By Gus Herrera
The Pasadena City Council held a very productive meeting this past week. Although there was a total of 25 items on the agenda last Monday, Feb. 22, the evening’s events proceeded much smoother than usual. There were no ceremonial matters after roll call and, surprisingly, only five public comments pertaining to items not listed on the agenda, thus allowing the meeting to quickly proceed towards the lengthy consent calendar.
The majority of the items on the calendar required the council’s approval of contracts between the city and a myriad of private companies to carry out several municipal services such as: sewer and storm drain re-lining; fiber optic splicing; printing and mailing services; software licensing; minor construction projects; among others. Many of these contracts were simply renewals or slight modifications of previous dollar amounts. For the most, part Mayor Tornek and the council were on the same page as they only decided to pull out five items for further discussion. As for the rest of the items, Tornek proposed a sweep motion of approval, a motion that was adopted unanimously by the councilmembers.
It was apparent that everyone in the room was on a mission to move through the evening’s agenda as efficiently as possible. Furthermore, there was a certain implication by Tornek’s sweep motion that the items approved were of a fairly routine nature. It is important to note that out of all the items on the consent calendar there was only one public comment of disapproval, so it is safe to say that the sweep motion was in general agreement with public opinion. Of the five items designated for further discussion two were particularly interesting.
The first issue had to do with Item 7, which concerned the authorization to enter into a contract with HHS Construction Inc. for fiber optic splicing, testing, and emergency troubleshooting for Pasadena’s fiber optic network. Councilmember Kennedy pointed out a large disparity between the bid amounts proposed. The city saw a total of four bids for this contract, according to the staff report the highest bid was $1.12 million and the lowest, submitted by HHS Construction Inc., was $357,262.16. The other two sat right in the middle at $523,512.34 and $525,599.46. Tornek calmed Kennedy’s concerns by assuring him that the city has a history with the vendor in question. Moreover, despite their low bid, the company does satisfy all requirements and specifications. The item was unanimously approved.
The second issue also had to do with bidding figures. It concerned Item 9, the authorization to enter into a contract with Impex Technologies Inc. for storage area network hardware and implementation services. This time the issue had to do with the amount of bidders, as opposed to the dollar amount. Councilmember Wilson pointed out that there was only one bidder for the contract; a notion he claimed made him feel quite nervous. Phillip Leclair, chief information officer, explained that the companies that typically bid for these types of city contracts carry out their own process between themselves in determining who is best suited to bid for the job. Neither Tornek nor Wilson was particularly satisfied by the explanation, yet the item was approved by a “grumpy unanimous vote,” to quote Tornek.
Once all the items on the consent calendar were approved, the meeting proceeded towards the final topic, Item 25, the authorization to initialize the opening phases of the potable water project. According to Gary Takara, principle engineer, the goal of this project is to reduce the use of imported potable water. As of today, Pasadena imports more than 60 percent of its potable water; the project would increase local reliability from the current 40 percent to over 50 percent. This would be achieved by maximizing the local supplies from tunnels and streams in the Arroyo Seco and Glendale’s recycled water system. The project would cost an estimated $50 million and would take 20 years to complete, according to Takara. It requires substantial construction, including thousands of feet of pipeline and new reservoirs. Naturally, there was disapproval from local residents, the majority of concerns having to do with traffic, noise, aesthetics, and changes in property value. As deliberation progressed and facts came to light, more and more concerns arose, especially from Councilmembers Madison and Hampton whose districts would be directly impacted by Phase I of the project. Ultimately, the motion passed with only one councilmember opposed, Hampton. With the approval, the project can now move forward to try and secure critical state funding via grants.
For more details on the council’s meeting visit: http://ww2.cityofpasadena.net/councilagendas/council_agenda.asp.
