Laserfiche WebLink
COMMISSION BUSINESS <br /> <br />Case #1: Review report from vehicle committee on cost comparison of Blue Book/Bids <br /> <br />Mr. Rustad stated that the $130,000 estimate for the Pumper listed in the Fire Safety <br />Committee Report did not include all of the extra equipment. The basic strip down price for the <br />Pumper would be $130,000-135,000. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley <br />equipment. <br />itemized by <br /> <br />stated that the budgeted amount for the Pumper and Tanker did not include <br /> Several quotations were obtained to include all additional equipment needed, <br />price to clarify additional cost involved. <br /> <br />Mr. Pearson observed that figures quoted in bids received are higher than budgeted and inquired <br />as to where the money will come from. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley stated that the cost of establishing the Fire Department would be covered by the <br />Landfill Trust Funds. The estimated "break even" point would be 3-4 years. <br /> <br />Mr. Bawden stated it was his understanding that $500,000 from the Landfill Trust would be <br />used in establishing the Fire Department. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley stated that the specifications and bids received for the Pumper are in the same class <br />as the Fire Safety Committee Report, but the Tanker is much more than estimated. <br /> <br />Mr. Rustad stated that the Tanker specifications in the Fire Safety Report include a tandem <br />axle/2000 gallon tank. The current specifications for the Tanker list a single axle/1850 <br />gallon tank. The Fire Safety Committee Report and the current specifications both list pumping <br />capacity at 450 gallons/minute. Also, not included in Fire Safety Committee Report, $4,500 <br />worth of additional equipment required on Tanker by NFPA prior to placing in service. <br /> <br />Mr. Bawden stated that "middle numbers" were used in estimates for Fire Safety Committee <br />Report. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley stated that two vendors refused to bid. It was their opinion that proprietary <br />specifications were written. <br /> <br />Mr. Bawden inquired as to what the options were. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley stated that any re-bidding should have been done prior to bid opening. <br /> <br />Mr. Bawden inquired as to what the recommendation should be. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley stated that the bids received were not that far out of line. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley made a motion to accept recommendation of vehicle committee which is: <br /> <br />Fire Board/December 22, 1988 <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br /> <br />