Ludington City Website Bid: Lize Against Revize

[XLFD]

At the November 24, 2014 Ludington City Council meeting, the council had a first reading of an ordinance to contract with a company called CivicPlus in order to redesign the City's website.  The council packet had the proposal therein which was set to cost the city $17,475 over the next three years.  They also noted that the City's current website provider, Revize, had made an offer that was significantly less, but the city council was scheduled to only consider contracting with CivicsPlus. 

In my public comment, I reminded the council about the competitive bidding process, and how the city violated it in this instance by choosing the bid that was admittedly 43% costlier than the low bid, and gave a historical example where the City wasted almost $200,000 when it ignored a  Ludington engineering firm's low bid to hire a much pricier firm with their closest office 100 miles away. 

                                                             A home page for a CivicPlus website for Plano Texas

On the December 1, 2014 meeting they had the approval of the contract on the agenda.  In my public comment, I once again pleaded with the council to follow the rules, saying:  "At that point, the only criteria the city had in resolving the competitive bidding process was to accept the lower bid; a city official just can't change the rules at that point, it goes against the public interest and is indicative of corruption. If you vote for the high bid tonight, you will be violating the city code section 2.4: "Competitive bids for all purchases and public improvements shall be obtained where practicable and contracts awarded to the lowest responsible bidders."

Nevertheless, the contract was awarded by unanimous vote, after Councilor Castonia and Winczewski made a few claims of how CivicPlus got the contract starting 15:00 into the video of that meeting.  They effectively read from John Shay's memo to them, which I've highlighted in certain areas:

Like most questionable acts performed by the city, the records and facts tend to work against them.  First off, you will notice that the wording on the publicly available records and council chatter said that 'a committee' did the fact finding in this instance, but never specifies what committee did the work. 

Via a FOIA request, we see within a 2014 10-10 Personal Notes from Meeting with CivicPlus.pdf, that John (Shay), Les (Johnson), Heather (Tykoski), Kaye (Holman), Jackie (Steckel), and two indecipherable names met with CivicsPlus to discuss their website.  In communications this seems to be what was called the City's "Technology Committee", a board that has not been granted any recognition by the city council, although two councilors are on it who happen to be on the Finance Committee. 

I asked both John Shay and Jackie Steckel who was on the Technology Committee, how the committee was formed, what is its powers, and under what authority was it created.  Both officials have ignored each of those questions, in typical Ludington city management 'transparent' fashion.  A letter from the Revize representative included in the original FOIA reply indicates he also presented material before this committee on the same day, but oddly, there was no notes available for that meeting with Revize.

The memo also makes several claims about why Revize's overtures were declined even though they bid 43% less and were the City's provider already who have had a great track record of performance (among all the records, none commented on anything negative about Revize's performance over the last several years).  These are exaggerations and abject lies, which unfortunately is what I've grown to expect from John Shay's memos.  Consider:

1)  The Revize Proposal was $12,222:  False, the 2014 10-13 Revize Proposal.pdf shows that the base proposal for service was actually $9322.  Shay apparently added in the totally optional and unnecessary $2900 training session with no analogous training session with CivicsPlus.  This actually made the Revize proposal 87% less than the other, saving more than $8000.

2)  The Revize Proposal did not allow for text messaging: False, the records did not show conclusively whether this was the case, so I contacted Revize and fished for information.  I found out that they currently do not offer text message alerts, but will have this technology available in January 2015-- oddly enough, when the contract with Ludington would go in effect.  I was able to infer that this would not cost any extra to an established contract.  The Revize website shows it offers the same app offered by Civicplus.

3)  The New Website Will be easier to Navigate:  Likely False, the records were again not conclusive, but at least for a time, the website will most assuredly be more difficult for those who are used to navigating the old one.  If the two proposals are any indication, the CivicsPlus proposal (2014 10-20 Correspondence CivicPlus.pdf) is a lot more complex and confusing than the Revize proposal noted above in 1).  Likewise, I find the Civicplus website itself much the same way, more so than Revize's website.  The simple and direct citizens should prefer a simple and direct city website to get information quickly and easily.

                                        Part of a Harrison Township, Michigan home page that uses Revize for its government's website

4)  The Committee felt that CivicPlus' websites were much more attractive and user-friendly:  Unsubstantiated and Subjective, the 'committee' offers no justification for either claim; my research has uncovered some pretty impressive and user-friendly Revize sites, and some CivicPlus sites that puzzled and did not impress me.  This criteria is not the reason to spend 87% more for a website, when the look and user-friendliness is effectively chosen by the city officials' input.

5)  In addition, CivicPlus fee can be paid over a three year period at $5825 interest free.   True, but Revize can ALSO be paid over a three year period for ONLY $3108 interest free, it says in the 2014 10-13 Revize Proposal.pdf.  This three year payoff was touted by John Shay at the November 24 meeting (and in his memo) as the big reason for choosing CivicPlus over Revize.  Apparently, saving $2717 each year does not work for John Shay's budget.  

What might be worse than the city's disingenuous attempt at justifying their switch is the implications.  The City ignored a much cheaper alternative that it already has worked with and found acceptable all the years the City has fielded a website.  They made a bid, made it much smaller than the other, and much more understandable.  If the City has problems, Revize is based in Troy, Michigan, and has won several national awards for its work.  No problems have been noted for the record in dealing with their past work.  CivicPlus is based in Kansas; so much for Pure Ludington's Pure Michigan credentials. 

So how did City Manager John Shay field a question from Revize's sales rep when they respectfully inquired about why the City of Ludington thought the Civicplus brand was a better fit:

" Civic Plus provided examples of actual city websites that it has created across the country, including Michigan, which seemed to meet the needs that we face here, including the ability to provide text message and email notices to residents, as well as the ability to easily create fillable forms. I hope this helps."

The only thing it helps to show is that the City Manager of Ludington and his complicit city officials on an illegitimate committee have no problem spending $8000+ extra of your money and sending it out of state for the same services of another Michigan company they employed and disloyally betrayed in giving a fair selection process to, violating the city charter in order to do so.

[XLFD]

For those who want the complete timeline of this bizarre process, I have arranged the records, mostly E-mails, as chronologically as I can get them here:

Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 2:29 PM  To: Heather Tykoski; Jackie Steckel  From: Dan Schultz, CivicPlus 

Thanks again for your time earlier this summer when we sat down and looked at the CivicPlus website product. We had discussed a meeting to share with others on your team to give them a sense of what else is out there in the marketplace. We would love to share with the group. 

For the month of September, we are offering a great sales special including a 20% new client discount and a free mobile app for any family members that join our group of 1,700 municipalities and growing.

You can view an example of the mobile app on the Apple App or Google Play stores for Rochester Hills, MI.  Also, here are a few of our recent go lives:  http://www.cityofmidlandmi.gov/ 
http://www.ci.circleville.oh.us/ 

 We would love to work with you! 

Sent:  Sep 17, 2014, at 7:43 AM  To:  Dan Schultz, CivicsPlus  From:  Heather Tykoski 
  
We have a committee meeting set up and are hoping you are able to give a presentation to them about the possibility of a redesign on our web site. They are also interested in learning about mobile features and a possible mobile option or ap.

The meeting is set for October 10. Are you available at 1pm or 1:45pm? We can do this remotely or if you are in the area you could attend in person. Thank you.

Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 3:07 PM   To: Heather Tykoski  From:  Dan Schultz, CivicPlus

It's good to hear from you. I would love to visit with your committee. The 1pm slot works great. Could you send me a meeting invitation with the address so I can plug it into my calendar?  Thanks again!

Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 4:30 PM  To: Heather Tykoski, Cc: Jackie Steckel  From:  Joseph J. Nagrant (Revize)  
 

Thank you for reaching out to us. I will be the one to present to the City Technology Committee.  Heather, when you have a chance, please give me a call so I can ask you a few questions. Thank you.

2014 10-10 Personal Notes from Meeting with CivicPlus.pdf

Sent: Monday, October 13, 2014 4:05 PM  To: Heather Tykoski  From: Joseph J. Nagrant (Revize)
 

Thank you, John Shay, and everyone for allowing me to present on Friday. Attached is our proposal for you and the web committee to review.
Revize greatly values the City of Ludington as a Revize client.

Proposal Highlights:

· Pricing is on page 35

· Optional 3 year payment plan

· We will upgrade your existing annual services and hosting contract to “Unlimited Users” at no additional cost

· Design and Build price includes all listed government web applications listed on page 37 and 38 (including Employee Intranet Portal)- pick which ones you want, and escrow the rest

· Sign a 5 year annual services contract with Revize and we will give you an website redesign absolutely FREE immediately after 5 years of services have been paid (beginning of the 5th year)

Let me know when is the best time for me to call you and go over this proposal. Thank you.

2014 10-13 Revize Proposal.pdf

2014 10-20 Correspondence CivicPlus.pdf

Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 9:00 AM   To: John Shay  From:  Joseph J. Nagrant (Revize)
 

Thank you (f)or letting me know you will be moving forward with CivicPlus. We always like to learn from our experiences.  Can you give me a detailed explanation why you feel that the CivicPlus solution was a better fit for Ludington?

We’d greatly appreciate it!

Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 1:30 PM  To: Joseph Nagrant  From:  John Shay
 

Civic Plus provided examples of actual city websites that it has created across the country, including Michigan, which seemed to meet the needs that we face here, including the ability to provide text message and email notices to residents, as well as the ability to easily create fillable forms. I hope this helps.

Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 2:14 PM  To: John Shay  From:  Joseph J. Nagrant
 

Ok, Thank you John.

Per the freedom of information act, would send me a copy of their proposal just for learning purposes on our end. I’d appreciate it.

Thank you again.

Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 3:43 PM  To: Heather Tykoski; Jackie Steckel  From:  John Shay
 

Heather or Jackie:

Please provide me with a copy of Civic Plus’ proposal, so that I can respond to Revize’s FOIA request. Thanks.

2014 12-2 Email Correspondence.pdf

[AQUAMAN]

Yup, another great waste of more taxpayers monies to a website that probably hardly anyone ever even uses, esp. the city council members. I doubt many councilors can even use the computer efficiently, and again relied on John E. Shay III's advice only. I wonder what if any connections this time Shay has with any employee's at the new provider? I also wonder why this is such a big deal, the city website. And finally, why can't a local Ludington website guru do the same thing locally, keeping tax dollars where they belong, with local contractors? I even wonder if any local website guru's had notice and were even able to bid on this contract? I'll bet NOT! The sameo crap of defying the city charter regarding competitive fair bidding in contracts is sailing full steam ahead, irregardless. It's repeated over and over again, while the poor locals pay more, based on the advice of one greedy arrogant individual, John E. Shay III. Thanks for a well investigated and informative thread again XLFD, great job.

[Willy]

Once again you have brought forth and have shown just how lazy and irresponsible the City Council members are. None of them checked into how or why the bids were so far apart and why they were even voting for the highest bid. What a bunch of do nothings. All I can suggest is that they get off their collective rears and do their jobs. It's their responsibility to follow City policy and ordinances and respond to citizens about what is taking place. The fact that none of them questioned this transaction reflects an "I don't give a crap about the voters" attitude, an attitude that is also pervasive in Washington D.C. Great job X.

[XLFD]

Thanks Willy, Aquaman, I appreciate your interest and your input here and any help you can give in getting the facts out beyond those who stumble upon these flaming web pages. 

You may have noticed that the two councilors that seem to be part of the Tech Committee (Les and Kaye) said nothing at either council meeting where I commented and they read, discussed, and passed the ordinance.  Instead, Councilor Castonia ("Always listen to your M-m-manager-r-r") read part of the ordinance, and then was prompted by Councilor Winczewski to read Shay's memo to 'refute' my claims of fairness propriety.  But the only thing these two knew about was what they were given in their packets, which was effectively false propaganda to vote for the much higher bid. 

These councilors, well-meaning or not, blindly trust their appointed helpers in Shay, Wilson, Venzke-Tykoski, Steckel, etc. to the point of what is commonly referred to as being "useful idiots" of these servants of theirs, instead of smartly looking out for the interests of their constituents. 

These servants continue to do things against the rules as we've seen the last two months in the various scandals:  Softballgate, (Attorney) Billinggate, Hangergate, and now Technogate, which had Steckel, Wilson, Shay, and Venzke-Tykoski respectively, be the key players.  They don't give a crap, which is a reflection of their masters, the Ludington City Council, which goes out of their way to praise them whenever possible in some bizarre symbiotic, parasitic relationship where the citizens of Ludington are the host.

[AQUAMAN]

Absolutely on-key observations X. And as Willy so wisely and frankly said: "what a bunch of do nothings". This is our city council? Elected to do what exactly? Surely not think for themselves, do any research, do any fact-finding, make any phone calls, make any effort whatsoever to uncover the truth and facts! Just take the opinion and suggestions of an unauthorized and illegal SELECT committee that was just thrown together for the sake of convenience and falsely placed trust, and follow like sheep to the slaughter. If this isn't laziness and ineptness, I guess no one knows the definition anymore! This certainly IS NOT what these councilors were elected for and to do! But, as apathy and misplaced trust are the main culprits, along with the media's lack of reporting injustices continues, we are just stuck in the MUD with incompetence and malfeasance. This isn't what a small berg like Ludington deserves, nor should have to witness and put up with. Until someone with BIG STONES like X and many others speak up, we continue into the abyss!

[Willy]

Well said, X and Aquaman.

By the way I like the new header for this website.

[AQUAMAN]

That new header is nice: Fires Me UP! But that pic., needs a little coating of snow next time around imho. I doubt many are still on the breakwall anymore right now, lol. Maybe a pic. of generous Ludington Santa Shyster Shay, spreading tons of money all thru the galaxy at taxpayers expense.

[XLFD]

The background picture, complete with a summertime vista of the breakwall and a sailboat was more wistful thinking on my part of what we may have around this area at this time in a few years if those nasty carbon emissions don't get under control, LOL. 

I did a little looking around for some new logos for the site, because I hope to begin the process of progressing/migrating to a new and improved Ning website shortly after our 5 year celebration right here, where love of Ludington, love of truth, and love of freedom intersect:  The Ludington Torch.