Art Work - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

A JOINT PROJECT BY Marion County Board of Commissioners Randatl Franke Patti Milne Mike Ryan Satem Area Mass Transit District Board o( Directors Luis Carabalb Kenneth `Casey" Campbell Marcia Kelley Dennis Koho Eric Swenson Nancy Towsiee Mark Weprecht March 29, 1999 The Hono ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ rable Mike Swaim ~q~ j ~ 1999 Mayor, City of Salem Salem Civic Center COMMUNII~ r S55 Liberty St: SE ~F~ ~~ ~• Salem, OR 97301 Re: City of Salem Streetscape funding for the Courthouse Square project Dear Mayor Swaim, We are writing to you to seek your assistance in resolving an issue which is of both fiscal and substantive concern to our respective jurisdictions. As you know, we have completed the bidding phase of the Courthouse Square project and have awarded the bid for construction to Pence/Kelly Construction, of Salem. At City staff s request, we included in that bidding a detailed breakdown of the streetscape cost elements. Unfortunately as it turns out, the low overall bidder on the project- PenceJKelly-was the highest "bidder" on the streetscape poction of the project. This has brought about a difficult situation for the County and the Transit District, and the City as well. Through our own purchasing rules, not to mention Federal Transit Administration regula[ions, we were obligated to award the project to the low bidder, even though the streetscape element of the project was the highest (the Pence/Kelly bid for streetscape was $1,711,751...the lowest streetscape bid in the range was $1,174,530) Faced with this dilemma, City staff made an administrative decision to incorporate a process of averaging all six bids on the streetscape, and allowed the County and District an allowance of 120% of that average as a b~isis for payment. In so doing, the partnership is left $247,000 short of the revenue needed to pay the actual bid cost of Pence/Kelly. We feel that the City's process of averaging bid costs is unreasonable given the nature of the bidding process that was used, and is not consistent with the original intent of the City's agreement to provide for the actual costs of streetscape, up to a maximum of $2 million. While we very much appreciate the cooperation and work effort that City staff has provided us in trying to resolve this issue, we feel that the product that has resulted violates the previous agreements between the City and our jurisdictions, and are asking that you review the City's position. ~ ~ = ::~. ATTACHMENT A