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.
