Search

Finance Committee Page 3
August 17, 2016

Director Cummings

Yes.
MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Purchase of Radios for Emergency Management Vehicles (Value: $11,997)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGELTO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE
FROM MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $11,997. SOURCE OF FUNDING IS
DEPARTMENT: 156 EMERGENCYMANAGEMENT; FUND: 2015/2016 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
PERFORMANCE GRANT (EMPG) $11,822; ACCOUNT CLASSIFICATION: 61 SUPPLIES & MATERIALS
DEPARTMENT: 156 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT; FUND: GENERAL FUND $175; ACCOUNT
CLASSIFICATION: 61 SUPPLIES & MATERIALS

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Siegel

There is an option in here for 9,600 bit per second communication. Is that just in case we go back in time to
1988? I’m just not sure...that’s where the P95 communication... but all of the other communication happens at
like one normal current technology. Maybe Justin can answer that at some point but it’s not really that
important.

Mr. Kooken
| don’t know the answer to that but | can ask.
Mayor Donchess
Can you get back to Alderman Siegel on that?
Mr. Kooken
Yes.
MOTION CARRIED
From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Award of Contract for Spit Brook Road Fire Station Addition/Renovation
(Value: Not- to-Exceed $112,500)
MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE COTNRACT TO
PORT ONE ARCHITECTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $112,500. SOURCE OF FUNDING IS AVAILABLE IN
DEPARTMENT: 152 FIRE; FUND: GENERAL FUND PRIOR YEAR ESCROWS $56,750; ACCOUNT
CLASSIFICATION: 81 CAPITAL OUTLAY; DEPARTMENT: 152 FIRE; FUND: BOND; ACCOUNT
CLASSIFICATION: 81 CAPITAL OUTLAY $55,750

ON THE QUESTION

Finance Committee Page 4
August 17, 2016

Alderman Siegel

Is this controlled construction? Is the architect going to do controlled construction and oversee that it goes
according to plan? It just wasn’t clear from the contract.

Assistant Chief Rhodes

The way that | understand we are going about this is...we have an architect and this isn’t a design build
project, it’s through a construction manager so we have the architect who is going to do all of the engineering
and physical drawings of the building and he will act as our agent as well as the city to protect our interest in
making sure that everything that we were looking for...that the project is going according to plan and things
don’t change.

Alderman Siegel

Okay so the answer is yes, that’s the definition of controlled construction.
Assistant Chief Rhodes

| apologize because | didn’t know the definition.

MOTION CARRIED

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Contract Award for Performing Arts Center Feasibility Study Phase II (Value: $27,000)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGELTO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE CONTRACT TO
WEBB MANAGEMENT SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $27,000. SOURCE OF FUNDING IS
DEPARTMENT: 183 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; FUND: DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE
TRUST FUND; ACCOUNT CLASSIFICATION: 53 PROFESSIONAL & TECHNICAL SERVICES ($25,000)
AND CONTINGENT UPON BOARD OF ALDERMEN APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED FY2017 PRIOR
YEAR ESCROWS, DEPARTMENT: 183 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; FY2017 PRIOR YEAR ESCROWS
($2,000)

ON THE QUESTION

Mayor Donchess

Director Cummings, will you give a brief overview of what is being proposed?

Director Cummings

Before you this evening is essentially a second phase of the Performing Arts Center Feasibility Study. To
quickly recap and there is a memo in your package which basically outlines where we have come from
previously and where we are to date. Phase | has been executed and presented to the community regarding
the results and conclusions. At the end of the day the consultant made a couple of recommendations which
were to partner with a college or university on the development of a new downtown arts center, develop a
downtown meeting events or music center and then develop an “Arts District.” Phase | cost approximately
$22,000 and it’s been 100% completed and the budget has been expended. Recently, last month, the
Planning and Economic Development Committee met and discussed what is in front of you today which is the
phase II portion of the feasibility study where the consultant, Duncan Webb, and to re-orientate everyone, this
was the previous conversation that took place about one year ago where the City of Nashua agreed to go into
this type of project in a multi-phased concept. With that being said, Duncan Webb, our consultant, has
developed this phase II scope which is in front of you and what | am here tonight looking for approval on. My

Finance Committee Page 5
August 17, 2016

understanding of the budget is that it’s going to cost approximately $27,000 and we have $25,000 set aside
through the Downtown Improvement Committee fund and we will be looking to take an additional $2,000 under
the escrows which will be forthcoming in the next week or so. | wanted to be somewhat ambitious to keep this
moving along because this is a project that has been hanging out there for a while and | felt it imperative to
keep the ball moving and because there are so many moving parts | wanted to present this in front of you and
hopefully get this approved this evening with the understanding that execution of the contract wouldn’t occur
until after the escrows are hopefully approved.

Mayor Donchess

The escrows have been proposed and referred to the Budget Review Committee for review on next Monday,
August 22",

Alderman Cookson

| hesitate bringing this up because it’s not directly related to the proposal but my question would be more
around yes, | support the Performing Arts Feasibility Study but what | would be more interested in
understanding is | Know that our downtown Master Plan needs to be updated and | am wondering how the two
would actually complement one another or not just complement one another but | think we need to understand
what is going on downtown in conjunction with adding a new Performing Arts Center in the same general area.
| know that Director Marchant has mentioned maybe on more than one occasion, the idea of updating that. Do
we have any plans on setting funds aside so we can actually conduct that downtown Master Plan update as
well?

Mayor Donchess

There was $50,000 included in the budget that just passed for the beginning of Master Planning work and |
think what we were going to propose to you is that the first phases of that begin downtown as part of an overall
City Master Plan and that we will be coming forward with that as a recommendation in the relatively near
future. | agree that we want to look at this as part of an overall concept plan for downtown, that’s the whole
point here and make sure that this is a part of what we plan for the entire downtown and that this is part of our
overall downtown revitalization effort.

Alderman Siegel

| have no problem with the study but | have a question about the economic split. There’s $2,000 of other
money coming from outside of the scope of the Downtown Improvement Committee. Was there just not
enough money in that fund?

Director Cummings

My understanding is that there was an original appropriation recommended by the Downtown Improvement
Committee which was $25,000. This quote came in after that because this is the second phase and it came in
higher and wanting to get as complete of a project as possible, we were able to, through excess salary money
in the Economic Development Department because of the transition that predated me, we were able to transfer
the $2,000.

Mayor Donchess

That is the source of the escrow that has been proposed.

MOTION CARRIED

Finance Committee Page 6
August 17, 2016

From: Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager
Re: Contract Award for Wayfinding Project Phase 1 (Value: $49,110)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGELTO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD THE CONTRACT TO
GREENMAN-PEDERSON IN THE AMOUNT OF $49,110. SOURCE OF FUNDING ISDEPARTMENT: 183
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; FUND: DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE TRUST FUND;
ACCOUNT CLASSIFICATION: 53 PROFESSIONAL & TECHNICAL SERVICES

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Siegel

| am fine with the proposal and the selection but | do have a question about the RFP process. It seemed like
there was a bid and the bid was high and then after we selected the vendor we kind of got them down a little
lower than we had before. It’s great that we are saving money but | guess the question | have is that okay
because it seems like it is somewhat outside of the norm?

Director Cummings

My understanding is that it was always understood in the RFP process that the bid could be “split” in two
phases so when the RFP was issued that was understood as a possible outcome. During the selection and
review process that the committee held, they made a determination at that time that was the direction in which
they wanted to go and so upon making the decision based off of phase I, the design aspect, they went back to
the individual vendor that they selected and had an additional conversation, understanding that it was going to
be essentially less work now, and the vendor then offered a lower amount of money.

Alderman Siegel

So each vendor was given equal opportunity to understand all of the parameters to deal and bid accordingly?
Director Cummings
That’s correct, yes.
Alderman Clemons

What was the issue with W.S. Sign Design? Their phase 1 price is $12,000 and Greenman-Pederson was
$59,000 so | am curious why we are going with the one that’s the most expensive.

Mr. James Vayo, Downtown Specialist & OED Program Coordinator

W.S. Signs put forth a proposal that did not have the same qualitative value as the other two proposals that
were put forth. It basically lacked a considerable amount of information and it wasn’t clear from their proposal
that they could provide the same level of scope of services as the other two bidders. They did technically meet
the qualifications for the RFP but the caliber of their work was not nearly as good as the other two.

Alderman Clemons

Can you be more specific?

Mr. Vayo

When it came to laying out how they were going to provide information about existing signage as
documentation to use for how to locate new signage; that was basically either non-existent or insufficient.

Finance Committee Page 7
August 17, 2016

Information about how they would structurally design signs or the demonstration of knowledge about how to
design signs or meeting MUTCD standards was insufficient or non-existent. That's two examples but there
were other things as well.

Mayor Donchess

And the standard you referred to was... you used an acronym | think.

Mr. Vayo

It’s MUTCD which stands for Manual Uniform Traffic Control Device which is used nationally for signage for
roads. It reaches into the pedestrian realm as well. Things you wouldn’t even consider like if a sign is hit by a
car is it bolted down to a concrete foundation in a way that the bolts would break away in the event of an
accident in the right scenario to limit harm and bodily injury. It was stuff that | didn’t even know about until we
got into this RFP process.

Alderman Clemons

Archtype Signworks was similar and | would imagine we are going with Greenman because they are less
expensive, is that the case?

Mr. Vayo

Archtype Signworks’ proposal was also a qualitative issue where the examples they gave in their proposal
were not nearly as esthetically pleasing to the selection committee nor reflective as accurately to the scope of
work that was desired for Nashua. The physical that they showed in their RFP package did not look like the
kind of stuff that the selection committee and the Downtown Improvement Committee were looking for in
Nashua. They were really looking for signs with black backgrounds and white lettering and Archtype
Signworks, while a very capable fabricator and vendor for fabrication, seemed weaker on the design elements
of the proposal.

Mayor Donchess

Who is on the design committee that you were speaking of?

Mr. Vayo

We had DPW staff, myself, Ron from the Downtown Improvement Committee. | can’t think of the whole list but
| can get it for you.

Director Cummings

In the memo that is in the package it outlines that on June 17" a seven member proposal evaluation committee
met and reviewed the proposals and they included representatives of the Community Development Division,
the Economic Development Office, the Department of Public Works, which were their streets division and then
also a member of the Downtown Improvement Committee.

Alderman Siegel

| think the decision process was well vetted. It’s not always price that we decide things on because there is
what you are buying for what you are getting. We see this all of the time in the IT Department where prices
vary but the scope of the work and the various criteria that go beyond just price also weigh in.

MOTION CARRIED

Finance Committee Page 8
August 17, 2016

UNFINISHED BUSINESS — None
NEW BUSINESS - None
TABLED IN COMMITTEE - None
DISCUSSION

Alderman Cookson

| will just add with regard to the Wayfinding Project that | think we are going to see a lot of changes in
downtown and one of the things that we have been looking at is two-way streets becoming one-way streets or
vice versa and different traffic patterns. | am hoping that these wayfinding signs are going to be generic
enough, especially as you are coming from the Broad Street Parkway; that it just provides you with a general
understanding. With regard to the signage that currently exists, I’m not sure how old that signage is but a lot of
the signage still provides good directions and is appealing to the eye as well. It’s not ugly per se. A lot of
things are going to be changing downtown and | just want to make sure that as we have these decisions that
we are making that we keep in mind all of these other things within the system that are going to be impacted
and effected by it. So as we make decisions information is going to have to be transmitted to appropriate
vendors so that they understand what it is that we are attempting to do within the downtown. | am certain that
Director Cummings and Mr. Vayo will, as they participate in the Infrastructure Committee and the Planning and
Economic Development Committee, that they will be right on top of a lot of these topics as we are discussion
them. | think it is going to be vital that we make sure that we end up with the deliverable that we all want and
expect.

RECORD OF EXPENDITURES

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL THAT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE HAS COMPLIED WITH THE CITY
CHARTER AND ORDINANCES PERTAINING TO THE RECORD OF EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD
JULY 29, 2016, TO AUGUST 11, 2016

MOTION CARRIED

PUBLIC COMMENT - None

POSSIBLE NON-PUBLIC SESSION

ADJOURNMENT

MOTION BY ALDERMAN WILSHIRE TO ADJOURN
MOTION CARRIED

The Finance Committee meeting was adjourned at 7:31 p.m.

Alderman Ken Siegel
Committee Clerk

FINANCE COMMITTEE

AUGUST 17, 2016

7:00 PM Aldermanic Chamber

ROLL CALL

PUBLIC COMMENT

COMMUNICATIONS

From:
Re:

From:
Re:

From:
Re:

From:
Re:

From:

From:
Re:

Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager

Police Ammunition (Value: $31,537)

Department: 150 Nashua Police Department; Fund: General Fund;
Account Description: 61 Supplies and Materials

Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager

Snow Plowing Contract — City Parking Lots (Value: Not-to-Exceed $26,000)
Department: 183 Economic Development; Fund: Parking General Fund;
Account Classification: 54 Property Services

Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager

Purchase of Radios for Emergency Management Vehicles (Value: $11,997)
Department: 156 Emergency Management; Fund: 2015/2016 Emergency Management
Performance Grant (EMPG) $11,822; Account Classification: 61 Supplies & Materials
Department: 156 Emergency Management; Fund: General Fund $175;

Account Classification: 61 Supplies & Materials

Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager

Award of Contract for Spit Brook Road Fire Station Addition/Renovation
(Value: Not- to-Exceed $112,500)

Department: 152 Fire; Fund: General Fund Prior Year Escrows $56,750
Account Classification: 81 Capital Outlay; Department: 152 Fire; Fund: Bond;
Account Classification: 81 Capital Outlay $55,750

Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager .

Contract Award for Performing Arts Center Feasibility Study Phase II (Value: $27,000)
Department: 183 Economic Development; Fund: Downtown Improvement Committee Trust Fund;
Account Classification: 53 Professional & Technical Services

Dan Kooken, Purchasing Manager

Contract Award for Wayfinding Project Phase 1 (Value: $49,110)

Department: 183 Economic Development; Fund: Downtown Improvement Committee Trust Fund:
Account Classification: 53 Professional & Technical Services

UNFINISHED BUSINESS — None

- NEW BUSINESS - None

DISCUSSION

RECORD OF EXPENDITURES

PUBLIC COMMENT
NON-PUBLIC SESSION

ADJOURNMENT

THE CITY OF NASHUA “the Gate Cy

Financtal Services

Purchasing Department

August 9, 2016
Memo #1 7-028

TO: MAYOR DONCHESS
FINANCE COMMITTEE

SUBJECT: POLICE AMMUNITION (VALUE: $31,537)
DEPARTMENT: 150 NASHUA POLICE DEPARTMENT; FUND: GENERAL FUND
ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION: 61 SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS

Please see the attached communication dated August 9, 2016 from Karen A. Smith, Business Manager
for the information related to this purchase.

The Nashua Police Department and the Purchasing Department recommend the award of this purchase
in the amount of $31,537 to Eagle Point/TJ Morris & Son of Thorofare, NJ.

Respecttully,

Y Ab fu L Sin a

Dan Kooken
Purchasing Manager

Ce: K. Smith A. Lavoie

i
IFBO868-082716 Basketball Shirts
229 Main Street e Nashua, New Hampshire 03061 © Phone (603) 589-3330 « Fax (603) 589-3344

10.

If after termination for the failure of DesignLAB to adhere to any of the terms and
conditions of the contract or for failure to satisfactorily, in the sole opinion of the City of
Nashua, to complete or make sufficient progress on the work in a timely and professional
manner, it is determined that DesignLAB had not so failed, the termination shall be deemed
to have been a termination at will. In that event, the City of Nashua shall, if necessary,
make an adjustment in the compensation paid to DesignLAB such that DesignLAB
receives total compensation in the same amount as it would have received in the event of
a termination-at-will.

C. GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR TERMINATION Upon termination of the contract, the City
of Nashua may take over the work and prosecute it to completion by agreement with
another party or otherwise. In the event DesignLAB shall cease conducting business, the
City of Nashua shall have the right to solicit applications for employment from any
employee of the DesignLAB assigned to the performance of the contract.

Neither party shall be considered in default of the performance of its obligations hereunder
to the extent that performance of such obligations is prevented or delayed by any cause,
existing or future, which is beyond the reasonable control of such party. Delays arising
from the actions or inactions of one or more of DesignLAB's principals, officers,
employees, agents, subcontractors, consultants, vendors, or suppliers are expressly
recognized to be within DesignLAB's control.

DISPUTE RESOLUTION The parties shall attempt to resolve any dispute related to this
contract as follows. Either party shall provide to the other party, in writing and with full
documentation to verify and substantiate its decision, its stated position concerning the
dispute. No dispute shall be considered submitted and no dispute shall be valid under this
provision unless and until the submitting party has delivered the written statement of its
position and full documentation to the other party. The parties shall then attempt to resolve
the dispute through good faith efforts and negotiation between the City of Nashua
Representative and a DesignLAB Representative. At all times, DesignLAB shall carry on
the work under this contract and maintain and complete work in accordance with the
requirements of the contract or determination or direction of the City of Nashua. If the
parties are unable to resolve their dispute as described above within 30 days, if requested
in writing by either the City of Nashua or the DesignLAB within 14 days after the 30 days
described above , the parties shall attempt to resolve the dispute by entering into structured
non-binding negotiations with the assistance of a mediator on a without prejudice basis.
The mediator shall be appointed by agreement of the parties, which agreement shall not be
unreasonably withheld. If the parties cannot agree to a mediator within 30 days or the
dispute cannot be settled within a period of thirty (30) days with the mediator, the parties’
reserve the right to pursue any available legal and/or equitable remedies for any breaches
of this contract except as that right may be limited by the terms of this contract.

NO DAMAGES FOR DELAY Apart from a written extension of time, no payment,
compensation, or adjustment of any kind shall be made to DesignLAB for damages because
of hindrances or delays in the progress of the work from any cause, and DesignLAB agrees
to accept in full satisfaction of such hindrances and delays any extension of time that the
City of Nashua may provide.

GC 6 of 13