Title
MOTION TO AWARD IFB # RE-26-01 "EPOXY REPLACEMENT OF THE GREAT HALL OF CHARLES F. DODGE CITY HALL” TO THE MOST RESPONSIVE/RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, THE EPOXY PROS, IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $165,312.50, WHICH INCLUDES AN OWNER'S CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $14,375.00, AND A PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,187.50.
Summary Explanation and Background
PROCUREMENT PROCESS TAKEN:
- Chapter 35 of the City’s Code of Ordinances is titled “PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES, PUBLIC FUNDS.”
- Section 35.15 defines an Invitation for Bid as “A written solicitation for competitive sealed bids with the title, date and hour of the public bid opening designated therein and specifically defining the commodities or services for which bids are sought. The invitation for bid shall be used when the city is capable of specifically defining the scope of work for which a service is required or when the city is capable of establishing precise specifications defining the actual commodities required. The invitation for bid shall include instructions to bidders, plans, drawings and specifications, if any, bid form and other required forms and documents to be submitted with the bid.”
- Section 35.18 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "COMPETITIVE BIDDING OR COMPETITIVE PROPOSALS REQUIRED; EXCEPTIONS.
- Section 35.18(A) states, "A purchase of or contracts for commodities or services that is estimated by the Chief Procurement Officer to cost more than $100,000 shall be based on sealed competitive solicitations as determined by the Chief Procurement Officer, except as specifically provided herein."
- Section 35.19 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "SEALED COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCEDURE."
- Section 35.19(A) states "All sealed competitive solicitations as defined in § 35.18 shall be presented to the City Commission for their consideration prior to advertisement."
- Section 35.21 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "AWARD OF CONTRACT."
- Section 35.21(A) of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "City Commission approval.
- Section 35.21(A)(1) states, "An initial purchase of, or contract for, commodities or services, in excess of $100,000, shall require the approval of the City Commission, regardless of whether the competitive bidding or competitive proposal procedures were followed."
SUMMARY EXPLANATION AND BACKGROUND:
1. On February 18th, 2026, the City Commission approved the advertisement of IFB # RE-26-01 " Epoxy Replacement of the Great Hall of Charles F. Dodge City Hall”. The solicitation was subsequently advertised on February 24th, 2026.
2. The existing flooring surface in the Great Hall of Charles F. Dodge City Hall, although properly maintained, has been worn down and reached end of useful life from sustained foot traffic and event operations. The objective of the solicitation was to renovate the flooring in the Great Hall while minimizing the time-period that would impact operations.
3. On March 31st, 2026, the City opened four (4) proposals in response to the solicitation. All proposals included the required performance/payment bonds, as stipulated in the solicitation. The proposals were submitted by the following firms:
|
Vendor |
Cost |
P&P |
Total with P&P |
|
Blue CS Construction LLC |
$113,750.00 |
5.00% |
$119,437.50 |
|
The Epoxy Pros |
$143,750.00 |
5.00% |
$150,937.50 |
|
Bay to Bay Stone Restoration |
$217,250.00 |
2.50% |
$222,681.25 |
|
The OJ Painting & Waterproofing co |
$358,850.00 |
3.00% |
$369,615.50 |
4. On May 4, 2026, a pre-award meeting was held with Blue CS Construction LLC. During the meeting, Blue CS Construction LLC clarified that its proposal included alternative products that were not explicitly identified in its submission. City staff advised that alternative paint products are not permitted under the solicitation requirements.
After further discussion with City staff, Blue CS Construction LLC determined that it would be unable to maintain its submitted pricing while utilizing the materials specified in the solicitation and subsequently withdrew its bid.
5. On May 7th, 2026, a pre-award meeting was held with The Epoxy Pros. The Epoxy Pros confirmed that their pricing proposal was accurate and that the vendor and City were aligned on material requirements and the scope of construction services requested. Additionally, The Epoxy Pros confirmed their ability and capacity to complete the work within the limited timeframe provided by the City’s operations and event schedule.
6. The Recreation & Cultural Arts Department determined that The Epoxy Pros was the most responsive/responsible bidder for IFB # RE-26-01 " Epoxy Replacement of the Great Hall of Charles F. Dodge City Hall”. This determination was based on the firm’s submission of the lowest-cost responsive proposal and the input of the Public Services Department following the pre-award meeting.
7. The total project cost reflects the base bid submitted by The Epoxy Pros, inclusive of required payment and performance bond and a designated Owner’s Contingency, as outlined in the breakdown below:
|
The Epoxy Pros |
% |
Total |
|
Bid Total |
|
$143,750.00 |
|
Owner’s Contingency |
10% |
$14,375.00 |
|
Payment & Performance Bond |
5% |
$7,187.50 |
|
Total |
|
$165,312.50 |
8. Staff recommends Commission to award IFB # RE-26-01 " Epoxy Replacement of the Great Hall of Charles F. Dodge City Hall” to the most responsive/responsible bidder, The Epoxy Pros, in the amount not to exceed $165,312.50, which includes a payment and performance bond in the amount of $7,187.50, and an owner's contingency in the amount of $14,375.00.
Financial Impact
FINANCIAL IMPACT DETAIL:
a) Initial Cost: $165,312.50, which includes a payment and performance bond in the amount of $7,187.50, and an owner's contingency in the amount of $14,375.00.
b) Amount budgeted for this item in Account No: Funds will be available in Account # 001-573-7010-546150-0000-000-0000-00340 | R&M Land Bldg & Improvement
c) Source of funding for difference, if not fully budgeted: Not Applicable.
d) 5 year projection of the operational cost of the project: Not Applicable
e) Detail of additional staff requirements: Not Applicable.
FEASIBILITY REVIEW:
A feasibility review is required for the award, renewal and/or expiration of all function sourcing contracts. This analysis is to determine the financial effectiveness of function sourcing services.
a) Was a Feasibility Review/Cost Analysis of Out-Sourcing vs. In-House Labor Conducted for this service? Not Applicable.
b) If Yes, what is the total cost or total savings of utilizing Out-Sourcing vs. In-House Labor for this service? Not Applicable.