CC_Minutes_2003_1117 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

\ \ l;'rom: .lent: To: Cc: Subject: O'Neill, Tim Monday, November 17, 2003 2:28 PM *RV Council Beets, Neal; Gasaway, Richard Fire truck purchase fvIr. Schroeder, Thank you for the e-mail regarding your concerns on the purchase of the new fire truck. This is a large purchase and I can certainly understand your desire to be fully informed on this important decision. I was enable to reach you by phone today and wanted to assure that I responded to your concerns. The fire department prepared bid specifications that were sent to the City Attorney for review and approval. Once approved, we advertised for bids in the newspaper and sent the specifications to six fire apparatus manufacturers. We received two bid proposals. After reviewing the bids and obtaining feedback from our firefighters we recommended the fire engine whose bid was $20,000 more than the other bid. Some of the reasons for that recommendation are as follows. While the bids are for two distinctly different fire engines, both bids came from the same manufacturer. The company, pierce Manufacturing, bid the second fire engine because the first fire engine that was bid (the one that meets the specifications) is a demonstrator fire engine that is currently being actively marketed for sale in Flori9a. The company representative informed us that there is a chance that the fire engine that meets the bid spec would be sold by the time we are ready to purchase. Thus, pierce bid the lesser priced truck as an lIalternate.1I This lIalternatell bid does not meet the specifications of the bid. Jur bid specifications discussed the situation (mechanical problems) with our two older engines and the need to get a new truck rather expeditiously. Thus, pierce bid the alternate fire engine as a way to let us know that if the fire engine that meets the bid spec is sold before we can purchase it, there's another option for us. Bottom line is, fire engine with the lower bid price does not meet the specifications as advertised. The recommended engine has a mid-ship pump panel consistent with all our current engines, while the lesser prices engine has a real mount pump. The rear mounted pump is a safety concern as it exposes the pump operator to traffic that approaches from the rear when the fire engine is parked on the roadway. The recommended fire engine has a much safer cab design. The steps allow for easier and safer access. The windshield allows for maximum visibility and there are no roof top obstructions. The recommended fire engine has much better options for pre-connected firefighting hoses. The recommended engine has a 100-foot multiple use fire hose built into the front bumper, two 200-foot pre-connected fire hoses above the pump and a 2 1/2 inch pre-connected fire hose above the pump. The lesser priced fire engine has only two pre-connected fire hoses located mid-ship and are a very difficult design for re-loading the hose. The recommended fire engine has Class-A firefighting foam capabilities to all four pre- connected fire hose lines, while the lesser priced engine has class-A firefighting foam capabilities to only the two pre-connected fire hose lines. The recommended fire engine has 750 gallons of water compared to 870 gallon for the lesser fire engine. The additional water adds to the height of the engine and concerns for 3afety when operating on top of the fire engine. The recommended fire engine has a Quantum cab design which is identical to our ladder truck. This will facilitate less driver training time to place the new engine into service