HomeMy WebLinkAboutNB 1a UNIFORM BIDS 02-16-82DATE: FEBI~JARY 2, 1982
NEW' BUSINESS
Inter-Corn
TO:
WILLIAM HUSTCN, CITY ~ER
FROM: BC8 LEDENDECKER, DIRECTCR OF PUBLIC ~S/CITY ENGINEER
SUBJECT: MAIN'rez4ANCE ~ER UNIFORM BIDS
RECCI~4ENDATI (lq ..
That the Tustin City Council, at their meeting of February 16, 1982, authorize the
award of bid to Valley Industrial Services in the ~nount of $8,944.00 per year for
furnishing Maintenance Worker uniforms and providing laundry service for said
uniforms for a three year period.
BACKGRCUND:
Bids for the contract renewal of the Maintenance Worker uniform laundering were
solicited and received on January 26, 1982 and are tabulated on the second page of
the attadqed memo.
DISCUSSICN:
Three firms responded to the bid request with the low bidder being Valley
Industrial Services. The low bidder's proposal shows a 2.5% increase over our
current contract with L & N Uniforms.
The effective date of the new contract will be April 29, 1982 and will run for a
period of three years with a renewal clause subject to both parties approval.
BCB LEDENDECKER
DIR~C"B~ OF PU!~,IC I.~R~/
db
Attachment
DATE:
TO:
FROH:
SUBJECT:
JANUARY 28, 1982
Inter -Corn
BC~ LEDENDECKER, DIRECTCR CF PUBLIC W~gKS/CITY f~qGINEER
MC[~DA ~3CF~.wf, ADMINISTR~I'r~E ASSISTANT
UNIFO~ BID
Attaohed is a recap of the recently submitted bids for uniform services. A
comparison is drawn between the current contract prices and those submitted on
January 26, 1982.
Following are considerations, other than low bid, that should be taken into
account before final determination of the contract award is rode:
L & N UNIFC~MS
1. Was middle bidder (19.6% over current contract)
2. Is our current uniform supplier
3. We have experienced proble~u~ with this c~pany in the past: however, according
to Mr. West,. the situatic~ has improved.
PRUDENTIAL
1. Was high bidder (34.8% over current contract)
2. Bid on a higher ~1 ity mterial for shirts
3. Has provided good service to the City in the past
V~T.T.~y INDUSTRIAL
1. Was low bidder (2.5% over current ~ontract)
2. Four other Valley Industrial clients were contacted (as Tustin had no direct
experience with the u~,~any) and received good reports from all.
REC~ATICN
After weighing all the considerations, I feel it is in the best interest of the
City to award the uniform contract to Valley Industrial.
If you n~-~cd any further informaion, please contact me at your convenience.
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
db
Attaohment
'JNIFORM BID
JANUAR~ 28, 1982
P~d3E 2
Shirt
Laundry
Pant
La~d~
Shirt
Replacement
Pant
Replacement
Identifying
Patc~
O3RR~qT
COqTRACT
PRICES
.38
UNIFCE~I PRCPCSAL
$.40
$.44
L&NI
$. 45 *
.40 .40 .49 .60
7.00 6.25 7.00 7.30
9.00 9.50 9.00 9.85
1,619.65
2.20 ea. if awarded bid
3.00 ea. if not
awarded bid
4.80 ea.(for 220)
3.96 ea.(for 440+)
A~qUAL CCST
FCR LAUNDR~
SERVICE.'
PUBLIC WORKS
WATER S~E~ICE
$6,084 $6,240 $7,254
2,636.40 2,704 3,143.40
$8,720.40 $8,944 $10,397.40
Represents 2.51% increase Represents 19.6%
over current contract increase over
current contract
$8,190
3,549
$1 ~ ,739
Represents
34.8%
increase
over current
contract
*Bid higher quality shirt