HomeMy WebLinkAbout5I AMRS Contract Amendment Report
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 / www.cityofpriorlake.com
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: DECEMBER 3, 2018
AGENDA #: 5I
PREPARED BY: JASON WEDEL, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER
PRESENTED BY: JASON WEDEL
AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND
CITY MANAGER TO AMEND THE CITY’S STANDARDIZED CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRACT FOR THE 2018 AMRS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
DISCUSSION: Introduction
The City’s existing Automatic Meter Reading System (AMRS) was installed in
2002. The life expectancy of the Meter Transmitter Units (MTU’s) within that
system is 20 years. The City is experiencing many of these MTU permanent
batteries already expiring, which is making the collection of data for water billing
purposes difficult. It was therefore necessary to move forward with a full city-wide
replacement.
The City included funds in the 2018 budget for this work. City staff sent out
Requests for Proposals (RFP’s) to three different vendors that provide these types
of improvements. The City Council selected Ferguson as the preferred vendor at
the May 7, 2018 City Council meeting and directed staff to negotiate with
Ferguson on the final contract amount and bring the contract back for
consideration of approval and authorization to proceed with the work at a future
meeting. The final contract was approved by the City Council on June 4, 2018.
The work began on the project this fall and it has since been discovered that there
were errors in the original proposal submitted by Ferguson. It is therefore
necessary to revisit the contract and consider an amendment.
History
The City of Prior Lake’s water meter MTU’s are reaching the end of their useful
lives. In 2002 the City installed an AMRS system consisting of MTU’s, and
centralized data collecting units (DCU’s). Readings collected by the meter
registers are transmitted to the central database once per day through a fixed
radio system.
The current AMRS collects meter reading data multiple times every day.
However, there are meters that are not currently detected. The City has 14 DCUs
spread throughout the City that read the signals coming from the MTU’s at each
billing address. Unfortunately, some read locations remain undetectable to our
DCUs. The options for picking up these locations is adding more DCUs or having
an alternative method for obtaining readings from those locations such as a drive-
by detection unit.
With the increasing number of existing MTUs failing every day it was necessary to
initiate the replacement this year. Delaying the replacement would have put the
City in a position where we could not keep up with daily MTU replacements, which
results in meters that go unread requiring Utility Billing to make estimates on the
amount of water used by those accounts.
The City received three proposals. The proposers included the City’s current
provider Aclara as well as Winwater and Ferguson. The City Council selected
Ferguson based on several factors including overall cost for MTU and water meter
replacement, the company being local, and they were the only provider that
offered a drive-by option for meter reading.
The total proposed cost for both MTU and water meter replacement was originally
presented to the City Council as follows:
Ferguson $2,079,079.22
Aclara $2,834,885.00
Winwater $2,699,520.38
The City’s budget for the AMRS project in the CIP was $1,700,000 and was
established solely for MTU replacement. However, it was decided later to include
replacement of water meters at the same time as the MTUs for several reasons.
1.) Replacing the older water meters will result in more accurate water meter
readings which will provide more revenue to the City due to older meters
under reporting water usage.
2.) Replacing the water meters now will allow the City to only inconvenience
our residents once rather than coming back in five years to replace the
water meters.
3.) City staff will have one consistent water meter system throughout the City.
It will therefore be much more efficient to maintain, because we will only
have to stock one model of parts and we only need to train our staff on how
to service one type of product.
4.) It is more cost effective to replace the MTUs and the water meters at the
same time.
The City Council directed staff to work with Ferguson to negotiate a final contract
amount that was closer to the allocated funding. Staff subsequently worked with
Ferguson to reduce the number of DCUs which resulted in a revised proposal cost
of $1,476,324.07. The City Council approved a contract in this amount at the June
4, 2018 City Council meeting.
Current Circumstances
The project has subsequently begun, and we have discovered a mistake in the
proposal and contract relating to the meter replacement program. The mistake is a
result of Ferguson improperly completing the proposal form. The City requested
prices for 26 different items, but items 1, 2 and 3 were to be alternates:
1) MTU’s, registers and meters
2) MTU’s and registers
3) MTU’s only
This would allow the City to select all or just part of a new meter reading system.
The City’s intent was that the City would select item 1 or 2 or 3 where item 1 would
be the entire system, item 2 part of the system, or item 3 just the MTU’s.
Depending on the prices, the City would select 1, 2 or 3, thereby rejecting the
other two options.
However, Ferguson read the three alternates as three separate parts of the
system to be provided. Ferguson understood that the City could select 1, 2 or 3
but believed that the City could select more than one (i.e. 1 and 2 or 1, 2 and 3).
Whichever items the City selected would be added up for the total price. Ferguson
provided the pricing for the meters and registers as item 1 and the MTU’s as item
3.
As a result of the mistake, the City believed the cost for the meters, registers and
MTU’s was $633,164.95 while Ferguson was actually proposing that the meters
and registers would cost $633,164.95 and the MTUs would cost an additional
$662,494.82.
ISSUES: The error was on Ferguson’s part. The proposal form did state what pricing should
be included in items 1, 2 and 3. The other two proposers completed the proposal
properly. In addition, the proposal form states: “Should Proposer fail to identify all
items, Proposer shall be responsible for all associated costs after a determination
of award has been made.”
However, the City could have been clearer that item 1 was the entire system as
opposed to items 1, 2 and 3 each being a part of the system. In addition, the City
could have noticed the error and addressed this issue when the proposals were
reviewed.
At this point, City staff is hoping to reach a mutually agreeable solution with
Ferguson for several reasons:
1.) The proposal still would have been the low proposal had it been completed
accurately.
2.) Staff still would have recommended proceeding with the full project at the
higher proposal price.
3.) The City has been very pleased with Ferguson regarding working with staff
and residents, especially compared to the prior contractor whose customer
service was poor.
If we do not reach a mutually agreeable solution, Ferguson could walk away or we
could end up in court. If we end up in court, we don’t have a guaranteed victory
and we could harm an important long-term relationship. Although the error was
Ferguson’s and our language makes clear any error is at Ferguson’s cost, the
court may find that Ferguson’s error was reasonable and/or that the City is
receiving a benefit and thus should pay the cost of the benefit received regardless
of our understanding.
Staff recommended that the City Council include the water meter replacement
alternative along with the MTU replacement. There is an additional cost for doing
this; however, there are several benefits for doing both at the same time as
described earlier.
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
To show good faith, Ferguson has offered to eliminate a portion of their
professional services costs which results in a discount of $50,250. They have also
conceded their share (50%) of the brass recycling revenue from recycling the old
water meters which increases the City’s revenue by $10,000. We discussed
pushing for more of a discount but reconsidered. Ferguson already lost
approximately $70,000 due to a sales tax issue which Ferguson is covering. The
City is exempt from paying sales tax for goods and services that are inputs used to
provide government services. Ferguson thought they had this covered but
discovered after they entered into the contract with the City that their process for
completing the installations made them ineligible for the exemption. Based on the
combination of all these items it means that Ferguson’s profit has likely already
been reduced to zero.
We are also hoping to find some additional savings in placing DCU’s on the water
towers. This had not been done with the old system. Hopefully having the DCU’s
at a greater height will allow the City to install fewer DCU’s which could result in
additional savings. Initial results have been promising and once additional water
meters have been installed throughout the City we will have a better
understanding of how many DCU’s will be needed. The total cost associated with
installing all 13 DCU’s is $126,176.57. Elimination of any DCU’s will help reduce
this cost.
The proposed contract amount based on these changes would be $2,230,590.79.
The next lowest proposal was from Winwater which was $2,699,520.38 and
included 13 DCU’s as well. The revised Ferguson contract would be $468,929.59
below that proposal.
The City’s budget in the CIP for replacement of the MTU’s is $1,700,000. Earlier
this year the City sold bonds to cover the cost of this project. The costs included
in the bond sale for the AMRS project was based on the original contract amount
of approximately $1,500,000. The revised contract which includes replacement of
the water meters as well as the MTU’s would be $730,590.79 over what was
included in the bond sale.
When the City first presented this project to the Council on May 7, 2018, one of the
advantages of replacing the water meters was more accurate meter readings. The
City has a significant number of meters that are old and no longer read accurately.
We estimate that this costs the City $177,165 per year in under reported water
usage. The added cost of Including the water meter replacement with this project
will pay for itself fully, just based on accurate reporting, in a little over 4 years. The
City will also have ongoing annual savings due to the current annual budget
including $190,000 for water meter purchases. Once this work is completed that
annual expense will be reduced to $120,000 per year, resulting in a savings of
$70,000 per year. This brings the pay back period to 3 years.
The funding for the additional project cost is proposed to come from the water
enterprise fund. This fund is currently capable of covering the additional cost.
ALTERNATIVES: 1. Motion and second as part of the consent agenda a resolution authorizing
the Mayor and City Manager to execute an amendment to the City’s
Standardized Construction Contract for the 2018 AMRS Replacement
Project.
2. Motion and second removing this item from the consent agenda for
additional discussion.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
Alternative #1
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RESOLUTION 18-xxx
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITY’S STANDARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE
2018 AMRS REPLACEMENT PROJECT (WTR17-000004)
Motion By: Second By:
WHEREAS, The replacement of the City’s AMRS was identified in the 2018 Capital Improvement
Program; and
WHEREAS, Proposals were received, opened, and tabulated according to law; and
WHEREAS, Proposals were received from three vendors: Ferguson, Aclara, and Winwater; and
WHEREAS,
Ferguson was determined to be the lowest responsible vendor for replacement of both the
MTUs and the water meters; and
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
The City directed staff to renegotiate costs with Ferguson and the revised proposal
amount was $1,476,324.07 for both MTU and water meter replacement.
It was determined that the proposal form was incorrectly submitted by Ferguson and the
actual contract amount for both the MTU and water replacement is $2,230,590.79,
which is still below the proposals received from the other vendors.
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. Ferguson is the lowest responsible vendor.
3. The Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to amend the City’s Standardized Construction
Contract with Ferguson for an amount of $2,230,590.79.
4. Funding for this work will be from Acc ounts 601-49400.00-55530.00 and the 2019 budget will be
amended to reflect this contract change .
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 3rd DAY OF DECEMBER 2018.
VOTE Briggs McGuire Thompson Braid Burkart
Aye ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Nay ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Abstain ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Absent ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
______________________________
Frank Boyles, City Manager