City of cockburn
|
|  Yüklə 0.8 Mb.
|
Background The provision of a private swimming pool inspection service had to be re-tendered (RFT 34/2003) due to professional indemnity insurance to the value of Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000) not being provided by either of the two tenderers under RFT 22/2003, submitted at that time. It is required under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, Section 245A that all private swimming pools be inspected so that not more than 4 years elapses between inspections. Persons who undertake the inspections of pools are required to be authorised by Council. It is required that all private swimming pools within the City be inspected before July 2004. Submission Four (4) tenders were received in response to RFT 34/2003. Report Three of the four tenders complied generally with the Compliance Criteria. The tender submitted by William Baxter was non-compliant due to a lack of insurance details, inadequate supporting information and insufficient tender copies. The Royal Life Saving Society Australia (WA Branch) and C. E. Nicholls and Son Pty Ltd, submitted prices well below the other tenderers, namely:-
The difference between the two tenderers in terms of tendered price is 77c per pool or $2,310 for an estimated 3000 pools. Both C. E. Nicholls and the RLSSA lodged tenders for the previously called tenders for the pool inspections, namely tender 22/2003. The previous winning tender price of C. E. Nicholls was public knowledge to all tenderers submitting tenders under this recall for tenders. C.E. Nicholls has reduced their tendered amount by 3c per pool, whereas RLSSA have reduced their tendered amount from $28.54 last time to $25.30 this time, a reduction of $3.24 per pool ($9,720 for 3000 pools). Taking into account the information supplied, the Principal Building Surveyor and the Purchasing Coordinator undertook the analysis of the tenders. The Principal Building Surveyor and the Manager Information Services carried out referee checks on the two most cost effective tenders submitted by RLSSA and CE Nicholls. The resultant Weighted Criteria Analysis took into account relevant experience (30%), skills and experience of key personnel (20%), tender resources (10%), methodology (15%) and tendered price (25%). The tenderers’ averaged scores were as follows: C E Nicholls and Son Pty Ltd 84.2% RLSSA 83.8% City of Melville 74.9% William Baxter 18.3% C E Nicholls and Son Pty Ltd have not worked for the City previously. The RLSSA carried out the year 2000 round of the private swimming pool inspections for the City of Cockburn. The task could be undertaken by either RLSSA or C E Nicholls, however, taking into account the weighted criteria, tendered price and the assessment undertaken by Officers, the submission by C E Nicholls and Son Pty Ltd is considered to be the preferred tenderer to undertake the program of pool inspections. In order to allow C E Nicholls & Son to Pty Ltd to commence inspection of the pools, their nominated swimming pool inspectors Cyril and June Nicholls are required to be authorised by Council to undertake the work on the Council’s behalf. It should be noted that the previous tender was called to enable the successful contractor to commence the swimming pool inspections on 1st July 2003, however, due to the delays in appointing the inspector, three months has elapsed, making it important to proceed with the appointment so that the pools can be inspected within the required time. In the meantime Council staff have been undertaking some inspections in order that the delay will not adversely affect the inspection program. Strategic Plan/Policy Implications The Corporate Strategic Plan Key Result Areas which apply to this item are:- Managing Your City
Budget/Financial Implications C E Nicholls’ tendered sum can be accommodated within the available budget. Legal Implications Section 245A of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960. Community Consultation N/A Implications of Section 3.18(3) Local Government Act, 1995 Nil. 22. MATTERS TO BE NOTED FOR INVESTIGATION, WITHOUT DEBATE Nil 23. CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS Nil 24. (MINUTE NO 2165) (OCM 16/09/2003) - RESOLUTION OF COMPLIANCE (SECTION 3.18(3), LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1995)
25
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES I, ………………………………………….. (Presiding Member) declare that these minutes have been confirmed as a true and accurate record of the meeting. Signed: ………………………………………. Date: ……../……../…….. |