File #: DIS 18-111    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Discussion Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 7/12/2018 In control: City Council Workshop
On agenda: 8/7/2018 Final action:
Title: Discussion of issues relating to the bids for a one-year supply of garbage bags.
Sponsors: Finance
Attachments: 1. Garbage Bags - Revised Specs 06.19.18, 2. Garbage Bags - Notice to Bidders 06.21.18, 3. Garbage Bags - Bid Tab 07.16.18
Date Ver.Action ByActionResultAction DetailsMeeting DetailsAudio
No records to display.
Title
Discussion of issues relating to the bids for a one-year supply of garbage bags.

Body
Summary:
The City advertised for and received seven (7) bids on May 29, 2018 for garbage bags to be purchased for FY 2018-2019. The bid specifications reflected "minimum requirements" for the garbage bags stating, "The plastic bags shall be a 40 gallon size, and a minimum 2 MIL gauge thickness with 0 tolerances. The preferred overall bag size is 40"x46". The bags should have a flat seal bottom with bags connected together in a strip with perforated tear lines for easy separation. There shall be a 1 - 1 1/2 inch core of plastic or cardboard included in the center of each roll. The bags shall be folded in half with the roll being 20 inches long." Additionally, each roll should include "6" wire ties, one per bag." A sample of six (6) bags meeting these specifications must be provided with the bid.
The low bidder was asked to send a sample box of bags. Their bags were slightly smaller than specified (39-5/8" x 45-3/4") and the MLS tested on the bags ranged from 1.9-3 MLS gauge thickness. The current vendor had provided bags that are slightly larger than specified (40" x 46-3/4"), exceeding the minimum requirements, and slightly thicker with the MLS range from 2-4 MLS gauge thickness. The sample bags supplied by the low bidder appear to be thinner than the current bags. Ben Alexander, the Sanitation Supervisor, did a comparative test of the current bags and the sample bags from the low bidder commenting that "both bags did pretty good although the current bag did a lot better." He indicated, "the current bag held up to about 45 lbs. before it ripped, the other bag failed after putting close to 40 lbs. of waste into it." "Although it looks thinner, the proposed bag didn't perform all that bad."
Comparatively, the low bidder met the "preferred" overall bag size despite the fact the bag is shorter than 46" in length. Although the bags tested well for the expected l...

Click here for full text