Duct Tales

[XLFD]

$32,000 in Pure County Government Waste on Cleaning Ducts at the Mason County Jail

 

 

Prologue

Back in January, the new Mason County Sheriff Kim Cole uncorked a wish list of projects detailed in eight pages.  High up in the list was some deemed necessary duct cleaning at the jail that the Sheriff was able to get some bids on.  The price was bid out by the MCSO, and two companies returned their bids at $18,000 plus, what many here felt was rather steep and possibly unnecessary at the time, for a thorough duct cleaning.  The Mason County Press, January 22, 2013 stated:

"The sheriff’s office sought bids for cleaning the ducts. They chose to go with Hankwitz Heating, Air Conditioning and Duct Cleaning of Ludington, which bid the job at $18,040. The next closest bid came from Van’s Plumbing and Heating of Cedar Springs for $18,900. The committee voted to pass the request to the county’s finance committee."

 

The Adventure Begins With Mystery 

On March 8, 2013, it was reported in the local newspaper that: 

"Mason County Administrator Fabian Knizacky said the board will consider approving an architect to develop bid specifications for the air duct cleaning project.

“So we get specifics of what we want done so we’re sure we’re getting the end product we want,” he said.

Cole already sought bids for the cleaning project and hoped to keep the work local.

The low bid received was for $18,040 from Hankwitz Heating, Air Conditioning and Duct Cleaning of Ludington, but members of the county board’s Finance, Personnel and Rules Committee decided they wanted a firm to develop specifics for the work before a contract for duct cleaning is awarded.

The cost to develop the bid specifications is $5,000."

On May 8, 2013, one week ago, the City of Ludington Daily News (COLDNews) reported that: 

"The (Mason County Commissioner's Finance) committee learned one bid of $45,000 was received for cleaning the duct work in the Mason County Jail/sheriff’s office.

Knizacky said he believes six companies took out bid packages but only one returned a bid by the deadline.

The committee recommends the full board approve the contract with the money coming from the Jail Construction Fund — but with the stipulation that the architect hired to develop the bid package examine bid and determine it is sufficient before the board takes action."

 

The mystery is the new figure and the new playing field.  This is still a duct-cleaning exercise, no more, no less (the mold cleaning is already done and over)-- but instead of two firms bidding under $19,000 to do the task, the county has utilized an architect (at the cost of $5000) to draw up a bid package and review the one bid out of six that came back and that price was 150% more than both prior bids for cleaning ducts.  Instead of paying a reputable local business $18,000 to do the job, we are paying an architect and some anonymous business $50,000 total. 

 

 

Dirty and Daffy Ducts

 

The COLDNews reports today what happened at yesterday's meeting regarding this duct work, tucked away on page three under the dull title of "County Board Approves Jail Duct Work Cleaning".  Dave Hankwicz, representing the company that won the bid in January but lost it to a much larger bid in May, was a bit beside himself in the article, and I was able to confirm some of his displeasure in a side interview myself.   

 

Hankwitz's business was still interested in the job, and well prepared to resubmit a bid on the revised project.  Architect Bill Roy developed the specifications for the bid (at the cost of $5000) and posted on a pay-to-play internet exchange system that many local contractors, including Hankwitz Heating are not part of, but County Administrator Fabian Knizacki had suggested contacting Hankwitz to Roy, since he knew of Hankwitz's interest in the project. 

 

Roy called Dave Hankwitz and was given his e-mail address in order to have the specification for the bid sent to him.  Roy never sent the specs, and when Dave Hankwitz had talked with county officials he was told the project had been delayed and that other MCSO issues involving boat motors and mold removal were at the forefront.  The bidding deadline passed, and Mr. Hankwitz had nothing from either the county or the architect. 

 

When the issue came up on Tuesday, Commissioner Mary Nichols suggested the board reopen the bidding process due to the unfairness of what happened, and to save the county some money.  Commissioner Janet Anderson countered with the idea that reopening the bidding process would jeopardize the County's getting bids on projects in the future.

 

I would counter that there was something that went wrong with the bidding process, where a contracted architect from Grand Rapids was allowed to pick and choose the methodology of picking duct contractors, and settled on Warren Michigan's Sani-Vac Services at a price that is two and a half times the original price.  Why is our County Administrator abrogating his responsibilities by neglecting to conduct these bids in a manner that is consistent with established protocol? 

 

The County Board voted down Commissioner Nichol's sane suggestion about rebidding the duct cleaning project 6-1, so apparently our elected representatives are okay with wasting $32,000 of our public money on this fiasco, sending it down to Grand Rapids and Warren because our county administration can't do their jobs.

 

[Jane]

That is total BS! I see out of town contractors all over our county and am disgusted every time. Why should our money go out of town(out of our county since this is a county paid issue).

[XLFD]

It brings back to mind the engineering contract for the Washington Avenue Bridge (to be built later this year).  The local engineer, Nordstrom, with civil engineering prominently in their background were overlooked by the City even though their bid was around $180,000 less than the successful company's bid (recall this thread), and about 1/4 the cost.  Our governments here in Mason County discriminate against our own people!

Maybe our officials rationalize that it's safer to get kickbacks from someone outside the county, someone who won't be upset that the taxes they pay are going to pad pockets or for quid pro quo.  Such observations almost have to cross your mind when you see things like this happen.    

[Willy]

Another fine job of gathering information X. The bid should contain information as to what equipment will be used, what materials or parts will be required and what the labor costs will be. An itemized bid would be a good start in determining just how this duct cleaning job has blown up in taxpayers faces. Was any of that information given out by the board? 

[XLFD]

This information was not given out freely by the board (or the county administrator), but a FOIA request has been sent out asking to see the three bids we know about, the architects specs, and the other five or so contractors who supposedly took out packets and did not bid. 

[Willy]

I forgot to mention those great pictures you included in the topic. Very creative

[XLFD]

Thanks, I try my best to keep somewhat dry topics like heat ducts as  entertaining and memorable as possible.  Heat ducts are generally somewhat dry to begin with; greased palms add a little moisture to the topic.