Skip to main content

Main navigation

  • Documents
  • Search

User account menu

  • Log in
Home
Nashua City Data

Breadcrumb

  1. Home
  2. Finance Committee - Minutes - 1/19/2022 - P14

Finance Committee - Minutes - 1/19/2022 - P14

By dnadmin on Sun, 11/06/2022 - 21:40
Document Date
Wed, 01/19/2022 - 00:00
Meeting Description
Finance Committee
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
Wed, 01/19/2022 - 00:00
Page Number
14
Image URL
https://nashuameetingsstorage.blob.core.windows.net/nm-docs-pages/fin_m__011920…

Finance Committee — 01/19/2022 Page 14

Alderman Comeau

I'll try to be brief within the first question. | just want to make sure | understand the parties. So my initial thought was that
this was all part of the contracting but if | understand you correctly now, the engineer is independent of the contractors.
So this is less the contractor is asking for an increase because they’ve gone over their estimate. It’s more the engineer
doesn't really have a whole lot of control over how long it’s taken the contractor to complete the job and now if we want
the services of that engineer to continue, we’re just adding time. It’s not the initial contract is more expensive, it’s just that
we’re adding time on to the end of it. Do | understand that correctly?

Camille Correa, Transit Administrator

And also an additional fee. So the initial fee was approximately $120,000 for 17 weeks because you have an engineer on
site eight hours a day. What we did do was we crossed compared as a cost estimate to another architectural/engineering
contract that the city has to make sure that the pricing is in line and that’s not a contract that we’re going into that the
pricing would be higher for one or another. So it’s in line.

| also pulled the data in general as to what the average price is for the construction administration from an engineering
company - the architectural design to just do that review and make sure that the costs are in line. | also have to do that
for the Federal Transit Administration when they come in to review the project. They’re going to want to know that we
didn’t just say just do this for us. We wanted to make sure that the price was negotiated, the hours were there, and there
could be a cost savings and not spent depending upon how many hours are spent on the project. So it could go both
ways — the extension or cost savings. Thank you for the questions.

Alderman Jette
Mr. Mayor | apologize to Alderman Thibeault. | just noticed that he’s with us by Zoom. | didn’t notice him at the beginning
of the meeting. Forgive me Alderman Thibeault for not noticing you but this is my first time. | don’t know when you got

here.

Alderman Thibeault

From the beginning.
Alderman Jette
Okay, thank you.

Mayor Donchess

We'll forgive you this time Alderman Jette. Anyone else? Could the Clerk please call the roll?
A viva voce roll call was taken which resulted as follows:

Yea: Alderman Klee, Alderman Cathey, Alderman Comeau, Alderman Gouveia,
Alderman Jette, Alderwoman Timmons, Mayor Donchess 7

Nay: 0
MOTION CARRIED

From: Kelly Parkinson, Purchasing Manager
Re: Server Upgrade in the amount not to exceed $141,840.75 funded from 81342/CERF (IT)

MOTION BY ALDERMAN JETTE TO ACCEPT, PLACE ON FILE AND AWARD A BID TO DELL TECHNOLOGIES
FOR THE PURCHASE OF FIFTEEN (15) NEW SERVERS TO UPGRADE THE VIRTUAL HOST SERVERS AT THE
CITY’S PRIMARY DATA CENTER AND BEGIN THE BUILDOUT OF THE DISASTER RECOVERY SITE IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $141,840.75. FUNDING WILL BE THROUGH DEPARTMENT: 122 INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY; FUND: ACCOUNT 81342/CERF, BY ROLL CALL

ON THE QUESTION

Page Image
Finance Committee - Minutes - 1/19/2022 - P14

Footer menu

  • Contact