Councilwoman Pauline Valdivia said it right Monday when she all
but scolded staff before the City Council rejected all five bids on
a crucial wastewater project and restarted Hollister’s search for a
contractor on the multimillion-dollar project.
Councilwoman Pauline Valdivia said it right Monday when she all but scolded staff before the City Council rejected all five bids on a crucial wastewater project and restarted Hollister’s search for a contractor on the multimillion-dollar project.
Valdivia and other members had to re-bid the storage pond phase of the new sewer plant after one of the competing firms protested the low bid of $8.7 million. City staff had recommended it for approval before Shimmick Construction Co. questioned the eye-popping discrepancy among estimates.
“If it had been done right, we wouldn’t have to go through this,” Valdivia said Monday.
She also noted how council members would absorb the blame if they awarded a flawed bid. She’s right. And we hope our elected officials would have examined the widely varying estimates – other bids ranged from $13.5 million to $14.5 million – more inquisitively than professional staff did.
This shouldn’t have taken a company’s objection to prevent a blunder on such an enormously important task. The only reminders anyone needs of the project’s significance are Hollister’s lackluster economy and those inflated sewer bills showing up in the mail every other month.
With the city’s building moratorium continuing until a new sewer plant is finished – officials hope that happens by December 2008 – this has become the most consequential project in recent city history and undoubtedly will remain so for many years.
Project organizers must exhibit a higher level of care than the shoddy effort shown in nearly letting the first bidding process progress further, potentially causing longer than necessary delays or the wrong company getting the job.
City Engineering Manager Steve Wittry said several misunderstandings led to the discrepancies.
After Shimmick’s protest prompted a closer city scrutiny, officials went back and asked specifically about costs of disposing dirt to make room for the ponds. Overaa’s bid for that was 1 cent per cubic yard, while Shimmick’s was $9 per cubic yard.
The firms, likely assuming the project’s potential for heading back to bid, declined to elaborate on how they came to those estimates when asked after the protest – the key word being “after.”
City officials also acknowledged failing to include a deadline for the winning firm to decide whether it would sell the soil or dispose it at the wastewater project’s sprayfields. And Wittry noted how Overaa estimated sheeting and shoring would cost $50,000 – while Shimmick projected it at $1.2 million.
Although the city avoided a potentially major gaff this time, flaws to this process should alert officials a more diligent understanding of such bids is needed to ensure citizens are getting their money’s worth and the right firm is doing the job.
