O � n M O M N •o oz z Qa H H PQ W U O O O O 4J o O O o ro . o H H 0 u H 4 v Cl) CT N N z 4J ^ ^ rl 00 ul It N to Q O O r 41 H 0 0 Co 3 O Q^ 4 c O� a) 0 � �i Cl) a) to -H It N N z }-1 p Q) Pa O Ln %D N rl in ur ro Cd O O O O O rl J.J O ltl Lr) O r4 ro N (: vl N n ul 41 p r m O n (1) N 00 m 00 00 z U 4J H 00 N It 00 P' m O rl n yr rl S4 N O� U m ro 3�0 N H P'1 :4 O oc 00 O PCI H U 4-I ':) P' o 10 0 41 0 P4 o u v r, 00 .00 r z �ww z 00 a) 000 N W ro Cd yr yr cn a v z1-4 0) O o O O H ro•4 O O O O z U H • W I 1J O O O Lr) 0 0 OD Ln m Q) z 0 0000 b o ro-I n M Ch H O m O r U Py �: H O O O O O rl rl O vl �o rl O 4-1 a) }.I co O It O N bDa) n H .t z -d 41 td a) W m Lr I- 00 r • I pG U I O }4 00 U) to a) 4-3 i N Oro G 14 z S a - p CCd r-I Cd r 4 v 0 O v- U 04 H 1d •H 'TJ E o W O 4-1 t •ri a 4J X CO 0 'Z H C')i � m .,i cn io F p H W W LW O N u ao P+ Q) O C C 0 u o 0 0 0 ro u q o I� r- 0 u _ }a It oo Cl) (1) H (1) It ul O r- I� ^ -A ^ H l0 I- I+l !A Q N M H J-I r-I H U C) ro UI Il O Cl) C y-I n C O O 0 M N W C co cC C r } • p o M M o u .G Cl) 0 Cl) Ln v G z U) •rl 1� C r r z z N H w (3) P+ o r_ M ul n IF-7 'm H H ra r-I PCI Fu r-I V!- V)- ro 0 0 •J 0 0 0 0 H u c 0 C 0 u a) G 0 C4 rl c 4J $ Lr) N n N m ,x a) F— It 1-4 H z U 4-J J ^ CO H N M r-I rl r r � V]- i/T u< N N U] N s � o Ad a o c o N �H a) ` � 0 0 a r C 41 w P �o M IT N (1) 4J (1) OC N C N w a+ P H 6 Vr V:- Vr A +J U (1) C7 m z r-I a) G C C C H 41 •r1 O O O O z c w u O o o Lr) u PL, m O � � 00 v c o � o o u-i Ln 0 o Hn M C7 H N M r r1 r-I U H O O O C O I-I r O }� ca Vl O v1 O A-J Q) }a vl O� O (1) bD a) 00 O cc oo z ,O -J ct u o �o o rn pq O O r 4 ra H V} V} V} I pC, U I O a) 3 = a ro E co Co d r - O w a) •rl a) H z 3 w 4 � Q) N a a a� CD (1) = U P. E Cd •rl ro 5 E 0 w o u It -H a +3 m U Nt�7'M-HM H � H �H H PU W LW O N u ao P+ Agenda Item 6 -H: Contract No. 2497(CCS) for purpose ters was awarded to Badger Industries in the amount Year 1977 -78 by issuance of P. 0. No. 36272 and for N t e water Mater Co in the amount of $110.091.60 ep un ed after Fiscal Year 1978 -79 budget approval. of 3,500 water me- of $83,141 for Fiscal 4,200 water meters to , number to be assign i CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - April 11, 1978