The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutIR 7526 INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. -' 7526 T t cosy To the Mayor and Members of the City Council Page 1 of 5 May 28, 1991 Subject: RECOMMENDED OPTION FOR ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL SERVICES lei On February 25 , 1991 , the City Council directed staff to develop three options for provision of kennel services in the Animal Control program. These options were: 1 . Kennel Services Contract with public/private agencies . 2 . Lease/Purchase of an Animal Control facility . 3 . Construction of a City owned Animal Control facility . Each of these options have now been evaluated and the recommended action taken on each option is outlined below. KENNEL SERVICES CONTRACT One proposal was received on the contracting of animal kenneling services . Even though only one proposal was received, the prees- tablished evaluation process was followed . The proposal was submitted by the Humane Society of North Texas . A five member panel was assembled to interview the Humane Society staff and visit the facility. Panel participants were Abe Tuggle, supervisor of the animal control program in Garland , Texas, Oft, Edwin A. Beckcom, D.V.M. retired veterinarian from the Dallas Animal Control program, Frances Pieters , Assistant City Attorney, City of Fort Worth , Letha Aycock, Assistant Director, Health Department City of Fort Worth, and Pat Diffee , Senior Buyer , Purchasing Division , City of Fort Worth. The panel interviewed Humane Society representatives Mr . Art Brender, Dr. John Burns , and Mr. Paul Giles . Four of the five panel members made a site visit to the Humane Society of North Texas facility on East Lancaster . (Ms . Frances Pieters , Assist- ant City Attorney , did not visit the site . ) All of the four panel members were in agreement on the following items after the site visit . Contracting kennel services to the Humane Society would have benefits . These benefits are listed below: 1 . Citizens would have one central location to call or visit . 2 . The Humane Society proposal would make the facility more ac- cessable to the public . The facility is open 7 days a week . The City facility currently is open to the public six days a week . 3 . A spaying/neutering policy at the Humane Society facility is consistent with current City policy which has as its goal the reduction of stray animals . 4 . A Veterinarian would be on site 40 hours per week as opposed to the 2 1/2 - 3 hours per week at the City ' s facility. 5 . The vendor is well insured . 6 . The June 1 , 1991 proposed start up date as opposed to a pro- f jected move in date on a newly constructed facility of March 1992 is attractive . ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7526 Page 2 of 5 To the Mayor and Members of the City Council May 28, 1991 �h-"p exA Subject: 7 . The Humane Society has a good public image . The panel also noted the following deficiencies : 1 . The quarantine area had not been completed at the time of the site visit . 2 . The Humane Society did not possess , at the time of the site visit , an approval from the Texas Department of Health for the operation of either their quarantine or their kennel facilities as required in the RFP . 3 . The kennels for large dogs were not complete at the time of the site visit . 4 . Plans for providing adequate staff and equipment for making and receiving phone calls were not included . in the proposal . 5 . The unloading area in the back of the facility is reached by a dirt driveway and the area provided for unloading animals is not covered . This would make operations difficult during inclem- ent weather . 6 . A line item budget that included the number of positions by job titles did not show an increase in staff to handle the 40% increase in workload anticipated from the City Animal Control operations . 7 . In the RFP , all fees collected by the vendor were to be credited to the City. The Humane Society has proposed to keep all adoption and quarantine fees collected to underwrite the cost of adoptions and quarantining animals . They are silent on the collection of other fees . We have assumed in the fiscal analysis that the fees collected by the Humane Society will equal those generated by the City, except in the case of licensing where the designated veterinarian will be applied . 8 . There is no provision for a required wash out area for the Animal Control trucks . At the time of the site visit , Humane Society staff indicated they were looking at an off site loca- tion. 9 . The Humane Society failed to submit a description of the type and method of training given to center attendants as requested in the RFP. 10. The automated system for tracking animals and for invoicing the City of Fort Worth was not available at the time of the site visit . If the City Council authorizes a contract for the provision of kennel services , City staff will work closely with Humane Society personnel to overcome these deficiencies . ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS LINFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7526 rFk ,AS Page 3 of 5 - To the Mayor and Members of the City Council May 28, 1991 il 0 Subject In the evaluation criteria for proposals , price was the most significant factor . To evaluate the attractiveness of the Humane Society proposal on the basis of price , their proposed operating budget was compared to the City of Fort Worth Animal Control operating budget . Revenue estimates for each program were also projected, This comparison showed that a savings of $31 , 934 could be experienced if the contract were awarded to the Humane Society. ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET CITY OF FT. WORTH HUMANE SOCIETY ANIMAL CONTROL Board/Quarantine $219 ,653 $149 ,841 Dead Animal Removal 9 ,000** 9 , 000 Service Fee on Collections ..-3 . 190 OP,k 231 ,843 158 ,841 Rental costs for office space Animal Control Admin . Field Staff 17 , 100 Debt Service 160,856* Total $248 ,943 Total $319 , 697 Debt Service schedule assumes 20 years at 7 .25% Service not provided by Humane Society , City continues to incur the cost . ANNUAL REVENUES - KENNEL SERVICES CITY OF FT. WORTH HUMANE SOCIETY ANIMAL CONTROL Licensing $ 4,680 $ 15 , 600 Impoundment *50 ,010 50 ,010 Board *13 ,790 13 , 790 Quarantine 62 ,900 62 , 900 Adoptions ------ 5 ,400 #OP' TCOM Contract 22 , 500 Total $131 ,380 $170,200 *5% service fee charged on collection -ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No, 7526 To the Mayor and Members of the City Council Pa CJ E? 4 of 5 May 28, 1991 Subject: Hers Total Expenditures $ 248 , 943 $319 , 697 Total Revenues Collected -131 ,380 -170,200 Net Operational Costs $ 117 , 563 $149 ,497 LEASE/PURCHASE FOR ANIMAL CONTROL FACILITY One response was received on the proposal for the construction of an animal control facility with a Lease/Purchase option . This proposal was submitted by Amelang/Hall . Failure to include the required bid bond resulted in the vendor Amelang/Hall being classified as non-responsive . Consideration could not be given to their proposal . CONSTRUCTION FOR ANIMAL CONTROL FACILITY Plans and specifications for construction of an animal control facility were completed in February 1991 . The project was adver- tised for bids on February 21 , and 28, 1991 . Six responses were 001b, received from contractors . The responding contractors and the base bid submitted along with alternates 1, 2 and 3 are listed below. CONTRACTOR BASE BID ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 Ed Parker & Assoc . $1 , 189 ,898 20, 500 13 ,000 300,000 Tom Stephens , Inc . 1 ,275 ,000 46 ,000 10,000 344 ,000 Westland Const . 1 , 276,000 21 ,600 14 ,700 330 ,840 Harold N. Hall Const . 1 ,333,000 19,000 20,000 388 ,000 E. Horn Const . Co. 1 ,388 ,888 15 ,333 13, 333 364 ,000 Ed A. Wilson A. Inc . 1 ,421 , 500 18 , 300 11 ,350 366 ,400 The base bid included the administration building, clinic , 100 kennel cages , parking and site work. Alternate #1 was for a covered walkway between the administration building and the ken- nel buildings . Alternate #2 was for a canopy for the truck wash area . Alternate #3 was for an additional 100 kennel cages . Staff of the City Manager ' s office , Transportation and Public Works Department and Health Department reviewed the plans and specifications and concluded that only minor cost savings could be affected without changing the scope of the project or sacri- ficing desirable materials in the construction . Therefore , if this alternative is selected, staff recommends that the contract e" be awarded as bid . ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER - FORT WORTH, TEXAS INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7526 Page 5 of 5 To the Mayor and Members of the City Council May 28, 1991 Total Budget for Base Bid and Alternates : Construction $1 ,523,398 A/E Fee 67 ,200 Testing & Utilities 47 , 127 Printing and Advertising 1,800 Administration & Inspection 64 ,490 Contingency 150,000 Land Survey & Soils Tests 157 ,985 Fixed Equipment 30,000 Movable Equipment 45 ,000 Sub Total $2 ,087 ,000 Original Appropriation (221, 930) Budget Request $1 ,865,070 opok Recommendation for Animal Control Kennel Serviges It is recommended that the Animal Control kenneling, euthanasia, and disposal services in the City of Fort Worth be provided by the Humane Society of North Texas . This recommendation is being made because contracting for kennel services with the Humane Society of North Texas allows the City to realize an annual savings of $31 , 943 as compared to the construction and operation of a new City facility . More importantly, it addresses the City Council ' s stated goal of working more cooperatively and creative- ly with local non-profit agencies , school districts and other governmental agencies in order to eliminate duplication . Post-It`brand tax transmittal memo 7671 #ofpagess, 71 #of pages From TO From David Ivory Irax ff g?' Fax City Manage ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS _