5. Chanhassen Fire Dept. Rescue Truck I 4
CITYOF ....C.
I 4k f, CHANHASSEN .
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
1 -*,.,,,,, (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
1 MEMORANDUM
I TO: Mayor Don Chmiel
City Council
Don Ashworth, City Manager
/
FROM: Scott Harr, Public Safety Directorq
1
DATE: February 6, 1992
1 SUBJ: Rescue Vehicle Purchase
•
I This memo is to provide inform 'on regarding the proposal to
purchase a new heavy rescue i 'cle, and to .recommend this
purchase.
1 ■
BACKGROUND
I Future planning by the Cha ,G ssen Fi, Department recognized the
eventual need to replace tf ' heavy re ue truck that has been in
use here for more than d years. Seral years ago the Fire
Department established a uck committe o examine the need and to
I develop a recommendati•" This committ put in significant
work reviewing the n `; researching o.' , ons; and, developing a
proposal.
Truck No. 21 � t • t ea, t, -c . - hicle, is a 1971 step
van, which was w ally . °` ° � � ' ` t ruck prior to being
I purchased a ve .: r , - , ... , 4 this truck
now over two ecades old, but because it was no ma - ctured to
serve as a rescue`vle it does not meet current ,.,y standards
for transporting firefigh _ • for othe ; • purposes. The
1 truck needs to be replaced.
The truck committee has examin he necessity for having such a
I vehicle. It does serve a ` '•er of specialized functions,
including playing an important role in our developing emergency
management plan by providing a mobile communications and operations
I center. Large rescue equipment, additional bre ath i ng equipment and
firefighters are transported in this unit. Th is type of unit is
accepted as a necessary component of the overall emergency response
1
It
t4IT PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
February 6, 1992
Page 2
1 fleet for a city, and neighboring communities have similar vehicles
(in fact, the truck committee learned that most of these are more
expensive than the unit being proposed). The truck committee has
' thoroughly researched various designs and manufacturers producing
such equipment. They have attended shows and visited other fire
departments in order to determine which configurations and units
' would meet the needs of Chanhassen. The results of their research
concluded with the recommendation that it is better to have a unit
built to specifications than to buy a vehicle and add the necessary
equipment afterwards, and to purchase a vehicle that would serve
present needs as well as a unit that would continue to serve the
growing needs of this City.
' Because of the expense of such a vehicle, the City Council was
approached two years ago with the request for a new rescue truck.
It was determined that the most appropriate way to proceed was for
' the Council to budget part of the cost in the 1991 budget and the
remainder in the 1992 budget.
' In conjunction with the request for funding, the truck committee
drafted specifications; a request for bids was published; and, the
bid opening was scheduled for January 13, 1992. The only bid
received was from Lynch Display Vans, Inc.
ANALYSIS
Upon initial review, two things concerned me. First, that only one
bid was received; and, second, that the cost for the unit would
exceed the $102,000 the Council had budgeted. As a result, I had
' this item pulled from the 1/27/92 Council agenda in order to
provide additional time for review.
' I have since met on a number of occasions with Fire Chief Jim
McMahon and representatives of the truck committee. The results of
our discussions have been taken back to the general membership of
' the Fire Department for their input. These discussions have been
reviewed with the City Manager.
Regarding the single bid, the consensus is to recommend to the
' Council that we remain with the bid that was submitted. This
particular vehicle is so highly specialized that while the
opportunity for other manufacturers to provide bids with exceptions
I existed, only the one responded. The truck committee believes that
this is the unit that best meets the need, and requests that we not
seek additional bids.
' Regarding the bid amount, my initial statement to the Fire Chief
and truck committee was that I would not take the recommendation to
the City Council over budget. I asked the Fire Department to
1
February 6, 1992
Page 3
review the specifications and cut where possible. Chief McMahon
has suggested that in order to further address the amount over the
budgeted figure, the Fire Department be permitted to transfer
necessary funds from their 1992 department budget.
An issue is what will be done with the existing truck. In a memo
dated 10/1/91 to the City Manager from Captain Bob Halverson,
chairman of the truck committee, which was included in the 1992
budget request material to the Council, he advised that the Fire
Department anticipated receiving approximately $10,000 from the
sale of the old truck. However, subsequent discussions have
resulted in the consensus that this truck would ideally serve needs
of the Utility Department. City Engineer Charles Folch and Utility
Superintendent Jerry Boucher have stated that this truck would meet
a need they have for a unit to respond to such significant
emergency repairs as water main breaks. Because the existing unit
has warning lights that can be replaced with amber covers, as well
as equipment such as a generator with exterior lamps, the vehicle
could transport equipment that presently requires numerous trips
back and forth, while serving as a unit from which to work.
Actually all that would be necessary for the unit to be placed into 11 service as a utility vehicle would be to replace the red beacons
and paint the exterior. A transfer of funds from the Utility
Department budget for the fair market value of the truck could
occur rather than selling the unit. 1
RECOMMENDATION
The City Council has budgeted $102,000 for the new vehicle. The
additional $5,000 to be used by the Fire Department for the
purchase of this vehicle resulting from the transfer of the
existing vehicle to the Utility Department would result in there
only being the need for the Fire Department to transfer a
relatively small portion of their 1992 departmental budget to cover
any additional difference remaining. 1
The options of rebidding the unit, or reconsidering the entire
project altogether do exist. However, there are several factors
that mitigate against this. If we order this unit by March 15,
1992, the manufacturer will provide additional equipment at no
charge so they may show it at an upcoming convention. Also, as
previously stated, this is the vehicle the truck committee is
recommending.
It is the recommendation of the Fire Chief, the truck committee,
the general membership of the Chanhassen Fire Department, and the
Public Safety Director that the bid from Lynch Display Vans, Inc.
be accepted and the Public Safety Director be directed to proceed
with the purchase of the vehicle and necessary equipment, providing
that any cost above the $102,000 system be funded from other
existing sources.
1
1
February 6, 1992
Page 4
Manager's Comments:
The concept of using the existing rescue truck as an emergency
repair vehicle for our sewer and water operations has a lot of
merit. The vehicle is currently equipped with a generator, light
pack, heater, and numerous compartments - -all of which are necessary
for an emergency repair vehicle, i.e. vehicle to use when lift
stations need repairs, sewer lines are severed, and to fix broken
water pipes. The vehicle is in good condition, but given its age
and potential to roll over, it is a poor fire response vehicle. We
discussed obtaining a disclaimer from any other fire department
that might purchase the vehicle; however, using it ourselves would
eliminate the potential of some other city's firefighter being
' injured. By having everything in one vehicle, I sincerely believe
that we would save significant dollars in not having to
continuously run back to the shop to get forgotten parts or
equipment that are not part of our daily routines. Sewer and water
repairs typically include 6, 8, 10 and 12 inch plugs; caps; clamps;
etc. The use of the vehicle for repairs is not new in that we used
this vehicle during a waterline break on Minnewashta Parkway. The
temperature was -20° to -30° with a windchill factor even lower.
' It was a major break requiring nearly 18 hours to repair. Being
able to warm up in the back end of the vehicle was the only way
that that job could be accomplished, although the Fire Department
t did not appreciate the clean up that was necessary as a part of the
ordeal. The vehicle could be kept in the cold storage building
with the use of a tank heater. The Fire Department has been
II counting on the old rescue truck of having a value of $10,000. As
noted by Scott, this may be an over ambitious number. Regardless
of what number is chosen, $5,000 or $10,000, one fact remains
clear -- general operations of the city should not subsidize sewer
and water operations and, similarly, sewer and water operations
should not subsidize the general fund. Monies exist within the
Sewer and Water Availability Fund (fund used to pay for major
repairs to the sewer and water system) to pay for the purchase of
the truck. Should the Council agree that using this vehicle as a
part of sewer and water operations makes sense, we would determine
' what the fair market value of the vehicle was and transfer that
amount from the Sewer and Water Availability Fund to the Equipment
Purchase Fund.
' I applaud the efforts of the Fire Department to reduce the cost of
the rescue truck. Reductions in the truck itself currently total
approximately $5,000 with an additional $5,000 being identified as
potential cuts in the Fire Department budget itself. An additional
area to be cut is the proposed hurst tool which is proposed to be
housed in the new rescue truck. The cost of this tool is $12,000.
I think it is important to note that the legislature is ready to
reconvene and to make determinations as to how to solve the state's
deficit ($400 -$500 million). To have any of our departments
1
1
February 6, 1992
Page 5
cutting their budgets at this point will assuredly preclude their
ability to make further cuts when we are mandated to do such by the
state. I can almost assure that we will be going back to each of
our departments and they will be asked to cut 5% to 10% from their
existing budgets. Again, to force the Fire Department to reduce
•
travel and training budget, operational expenses, etc. - -all in an
effort to fund the rescue truck, would be a mistake.
All indications would show that the bid received is a reasonable 1
bid and that rebidding would probably not result in additional cost
savings. This office would recommend that the Council award the
truck bid to Lynch Display Vans, Inc. in the amount of $112,800.
Additionally, the Fire Department should be requested to delete
items from this bid totalling approximately $5,000. Staff will
continue to establish a fair value for the old rescue truck, but a
"split the difference" position of approximately $7,500 would
"balance the budget" [$102,000 (budget) + $5,000 - $10,000 (truck
sale) + $5,000 (cuts) = $113,000 (bid).] In regards to the $5,000
in operational cuts being considered by the Fire Department, as
well as the purchase of the hurst tool, I would suggest that all of
these items be held in abeyance awaiting actions of the state.
Should the state not inflict as much damage as I currently believe
that they will, these expenses could be reinstated. However, until
we know exactly where we stand with our 1992 budget, I would
recommend that we not proceed with spending these dollars. 1
Recommendation
Award of the low bid to Lynch Display Vans, Inc., is recommended. 1
Authorizing staff to establish the fair market value for the old
rescue truck and authorizing its transfer to the Sewer and Water
Department is recommended. [Note: This action would authorize
staff to transfer the fair market value of the rescue truck from
the Sewer and Water Availability Fund to our Motor Vehicle
Depreciation Fund.
1
1
1
1
1
1