CR 97-05 Approve Contract for Custodial Services for Various City BuildingsDecember 30, 1996 Council Report: 97-05
y 5
~ F K ` ~
APPROVE CONTRACT FOR CUSTODIAL SERVICES
FOR VARIOUS CITY BUILDINGS
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends adoption of the following motion:
Overview.
City staff has conducted an analysis of the current program of having
city employees provide custodial service for various city buildings.
This analysis was completed in order to determine if the city could
reduce building maintenance costs by contracting out certain building
maintenance services.
Requests for proposals were solicited and three proposals were received
for providing daily custodial services at Public Works, and the
Activity Center, and weekend and holiday custodial services to the
Police station. Two of the three proposals were lower cost than staff
estimates for providing services in-house. If approved, Coverall
Cleaning Concepts could start in 10-15 days.
Primary Issues to Consider
o What are the cost savings to the city?
o Police Department and Activity Center concerns.
o Is the award to Coverall Cleaning Concepts in the best interest of
the city?
o Will any city employees be displaced if contract is awarded?
Supporting Information
G / F
G\
o Specifications and Request for Proposal
o Alternatives
Council Report: 97-05
Page 2
Detailed Backaround
At the present the city employs one full time person to clean the Public
Works building and the Hopkins Activity Center. We also have a building
maintenance employee report on the weekends and Holidays to clean the
police station and check the city boilers.
Currently Building Maintenance Standby costs and duties are shared
between HRA staff and building Maintenance staff. Because of changes at
HRA they have optioned to employ a live-in caretaker at Dow towers.
When the live in caretaker is in place (sometime mid-December) HRA has
informed city staff that they will no longer share in the weekend
standby duties. The live in caretaker will be handling all callouts for
HRA. With this change we were faced with our standby duty costs
doubling. Fortunately the majority of callouts for the person on
standby originated from HRA properties; Dow towers and 20th Avenue
townhomes.
With this in mind staff decided not to have our own Building Maintenance
person continue to carry a pager and be on standby. If any problems
occur after hours the public works standby supervisor would handle the
calls. The custodial contract would provide cleaning service to the
police station on weekends and Holidays. City staff would still need to
check the city Hall and Activity Center boilers during the winter
period, monthly.
This state requirement of checking the boilers each day is scheduled to
change in March of 1997. The change in State regulations will leave it
up to the chief engineer of a building to decide how often the boiler
needs to be checked. When this regulation is changed we may decide to
only check the boiler once a weekend or not at all and monitor its
operation remotely with a computer.
There would also be about a $1,500 savings for both areas for cleaning
supplies as the contractor would supply their own. This savings may be
used to provide contract carpet cleaning at the Activity Center if city
staff is unable to schedule it with available manpower.
Analysis of issues
o What are the cost savings to the city?
The cost savings by awarding the custodial contract to Coverall
Cleaning Concepts are outlined below:
CURRENT PERSONNEL COST - Activity Center & Public Works
1 full-time employee
Wages & Benefits $35,500
Contract Amount $19,200
Savings $16,300
Council Report: 97-05
Page 3
CURRENT PERSONNEL STANDBY COST5 - Police Station/Check Boilers
1 hour per day on standby plus 2 hours O.T. each time employee
reports minimum 11 hours O.T. per week at $25.00 per hour.
$275 per week x 26 weeks = $7,150 per year
Contract Amount S3.456 per ear
Savings $3,649 per year
* Savings will be less for first part of 1997 until requirement
for checking boilers is reduced. If we continue to check
boilers daily deduct $2,600 from savings amount.
TOTAL SAVINGS $19,949
o Police Department and Activity Center concerns.
Police department
At the Police department there were some security issues that
needed to be addressed, such as a security check for all cleaning
personnel and access to the Police department. These issues were
addressed by having all cleaning personnel for the Police
department go through a background check prior to having access to
the Police department. We also would make a set of keys that the
cleaning personnel would check out from Dispatch upon his/her
arrival and return after cleaning the facility. Also the cleaning
contract does not cover any office areas but only hallways, jail
cells, wens restroom and squad room. The other areas of the Police
department are cleaned by city personnel during the work week. The
Police department is satisfied with how the security issue is being
addressed and are willing to proceed with the contract.
Activity Center
Several issues were brought up by the Activity Center staff that
needed to be addressed before proceeding with a cleaning contract.
One issue was security for several areas of the Activity Center.
This problem has been addressed by changing locks on several
storage areas and the Raspberry patch craft room. Another issue
was taking down and clean up after the noon senior dining program.
In the past city staff has assisted the Activity Center staff in
taking down the tables and chairs and cleaning the floors. Because
the contract custodial service would be cleaning the Activity
Center after it closes in the evening there would be no custodian
on site to assist the dining program with the task. Several ideas
were suggested as to finding someone to assist with the task. Dave
Johnson, the Hopkins Minnetonka Joint Park Recreation Director, is
working with Susan Newville, the Activity Center Coordinator, to
find someone that could assist the Activity Center staff with this
clean up after dinner.
The current level of service provided by Public Works will continue
until an alternative is mutually agreed upon.
Council Report: 97-05
Page 4
o is the award to Coverall Cleaning Concepts in the best interest of
the city?
The city solicited proposals from various cleaning contractors. A
mandatory walk through of each building was a requirement for
submitting proposals. Proposals were due November 27, 1996 and
three proposals were submitted. The amounts are itemized below:
Activity Public
Center Works Police Total
Coverall 10,500 8,700 3,456 22,656
Jani-King 12,084 8,420 2,420 23,124
Marsdan 18,576 5,424 6,324 30,324
After review of the proposal amounts and checking supplied
references, staff recommends awarding the contract to Coverall
Cleaning Concepts based on lowest overall cost to the city.
o Will any city employee's be displaced if contract is awarded?
The current city employee that is performing the custodial services
will be taking an internal transfer to a new position in the Street
division of Public Works.
Alternatives
o Rehire Full-time position
If we decide to rehire for the custodian position the city would
have to increase the Public Works personnel budget approximately
$16,000 to pay for the increased personnel costs. This increase is
the difference between the contract amount and the cost of a full-
time employee. We would also need an additional $2,500 per year
above the current budget amount of $3,000 for contract cleaning for
police station maintenance on weekends and holidays. This cost is
for a two hour call in for a city employee to perform these duties.
o Hire Part-time employee
Another area that was explored was hiring a permanent part-time
employee to clean public works and the Activity Center. Currently
if we establish a permanent part-time position the employee can
work up to 5 hours a day, 5 days a week, without the city providing
full benefits. This scenario won't work because five hours a day
is not enough time to provide cleaning services for both buildings.
The current work load requires at minimum six to eight hours daily
in order to maintain the buildings.
Council Report: 97-05
Page 5
The other scenario of six hours a day, five days a week would come
to approximately $23,000 per year with benefits or $3,600 more than
the contract amount. The other added expense is that we would need
to pay overtime or reduce service when this employee is on vacation
or sick leave. At the Police station we would need to find someone
to come in for two hours per day on weekends and holidays. If we
paid a regular employee a two hour minimum call in on overtime, the
cost would be about $6, 000 per year or $2, 500 per year more than
the contract.
Overall the cost savings and level of service to the Activity
Center, Public Works and the Police department are not there when
all factors are figured in.
o Contracted Cleaning
When we first looked at alternatives to our current full-time city
employee, we started contacting several cleaning companies that
were currently cleaning buildings. We asked them to give a
ballpark number to see if the cost savings would warrant further
action. The quotes we received looked promising and with this
information started proceeding with drawing up specifications to
present to various cleaning companies. When the bids were opened,
the cost savings turned out better than the estimate. While there
are some drawbacks to contractual cleaning like added staff time to
monitor their duties and loss of a full-time employee in the
Building Maintenance division, I believe our duty to the people who
pay taxes is to provide them with the best buy for their dollar.
Recommendation
o Contract with Coverall Cleaning Concepts
The low bidder for the custodial contract was Coverall Cleaning
Concepts. The company has been in business since 1989. What
Coverall does is package contracts like the one we proposed and
turn them over to franchises that have a vested stake in the work
they do (see attached article). We hope to get a person or persons
cleaning our buildings that show pride in their work. If we do
have problems with the cleaning personnel, Coverall will replace
them with a different franchisee. I have personally checked
several references at other cities. One was Gary Johnson the
Public Works Director at the City of Inver Grove Heights. Gary was
very satisfied with the service he has received from Coverall.
Another city that is using Coverall that I contacted was Peggy
Linc at the City of Circle Pines. She is also happy with the
service they are receiving. It is apparent that Coverall will work
with us to ensure quality work from a franchisee. However, I
believe in the end we can make it work for the good of all
concerned by contracting with Coverall Cleaning Concepts.
Small business
Coverall partners ,~~~ ~:
cleaning up with ` `~ ~ • t
janitorial service nickYoungbiooa
There are several reaaoas be-
yond an appamndy permanent
shoetege of qsh why INe nevu
made It in the ehuepreneurmg
e.
Indolence is another fattor,
no[ to overlook rampant ditotge
Wiz+uon Ma:nN. 6owewn Ne
problem Is surtP Y a lack pf imagl-
nauon
For euample, 1 never Tvpuld
ante, Md V I hatl, I rertainly
never would brie thought to taro
it inroafrancldaebuslnesa- '
But that's what a gmt in MIS-
eissauge, Ontario. @ doing w1N
his Shsed•h Iad.. attording to a
heRy rome celled "The Source
Book of Pmnchlse Opportu•
Wtl¢a'
And I don't think evm the en-
vepceneurlal Ilke of Curt Ca~l-
son or 7eno patilueci ever had a
brainstorm ro rival ehs[ of Ron
Hru8eld oiMemphia. Tenn. Heb
created p frmncltlse 6uaines out
of his Birds Over Ametlca Ltc..
which Involve releasing equed-
ronc of whim homing pigeons
over a special event and hoping
Net thel'll 11nq Neir wsy home
aver ehe fewlvlUas are w/tr3uded.
n" 6e11111g UP Cofnp~elrltY
I stumbled aeon Neee Udblta
_ m i sought ro coMcrr, the eeav-
an
a jl
em
he
tan,
as
f i
clt
co i
nc ana
iger. em SIer TAYyepaobbya~M Ywngbbod
dI1U re- gebgMrhw.ieh, end OMleBapom lnrealsd Mpk aevnaMe 0om Benaral
ed Ney MlYbhanahlatn67aNlydaleerrlcee:TNeyrscNanln[q-
.. They
r sever-
seMce, for a fmnchiae (ea that stazn at half-dottn acquisitions of wm-
ro form 29,250 and average 40.000. plus pedwrs around the Twin GUea
tee and al5 percent moothlymyahymd Brea, he's added 35 employees
? just grab alrroom oe vances qn Nell
ip vacutfm leaner and shield againstN
trainee. rlghf? aa[et Nat wn re
tP you to up at4 mgnt tote demand p
rsupeevWnge tleawng while cusromen
's 6orng m answer the Neu bills
to the marketing ana The <ompam
e bilWgaad Omer pa- 24•hour answer
hp nqd dpavv~l "We sell
"
8
d
f its group bupmg
fo
di
cite
e
an mcomp
8 scounts
r
small-business owner, equipment and
dd. ongoing maininf
mare Nan giz yeem, a IrancNsee's m
and Sch»ver have sold of about 2.8 tit,
80 Pre
about
un,~eyagale iee7 ,
5o what d o they offe In remm
um am,n.nv
saaidelineto y~,..-
a<gWSlUOa late this e'
pe more tat- more ttun4500.000Waary
>ffer fren¢!ti- 'I coWd have done Ihi
ten-free ad• own, but it would have r.
slvablee u a along, tong time," said
ah-HOw pre- who start¢d out whh the
[ when uedi- having a sideline bueine
Tpt payment shitted lntoowdtive site
e slowropay laid offBOmhie job as as
me"~,+:.
.o ptov(de6s SomefmnclUSeec hnvt
eetvice, uses lea aggressive anategfa
war to secure and )a eBrown,Hoavo
a
il of the lo• 430.000 [his year and wi~l gross
it saeede4 5eumanSl0.DO0neuyeer.
marketing. The reason "Our s<h<dWes
jw[ go[ mo hectic," sold Hrown,
cgWred his who works full tlme as a mott-
3 6y buying gage banker while hfs wife works
q parkage, sae howekeepingaupervlsot toe
cgVipmont abW motel.
eontree[ to No mater the comparative
tut 8700 a zlie oP their opecetlon,fiowevM.
000 lavet• Koland and Brown ere In egree•
guaeant<ed m+nt on one mattes: A )anhm:el
o produce tranNlee 16 a relatively inaapea-
,¢nyea. Tl!¢ eive and palNess way for the en•
coating n¢preneutiallY Inelmad to yet
410,000 UI Nro Nevouv business.
Intgely ro i ,