The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About9C - Vehicle and Equipment Purchases 01 PRION U 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake_ MN 55372 �INNriSp�P CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 9, 2015 AGENDA#: 9C PREPARED BY: KATY GEHLER, PUBLIC WORKS & NATURAL RESOURCES DIRECTOR DOUG HARTMAN, FIRE CHIEF PRESENTED BY: KATY GEHLER AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING 2015 VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENTS AND PURCHASES DISCUSSION: Introduction The purpose of this agenda item is to seek City Council approval for the 2015 Fleet Purchases. History In 1998 the Equipment Replacement Plan was created as a budgeting tool to assist in financial planning for major expenditures and to help moderate the an- nual fleet replacement budget. The goal is to replace the equipment in a timely and cost-effective manner. Annually the plan is reviewed and updated based on the current condition of the City's fleet and adopted by the City Council as part of the Capital Improvement Program. New this year a fleet rating system has been developed that system- atically considers the age, mileage, repair history, and condition of each piece of equipment. This metric is used as a tool to help determine the schedule for replacement. Attachment 1 Shows the ratings for the equipment under consideration as part of this item. Pursuant to council direction, maintenance was adjusted to exclude basic preventative maintenance like oil changes. We also confirmed the num- bers are pulling correctly. The council noted the mileage on the one vehicle was quite high. It was entered incorrectly by the staff person who last fueled the truck. The purchases for the coming year (2015 in this case) are incorporated into the annual budget requests and adopted by the Council in December. As per state statute, all purchases over $20,000 are brought back to the Council for final purchase authorization. Current Circumstances For 2015 there are thirteen pieces of equipment that are programed to be re- placed or purchased which require council approval (> $20,000): Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245/www.cityofpriorlake.com 1 #452 - 1 ..........___._ .._............... _.__—..... -------._..... 2 #467 - 5 Ton Single Axle Dump Truck 3 #472 - Mechanical Street Sweeper _- 4 #502 - Skidloader 5 #524 - 2008 Jacobsen 325D _.—_.—,-....._.___..._...----....--._....-.. ..._...__...------...... ._—_......_.._...--- 6 #538 - 2005 Cushman Truckster 7 #758 - 1 Jon Truck -Water Foreman 8 #9202 - 1/2 Ton Chief's Truck 9 #9203 - 1/2 Ton Chief's Truck (NEW) -- - — ................_..............._...........- —------........-__ ._.. __...---._.......-._._........ _._...- -.... 10 #9275 - Grass & Ice UTV_ _ 11-13 Police Squads (3) Prior to the recommendation for purchase as part of the CIP, seven options are analyzed to determine whether a vehicle/equipment should be replaced, how and with what type. Attachment 2 shows a summary of the 2015 fleet purchase options analysis. The considerations for each of the options are described be- low: 1. Refurbishing Refurbishing of vehicles can extend the life of the piece of equipment two to five years. Generally, the older a vehicle gets the less cost effec- tive refurbishing becomes as there are multiple systems within a piece of equipment that become worn and at a higher risk of failure. It is often difficult to estimate the true refurbishing cost as it is very difficult to pre- dict exactly when these various items will ultimately fail. In addition there is a cost to unexpectedly have a piece of the fleet out of service. Be- cause the City has historically managed the fleet such that we keep our equipment beyond the I useful life, refurbishing is usually not a cost ef- fective option. One major repair can become extremely costly eating up the operating budget that is depended upon for routine maintenance and repairs. The City does maintain $20,000 in the Equipment Replacement Plan for refurbishing. This amount is used to repair items that typically wear early or unevenly from the base vehicle. For 2015 staff will use these funds to make repairs to the 5 ton trucks to help manage their replacement over the next seven years. 2. Lease, Rental and Borrowing Options Generally, lease or rental options are good for equipment that is special- ized and not frequently used. This is not a good option for equipment that is used on a regular basis throughout the year. In those cases where a rental option is considered, the cost of rental for the frequency of use is compared to the purchase cost. The most eco- nomical choice is programmed into either the operating or capital budg- et. 2 In several cases the equipment is customized from the base vehicle re- quiring emergency equipment, dump boxes, racks for carrying tools and equipment, etc. In these cases a vehicle equipped to our specifications is not available for a lease/rental option. Examples include squads, fire equipment, dump trucks, and utilities trucks. 3. Equipment Zero Value Operations Generally the City has managed the fleet such that each piece of equipment is utilized through its dependable performance life. The in- tended service level expected out of each vehicle is weighed against the increasing risk of it being out of service, stress on the other equipment to complete the job and a decrease in customer service levels. This in- cludes considering available interim rental or partnership options. In many cases interim options are not available if a vehicle has to be taken out of service for an extended period of time for more significant repairs. 4. Alternative Fuels Generally the most fuel efficient option for each piece of equipment is considered where there is an option. In the past a majority of our one ton trucks were purchased with a diesel engine. In 2011, staff conducted research on gas vs. diesel engines on one ton trucks and smaller. The data utilized for the study was obtained from past history recorded on our existing city owned trucks and documentation received from the Cit- ies of Eagan, Lakeville and Woodbury. Based on these statistics the capital purchase of the vehicle, annual maintenance costs, the price of diesel vs. gasoline, results in a substantial savings by purchasing the gasoline engine. Today we generally recommend trucks with a gasoline engine capable of operating on E-85. 5. Equipment Utilization and Right Sizing The utilization and size requirement for each vehicle is considered when reviewing the CIP annually. Optimizing the scheduling, useful life, and vehicle size are key in having an efficient fleet. Scheduling - The scheduling of each vehicle is maximized across all departments. For example, the city owns two loaders that are scheduled for work tasks for the Streets, Utilities, and Parks divisions depending on the need each day which optimizes the use of this piece of equipment. Useful Life — The city's needs for vehicles varies seasonally. During the summer months the Parks Division utilizes about 25 staff to complete summer maintenance within the parks system. Additional vehicles are needed to transport staff and equipment to the job sites. We have found that as squad cars are no longer reliable for emergency service and are retired in the spring, they can be utilized during the summer months for seasonal staff without impacting the residual value of the vehicle at auc- tion in the fall. Right Sizinq —The size/power of the vehicle is considered as part of the replacement process. Upsizing would be recommended if it would make a vehicle more useful or will fill a gap in service. For example, the engi- neering inspections truck replaced in 2014 was programmed for a '/2 ton pick-up replacing like-for-like. By upsizing to a one-ton pickup, this vehi- cle can now be used in the winter months for plowing snow should the 3 need arise due to other vehicle break downs or large snow events. Conversely, a vehicle or piece of equipment will be downsized if it is overfilling its need. An example was the replacement of the loader in 2014. The pricing incorporated into the CIP allowed for upsizing. How- ever, it was determined that the current size is serving our needs, thus a savings was realized. 6. Equipment Partnerships Equipment sharing and partnerships have been promoted through the creation of SCALE. The City has utilized two types of partnerships in the past, equipment sharing and joint purchasing. Equipment Sharing — Equipment sharing can take several forms. Gen- erally, maintenance staff of the County and surrounding municipalities engage in equipment sharing to fill short-term needs. For example, Scott County lent the city dump trucks on two key occasions in 2014, during the floods to haul sand and to help with the construction of the CR 21 trail. On a different scale, equipment sharing can be more deliberate. For example, the City of Savage purchased a paver in 2011 to complete roadway and trail repairs. Complimentary to this machine, the City of Prior Lake purchased a four-foot milling machine. The combination of these two allows for both cities to complete pavement repairs and resur- facing in a cost-effective and efficient manner. Joint Purchasing — The City has utilized joint purchasing on a few occa- sions in the past. Joint purchasing is a viable option for low use equip- ment that does not serve a niche use. Joint purchasing was considered as an option when the city replaced the bituminous hot box. This equip- ment is utilized to pick-up bituminous from the plant and deliver to the various repair sites around the city. During the peak spring pot-hole season, this piece of equipment is utilized all day, every day by almost every entity who completes road repair. This does not make this equip- ment a good candidate for joint purchasing. However, the City is explor- ing the joint purchase of sewer televising equipment. The use of this equipment generally is not time-sensitive and can be scheduled throughout the year. 7. Used Purchasing used equipment can be a good option for some equipment. Equipment that will have a lighter use and expected to have a longer useful life for the city are good candidates. For example, maintenance staff utilizes a fork lift for unloading deliveries of heavy materials and supplies, assisting in work around the shop, particularly working on ve- hicles and equipment. This equipment has a longer performance life (20+ years) and a lighter use so purchasing a unit that is 5+ years at a reduced price was cost effective. For vehicles that require dependability or are customized to the city's needs, purchasing a used unit is not a cost effective option. In many cases it is very difficult to find equipment that comes close to our specifications. For example, the large dump trucks are difficult to locate equipped for municipal plowing service. 4 Based on the CIP and in accordance with the City's purchasing policy, bids were solicited through the State of Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Venture (CPV) where available along with contacting local vendors for quotes that were not part of the CPV. Attachment 2 shows the tabulation of the bids/quotes for each piece of the fleet for which purchase authorization is being sought. The council is being asked to authorize the disposal of the old equipment and the purchase of the equipment highlighted. This item includes all of the 2015 vehicle purchases for which council action is required. Note that the council is being asked to approve the base vehicle purchases for the fire and police vehicles. Separate from the base vehicle, lights, wiring and other safety equipment will be purchased and installed in-house to outfit the vehicles for emergency response. The estimated cost of the materials is shown in the table under appurtenant equipment. This equipment is under the $20,000 threshold and will be purchased from the various vendors in accordance to the purchasing policy. A summary of the total purchases is shown below. The purchases for which authorization is being sought do NOT include the replacement of Unit #9270. This amount will be carried forwarded 5 years pending confirmation by the council as part of this item. In addition the City will realize an estimated $15,000 in revenue from the sale of the three squads at auction as these vehicles are retired from the city's fleet later in 2015. Purchases for which authorization is being sought $797,480.30 Disposal value of trade-ins $118,650.00 Total Purchase Authorization Sought $678,830.30 Budget for which purchase authorization is being sought $699,600.00 Over/(Under) budget _ ($20,769.70) Postpone Replacement of#9270- Fire Utility Truck $42,950.00 Conclusion Based on the City's detailed vehicle and equipment needs and financial analy- sis, staff is recommending purchase of the following: Unit Replacement Vehicle/Equipment Vendor Purchase Amount 452 2015 F-550(Includes Plow) Wolf Motors $ 33,264.54 452 Henderson 25-HEN-41982-13-41V1 Aspen $ 28,525.00 467 Freightliner 108SD I-State Truck Center $ 52,292.93 467 Ultra SSR Box-Henke Plow, Wing and TBEI $ 110,599.00 Controls 472 2015 Elgin, Pelican NP McQueen Equip- $ 179,662.00 ment 5 502 257D Caterpillar Zeigler $ 37,808.00 524 Toro 3280 MTI $ 31,132.34 538 Toro,Workman HDX MTI $ 20,150.53 758 2015 Ford F-350 Wolf Motors $ 24,516.41 9202 2015 Ford F-150 Wolf Motors $ 19,737.00 9203 2015 Ford F-150 Wolf Motors $ 32,237.00 9275 Argo 750 HDi Trenchers Plus $ 28,688.70 Multi 2015 Ford Utility Police Interceptor(3) Nelson Auto $ 80,216.85 ISSUES: 1. PRICING Generally the equipment quotes came within an acceptable amount of the es- timated costs incorporated into the CIP. Three of the units warrant additional discussion. S uads: The squads recommended for purchase are the Ford Interceptor Utili- ty Vehicle that can only be purchased through the CPV. These vehicles have a short window at which they are available. The 2015 Ford contract with the state opened at the end of 2014 and will expire before the next council meeting. It is recommended that the council act on the purchase of the squads, at a mini- mum, at the February 9, 2015 meeting. There are three squads programmed to be replaced this year. As noted above, we manage the purchase and sale of the squads to fill temporary needs in oth- er departments. Two of the three squads will be retained for use over the sum- mer and sold at auction in the fall. The third will be sent to auction after the re- placement squad is built out and ready for service. #502 Skidloader: Staff is recommending the selection of the Caterpilliar 257D over the Bobcat T650, which has a greater cost of$1,518.98. The Caterpillar is the only manufacturer with the option of a rubber torsion axle. This feature al- lows the axle to actually flex the tracks front to back and up and down. This in turn reduces wear on the tracks and provides better traction and stability for the operator. Considering the topography of the park land within the city this skid- loader is used to maintain, this is a significant safety benefit. In addition we have found that our other machine that is equipped with this feature produces 40% more life out of the tracks (1350 vs. 800 hours). Over the life of the ma- chine this option will pay for the up-front cost difference. #472 Mechanical Sweeper: The City has two sweepers it utilizes to keep the City streets clean. They are two distinct types, regenerative and mechanical, which serve two distinct needs. Regenerative sweepers use air and essentially vacuum the debris from the surface although typically equipped with round gut- ter brooms. This type of sweeper is good for picking up light materials and maintaining pervious surfaces. It cannot effectively pick up heavy materials and can be ruined if used to do such. Mechanical sweepers use brooms to sweep 6 up the debris from the surface. This type of sweeper is needed to pick up heav- ier materials such as sands and millings from road repairs. This sweeper meth- od is not effective at picking up material from pervious surfaces to ensure they continue to function. Unit #472 is a mechanical sweeper which has served its useful life. Only one manufacturer produces a mechanical sweeper, Elgin. There are two styles that Elgin manufactures, the Pelican, a three wheel style and the Eagle a truck mount four wheeled style. In preparation for the 2015-2026 CIP staff obtained the current cost for the Elgin Pelican, a like-for-like replacement of the current unit. Since that time the costs have increased dramatically for both styles. Justification from the local vendor was obtained to explain the increase in cost. Over the last year the manufacturer converted the sweepers to a Tier IV fuel efficient engine. We have seen substantial increases in pricing on the order of $3,000-5,000 on other equipment as the engine is converted to this more fuel efficient motor. The vendor also noted that the pricing has not significantly in- creased over the last three years coupled with an increase in steel pricing. The price history is provided below. Note that these prices are for the base sweeper and do not include safety and other basic equipment such as the LED lights and gutter brooms which are included in our pricing. Elgin Pelican State Bid Pricin History: 2015 $179,567 2014 $157,497 2103 $157,497 2012 $154,968 2011 $151,609 2010 $144,193 2. Fire Replacements The 2015 CIP identifies the replacement of three vehicles, the grass/ice ATV and two pickup trucks and the addition of a pick-up truck. Staff is recommend- ing managing the truck replacements differently than identified in the CIP to postpone the replacement of#9270 the one ton truck. Each piece of equipment is currently being used in the manner described below: • #9202 is a '/-ton truck used by the Assistant Chief of Operations- Station 2, Jim Kline. #9202 is the second of two trucks that were identi- fied for replacement due to age and engine failures. • #9203 is a new 'h-ton truck needed for Assistant Chief of Operations Station 1, Kurt Chelgren. This position was added in April 2014. #9270 is a 1-ton Truck that is currently being used as the Station 1 grass fire truck. It is equipped with a 250 gallon tank and pumping sys- tems which allow it to be utilized in rural or remote areas where water is not available. It has low mileage, but is 15-years old and is no longer re- liable as a front line emergency response vehicle. It still has useful life though for a less critical role in the fire fleet. This unit is programmed for replacement. 7 • #9275 is a Polaris ATV used to fight grass fires and complete ice res- cues. It has limited utility and is programmed for replacement. • #9272 is a 2007 Ford F-350 and is currently being used as the Interim truck for Assistant Chief Chelgren. Prior to being assigned to the Assis- tant Chief, #9272 was used as the station utility truck. The utility truck is a multi-purpose vehicle needed for towing the boat, ATV, Fire Safety House, transporting firefighters and their gear to school and many other uses. Since this interim assignment there has been a gap in the fire fleet. The following is being recommended: • Replace #9202 as planned • Purchase new#9203 as planned. • Convert#9272 to the Station 1 grass fire truck. This would entail trading the tank and pumping systems from unit#9270 to this vehicle. • Retain #9270 for another 5 years and use it as the Fire Department Utili- ty Vehicle (currently filled by unit#9272). • Replace #9275 as planned. Unit#9275, a Polaris 6x6 ATV, was donated by the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community in the year 2000 to fill a need of the department. While this unit shows low miles (no hour me- ter), it is limited in its capabilities with a number of deficiencies. It only will carry one firefighter. Fighting fire or conducting a rescue typically requires two firefighters minimum. Its pump is worn, has very limited output and is top heavy with risk of rolling on un-level terrain. After demonstrating a number of UTV's to serve the need as the Grass/Ice UTV, the Argo was chosen because of its payload capability to carry multiple firefighters (2-4), its ability to float on water, its stability in traveling very tough conditions on land, and its capabilities in snow. It can be used on questionable or thin ice conditions because of its ability to float, a key safety factor for firefighters in ice rescue operations. A more proficient slide in pump will be installed providing better firefighting capabilities with island structure fires being considered. The water tank and pump will have a lower center of gravity and a high pressure pump will stretch the limited water supply much further. The ATV has responded to approximately 325 grass/brush fires since it was put in service. It has responded to approximately 20 ice rescue events since we began documenting them in 2008.This UTV and the grass fire trucks are viewed as a very important pieces of equipment by the Credit River and Spring Lake Townships because of the potential wildfire risks in residential acreage and farmland areas. It is also an im- portant mutual aid tool. When you need them you usually need more than one. Our other neighboring departments utilize the Gator style UTV units so this equipment expands regional capabilities. 8 The 2015 budget allotted $38,000 for the purchase of unit #9275. This amount envisioned a like-for-like replacement. Due to the limited capa- bilities of the existing unit and the cost savings on the remaining fleet purchases, staff is recommending the purchase of the Argo 350 HDi and appurtenant equipment for a total cost of$38,688.70. FINANCIAL The Equipment Replacement Plan programmed and the Revolving Equipment IMPACT: Fund Budgeted $699,600 for the replacement of the fleet purchases for which authorization is sought. The replacement cost for the proposed fleet purchases are $678,830.30 which is $20,769.70 less than budgeted. In addition the city will receive an estimate $15,000 in revenue from the sale of the three squads at auction later in the year. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve a resolution authorizing the purchase of the proposed vehicles and equipment and disposal of the existing equipment as detailed in this report. 2) Table this agenda item for a specific reason. 3) Deny this agenda item for a specific reason and provide staff with direction. RECOMMENDED Alternative#1 MOTION: 9 O� FRtp� ti U 4646 Dakota Street SE '�'rNxsso"t` Prior Lake, MN 55372 RESOLUTION 15-xxx A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING 2015 VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENTS AND PURCHASES Motion By: Second By: WHEREAS, Each year the City Council adopts an Equipment Replacement Plan as part of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP); and WHEREAS, The 2015 Equipment Replacement Plan contemplates the replacement or purchase of the following units: #452- 1-Ton Dumb_— -- #467-5 Ton Single Axle Dump Truck #472-Mechanical Street Sweeper #502-Skidloader ____.__._..._... --...------------- ----------------------------- �......_..._..._.-__ #524-2008 Jacobsen 325D #538-2005 Cushman Truckster #758- 1-Ton Truck-Water Foreman #9202- 1/2 Ton Chiefs Truck #9203- 1/2 Ton Chiefs Truck(NEW) #9275-Grass&IceUTV — Police Squads(3).__ _._.-----__—_-.— -.___--- and --- WHEREAS, The 2015 Equipment Plan programmed $699,600 for the replacement of this equipment and appurtenant equipment; and WHEREAS, A needs and financial analysis has been completed and was included in the agenda report dated February 9,2015; and WHEREAS, Quotes were received through the State Purchasing Program and from other vendors and are incorporated in the agenda report as Attachment 3. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA as follows: 1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein. 2. Staff is authorized to trade-in the vehicles shown for disposal in the table below. 3. Staff is authorized to purchase the vehciles and equipment shown in the table below. 4. Funds will be drawn from the Revolving Equipment Fund. Unit Disposal Vehicle Replacement Vehicle/ Vendor Amount GL Number Equipment Authorized 452 22005 Ford F-550 4X4 2015 F-550(Includes Plow) Wolf $ 33,264.54 410-43100.00-55550.00 Dump 452 NA Henderson 25-HEN-41982- Aspen $ 28,525.00 410-43100.00-55550.00 13-41V1 467 2000 Sterling L8511 Freightliner 108SD I-State Truck $ 52,292.93 410-43100.00-55550.00 Center 467 NA Ultra SSR Box-Henke Plow, TBEI $ 110,599.00 410-43100.00-55550.00 Wing and Controls 472 2003 Elgin Sweeper 2015 Elgin, Pelican NP McQueen $ 179,662.00 410-49420.00-55550.00 Equipment 502 2008 Caterpillar 257B 257D Caterpillar Zeigler $ 37,808.00 410-45200.00-55550.00 Skidloader 524 2008 Jacobsen 325D Toro 3280 MTI $ 31,132.34 410-45200.00-55550.00 538 2005 Cushman Toro,Workman HDX MTI $ 20,150.53 410-45200.00-55550.00 Truckster 758 4X44 Chevy C1500 2015 Ford F-350 Wolf Motors $ 24,516.41 410-49400.00-55550.00 9202 2005 Ford F-150 2015 Ford F-150 Wolf Motors $ 19,737.00 410-42200.00-55550.00 Su ercab 9203 NA 2015 Ford F-150 Wolf Motors $ 32,237.00 410-42200.00-55550.00 9275 2000 Polaris ATV Argo 750 HDi Trenchers Plus $ 28,688.70 410-42200.00-55550.00 Multi NA 2015 Ford Police Nelson Auto $ 80,216.85 410-42100.00-55550.00 Interceptor Utility PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 9th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Thompson Aye ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Frank Boyles, City Manager 2 of rrt��, .f Attachment 1.Vehicle Condition Rating Use Age Expected Mileage Reliability Condition MainU Repair Overall Vehicle Category Manufactured Vehicle Expected Current Repair Maint.IRepair (5 ID Department Vehicle Category Points Date Age Lifespan Points Odometer Engine Points Count Points Points Costs Purchase Price Repair Points Condition (5 Points) (15 Points) lifespan (10 Points) (5 Points) Points) Percentage (5 Points) Index 452 PUBLIC TRUCK-1.5TON-DUMP 3 2005 11 12 14 71,031 100,000 7 5 2 5 $32,409 $66,500 48.74% 3 WORKS PUBLIC TRUCK-5TON-DUMP- 467 3 2000 16 12 20 93,060 120,000 8 16 3 5 $60,293 $200000 30.15% 2 WORKS SINGLE AXLE 472 PUBLIC SWEEPER- 3 2003 13 10 20 4,651 5,000 9 3 1 5 $66,247 $157,000 42.20% 2 WORKS MECHANICAL 502 PARKS SKID STEER 3 2008 8 6 20 2,732 3,500 8 14 2 5 $41,044 $70,000 58.63% 3 524 PARKS MOWER-6FT 3 2008 8 8 15 3,032 3,500 9 13 2 5 $17,509 $33,000 53.06% 3 UTILITY VEH-WATER 538 PARKS TANK 3 2005 11 10 17 2,282 3,500 7 5 2 4 $15,559 $20,000 77.60% 4 758 UTILITIES TRUCK-1/2 TON 3 2004 12 10 18 116,882 100,000 12 2 1 5 $7,343 $27,500 26.70% 2 9202 FIRE DEPT FIRE TRUCK-1 TON 5 2005 11 10 17 75,393 100,000 8 B 2 5 $11,200 $38,000 29.47% 2 9270 FIRE DEPT FIRE TRUCK-1 TON 5 2000 16 15 16 20,682 100,000 2 1 1 3 $2,736 $42,950 6.37% 1 9275 FIRE DEPT ATV 5 2000 16 15 16 205 1,000 2 0 0 3 $1,275 $32,000 3.98% 1 o� rxi � J. Attachment 2. Summary of Purchase Options Analysis Refurbishing Lease/Rental Zero Value Alternative Fuel Equipment Used Equipment Equipment Analysis Options Operations Analysis Utilization Options #452.2005 Ford At useful life,not Equipment Vehicle has Diesel most cost Utilization Equipment F550 04 Dump cost effective customized for use exceeded useful life effective Optimized customized for use #467-2000 Sterling L8511 - At useful life,not Equipment Vehicle has Utilization Equipment Chasis only on cost effective customized for use exceeded useful life Diesel only Optimized customized for use this price #472-2003 Elgin At useful life,not Lease/Rental Vehicle has Utilization Sweeper cost effective Option Limited or exceeded useful life Diesel only Optimized Not cost effective not Available #502.2008 Lease/Rental At useful life,not Vehicle has Utilization Caterpillar 2576 cost effective Option is more exceeded useful life Diesel only Optimized Not cost effective Skidloader expensive #524-2008 At useful life,not Lease/Rental Vehicle has Utilization Jacobsen 325D cost effective Option is more exceeded useful life Diesel only Optimized Not cost effective expensive #538-2005 Lease/Rental Consider Upsizing At useful life,not Payload capacity no Cushman cost effective Option is more longer meets needs Gasoline only Payload Capacity to Not cost effective Truckster expensive reduce wear #758-2004 At useful life,not Equipment Vehicle has Gasoline engine Consider Upsizing Equipment Chevy C1500 4X4 cost effective customized for use exceeded useful life more cost-effective to 1-Ton customized for use #9202 Ford ord #9150-2005SupeForcab At useful life,not Equipment Vehicle has Gasoline engine Utilization Equipment cost effective customized for use exceeded useful life more cost-effective Optimized customized for use Fire #9270.2000 Consider Equipment Vehicle has Gasoline engine Equipment Ford F350 Crew Consider customized for use exceeded useful life more cost-effective Conversion to customized for use Cab Grass Truck #9275-2000 Not cost effective Equipment Capacity no longer Gasoline onlConsider UTV Equipment Polaris ATV-Fire customized for use meets needs y Options to Optimize customized for use Temporary use in Equipment Past dependable Gasoline onlother departments Equipment Police Squads(3) Not cost effective customized for use life as squad y after retirement as customized for use squad Attachment 3. Quotes for 2015 Fleet Purchases '�$tk8e50�1,' Total Base Appurtenant Equipment Make, Model Vendor Vehicle Trade-In Equipment Cost 2015 F-550(Includes Plow) Wolf Motors $52,564.54 $19,300.00 $28,525.00 $61,789.54 2015 F-550(Includes Plow) Midway(State Bid) $51,413.81 $18,000.00 $28'525.0101 $61,938.81 2015 F-550(Includes Plow) New Prague $51,706.37 $12,500.001 $28,525.00 $67,731.37 *Dodge Nelson Auto(State Bid) Responded that they do not have a vehicle to meet our specs *GMC Nelson Auto(State Bid) Responded that they do not have a vehicle to meet our specs Appurtenant Equipment:Dump Box and Sander Henderson 25-HEN-41982-13-41V1 jAspen NA NA $28,525.00 Crysteel E-Series SS 3 yd jCrysteel NA NA 1 $28,913.83 'f -• Ilt , MEN=• I • 111 Chasis Frei htl. er 108SD .I-State Truck Center $88,292.93 $36,000.00 $110,599.00 $162,891.93 International 7500 Astleford International $90,627.62 $35,000.00 $110,599.00 $166,226.62 Mack GU532 Nuss Truck and Equipment $89,157.94 $32,000.00 $110,599.00 $167,756.94 Appurtenant Equipment: Box,Plows,&Controls Ultra SSR Box-Henke Plow, Wing and TBEI $110,599.00 Controls NA NA Edge-RS Box and Falls Plow,Wing and Controls Towmaster NA NA $116,771.09 2015 Elgin,Pelican NP McQueen Equipment $196,662.001 $17,000.00 $179,662.00 2015 Elgin, Eagle jMcQueen Equipment $249,496.00 $17,000.00 $232,496.00 f f.. ' 1 .• • .1 111 T650 Bobcat Lano Equipment $54,289.02 $18,000.00 $36,289.02 257D Caterpillar lZeigler $56,808.00 $19,000.00 $37,808.00 __ O Toro 3280 MTI $35,132.34 $4,000.00 $31,132.34 Jacobson Turlwerks $36,117.00 $3,200.00 $32,917.00 John Deere 1570 Scharber and Sons $36,626.87 $2,000.00 $34,626.87 Toro, Workman HDX Ilion $23,150.53 1 $3,000.001 1 $20,150.53 John Deere,2020A Pro-Gator I Scharber and Sons $22,778.221 $500.001 $22,278.22 • tt 11 1 •• • ttl 2015 Ford F-350 Wolf Motors $30,766.41 $6,250.00 $24,516.41 2015 Ford F-350 Midway Ford(State Bid) $30,382.64 $5,000.00 $25,382.64 2015 Ford F-350 New Prague Ford $31,372.43 $3,000.00 $28,372.43 2015 Dodge 3500 Nelson Auto(State Bid) $32,742.55 $2,700.00 $30,042.55 Total Base Appurtenant Equipment Make, Model Vendor Vehicle Trade-In Equipment Cost 2015 Ford F-150 Wolf Motors $32,237.00 $12,500.00 $5,500.00 $25,237.00 2015 Ford F-150 New Prague Ford $32,468.00 $11,000.00 $5,500.00 $26,968.00 2015 Ford F-150 Midway Ford(State Bid) $33,557.00 $10,000.00 $5,500.00 $29,057.00 2015 Ford F-150 Nelson Auto Declined to Bid 2015 Ford F-150 Wolf Motors $32,237.00 NA $5,500.00 $37,737.00 2015 Ford F-150 New Prague Ford $32,448.00 NA $5,500.00 $37,948.00 2015 Ford F-150 Midway Ford(State Bid) $33,557.00 NA $5,500.00 $39,057.00 2015 Ford F-150 Nelson Auto 2015 Ford F-350 Wolf $29,272.00 $12,500 $5,500.00 $22,272.00 Dodge Ram 3500 Nelson Auto(State Bid) $31,084.73 $6,700.00 $5,500.00 $29,884.73 2015 Ford F-350 Midway Ford State Bid) $28,880.00 $10,000.00 $5,500.00 $24,380.00 2015 Ford F-350 New Prague Ford $29,622.00 $8,000.00 $5,500.00 $27,122.00 .. off Argo 750 HDi Trenchers Plus $30,288.70 $1,600.00 $10,000,001 $38,688.70 Argo 750 HDi Midwest Underground $32,220.00 $1,350.00 $10,000-001 $40,870.00 Argo 750 HDi Aro International $34,402.84 $0.00 $10,000.001 $44,402.84 4 i 2015 Ford Police Interceptor Utility Nelson Auto State Bid $26,738.951 NA $8,500.00 $35,238.95 TOTAL for Squads $80,216.851 NA $25,500.00 $105,716.85 Purchases for which authorization is being sought $ 797,480.30 Disposal value of trade-ins $ 118,650.00 Total Purchase Amount $ 678,830.30 Budget for which purchase authorization is being sought $ 699,600.00 Over/(Under)budget $ (20,769.70)