Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Stevensville council rescinds approval, tables Trojan UV service contract pending scope and cost clarifications
Summary
After extended discussion about scope, parts, travel costs and what counts as "routine maintenance," the Town of Stevensville council rescinded a prior motion to approve a service contract with Trojan Technologies and voted to table the contract until staff can clarify airfare, routine-visit inclusions and parts/repair costs.
The Town of Stevensville council rescinded a prior motion to approve a service contract with Trojan Technologies LLC for maintenance of the wastewater plant’s ultraviolet (UV) disinfection system and then voted to table the contract while staff obtains further details on scope, travel and repair costs.
Council members debated whether the one-time repair and a five‑year maintenance option clearly covered airfare, on‑site time and parts. Council member Barker initially moved to approve the contract with Trojan; Council member Smith seconded. After questions from several council members and from Public Works Director Steven Lasser about diagnostics, replacement parts and how “routine maintenance” is defined in the contract, the council moved to rescind the approval and then to table the item.
Why it matters: The town’s UV system is the final disinfection step at the wastewater plant. Staff said one bank of the two-banks system has been offline for more than a year because the second bank will not reach required intensity when it attempts to switch on. Lasser and operations staff said local maintenance has not restored automatic cycling and that the manufacturer, Trojan, has not previously provided an on‑site professional visit since installation. If the problem persists, staff warned, reuse/effluent levels could exceed limits and trigger regulatory action.
Most of the council’s substantive questions centered on what Trojan’s proposed service covers and what would be billed separately. Council discussion and staff comments included these points from the meeting record: "1 charge from charging was $3,600" for a one‑time visit, a quoted five‑year option that reduced per‑visit cost to about $16.50 (stated in the discussion as a per-visit or annual figure in the contract language), and an hourly rate of about $315 for additional time beyond an initial on‑site block. Public Works Director Steven Lasser said Trojan can perform diagnostics, and that if parts are required the cost and the buyer’s responsibility are addressed in the contract but may be invoiced separately.
Council members emphasized training and knowledge transfer: if Trojan comes on site, staff want Trojan to run diagnostics in front of operations staff so the town can perform future troubleshooting. Several members also asked whether the quoted five‑year price includes airfare and travel; the contract language presented to the council was unclear, and staff agreed to confirm whether air travel and associated expenses are included in the five‑year option.
After discussion, Council member Anderson moved to rescind the earlier approval. The motion to rescind passed by voice vote with the clerk recording ayes and the chair announcing "motion passes 4 to 0." Council later moved to table the contract pending clarifications; that tabling motion passed 4 to 0.
Next steps: Council directed staff to get written clarifications from Trojan (including whether airfare is included, what the "routine maintenance" visits cover, and how parts and emergency visits are charged) and to check prior engineering notes from HDR about the system’s history. The council will revisit the contract at a later meeting once those answers are available.
