Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout- CC-7 - Approve the Purchase Request for the Re. - 7/15/2014CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: JULY 15, 2014 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: APPROVE THE PURCHASE REQUEST FOR THE REPLACEMENT AND INSTALLATION OF OUTDOOR DUTY LOCKERS PURSUANT TO THE TERMS OF THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH OLPIN DATE: JULY 15, 2014 FROM: POLICE DEPARTMENT - FIELD OPERATIONS DIVISION PRESENTATION BY: BRYAN GLASS, LIEUTENANT - FIELD OPERATIONS DIVISION FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: BRYAN GLASS - 714.754.5603 RECOMMENDATION: Approve and authorize the CEO to sign the Professional Services Agreement for the Replacement and Installation of Outdoor Duty Lockers with Olpin Group, Inc., 3520 E. Enterprise Drive, Anaheim, CA 92807 in the amount of $82,761.36, including tax. 2. Approve Budget Adjustment #15-002 for the appropriation of Narcotics Asset Forfeiture Fund undesignated funds in the amount of $82,761.36 for the purchase of duty lockers. BACKGROUND: Over the years, the duty gear and equipment required of a police officer to maintain and carry in the regular course of their duties has greatly increased. An officer assigned to Patrol Services typically deploys to the field with a duty bag, personal protective equipment (PPE) gear bag, crowd control gear, and a patrol rifle during every shift. Inclement weather gear would be included during the winter season. This duty gear and equipment is assigned to each patrol officer. It is stored in their downstairs locker and/or temporary outside locker which were refurbished and have limited space. At the beginning of each shift the duty gear and equipment must be loaded into a patrol unit and unloaded prior to going home for the day. Additionally, some of the equipment, i.e., radios, flashlights, and L-3 transmitters, utilized by the officers must be recharged daily before the officer's next shift. The majority of this gear is hauled to the locker rooms in the basement of the Police Department facility where there is no option for staff to charge equipment. ANALYSIS: The Police Department does not have adequate lockers capable of storing all the duty gear and equipment maintained by patrol officers to perform their regular duties. Additionally, the department does not possess the capability to provide patrol officers a location where they can individually charge the equipment assigned to them. Officers are required to swap out radio batteries and L-3 transmitters at the beginning of their shift, preventing the equipment from properly charging and remaining serviceable throughout the officer's entire shift. The proposed duty lockers from Olpin will be customized to meet the specifications needed to resolve the issue of adequate storage and challenges of charging equipment. The Olpin proposal is for thirty-seven (37) double tiered lockers, for a total of seventy-four (74) individual lockers, and a stainless-steel work table for the locker area. This is the quantity which fits into the designated area for the project and provides lockers for personnel assigned to the patrol and traffic. The lockers will be installed under the Police Department's heliport where they can be easily accessible to officers. The designated location also has electrical junction boxes which can be accessed to run power to the locker banks. Each locker will be equipped with the electrical hardware required to provide power and charging capabilities. Each locker will also include a shelf and combination locking system. The lockers will be assigned to officers, so they can secure their duty gear and equipment, while charging electrical equipment. On December 20, 2013, staff issued a Request for Proposals, RFP No. 1165, and received three (3) responses. Olpin Group, Inc. was selected as the top vendor, following an evaluation of proposals facilitated by the City and the Purchasing Division. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: Staff can pursue the option to remodel the locker room within the basement of the Police Department and install larger lockers which meets the storage and charging needs of officers. This option would be cost prohibitive, while interfering with normal operations and still require the gear to be carried from and to the locker room daily. Staff may also evaluate other offices and/or storage rooms within the department to identify a location that can be remodeled to address storage and charging needs. If an alternate office and/or room was identified, it would also require remodeling and the purchase of new lockers. This option would also be cost prohibitive. FISCAL REVIEW: The purchase of outside duty lockers was not budgeted for FY 14/15. The attached Budget Adjustment #15-002 in the amount of $82,761.36 authorizes the appropriation of Narcotic Asset Forfeiture Fund undesignated funds to purchase duty lockers. The Narcotic Asset Forfeiture Fund has a sufficient fund balance available for allowable purchases, such as outside duty lockers. LEGAL REVIEW: Legal has reviewed the documents and approved them as to form. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends the City Council authorize the CEO to sign the purchase agreement and approve the budget adjustment for the proposed outside duty lockers. BRYAN GLASS Lieutenant STEVE DUNIVENT Director of Finance 1 •1l N TW Chief of Police TOM DUARTE City Attorney 0 DISTRIBUTION: Chief Executive Officer Chief of Police City Attorney Director of Finance City Clerk ATTACHMENTS: 1. Olpin Group, Inc. response to RFP No. 1165 2. Purchase Requisition with Olpin Professional 3. Service Agreement with Olpin Budget 4. Adjustment #15-002 - CITY OF COSTA MESA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: CITY CLERK CC: BRYAN GLASS, LIEUTENANT, STEVE DUNIVENT, FINANCE DIRECTOR FROM: KIM WILSON, PURCHASING SUPERVISOR DATE: JULY 15, 2014 SUBJECT: REPLACEMENT OF THE PRICE PROPOSAL SHEET IN THE REPLACEMNT AND INSTALLATION OF OUTDOOR DUTY LOCKERS IN THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT A review of Olpin Group's Price Proposal Sheets revealed a discrepancy in the cost to replace and install Outdoor Duty Lockers for the City's Police Department. The discrepancy was related to column headers which were flipped on the two pricing forms. The first pricing sheet was submitted for "flat top" lockers, per the original request in the RFP. However Olpin went a step further and added a column to include prices for both 18 gauge steel lockers, priced at $67,547.10 and the 16 gauge steel lockers, priced at $81,492.36 respectively. The second pricing sheet which was issued as part of an amendment to the RFP requested prices for both the 16 and 18 gauge steel as well as Flat top and Slope top options. On the original price proposal sheet, Olpin listed the 18 gauge steel price first and the 16 gauge prices followed. However, the second pricing sheet listed the 16 gauge steel first and then the 18 gauge. Herein lies the discrepancy. Olpin clearly transposed their proposal costs on the second pricing sheet, placing the cost in the same order they'd placed them on the first pricing sheet, which in this case did not list the different gauges in the same order. In short, the 16 Gauge Steel prices were listed under the 18 Gauge Steel and vice versa. A call to Olpin resolved the discrepancy and a price proposal sheet correcting it was sent to replace the original (see attached). The Council Agenda Report itself would remain as is, because staff preference is for the 16 gauge steel which is a better quality than the 18 gauge. The only change would be to replace page 13 of the Council Report with the corrected price proposal sheet. 3 FLAT TOP 16 Gauae Steel 18 Gauae Steel Price for complete project (excluding Sales Tax) $ -7 6, aS 7. OD $ Sales Tax (current rate is 8%) $ $ Sales Tax (current rate is 8%) $ $ Total Price for complete project $ $ Total Price for complete project 6(, yq�.3(c Sv7, stiff, to SLOPETOP 16 Gauae Steel 18 Gauae Steel Price for complete project $ $ (excluding Sales Tax) 77, Lipa, L)a (OH, a-ys, a Sales Tax (current rate is 8%) $ $ Total Price for complete project $ $ �a,���,3(, 1pg,ss1.gD ADD ANY ADDITIONAL COST PROPOSAL SHEETS HERE All otherprovisions of the invitation of thisproposal shall remain in their entirety. Vendors hereby acknowledge receipt and understanding of the above Amendment Complete and submit this Amendment with yourproposal. du4u,J� Signature Date CFO Typed Name and Title Mw 6", Company Name 3sa� E EVI er YIS�� Ana hf,1M 0/4 c-;6607 Address OUTDOOR DUTY LOCKERS RFP No. 1165 RESULTS COMPANY SCORE PRICE Olpin Group 1495 $ 82,761.36 Engineered Storage 1385 $ 94,813.63 DLG Contractors 955 $ 81,780.00 OUTDOOR DUTY LOCKERS PROPOSAL EVALUATION COMMENTS DLG Contractors, Inc. Engineered Storage Systems, Inc. Oplin Group 1 QUALIFICATIONS: This criteria was not addressed and/or demonstrated in proposal. QUALIFICATIONS: 36 years of experience serving LE community in Southern California; QUALIFICATIONS: Over 8 years of experience; private & public agencies; experienced staff; customers — Ventura, Riverside, & LA County Sheriff Dept$.; provided references customers — Riverside County Sheriff (facility), military units, USC, VA Med Ctr. Police LB, & APPROACH: Vendor provided a general response to the RFP. The proposal was vague and various private companies (Experian, Qualcomm, & Herbalife); provided banking information did not demonstrate an in-depth understanding of and strong interest in being awarded the APPROACH: Vendor specifically addressed scope of services, e.g., removal/disposal of and references as indicated in RFP project. No mention of request to dispose of old lockers and the specifics of the lockers being existing lockers, installation, & new locker specifications; providing Tiffin Metal Product requested. Main focus was on turnaround time once lockers were ordered. lockers; locker diagram and layout provided; APPROACH: Vendor demonstrated a thorough understanding of the project and provided recommendations, i.e., 18 gauge vs. 16 gauge steel, in the specifications of the lockers; work PRICE: Flat Top: 16 gauge - $78,614,18 gauge - $68,724 PRICE: Price: $68,908 table included in scope of services Slope Top: 16 gauge - $81,780, 18 gauge - $71,340 18 to 16 gauge steel: + $23,702 ($68,908 or $89,902) Proposal does not indicate if work table is included Slope tops: + $2,205 ($71,112 or $94,814) PRICE: Price: $67,547 or $81,492 (flat top) Proposal does not indicate if work table is included Price: $68,552 or $82,761 (slope top) INNOVATION: Vendor's suggestion was for the City to accept a locker not meeting the Proposal includes requested worktable specifications outlined in the RFP. INNOVATION: Addressed electrical aspect of project and cleanup after installation; providing customer support on care & cleaning guidance after project completed INNOVATION: Providing recommendations to improve project outcome, i.e., recommending ADD'L COMMENTS: Vendor's proposal was vague and had general responses to the RFP. 18 gauge steel over 16 gauge steel because of actual exposure of surfaces; The only detailed information provided was the price proposal and turnaround time for ADD'L COMMENTS: Vendor knowledgeable and familiar with the project. lockers. ADD'L COMMENTS: Vendor knowledgeable and familiar with the project. 2 QUALIFICATIONS: Met with Police Department staff. QUALIFICATIONS: Local vendor, prior experience with law enforcement applications (Los Angeles, Ventura). ADD'L COMMENTS: Overall lacked detail in response. Did not demonstrate adequate APPROACH: Detailed response to RFP understanding of project APPROACH: Detailed response to RFP ADD'L COMMENTS: Listed many other similar installations, but did not have references from law enforcement agencies 3 QUALIFICATIONS: Proposal is vague and lacks information. Evaluator unable to determine QUALIFICATIONS: Proposal is very informative. Vendor provided information on key QUALIFICATIONS: Proposal is very informative, covering the company's financial stability if vendor has the ability or experience necessary to complete the listed project. The vendor personnel and a descriptive explanation of their installation methodology. Vendor provided and impressive work history. Vendor provided information on all key personnel and described provided no references, diagrams, or any other supportive information. two law enforcement related references for similar projects and has several decades of each member's responsibility as it relates to the project. Vendor has substantial experience experience with law enforcement applications. Well prepared proposal. with the fabrication and installation of lockers in both law enforcement and military APPROACH: Due to lack of information provided by the vendor, I can only assume they applications. Very thorough and well prepared proposal. have an understanding of the scope of the services as is evident in the mirroring of APPROACH: Detailed schedule not provided, however, installation methodology appears to information provided by the city. However, the vendor fails to expound. I also have concerns be consistent with what is expected with this type of project. 30 day follow up is a nice APPROACH: Vendor provided a detailed project schedule. Key personnel were identified with the timeliness of the installation. A Project Schedule was not provided and the working customer service courtesy. Vendor provided an adequate amount of information to with their individual roles during the project for accountability. Vendor clearly understands the relationship with the manufacturer is unclear. demonstrate an understanding of the scope of services to be provided. scope of services to be provided. PRICE: Price is competitive. PRICE: Price is competitive for lockers, which meet the City's provided specifications. PRICE: Price is competitive and is slightly lower than other proposals. Vendor also utilizes Company contracts with Tiffin Metal Products, which has specialized law enforcement line of Tiffin Metal Products. INNOVATION: The vendor suggested utilizing a pre -fabricated locker, which was not to the products. specification requested, in order to expedite the installation. This suggestion does not INNOVATION: Vendor suggested some deviations from the RFP, however, the suggestions improve the project. If anything, it is an unacceptable alternative which requires the City to INNOVATION: Not addressed were based on knowledge and experience in the industry and reflected a cost savings for the compromise. ❑ City. The Vendor's transparency and thoroughness in the preparation of this proposal leaves the evaluator with a sense of confidence that the vendor will provide and install a quality product. 4 QUALIFICATIONS: Proposal does not state if they are making the lockers from scratch QUALIFICATIONS: Reference provided by the vendor and the vendor has experience in QUALIFICATIONS: They are out of Yorba Linda. Spread sheet and website available and/or if they are buying the locker from a manufacturer and then installing the lockers. this type of work. Nothing provided. APPROACH: Vendor points out the smaller gauge steel is the best option and why. They APPROACH: Tiffin metal lockers to be constructed. also point out the inside dimensions vs. outside dimensions. APPROACH: "In the event this project is awarded to DLG Contractors, Inc. we will provide the City with detailed drawings with plan views and catalog cut sheets and product data PRICE: Price Proposal will be evaluated on the bases of the Total Estimated Annual Price PRICE: Consistent with other vendors. describing in detail the proposed products." ---This is the time to provide the Scope of submitted in Appendix D. Services.... not after we grant the contract. INNOVATION: Use of smaller gauge steel and specifications on table. INNOVATION: Tiffin paperwork says 5 — year warranty yet ESS says 2- year warranty. PRICE: Seems within the normal range. ADD'L COMMENTS: Tiffin Lockers are used which is the same as ESS vendor however ADD'L COMMENTS: Tiffin Lockers Oplin seems to provide a much better visual idea of what they are going to provide. INNOVATION: I saw nothing creative nor innovative ADD'L COMMENTS: Proposal seems almost as if the vendor is going to outsource the job if fact it awarded to this vendor. The only thing the vendor seems to be specific with is the cost of the project. OUTDOOR DUTY LOCKERS Proposal Scores 2 3 Totals Qualifications of Entity and Key Personnel 500 DLG Contractors 0 4 1 0 5 125 Engineered Storage 4 5 4 3 16 400 Olpin Group 4 3 5 4 16 400 Approach to Providing the Requested Services DLG Contractors 2 4 2 1 9 90 Engineered Storage 4 5 3 3 15 150 Olpin Group 5 3 5 4 17 170 Price Proposal 1,000 DLG Contractors 3 4 3 3 13 650 Engineered Storage 3 4 4 3 14 700 Olpin Group 4 3 4 3 14 700 Innovative and/or Creative Approaches DLG Contractors 1 3 1 1 6 90 Engineered Storage 3 3 0 3 9 135 Olpin Group 4 3 4 4 15 225 Proposers Totals Rank DLG Contractors 955.00 3 Engineered Storage 1385.00 2 Olpin Group 1495.00 1 NOTES: Of the (3) three proposals submitted for the removal and replacement of Outdoor Duty Lockers for the Police Department, the (4) four member evaluation panel ranked Olpin Group as the best option. Olpin Group received a combined score of 1,495 points, 110 points more than Engineered Storage who received a combined score of 1,385 and 540 points more than DLG Contractors.