Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Philomath council directs manager to sign utility-rate study contract after seven-day protest period
Summary
Council approved execution of a utility rate study contract with the apparent low bidder after a procurement review; councilors questioned scope differences between proposers and staff said five proposals were received and one high scorer removed a cost-of-service analysis.
Philomath’s City Council on Jan. 27 directed the city manager to execute a contract for a utility rate study with the firm identified in the motion as Raptellus following the seven-day protest period.
The council made the decision after staff described the procurement process and evaluation. The finance staff said five proposals were received and that the evaluation committee — which included finance and public-works staff and the assistant city manager — ranked proposals using a matrix. "We received 5 responses," finance staff said in describing the RFP process, and reported that one proposer later revised its scope and removed a cost-of-service analysis.
Councilors asked whether the lower price reflected omitted tasks. Councilor Andrade pressed staff to clarify "what was missing and whether or not they were still under or over budget," and finance staff answered that some firms proposed fewer meetings and that one firm had removed the cost-of-service analysis from its revised scope. Staff told the council the apparent low cost proposal was $77,000.
Councilor Nielsen moved to direct the city manager to execute the contract "with Raptellus following the 7 day protest period," and Councilor Crocker seconded. The presiding officer called for the vote; the motion was recorded as passing unanimously.
What the vote does and next steps: the city manager will execute the contract after the statutory protest window; staff said the study is scheduled to begin in mid‑February with an aim to produce a report prior to the June budget process so that the council may consider rate changes informed by the study. Staff also flagged that some numbers in the study may remain projections until certain treatment‑plan decisions are finalized.
Public financial detail and scope: staff confirmed the committee identified differences in scope between proposers, including the cost-of-service analysis. The council discussed using staged rate changes and additional outreach to residents as staff implements results from the study.
The contract execution was a formal council action recorded on the meeting minutes; there was no recorded dissent on the motion.
