Livingston council tables $1.41 million arsenic‑filtration contract pending itemized bid breakdown

On Aug. 19, 2025, the Livingston City Council voted to table action on a $1,408,672 contract award for green‑sand filtration equipment to treat arsenic at Well 8A and directed staff to obtain an itemized breakdown of the winning bid before bringing the item back to the council.

Council members said the project — intended to reduce arsenic levels in the city's water supply — is an urgent public‑health priority but expressed concern that the low bidder did not provide the same level of line‑item detail shown in other bids. Council member RuPaul, who pulled the item from the consent list, said the staff report supplied no breakdown of the $1.4 million figure: "we are provided 0 detail on exactly what's making up this 1,400,000 cost." He said he wants the vendor to provide an itemized scope so city experts can judge whether the equipment and services are reasonably priced.

City Manager Jose Antonio Ramirez told the council staff has requested the additional detail from the vendor and may be able to present it to council in a special meeting or on the next regular agenda. "We don't know exactly how long it's gonna take them. However, we did put in that request, and we're hopeful that we're gonna get it," Ramirez said. He added the city has some time to encumber the funding because a portion of the project is paid with American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds; staff said at least half the project cost is from ARPA and needs to be encumbered this fiscal year.

The staff report identified the recommended award as to LaCrest, a division of Water Remediation Technologies LLC, for the total bid amount of $1,408,672. Council members asked staff to require the same procurement transparency — an itemized materials and services list — that was provided by other contractors in separate bids (the packet included a detailed quote from a contractor identified as TBS, and a different bidder's scope of supply appearing on another page). One council member noted the city's engineers'estimate was close to the recommended bid but said "process matters," and that council should require comparable detail from all bidders.

After discussion, Council member RuPaul made a motion to bring the item back when the requested itemized breakdown is received; Mayor Pro Tem Samra seconded. The motion passed by a 4‑0 roll call vote.

Discussion (not decision) - Council debated procurement transparency and whether the absence of an itemized bid could allow contractors to place unspecified charges in lump‑sum bids. - Staff explained project scheduling: award is followed by engineering and design, then fabrication and procurement; those phases can carry work into 2026 so long as funds are encumbered this year.

Direction / next steps - Staff will request an itemized scope and cost breakdown from the awarded vendor (listed in the staff report as LaCrest, a division of Water Remediation Technologies LLC). - Council directed staff to return the item after receiving that breakdown; members signaled openness to a special meeting if the bidder provides the breakdown quickly.

Formal action - Motion to table the award and return with an itemized bid: passed 4‑0. The motion directed staff to obtain a detailed cost breakdown from the bidder before the council approves the contract.

The council did not approve the contract at this meeting; the award remains pending the additional documentation. Staff emphasized the city's intent to proceed expeditiously because some project funding comes from ARPA and must be encumbered by the end of the fiscal year.