From: Newton White [mailto:NWhite0@cfl.rr.com]
To: Kisela, Greg; City Council
Subject: Mowing and mowers
On the next meeting agenda their are items rejecting the mowing bids an to authorize purchase of additional mowers.
The use of temporary labor is a prudent move as the work is seasonal, and not a long term career position.
I am concerned with the purchase of the additional 5 mowers at about $84,000. Should after the evaluation the city determine to not do the work in house will the equipment be surplus? They are asked for as additional to the current fleet, and if not needed, would be surplus in 6 months when we would loose in the sale. Is their a better outlook on this? Is their a lease rent option?
I do want to see a real life experience in terms of performance and cost for the city to do its work in house. I feel that their should be a way for our governments to work efficiently doing maintenance work such as this. When it is contracted out we must consider the city is paying the cost of the work performed, a profit for the contractor, the cities oversite and administration of the contract, and bidding process.
I understand your concern. Two of the five mowers are programmed to be purchased in the FY 2015 fleet plan so we would be buying them early. The other three would be additional mowers. We would not surplus these additional newer mowers at the end of six months as we have much older mowers for surplus. We have looked for vendors who would rent us these mowers but haven’t identified any at this point. If you know of any vendor please advise. Long term I would prefer not to perform this work in-house as I believe the private sector should be able to do it more efficiently than we do.