Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutC32770 - Rjct - Rebid City Facilities Fire-Security AlrmCITY OF PALM DESERT PUBLIC WORKS STAFF REPORT Contract C32770 (f REQUEST: REJECT PROPOSAL FOR CONTRACT NO. C32770 FOR THE CITY FACILITIES FIRE AND SECURITY ALARM MONITORING AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO RE-ADVERTIZE THE CONTRACT (PROJECT NO. 780-14) SUBMITTED BY: Mark Greenwood, P.E., Director of Public Works DATE: September 12, 2013 Recommendation By Minute Motion: 1. Reject proposal from Desert Alarm, Inc., for the City Facilities Fire and Security Alarm Monitoring (Project No. 780-14); and 2. Authorize staff to advertize two separate contracts, one for fire and security alarm monitoring and one for armed response. Background The following City -owned facilities are currently monitored by two firms on a month to month basis: City Hall, the Corporation Yard, and the Portola Community Center. Therefore, staff solicited proposals to consolidate the fire and security alarm monitoring, for the following reasons: • Enter into updated contracts using current standards. • Minimize contracts/service providers for the facilities. • Add armed response. • Standardize services. • Solicit improvements to current systems for improved protection. On May 22 and May 29, 2013, a Notice Inviting Proposals for City Facilities Fire and Security Alarm Monitoring was advertized. No responses were received. Staff inquired of companies that had expressed an interest in the proposal as to why they had decided not to propose their services. After talking to several security firms, and consulting with the City Attorney, staff modified the Request for Proposal. Staff Report Reject Proposal for C32770 for City Facilities Alarm Monitoring (Project No. 780-14) Page 2 of 2 September 12, 2013 The project was re -advertised on June 29 and July 4, 2013. Proposals were due on August 12, 2013. While several firms attended the pre -bid meeting, only one firm, Desert Alarm, Inc., submitted a proposal. After reviewing the proposal, staff concluded that the City would be better served by re-advertizing the contract. Fiscal Analysis Above the advertising cost, there is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Prepared By: Cora L. Gaugush Capital Improvement Projects Technician Depart n H-ad: Mark ere nwood, .E Direct • r i f Public Work au S. Gibson, Director of Finance Ap )roval: ohn M. Wohlmuth, City Manager (4-0-1CP David Flint Building Maintenance Supervisor CITY COUNCILACTION APPROVED ✓ DENIED RECEIVED OTHER MEETING DAT0/,3 AYES• C/1sf,r1, ,r'Tanner,1.*e)er-, f rni K NOES: 1- f'7 ABSENT: N 1), r. ABSTAIN. ,K I P VERIFIED BY• i l)K/ra Original on File with City Clerk's -alike G:1PubWorks\Staff Reports 12013\September 12\03 Reject Proposal 780-14\SR Award C32770 Alarm Monitoring 780-14.docx