Search

Change Order
Summary

CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE:
Original Contract Price

$1,497,993

“CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIMES:
Original Contract Times

Substantial completion: October 6, 2020
Ready for final payment: November 6, 2020

Net changes from previous Change Orders

$2,275,125

Net change from previous Change Orders

400 days

Contract Price prior to us Change Order

$3,773,018

Contract Times prior to this Change Order

Substantial completion: November 9, 2021
Ready fer final payment: December 9, 2021

“Net Increase (decrease) of this Change Order

$150,000

Net Increase (decrease) of this Chatige Order

150 days for final payment

Contract Price with all approved Change Orders

Contract Times with all approved Change Orders

$3,923,118.
Ready for final payment: May 9,022 ~ TA,
RECOMMENDED:
ay: oe Ne inl ‘ By.
DPW ayor Jim Donchess
Engineer Owner
(Authorized Signature) (Authorized Signature) e cnuhowined ignatyre)
Date: (YAPR 22 Date: Aye]. AVA d~ Date: yk

2020 Sewer Replacement Project 2 of 2

Change Order 6

Finance Committee Page 14
August 3, 2016

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE
FROM MHQ IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,080. FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE IN DEPARTMENT 173,
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; 2016 AND 2017 CERF - VEHICLES

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO ACCEPT AND PLACE ON FILE THE COMMUNICATION FROM MR.
KOOKEN REGARDING THE 2002 CHEVY MALIBU CONDITION AND REPAIR HISTORY

MOTION CARRIED

Vice Chairman Cookson

We are going to need a copy of that for our record; can you please give one to Mrs. Lovering?

Mr. Kooken

Okay.

ON THE QUESTION

Ms. Heidi Peek-Kukulka, Manager of Environmental Health

| don’t Know what would be most helpful. | don’t Know if you have received the pictures of the under carriage
and the rust. Historically it was considered the “bad” car when we purchased the vehicles at the same time
and the Ford Taurus was the “good” car and we were heartbroken when the Ford Taurus didn’t pass
inspection. | am concerned about the safety of personnel driving that car just with the rust as itis. It may have
technically passed inspection but it has, in my opinion, exceeded its lifetime.

Ms. Bobbi Bagley, Director, Health & Community Services

Just that the vehicle hasn’t been driven because of the condition that it is in so we would want you to highly
consider the fact that we do need a new vehicle so that we can get to the places that we need to and don’t
have to rely on their own personal cars or try to just drive one vehicle.

Vice Chairman Cookson

So if you would allow me, based on that comment, I’d like to ask if people are using their own personal
vehicles and are you providing a mileage reimbursement for that use?

Director Bagley

Yes, mileage reimbursement is being provided when people use their own personal vehicles.
Alderman O’Brien

| used to drive cars that looked like some of the photos that you took. My best friends were in the welding
business that put the frame together. | did not think that this vehicle was that bad. The due diligence and
providing the photographs gave a greater insight to this Board and | would like to say thank you. | think this
vehicle has seen its day, we got our money out of it and it’s time to get a new one.

Alderman Siegel

| appreciate the information and | agree that the rust pictures shown look pretty bad. I’ve owned my share of
rust pockets. | also appreciated the maintenance and work orders information that was supplied. I’m a little bit
concerned because in this maintenance work orders where we have had a number of years that had gone by; |

Finance Committee Page 15
August 3, 2016

mean it’s clear that rust didn’t happen overnight and nothing was done so we are changing the oil but not even
addressing obvious problems. | find that tremendously weird.

Mr. Kooken

| would like to point out that of the work orders showed 35 labor hours at about $900 and that was for rust
repair in 2014 and that was repaired so it could pass the state inspection back then and the pictures you saw
today are new pictures where that repaired rust is kind of out of control.

Alderman Siegel

| would argue that many of us have cars that are stored outside for long periods of time. | have 2007 vehicle
with 178,000 miles on it and it’s stored outside and | can tell you that I’ve had it up on a lift and it looks nothing
like that and I’m just wondering how a vehicle could get that rusted out with just normal storage outside. One
of the things the work orders have, which | found interesting, was the odometer reading at the point which the
vehicles are serviced. On December 12" there is service order and the odometer reads 70,827 miles. Now
there is another service order that comes in on June 12, 2015; and the odometer reading is 70,827 miles so
either the odometer has been tampered with, which clearly is illegal, and | don’t think that has happened or the
car hasn’t gone anywhere. The next service order is dated September 17, 2015; and we are up to 74,401
miles. Now we are at October 19" where it’s 74,401 and moving along to the present day where | believe we
are at about 78,000. My point is basically over a number of years we have very few miles on this car. Why are
we buying a new car when we can do a reimbursement at .57 cents per mile?

Ms. Peek

In my opinion, it’s cheaper. We have been understaffed for periods of time when it hasn’t been necessary to
put everybody out on the road at the same time. Right now we have a vacancy and we are waiting for
someone to start on the 22™ of this month. This car has broken down repeatedly and we’ve had to get staff
back. We only two years of maintenance records but we recognize that it was a problem. It doesn’t lock, the
A/C doesn’t work. It’s just not reliable and it has not gone to Concord for a very long time.

Vice Chairman Cookson

| don’t think it necessarily addresses the question that Alderman Siegel asked which was why purchase a new
vehicle at $25,000 versus reimbursing at .57 cents per mile.

Alderman Siegel

Just to clarify, | don’t have any issue with the condition of the car. | think it’s not a drivable vehicle.
Ms. Peek

In my opinion it’s more expensive to pay for somebody’s mileage and | may be wrong. We have three people
whose time is almost 75% in the field. | don’t want to limit where they go and we can also have an animal
head that needs to be transported to the state laboratory and that cannot go into personal vehicles. We do a
lot of sampling of icky stuff that does not go into personal vehicles. We thank you very much for the approval
of the other car, we really needed that as well but | think that mileage would really rack up quite quickly. | try to
be very conservative with our mileage reimbursements and | don’t want to just start spending that down.

Vice Chairman Cookson

You characterize this as the “bad” car and so that raises the question of do you currently reimburse employees
mileage because they are not using the vehicle.

Finance Committee Page 16
August 3, 2016

Ms. Peek
Yes.
Vice Chairman Cookson

So you do have some sort of historical information that says this is how much we paid for mileage? That would
serve uS aS a good barometer. | mean if you are spending $25,000 in mileage reimbursement then it
potentially could make sense to purchase a new vehicle.

Ms. Peek

There are a couple of wild card factors; one is | never drive the city cars and my trips are typically back and
forth to Concord for meetings. If | am driving around locally then | do not submit mileage; again we are very
conservative about this. We've had some staff turnover and changes so the data is going to be a little skewed
there, depending upon who was on staff or who wasn’t using a car at some point in time. The responsibilities
of our Deputy Health Officer/Laboratory Director have changed so that he can conduct a lot of his activities in
the field as well. It’s hard to look at one point in time.

Vice Chairman Cookson

| can certainly appreciate that and | know that there are a bunch of variables that go into measuring it. | am
just trying to say that you have some historical information; you have data that can at least provide us with
some direction and some trending.

Alderman Siegel

| have no doubt that you are conservative. The point you brought up about laboratory material not being
transported in a personal car, | certainly would agree with that. The question is if here other cars available? It
sounds like there is a pool and we have other city cars and based on what I’ve seen, and admittedly it’s a small
sample of data here, I’m not seeing a lot of miles here and so when you are looking at the amount of money
that we are looking at to buy a new car, even assuming the current cost, it’s a lot of miles and it’s more than
the trends show in this particular vehicles case. | understand you are reluctant to use your mileage but in
looking at the big picture from the city’s perspective it’s more cost effective, again, based on this data that |
have, to get the mileage reimbursement. | am not comfortable approving this knowing that there might be
better information out there that we could save money and solve the problem.

Ms. Peek

I'd like to offer another scenario. VWhen we are conducting pool samples, there may be three people out
collecting those samples; ideally in city vehicles. Again, | don’t want those types of things; | mean it could be
high in chlorine and bleach someone’s seats. We have had a person who worked in our department who didn’t
have a car and depended on public transportation. | understand what you are saying but | would feel better
about having three newer vehicles that are safe and ready to go at amoment’s notice.

Alderman Siegel

And | understand that but we have a record in front of us that indicates that we have an automobile that didn’t
move for over six months and it was during the period of time that the pools would have been actively tested so
while it may not be ideal from one perspective there are other expenses with this.

Finance Committee Page 17
August 3, 2016

Alderman O’Brien

In looking at the photographs | would not have drove this myself, it would be dangerous. Are we going to ask,
as part of the interview process, do you mind using your own car? If something spills in their car do we have to
pay to remove a stain? If somebody keys their car do we have to pay for that? If they are under our employ
then | think the City of Nashua has broad enough shoulders to buy a vehicle to help those employees do their
particular job. If you are going to look at the data on this then | want a legal opinion on this as well because
making a demand that people use their own vehicles. If! am an employee but | like taking a bike to work then |
have to take my car. It’s putting a lot of the oeneus on people. This vehicle was a 2002 so the new vehicle is
going to have at least a better than 10-year life span with the city so | think we will get our money’s worth and |
think we got our money’s worth out of the 2002. | think this would be a good investment.

Vice Chairman Cookson

Director Bagley, do you have a policy within your department with regard to mileage reimbursement?

Director Bagley

| don’t think we have an official policy.

Vice Chairman Cookson

| didn’t know if this was a policy that you enacted that you thought it would be a good idea just to pay mileage

reimbursement or if this were something documented in the city as part of employment that if you did use your
personal vehicle then you were entitled to reimbursement.

Director Bagley

There is not an official policy at the division. I'd have to look and see if there is a city policy for all city
employees.

Alderman Wilshire

Who verifies whether these people have insurance on those vehicles that they are using while they are
working? Do we know if people who are driving their personal vehicle for work have car insurance?

Ms. Peek

| am not aware of that.

Vice Chairman Cookson

Let me follow-up with you. Are you asking whether they have insurance for their own personal vehicles?
Alderman Wilshire

If they are using their own personal vehicle to do city business, is someone verifying that they have insurance
on that vehicle because if they are injured during working hours and there is no insurance there | think the city
is on the hook for that.

Vice Chairman Cookson

Otherwise the city has insurance for the vehicles that they own.

Finance Committee Page 18
August 3, 2016

Alderman Clemons

At $25,080; at .57 cents per mile the break-even point would be 44,000 miles. The Ford Taurus had 80,000 on
it at the end of its life with the city so you could say that the cost that we are paying is for about half of the life
of the vehicle if we assume that we will get similar use out of the new Fusion. The question then becomes
what about maintenance. | assume that these come with a manufacturer's warranty?

Ms. Peek

| would assume so as well.

Alderman Clemons

Is that 36 or 60?

Mr. Kooken

It is three years or 36,000.

Alderman Clemons

Does that cover the hybrid battery?

Mr. Kooken

It covers it.

Alderman Clemons

Have we had good luck with our other hybrids?

Mr. Kooken

Yes, we have two of them in parking enforcement and | did check on the city service on those. They are both
2015 vehicles. One was at 25,000 miles and one was at 21,000 miles and there were a couple of small recalls
that were fixed under warranty and no other issues at all.

Alderman Clemons

My background is auto sales and the 2002 domestic vehicles are; that wasn’t a very proud time of auto
manufacturing in the United States however the Ford Fusion has a very good reputation. | think it’s an upfront

investment that is going to pay for itself over the second half of the lifespan of the vehicle. While we may save
money in the short run, | think in the long run we are better off to buy the vehicle.

Alderman Siegel

| wouldn’t even be having this discussion at this point if | didn’t see the odometer readings and calculated out
the yearly mileage usage so yes, you can say at .57 cents per mile we get “X” number of miles given the
purchase and even throwing away the maintenance and everything like that. It’s just that we aren’t putting that
many miles on the car, that’s my point. | agree that the car needs to be scrapped. We shouldn’t have people
driving that car.

| don’t think there’s anyone on this committee that says that car is fine. That’s not the issue. There seems to
be a situation where somehow we’ve managed to not even be driving this vehicle during periods of time but

Finance Committee Page 19
August 3, 2016

still accomplishing tasks. Even the aggregate number of miles over the 2 % years of solid data that we have in
front of us indicate that there’s not a huge amount of mileage. The total amount of miles accumulate is
uncertain at best. It may very well be worthwhile to use. It may be the case that getting a new vehicle allows
us to do things that we are doing by alternate means by putting miles on other vehicles. | don’t know. That’s
not in front of me. All | Know is there’s a certain reimbursement rate we can use and based on what | am
seeing in front of me, it would be better to go that way. That’s all | Know based on what is in front of me.

Director Bagley

| want to comment on the fact of the low mileage is because there was a choice made not to drive the vehicle
because the vehicle was unreliable and deemed to be unsafe and so it wasn’t driven. That’s why the mileage
is so low.

Vice Chairman Cookson

Which | think is why it is important to understand what miles gage was driven when this vehicle wasn’t used.
That would help us better understand what sort of expectation you are putting on your employees to
accomplish the jobs that they need to accomplish. Similar to Alderman Siegel, we can only go with the data
we have in front of us. The pictures and this information, the historical records, certainly broadened our
perspective more than we had at the last meeting. It helps us better understand to Alderman Siegel’s
comment, you shouldn't be driving this car. | don’t think there’s any question that everybody on this committee
agrees to that point, but | need more information. It helps me make a better decision based on due diligence.

Ms. Peek
| was hoping to drop our mileage line in the budget by getting these cars, both of these replacement cars. |
was also hoping to significantly reduce our vehicle repair line as well. DPW is very good to us. They really

don’t charge us much more than parts. It’s hard to gage some of these things. | was looking at reducing
those two lines by replacing these two vehicles.

Alderman O’Brien

Just an observation, looking at the rust on this vehicle, one could probably ask how does it happen. It’s a no-
brainer to those of us that live in the rustbelt here that we call New England. The amount of road salt we put
on our roads and the city, things are going to rust. Is there anything in your budget to help out these vehicles?
The $8 car wash with the undercarriage spray or is there no money for that?

Ms. Peek

We do have a miscellaneous line that we did used to use for regular car washes when they were new, when
they were worthy of it. When this car, particularly, stopped being reliable, we just kind of used it only when
necessary.

Alderman O’Brien

| would suggest, and | would be sportive maybe in the next budget, to look at that. It makes prudent sense that
if we’re going to supply vehicles to you that they are properly maintained. | know you don’t have a place to
park them, but if you use our Elm Street Parking Garage undercover.

Ms. Peek

They are.

Finance Committee Page 20
August 3, 2016

Alderman O’Brien

Can they go through a wash occasionally to maintain it. That’s just as important as an oil change.

Alderman Siegel

It sounds like a legitimate concern. What you have basically done is, the reason I’m seeing such a low
mileage, is it’s not that there’s not mileage being accumulated, it’s just been shifted to other automobiles that
were more reliable.

Ms. Peek

Yes.

Alderman Siegel

If you could just give a sense of the amount of miles, either you or Director Bagley, it would just make me feel
more comfortable. | support safe driving and something cost effective. If what we are doing is just taking
mileage and shifting them elsewhere then that 57 cents a mile doesn’t make sense in light of what | am seeing
in front of me. | don’t want to get a false sense of the data. Perhaps you can clarify that.

Director Bagley

| did take a note of that. We'll take a look back at some of the mileage reimbursement because we do keep
records of all of those things. Yes, we do have that data.

Alderman Siegel

We can get that data?
Ms. Peek

Yes. And may | say one last thing? | liked the fuel economy of this. | thought that would go a long way. My
understanding was that this was a better model vehicle and was excited about that, but we can certainly pull
that together for you.

Vice Chairman Cookson

| think to Alderman O’Brien’s point, and | think he hit the nail on the head, and that is regardless of what vehicle
you get or don’t get or the fleet that we do have, we have to maintain it. It’s not going to do us any good if we
buy this $25,000 car and let it rust out just as easily as this 2002. You're going to be sitting with a car that is
not reliable and you’re not going to let people drive. We've got to take a better stance at maintaining our
vehicles. This isn’t public health. This is the city. When we start looking at the facility on Burke Street and
being able to have a garage, things like that makes sense that say that we are doing the right things and we’re
going to maintain the assets that the city has. Thank you, Alderman O’Brien for making that statement.

Alderman Siegel

I’ve been swayed a little bit by the some of the things that have been said. On the other hand, it would be kind
of nice to know how much miles are going to be driven. I’m not sure what the sense of urgency is about this.
Perhaps we can make a better informed decision. If | make a motion to table it can be voted down which is
fine. | don’t to stifle communications, but it sounds like we’ve talked about this.

Finance Committee Page 21
August 3, 2016

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO TABLE PENDING ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION
MOTION FAILED

Vice Chairman Cookson

We won’t wait for additional information, but we would certainly appreciate it being made available to us, those
that are interested.

Alderman Caron

That is what | was going to say. | think having that information for future reference, because obviously there
will be other vehicles that will be coming up, will help us down the line.

Vice Chairman Cookson

We will go back to the original motion which is to accept, place on file and authorize the purchase from MHQ in
the amount of $25,080.

MOTION CARRIED
Ms. Peek

If | could just add a little bit more. It has made me nervous hiring somebody potentially without a vehicle. Our
lab director lives within walking distance. Sometimes he has walked to work. | think it would serve the city well
to look into some of those policies a little bit better. | know other departments just automatically get a stipend
for mileage. We don’t do that type of thing. We are depending upon our cars. We now have four people who
are primarily field people using three vehicles. There will be a reduction in mileage, but | was always a little
worried if | hired somebody without a vehicle. What were we going to do with them and how are we going to
handle that.

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO TAKE FROM THE TABLE O-16-015
MOTION CARRIED

O-16-015
Endorsers: Alderman-at-Large Lori Wilshire
Alderman Richard A. Dowd
Alderman-at-Large Michael B. O’Brien, Sr.
PROVIDING FOR CONFIDENTIAL REDACTIONS ON THE RECORD OF EXPENDITURES
e Tabled — 7/20/16

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO AMEND O-16-015 IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REPLACING IT WITH
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT PLACED ON OUR DESKS THIS EVENING

MOTION CARRIED

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO RECOMMEND FINAL PASSAGE AS AMENDED

ON THE QUESTION

Alderman Siegel

Before you are the changes. There’s one line that got changed. Part B, Item 3. Section B got changed to
remove all generality in the way we can redact information from the Record of Expenditures. It’s only wage
garnishments; workers’ compensation payments and payments where disclosure could endanger or
compromise police department personnel. Redactions in this situation may be overridden by a vote of the

Finance Committee Page 22
August 3, 2016

Finance Committee. This is essentially what we talked about with some changes from the prior discussion.
There’s no mention of going into non-public session. It is not a requirement of the finance committee to go into
non-public session. It is always the choice of the committee members to go into non-public or not. Members
always have the option of querying the police department directly on their own to find some clarification. If that
were the case and this were to come before the Board and there was a discussion, one wouldn’t have to go
into non-public session to say | talked to the Chief, or whoever, got some clarification. |’m comfortable without
releasing any information. There was also a discussion | had with Attorney Clarke regarding the specific
elements of the Right-to-Know law and how they would apply in this case. The Right-to-Know law is actually
not well drafted. This seems like an obvious case to us. It’s very clear that the lives of police officers would be
in jeopardy should this information be revealed. However, the Right-to-Know law isn’t entirely clear on this.
We're relying on the notion of impugning the integrity of an individual or the reputation of an individual. In this
particular case, a police officer, whether in this department or some other, who has a reputation of being a drug
dealer to reveal this information would in fact impugn their reputation which is a carefully crafted reputation to
serve a particular purpose. That is sort of the theory by which we can apply this. It’s a shame that the
common sense portion of this, which is we don’t want people to get killed because information was revealed, is
actually not part of the existing legislation. | would urge my colleague, Alderman O’Brien, a member of the
state legislature to look into plugging such a potential hole so we don’t get into a conflict about this. | doubt
any of us would reveal the name of a police officer because we were afraid of a Right-to-Know suit, but | just
wanted to point that out for completeness sake. That was part of the discussion. That was the changes, and
we don’t have any “etc.” in here that allow for a truck to be driven through this. It’s very explicit. That’s why the
changes were made.

Alderman Wilshire

I’m happy with the amendments; | think they work. | think they accomplish what we set out to accomplish.
Thank you for that, Alderman Siegel.

MOTION CARRIED

DISCUSSION

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 15, 2016 TO JULY 28, 2016

MOTION CARRIED

PUBLIC COMMENT

POSSIBLE NON-PUBLIC SESSION

ADJOURNMENT

MOTION BY ALDERMAN SIEGEL TO ADJOURN
MOTION CARRIED

The Finance Committee meeting was adjourned at 8:32 p.m.

Alderman Ken Siegel
Committee Clerk