Minutes 1955 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

377 In an explanation of the overdraft for Weed Abatement, Auditor Brophy explained this item is a carry -over from one fiscal year to another, charges for this year to be collected in the next fiscal year. The explanation for insurance (contractor's equip- ment) was to the effect that heavy contracting equipment is carried under a floating policy at'a rate lower than other automotive equipment. The money to cover this item II was left out of the Budget through an oversight. Councilman Spillers offered RESOLUTION 1901 and moved adoption, seconded by Councilman Stout and carried on roll call, Councilman Britschgi noted absent. PROPOSED ANNEXATION HIGHLANDS TERRITORY NO. 4 (BACK OF SEQUOIA HOSPITAL). Communication II from Assistant City Attorney Lebsack indicates that petition was not signed by all property owners in the area nor has any "consent to taxation" been.received from the property owners. In the event such a Consent to Taxation is not received from all of the property owners and the Council desires to proceed without such consent, it will become necessary to establish a special tax rate for this area for each year for the term of any outstanding bonds now issued or for the bonds now authorized but not yet issued. Councilman Granger commented on the Williams' property which is not included in this proposed area. Mr. Williams had indicated previously that he might be interested in annexation, however, it developes that he does not care to come in at the present time. It also appears that a Mr. Erich W. Faust, who is located in the area, refuses to sign the petition. Therefore, it appears unlikely that the Consent of Taxation is possible. Mr. A„chie Miller, one of the signers of the petition, stated that Mr. Faust had been contacted and would not sign petition nor consent. After further discussion, Councilman Stout moved that the matter be held over to the meeting of July 25, the City Manager to assign to someone the task of contacting Mr. Faust in an effort to secure his signature to the petition and the Consent. Motion seconded by Councilman Jones and carried. REPORT OF BID OPENING, FIRE TRUCK. Councilman Granger moved that matter be held over to meeting of July 25 and that letter received from American LaFrance Corporation be made a matter of record. Motion seconded by Councilman Spillers and carried. "In response to your call for bids covering a fire engine, you received five bids. Out of these five bids only two bidders complied with your request; that is, if a bidder deviated from the specifications, you requested that they list their de- viations. American LaFrance and Seagrave listed their deviations while the other bidders did not. Each one of the other bidders were quoting on the 935 Hall Scott and all of them shared a different net horsepower for the Hall Scott Enginee -- from 260 to 266. Your specifications called for 270 net H. P. They did not meet III your specifications. Why didn't the bidders of the Hall Scott list this as a de- viation? They could have met you net H. P. requirements by quoting on the Hall Scott 1091. The only major deviation we have taken is the cubic inch of our engine. We offer a 290 net H. P. with a 325 gross H. P. This exceeds your specifications by 20 net H. P. With this engine we exceed the performance of any other piece of apparatus offered in conjunction with this bid. It is very simple to prove this if you will take the maximum torque as shown an any bidder's power curve and multiply it by the rear III axle ratio. : You will then leave. the ` maximum . foot 'pound torque available to drive your rear axle. Some bidders will state they can place any rear axle ratio in the apparatus. This is an incorrect statement as they are limited by the design of their engine. Crown, Van Pelt and Seagrave have listed their rear axle ratio as well as American LaFrance. We have offered to you the best possible price and what we consider the low bid in connection with legitimate bidders. American LaFrance nor any other manufacturer can compete with bidders like Coast Apparatus, as they state they will furnish something in their specifications and when they deliver the apparatus they furnish something different, hoping it will not be discovered. I have specific reference to the deal they recently pulled in Sacramento.