HomeMy WebLinkAbout8 LED Holiday Lights Agenda Item #
TRUCKEE DONNER
t
CONSENT
To: Board of Directors
From: Steven Poncelet
Date: November 02, 2011
Subject: Consideration of Awarding a Contract for the Purchase of LED
Holiday Lights
I. WHY THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE BOARD
This matter is
before the Board as the total purchase of
annual LED Holiday Light Exchange g p e Program exceeds the $15
LED Holiday Lights for the
Board approval. ,000 limit and requires
2. HISTORY
This District began the LED HolidayLight
successful 9 t Exchange Program in 2007 and this
Program has been very ccessful in the past as measured by customer
cost-effectiveness, and customer education. No o participation,
t only are over 5/o of our customers
Participating in this program each year (over a 4-
who comes into the Conservation ( 5 week period), but eve customer
Department and the LED H every Exchange
Programs and s
Program is used to promote other District Holiday Light Exchange
strengthen our relationship.
For 2011, the District will take advantage
Promote specialt CFL's programs.
the customer's visit to our office to also
Y , residential energy surveys, and the toilet ro
.
3. NEW INFORMATION
For the 2011 program, Staff is targeting 7 0
and the District issued a g g � 00 customers {5/o of our customer base
Request for Bids (RFB) on October 14t )
for the 2011 LED Holiday Light Exchange h to purchase lights
schedules: ge Program. This bid was broken into two
Schedule 1 was for a total quantityof 77 +
'pine cone' LED holiday 2 (20 foot) and 90 (60+ foot) of the C
strands. This was further broken 6 or
Y light stra
and multi-color strands. down into soft-white
Schedule 2 was for a total of 1,080 20+ 'mini'
was further broken � foot} mrni LED holiday light strap
down into soft-white and multi-color strands. g strands. This
The RFB was advertised in the Sierra Sun and a bid opening was held on October
26th. The District received o
Nevada heSupplyone bid from Western Nevada Sup I . The bid, however, did not commit to meet p Y Western
the delivery schedule. Staff
consulted the District's General Counsel regarding this exception and the bid was
Staff had anticipated a larger number of bidde
rs for this procurement. When staff
queried the previous suppliers for this procuremen
ham er t, the suppliers indicated that long
rY p ed their ability to respond to the RFB. Ina
lead-times for delivery s addition, the
national suppliers for this commodity product,and to this such as a Home Depot or Lowes
routinely do not respond s type/size of formal government bid.
In order to meet customer demand for the LED
is recommending the foil Holiday Light Exchange Program, Staff
owing approach:
• Find the Western Nevada Supply bid non-res
• Dispense with further competitiveponsive,
bidding;
• Direct Staff to negotiate directly with suppliers
contracts to purchase the quantities pp ers and enter into one or more
total contract(s) q t es of LED holiday lights listed in the RFB for
amount not to exceed $30,000 plus tax; a a
• Authorize the District's General p � and
Manager to execute one or more Procurement
contracts. p ent
4. FISCAL IMPACT
The total potential contract(s) amount for the
LED holiday lights is $30,000 plus tax.
Sufficient funds exist within the FY11 budget
g for this item.
5. RECOMMENDATION
Find that the Western Nevada Supply bid is pp Y non-
responsive.
Dispense with further competitive biddin
suppliers for procurement g and direct Staff to negotiate direct) with
of the quantities of LED holiday lights listed i Y
for Bid in a total amount not to exceed 30 g in the Request
$ ,000 plus tax.
Authorize the General Manager to execute th
e procurement contract(s).
OWN-
Steven Poncelet — - _
Public Information & ConservationMichael D. Holley
Manager Genera
l Manager