Watertowergate: A Year Later

[XLFD]

Ludington's Watertowergate scandal was broke last year around this time in this thread.  Here we learned that the City entered into a contract to paint Ludington's two towers for $1.5 million according to City Council meetings, in wide disparity of previous paint jobs (on the order of over $1 million, adjusted for inflation), and of current paint jobs (the Scottville tower was painted for under $50,000 in local funds, under $200,000 altogether). 

We also found out it was painted just back in 2000, ten years prior, and found numerous sources that recommended steel towers of that type be painted every 20-30 years.  We wondered why the City got such a pricy paint job on these two mostly-hidden-from-view towers in the midst of a recession where it was laying off people and scrapping proven programs, as it did at the end of 2009 with layoffs of 5 city employees and the elimination of the lifeguard program.

In a lengthy process of trying to find out the whys, we were obstructed, and charged monstrous fees to eventually get the public records applying to this contract in the cover-up thread.   We then shortly thereafter paid $57 for 24 pages we asked to just inspect.

The records showed that the actual project was a bit less than what the original council minutes said, at just under $1.2 million and most of the documents I received were put up in low-definition on this revealing thread, before I invested in a scanner.

 

Now, over one year later, the Danaher tower is still unpainted, and will continue to be unpainted at least until next summer, over 30 months (2.5 years) into the contract.  Funny; on page 19 I received it says:

 

Maybe they haven't been able to locate this tower, after all page 18 has it on the corner of Danaher and Washington, but its actual location is two blocks away on Staffon.  If there was a chance of misinterpreting the above section, we find the following on page 20.

 

When I talked with John Shay at my interview for the Third Ward seat vacated by CC Scott, he avoided any talk of total price and insisted that the company would be painting the water towers again at the end of this contract.  So we would get two paintings for the price of one. 

That would be a better deal, if true.  But let's say the company paints the Danaher tower next year.  If the contractors are true to whatever vocal contract they had with John Shay (which isn't reflected in the written contract), they would be impelled to do so again in 2019, only seven years later.  But that won't happen, because it will not need more paint until after this contract expires and a new ten year maintenance contract is agreed to, at an even greater cost.

Similarly, the Gaylord tower which was finally finished in October 2010, could be repainted outside the current contract in 2020 (the contract ends on 12-31-2019) and still be repainted within the stipulated ten years.  So if John Shay was expecting to see two coats of paint on the watertowers by the end of this contract, I'm afraid he will be as disappointed as the citizens who see the Danaher tower go unpainted until three years into the contract he signed.

 

So let's review:

1)  Former City Manager Miller had the two towers painted inside and out for under $300,000 back in the year 2000.  Adjusted for inflation to the beginning of 2010 would be about $400,000.  There is evidence of competitive, sealed bids.

2)  Current City Manager Shay at the end of 2009 entered into a ten year contract to have both towers painted on the outside, one to be painted on the inside without any evidence of competitive, sealed bids for just under $1.2 million.  Three times what could have been expected.

3)  Current Scottville City Manager Williams in 2010 had their one water tower painted in and out for under $50,000 cost to Scottville, about $150,000 from grants, at the same time Ludington did their Gaylord tank.  Their were plenty of competitive, sealed bids.

4)  Steel water towers are recommended to be externally painted every 20-30 years, and can generally go longer without undue hazard. 

5)  Even though the contract between the City of Ludington and Utility Services Co. gives a definite timetable and describes this in the contract, they have not come near to fulfilling it. 

6)  Current City Manager John Shay, who signed this contract, has no problem with that (#5), and even believes that USC will paint the towers once again before 2020 because someone from the company allegedly told him that.

7)  In economically hard times, the City has wasted nearly $1.2 million on a project that was not needed, was given without receiving sealed bids from any competitors, and now has the contractor failing to live up to their side of the contract, without any public comment by anyone at City Hall, and no mention of it in LDN editorials or elsewhere beyond here.

 

This is Watertowergate, and if it doesn't get you upset over the sheer waste of money and the sheer incompetence of Ludington's leaders, then nothing I can put out here will.

[AQUAMAN]

Checkmate, and fine reporting, something our very own newspapermen cannot or will not attempt at the LDN.

[Marty Redman]

I'm upset, and I live in another state without any holdings in Ludington.  There was a 1,000,000 gallon tank paid down these ways for under $300K this year by some free spenders. 

 

You need to abbreviate the paper not by LDN but by AWOL.

[XLFD]

Annoying Weasels Occupying Ludington?

[AQUAMAN]

Methinks Marty may mean, absent with out logic, or legality, but I could be guessing. That might have to change to AWOLL.....lol.

[Willy]

Excellent work X

[XLFD]

Thanks, Willy; I  always appreciate hearing that from you.  It never gets old.

[Wanda Marrison]

Anyone ever asked why the delay this year in the Danaher tower? You might find that there is a good sensible reason for it.

[Willy]

Wanda

If there is a good explanaition I would like to hear it. I'm sure someone would have told X if there was. He has been asking and has put the information he has gathered on this forum. Why hasn't any City official mentioned the delay or reported in the LDN. If you know then it would help if you would post it.

[XLFD]

Publicly, I don't think anyone has asked outside of this watchblog.  Would you know, Wanda?  Would you like to share with us?

John Shay doesn't want to share, in conjunction with this article Toni sent a FOIA request to inspect:  All written records/communications dated in 2011 between Utility Services Maintenance (the water tower painters contracted in 2009 with the City of Ludington ) and Ludington City Officials/Employees.

 

She received his reply:  "I have attached the City of Ludington ’s response to your FOIA request. There are approximately 375 pages of records related to your request. The total cost is 375 pages x $0.25/page = $93.75. Therefore, please submit a deposit in the amount of $46.88, which represents one-half of the estimated cost to compile and copy the records you requested, so that the City can begin to compile this information. Upon receipt of the entire payment of $93.75, the City will release all of the records to you."

 

She has an Affidavit of Indigency on file.  She is almost as interested as me in these files.  She asks to inspect the records, meaning copying costs should not be applicable (response also includes that there was no exempt information to redact).  It's a real open government we have here in Ludington when we ask poor folk to pay nearly $100 to look at easy to produce records, isn't it? 

 

[Wanda Marrison]

 

As for the fact that the Danaher water tower has not yet been painted, the City is waiting for AT&T to upgrade its equipment on the tower before the City repaints it.  If the City repainted the tower prior to this work, then AT&T’s work would have resulted in a lot of touch-up work on a new paint job in order to repair burn marks caused by AT&T’s upgrade.  We expect AT&T to complete this work in time for the City to repaint the tower in 2012.

Pretty straight forward and sensible to me. Not to mention it will save $$.

A simple question and a simple answer.

[XLFD]

Please reference or show some documentation so we can verify that fact, Wanda.

As for $$$, we already have spent $108,000 on the (undone) Danaher paint job and will pay $54,000 more in January.  I don't get the savings angle.  Why didn't we start the Danaher contract in 2012, and save that $108,000 and get two more 'maintenance' years?  Sounds like poor planning led to $108,000 of waste to me.

[Wanda Marrison]

Probably because the delays by ATT happened in late summer, making it too late for the paint job to be safely started in 2011 before bad weather starts.

I learned this at a council meeting, just don't remember which one. It should be on video.

I sure wouldn't want contractors up on that tank this time of year. My $$ saving mind set was that if the tank had to be touched up that would cost extra money.