Purchasing manager’s sewer project rebids OK’d by council
by Sarah Cooper
Jul 14, 2009 | 600 views | 2 2 comments | 10 10 recommendations | email to a friend | print
The Sparks City Council on Monday ratified a contentious action by the city’s purchasing manger, retroactively giving the OK to the opening of redbids earlier this month on the $7.5 million Vista Boulevard sewer project. However, the council’s unanimous ratification came in the midst of a lawsuit against the city from Laborers Union 169 business manager Richard Daly.

Daly alleges in the suit that Dan Marran, Sparks’ purchasing manager, did not have the legal authority to toss out bids for work that had a price tag larger than $25,000. Daly pointed to both city code and Nevada Revised Statutes.

“We are not saying that it can’t be rebid,” Daly said. “It was just rejected with improper authority.”

Daly claims that by law, the City Council is responsible for the final say on large projects and their bidding and that the purchasing manager did not act under the proper authority.

City Attorney Chet Adams refutes Daly’s claim.

“It is our position that the City Council or its authorized representatives can withdraw bids,” Adams told the Tribune earlier this month. “The purchasing manager can withdraw a request for proposal for bids.”

Marran rejected Vista Boulevard sewer project bids from 10 contractors on June 17 and then he opened the project for rebids. According to Marran, the timeline changed for the Regional Transportation Commission’s widening of Vista Boulevard along the same stretch of road, tossing a potential monkey wrench into the sewer project.

“After the (first) bid went out, we learned more about the project that is widening Vista (Boulevard),” Adams said. “To be fair to them (the contractors), we wanted them to know exactly what the project was they were bidding for … including the timeline.”

At the meeting, Councilman Ron Schmitt said that the city saved about half a million dollars by rebidding the project with the new specifications.

Daly and the city are currently waiting to hear a response from Washoe District Court, where the suit was filed.

According to Marran, new bids have been accepted and a contract for the preferred bidder will come before the City Council for a vote on July 27.

Share This Article |
similar stories

City council to decide on sewer bids | 2 years ago by Sarah Cooper

City settles with union on sewer project bidding | 2 years ago by Sarah Cooper

Lawsuit hits sewer project | 2 years ago by Sarah Cooper

City looks into museum lease, labor dispute | 2 years ago by Sarah Cooper

City gives green light to sewer project | 2 years ago by Sarah Cooper

Comments
(2)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Nationally Concerned
|
July 16, 2009
This is not just a Sparks Nevada issue - To all: Our laws are set in motion by the Citizens of the United States with some latitude authorized by State and Local level governments for which you the Citizen are also in charge. While both sides will aggressively defend the bid/re-bid scenario; there should be a discussion/investigation with regards to the willingness to sole source pipe material and provider for Bid No. 09/10-002, PWP No. WA-2009-315, Spanish Springs Sanitary Sewer Phase 3b, 3c and 4 Project (Federally Funded). Nevada State Law ratified by Nevada State Legislature - Title 28 Chapter 338 NRS338.140 Requirements and limitations relating to drafting of specifications for bids - in summary states; “A public body shall not draft or cause to be drafted specifications for bids in connection with a public work: in such a manner as to limit the bidding, directly or indirectly, to any ONE specific concern…” The fiberglass pipe specification does just that; although alternative suppliers are available who provide fiberglass pipe of equal quality, meet all standards which are set by industry committees, and compete head to head as equals in open and fair bids all across this Nation, Sparks has restricted all but ONE manufacture. While all can argue over who may or may not be paying for the re-bid; one item is crystal clear – all of us (federally funded) are needlessly being subjected to potentially paying a higher price for the 54inch sewer pipe than need be. Our system may not be perfect for all, but at least we have a system for which we must follow; what system does Sparks follow? Will you the citizen continue to allow such cavalier disregard? You have a right – voice it – attend your council meetings, get more involved, and let the people you hired hear your concerns. If not, you may wish to think about getting an additional job so more of your hard earned money can be needlessly wasted.
Reply
Nationally Concerned
|
July 16, 2009
This is not just a Sparks Nevada issue - To all: Our laws are set in motion by the Citizens of the United States with some latitude authorized by State and Local level governments for which you the Citizen are also in charge. While both sides will aggressively defend the bid/re-bid scenario; there should be a discussion/investigation with regards to the willingness to sole source pipe material and provider for Bid No. 09/10-002, PWP No. WA-2009-315, Spanish Springs Sanitary Sewer Phase 3b, 3c and 4 Project (Federally Funded). Nevada State Law ratified by Nevada State Legislature - Title 28 Chapter 338 NRS338.140 Requirements and limitations relating to drafting of specifications for bids - in summary states; “A public body shall not draft or cause to be drafted specifications for bids in connection with a public work: in such a manner as to limit the bidding, directly or indirectly, to any ONE specific concern…” The fiberglass pipe specification does just that; although alternative suppliers are available who provide fiberglass pipe of equal quality, meet all standards which are set by industry committees, and compete head to head as equals in open and fair bids all across this Nation, Sparks has restricted all but ONE manufacture. While all can argue over who may or may not be paying for the re-bid; one item is crystal clear – all of us (federally funded) are needlessly being subjected to potentially paying a higher price for the 54inch sewer pipe than need be. Our system may not be perfect for all, but at least we have a system for which we must follow; what system does Sparks follow? Will you the citizen continue to allow such cavalier disregard? You have a right – voice it – attend your council meetings, get more involved, and let the people you hired hear your concerns. If not, you may wish to think about getting an additional job so more of your hard earned money can be needlessly wasted.
Reply

report abuse...

We consider the comments section of www.dailysparkstribune.com to be a key part of a constructive community dialogue. Your comments will appear as you type them. The Daily Sparks Tribune does not prescreen contributions to the comments section. Individuals posting libelous statements may be held responsible.