Loading...
CR 91-197 Contract For Vehicle TowingY 0 A' CD 0 P K September 3, 1991 Council Rpt 91-197 CONTRACT FOR VEHICLE TOWING AND IMPOUNDING Proposed Action Staff recommends the adoption of the following motion: Move that the Council approve a one yea extension of the current Contract for Vehicle Towing and Impounding as 12rovided in the contract document. Overview The current towing contract expires November 30, 1991. Contract provisions allow the City the option of two one-year extensions. The Police Department is satisfied with the current contractor's performance. Primary Issues to Consider 1. Has the performance of the current contractor been satisfactory? 2. What advaritages would there be in re-advertising for bids versus granting an extension? Supporting Information 0 Analysis of Issues 0 Alternatives 0 Recommendation 10 Memorandum from Nancy Anderson All Heather M. Alex Administrative Services Manager 91-197 Page 2 Analysis of Issues Based on the information presented,, Council has two primary issues to consider.: 1. Has the performance of the current contractor been satisfactory? The Police Department is satisfied with the contractor's performance. Although complaints are recevied periodically, none have proven to be a violation of the towing contract or outside the contractor's rights under existing local ordinance and state statute. The Community Development Department indicates that Mr. Hughes is in the process of completing the work required by his conditional use permit. 2. What advantages would there be in re-advertising for bids? The advantages of a yearly bid process is that the City is given the opportunity to review bids from a variety of potential contractors, thereby affording the City a wider choice in providing services. More competition also could lead to lower prices and/or improved customer service to be passed on to Hopkins residents. Given the current requirement that the storage facility be located within the corporate limits of the City of Hopkins, the potential for a variety of bids is diminished. This contract year, only two bids were received: one from the current contractor and the other from a party whose lot was not located in the city limits, albeit quite close by. This effectively made the current contractor the sole bidder. If Council were to change the location requirement to include a reasonable distance from the City limits, more bids would be received. Council would have to weigh the benefits of more bids and possibly lower cost to residents against the convenience of a lot located in the city. 91 -197 Page 3 Alternatives 1. Approve motion to extend the contract for one additional year. 2. Do not approve the motion to extend and re- advertise for bids given the current locations restrictions. 3. Table the motion and schedule a worksession to discuss amending the lot location requirements prior to re advertising for bids. Recommendation Staff recommends alternative 1. C I T Y O F H O P R I N S M E M O R A N D U M DATE: August 22, 1991 TO: Tom Harmening FROM: Nancy Anderson SUBJECT: Status of Conditional Use Permit for Dick Hughes Last winter Dick Hughes was granted permission to move his auto storage yard 20 feet to the east. Mr. Hughes has done some of the work and now appears. to be completing the rest of the work. To my knowledge Mr. Hughes is in compliance with his conditional use permit once the work is complete.