NEWS FILE PHOTO Mayor Ted Clugston is seen in this file photo. City administrators are giving more explanation when major contracts are awarded while a larger review of how tendering and procurement takes place, city council heard on Monday, Feb. 3, 2019
cgallant@medicinehatnews.com@CollinGallant
City administrators are giving more explanation when major contracts are awarded while a larger review of how tendering and procurement takes place, city council heard on Monday.
That follows perennial questions from councillors who say they have been hounded by the public when work goes to out-of-town firms with little explanation as to why.
The issue arose when council received the results of bidding to upgrade the sewer lift station in the community of Taylor, which was awarded to a company from Barnwell, near Taber.
The typical information sheet included a paragraph summarizing who judging was weighted and the specific condition that bidders have completed three similar projects in the last five years.
“So the question is, why is this (sort of information) being provided now,” asked Coun. Jamie McIntosh. “Is it because there were local bidders?”
Chief administrative Officer Bob Nicolay told council that the new reporting is an initial step of a larger overall procurement review that’s underway by the city’s corporate Services division. That will be completed this year, he said.
“These are large sums of money that are arriving at council in a standard format,” said Nicolay. “We’ve encouraged all departments to include as much information as possible without breaking any contractual confidentiality.”
Over the years council members have said that they are bombarded with questions about local companies getting city contracts, but have had little information to back up decisions other than to point to provincial free-trade agreements that bar local preference in contracts.
Coun. Brian Varga also wondered about the amount of pre-qualification that is being practised, a process that prejudges companies ability to complete work and essentially shortlists them for certain projects.
Mayor Ted Clugston said that the city will continue to pre-qualify companies and use the process for substantial or complex projects, but keep smaller projects more open.
“It depends on the project,” said Clugston, citing generally straightforward sidewalk work as one that wouldn’t.
“We are asking contractors to prove that they have the right people, qualified engineers, they’ve done this sort of work before.”
“And there’s a good side to pre-qualification in that if a company doesn’t get (approved), they don’t go through the process of bidding, which can be expensive, only to lose the project.”
In the case of the lift station, the bid evaluation was weighted 60 per cent to price, and 40 per cent to “overall ability and capacity of the contractor.”
Estimates from four unsuccessful bidders are not listed, but Porter Tanner’s bid of $1.295 million is just below the project’s $1.3 million budget. They also were the only firm to meet the experience portion, and, it is noted, was the only firm to include resumes of key personnel and relevant experience.
Three Medicine Hat-based firms — MJB Enterprises, BYZ Construction, and Dynamic Industrial Solutions — also submitted formal bids along with Lethbridge-based Nitro Construction.
It was awarded to Porter Tanner Associates of Barnwell.
Bids for city construction projects are evaluated by the purchasing agents and the relevant department, then contracts awarded by the administrative committee. That decision arrives at council for “information” purposes only, not for approval.
Coun. Julie Friesen said that process keeps politics out of decision making and keeps the focus on cost and delivery. Procurement review would be welcome she said.
“It’s come from some bumps, but it’s coming,” said Friesen. “I appreciate it (the information).”
City hall began prequalifying contractors with Veiner Centre reconstruction, but at the time some major contractors in town specifically objected stating it was hurdle to them bidding on the work.
Administrators defended the decision citing the complexity of the project — closing a basement, shoring a shifted foundation, then putting an large extension on an existing, partly damaged structure. It was argued the assurance the winning company could handle the work was also guard against it going over budget.
That also followed a high-profile fallout between the city and an out of town contractor over downtown utility and road reconstruction. It ended with the firm being dismissed after long delays on Second Street S., and two other sites that were part of a bundled three-project contract.
Nicolay stated that the procurement review would include input from the Medicine Hat and District Chamber of Commerce, the Medicine Hat Construction Association, and several undisclosed large, local contractors.
