HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/22/2023 - Telecommunications Minutes*** Proof of Publication ***
State of Iowa
Black Hawk County
Waterloo, City of - Legals
Accounts Payable
715 MULBERRY ST.
WATERLOO IA 50703
ORDER NUMBER 222688
The undersigned, being duly sworn, on oath, do depose and say that I
am an authorized employee of the Waterloo Cedar Falls Courier, that
The Waterloo Cedar Falls Courier is a weekly newspaper regularly
published and printed in the English language in the City of Waterloo,
Black Hawk County, Iowa, and has a general circulation in the said city
and county; and that I personally know that the notice, a true copy of
which is hereto affixed, was published in the Waterloo Cedar Falls
Courier on the following clays, to -wit:
Section: Legals
Category: 950 Legal Notice
PUBLISHED ON: 04/05/2023
TOTAL AD COST:
FILED ON:
258.88
4/5/2023
That the issues of said paper containing said notice were duly
circulated in the regular manner.
Notary Public j nizd"1r Said Cot ity
ANNE FOX
0 17- Commission Number 807163
My Commission Expires
October 24, 2023
* * *
Proof of Publication ***
TELECOMMUNICATIONS UTILITY
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Harold E. Getty Council Chambers
City Hall
March 22, 2023
4:00 p.m.
Members present: Batemon, Kurtenbach, Young, Van Fleet and Council Liaison Rob
Nichols.
Moved by Young seconded by Van Fleet that the Agenda, as proposed, be approved.
Voice -vote Ayes: Four. Motion carded.
1. Approval of Agenda.
Moved by Kurtenbach seconded by Bateman that the agenda, as proposed, be
approved. Voice -vote Ayes: Four. Motion carried.
2. Approval of Minutes.
Moved by Kurtenbach seconded by Young that the Minutes of March 8, 2023, as
proposed, be approved. Voice -vote Ayes: Four. Motion carved.
Mr. Kurtenbach raised questions about issues discussed previously. He requested
more details on where the federal dollars are being spent.
Courtney Violette, Magellan Advisors, stated that the current funding sources for the
project which are ARPA, GO bonds and revenue bonds, there is a required
Davis -Bacon for either distribution or the backbone portion of the project. There is an
outstanding application with the NTIA for a grant which could fund the backbone
portion. As of now, that grant has not been awarded and those funds are not part of
this project.
Mr. Kurtenbach questioned the contractor registration language in the bid documents
that was to be added, but does not appear to be so.
Steve Nadel, Ahlers and Cooney, clarified on the first question and as he recollects,
that as the bid documents are currently drafted, they are based on the assumption that
the grant will not be received.
3. Public hearing on Not to Exceed $60,000,000 Communications Utility Revenue
Capital Loan Notes.
3.1. Motion to open hearing and receive and file proof of publication of notice of public
hearing.
Moved by Young seconded by Kurtenbach, Voice -vote Ayes: Four. Motion carried.
3.2. RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT - No comments on file. No members of the pubic
provided comments.
3.3. Motion to close hearing and file any comments received.
Moved by Young seconded by Bateman. Voice -vote Ayes: Four. Motion carried.
3.4. Resolution instituting proceedings to take additional action for the authorization of
a Loan Agreement and the issuance of not to exceed $60,000,000 Communications
Utility Revenue Capital Loan Notes.
Steve Nadel, Ahlers and Cooney, provided an overview of the legal requirements of the
procedural process to have the authority to issue up to $60,000,000 in revenue bonds.
Moved by Kurtenbach seconded by Young. Roll call -vote Ayes: Four. Motion carried,
Resolution No. 2023-005.
4. Resolution approving preliminary plans, specifications, form of contract, etc.,
resetting date of bid opening as April 13, 2023, and date of public hearing as April 19,
2023, in conjunction with the FY2023 Construction of a Fiber -to -the -Premise Feeder
/Distribution and Backbone Network Project, Contract No. 1080, and direct the Board
Secretary to publish notice.
Moved by Young seconded by Bateman. Roll call -vote Ayes: Four. Motion carried.
Resolution No. 2023-006.
Mr, Kurtenbach commented that there was an issue dealing with contractor
qualifications that would be included in the bid documents. He shared that he did not
know if that was on the city to get those changes included or the consultant. He
requested to know if the qualifications was Included in the bid document and if so
where it was located, as he is not seeing it.
Courtney Violette explained that he would need to go back and review as he was under
the impression that all requested changes were included.
Mr. Kurtenbach clarified mat it is specifically the contractor qualifications he was
looking for.
Courtney Violette questioned if there was a process that the city uses to validate
contractor qualifications.
Jamie Knutson, City Engineer, explained that requiring contractor registration is not
something that the city has included in the thirty -years he has worked with the city.
Contractors provide bonds and insurance among other things.
Steve Nadel commented there are some limitations in public sector bidding on what
can be requested regarding qualifications. He is unsure if this falls under the same
limitations, but it is possible that it was excluded Intentionally.
Jamie Knutson concurred and explained that when the bid is in, they will look at the
contractor and if the city has not worked with them before they will have them fill out
paperwork to ensure they are a responsible bidder. He added that an attorney with
Ahlers and Cooney did go through the bid specs and no change on this matter was
requested by them.
Mr. Voung clarified that the concern is that we do not want to have someone who has
no experience or a bad track record win the bid He requested clarification that we do
have a check or fail safe to go through during the bidding process to ensure that the
low bidder meets certain requirements to do this job.
Jamie Knutson confirmed.
Courtney Violette added that they will make sure that the contractors are qualified to do
the job. He explained that there are performance and bid bonds that typically weed out
some of the smaller fly-by-night contractors. There is the added requirement that not
more than fifty -percent be sub -contractors.
Mr. Kurtenbach questioned if the contractor and subcontractors would be pre -qualified.
Courtney Violette concurred.
Jamie Knutson explained that the city only has an agreement with the prime contractor,
not the subs.
Mr. Kurtenbach commented that this is the reason for the concern. He stated that the
city has already dealt with a contractor underperfomring on a project and he doesn't
want to see that again. He questioned if the qualifications are determined before or
after the bid is awarded.
Jamie Knutson confirmed that occurs prior to awarding the bid.
Mr. Kurtenbach questioned the seven-day timeline and if that was included in the bid
documents.
Courtney Violette explained this would be in the timeline of the bid documents.
Jamie Knutson commented that typically the city has up to 30 days to award the
contract.
Steve Nadel shared that the answer could be found kr the notice to bidders which will
indicate the date when bids are due and when the bids will be considered. The time
between the two dates is when the low bidder would be vetted.
Mr. Kurtenbach questioned if this is something that should or should not be asked in
the bid documents.
Jamie Knutson explained that this has never been done in thirty -years. He commented
that this would be something that can be discussed and reviewed with the city attorney.
Mr. Kurtenbach commented that we had a contractor doing a large concrete project
and was listed in contractor registration as a sole proprietor. He questioned how a sole
proprietor does not having more people working for him to do that much concrete work,
Jamie Knutson commented that he would welcome a conversation on this to gather
specifics. If there is something that is going on that we are doing or not doing, or a
concern with a particular contractor, we can address that separately.
Steve Nadel questioned if there is a plan for construction monitoring and management.
Courtney Violette that the City or Waterloo approved a new contract with them in
January that included project management services. Magellan will have one
construction manager and one additional inspector at all times during construction.
Jamie Knutson explained that the contractor has to post a bond for the entire cost of
the project and if the contractor fails the bonding company has to complete the project.
He added that only once in thirty years has it happened when a contractor failed.
Mr. Kurtenbach expressed his serious concerns of over discrepancies in prior
***
Proof of Publication ***
a mueuu moue ru ups OU.Ittwniyeiau m mwe Malt. wm9u n - mu mar nit
needs an answer moving forward to the question being asked in future bid documents.
Mr. VanFleet questioned if there is anything in the evaluation process that needs to be
included.
Mr. Kurtenbach commented that once the low bidder and their subcontractors have
been identified, that information should be shared with the Board so we can look up
those names to see it they are registered and to ensure they are answering the
questions correctly for the size of the project we are looking at.
Mr. Batemon questioned it this would be done through a modification of statement of
qualifications.
Mr. Kurtenbach commented that this is what he thought was going to happen based on
a previous conversation.
Mr. Young requested an update on the Middle -Mile Grant.
Courtney Violette commented there are no updates as of yet but are hoping to hear
something by the end of the week.
Mr. Van Fleet commented that the liquidated damages dollar amount seems to be low
ff the contractor is delayed. He questioned if the board is comfortable with that dollar
amount.
Courtney Violette commented that there was a legal component discussed to what was
allowable for liquidated damages.
Steve Nadel commented that he is aware that there are legal limitations, but he is
unsure of what those are.
Jamie Knutson commented that generally you have to show actual damage and it is for
a certain amount of time or money. He stated that he has one going on right now and it
is costing the contractor $1,000 per day because that is what is costing the city to
provide additional engineering inspections for that project.
Mr. Kurtenbach commented that is a double-edged sword as he knows several
contractors that have been reluctant to do work with the city due to the potential for lost
damages.
Mr. Van Fleet commented that he Is looking at page 3 of 6 of the notice to bidders. He
stated that he is excited to see construction starting In June. He questioned why it is
not broken down by phase by year.
Courtney Violette commented that the phases will be broken into task orders for the
contractors as They make progress on the project as opposed to rolling out an entire
phase at once.
Mr. Van Fleet questioned if that was standard practice.
Courtney Violette explained it is more of 8 need to manage the project in its complexity.
Moved by Young seconded by Batemon. Roll call -vote Ayes: Four. Motion carried.
Resolution No. 2023-006.
5. Motion establishing the position of General Manager and approving he general form
of a job description and compensation package for said position.
The board and Kelley Felchle, Board Secretary, discussed how the process of posting
and hiring for the position.
Steve Nadel commented that the issuance of bonds will be used for working capital.
Until rates are set, the city can front money then be reimbursed on back end.
Mr. Kurtenbach questioned 8 a 28E Agreement is needed. And once hired, where will
this person's office he.
Mr. Van Fleet explained that he has had a conversation with Randy Bennett about this
and he has offered space at the Public Works facility. He also mentioned fueling trucks
and utilizing mechanics out of that facility as well to help prevent us from starting from
scratch.
Courtney Violette commented that he and Randy also spoke on the matter as well.
There will be a number of operational things that will need to be corroborated with the
city.
Mr. Van Fleet commented that they would really like to get this person hired by June 1.
He will be out of country for the entire month and will return on June 301h. He also
commented that there may be some bullet points with regard to physical demands that
may not be applicable to the General Manager that were left in the current document
that will need to be removed.
Kelley Felchle explained that the document is the final that was provided by Human
Resources and that the physical demands are likely necessary. She added that if there
are any changes needed following tonight's discussion, she can work with Human
Resources.
Mr. Bateman questioned if the title for the position would be Fiber Director of General
Manager.
The board members discussed options for the title. The title of General Manager of
Telecommunications was accepted by the board.
Rob Nichols questioned if the name of this organization has been finalized.
Mr. Van Fleet explained that the board has been working to condense the name down
to two words — Waterloo Fiber. He noted that a preliminary logo has been created
which says locally owned and operated, which is a huge differenhator between us and
the competition.
Moved by Young seconded by Batemon. Voice -vote Ayes: Four. Motion carried.
6. Motion appointing Kelley Felchle as Board Secretary.
Moved by Kurtenbach seconded by Young. Voice -vote Ayes: Four. Motion carried.
7. Motion adopting an official seal of the Waterloo Telecommunications Utility Board of
Trustees.
Moved by Young seconded by Batemon. Voice -vote Ayes: Four. Motion carried.
8. General update from consultants and board member comments.
Steve Nadel commended the board for a great discussion today and noted that the
engagement of this board is very beneficial.
With no further business before the board, it was proved by Kurtenbach seconded by
Young that the meeting be adjourned at 5:06 p.m. Voice -vote Ayes: Four. Motion
carried.
Kelley Felchle
Board Secretary