Tuesday, August 14, 2012
CONCESSION STAND MESS
Once again that which will not b e on next Monday’s Council agenda was of greater interest than most of next week’s resolutions and ordinances.
One Resolution, one Ordinance for first reading and two Mayoral Commission/Board recommendations were not approved for action next week. There was a long discussion on the road resurfacing program and the Water Companies multiple cutting of Watchung Ave about 24 hours after the pavement was laid. More on this subject and the appointments in subsequent blogs.
There were two potential Resolutions relating to the Concession Stand at the Joe Black Rock Ave. complex; Item “F” and Item “X”. Although inter-related the Chairman insisted they not be discussed together but in order.
Item F amended Resolution 126-12 which approved the awarding of a $71,432.03 contract to a Washington State Concern for a pre-cast concrete stand. There was no change in the contract but it had to be amended to comply with the fact that the vendor was part of Washington‘s approved vendor group. (If you are confused so am I).
It seems that this contract was enacted through an approved vendor list without open bidding. The Stand is ready for shipping but Plainfield asked for a delay until November as was clarified in Item “X” which was to award Remington et al a $29,250.00 contract for engineering services for construction of the Concession stand.
It seems that contrary to the impression given when R126-12 was approved the “Stand” is only a shell not a complete “turnkey unit. Site planning, utilities plans, construction contracts including sub-contracts and oversight were not included in the original costs.
This information which will raise the total cost to near $200,000.00 was never given to the Council. Except for Council approval of R126-12 it is a mystery of who placed the order. When was it placed, and why the supplemental work was not requested.
The impression received previously was that Recreation was handling the matter.
Resolution ‘X” was tabled pending a RFQ for the engineering studies and sub-contracts. In addition Council wishes to speak with Director of Public Works, Eric Jackson regarding why the lack of information prior to submitting R 126-12.
Once again the lack of fiscal controls and following a centralized purchasing process is going to cost the city. Did Recreation act without consulting engineering?