BY JOHN BRICE
FOR THE LAFAYETTE SUN
LANETT — The Lanett City Council held a special work session Monday, Nov. 9, to cover agenda items it ran out of time to discuss at its previous work session.
The council first briefly discussed a land lease agreement that would allow Point Broadband to build a small structure near the city’s water tower. The company would pay the city $3,600 a year, with a 3% annual increase.
Council members then debated whether to advance with ClearWater Solutions, the only company to bid on a project to fix the city’s water meters.
Mayor Jamie Heard outlined how the process reached this point.
“ClearWater had talked to us over a month ago and gave us a price for what they would do,” Heard said. “It was requested that we advertise, and we did on the website and the local paper. The bid opened last week, and we only had one bid — ClearWater Solutions.”
District 3 Council Member Brad Lynn raised concerns about the bidding process and the cost to the city. He said ClearWater’s bid matched the price the company originally proposed: about $5,000 in base and travel costs, which he said could rise, plus $58 per meter. He said with 2,500 to 3,000 meters in the city, the total could exceed $150,000.
Lynn added the bid still includes changing out the meters, even though he understood from Water Superintendent Richard Chapman that ClearWater would handle the changeouts, so that cost should come out of the bid.
“In my opinion, by doing this and not advertising outside of the local area, the only bid we got was [from] the people who already knew about it,” Lynn said.
He said the city still has no competing bids, which state municipal officials require before a city can award a contract to a single source.
District 1 Council Member Denise Zachery said ClearWater had already helped the city at no charge.
“ClearWater has come in. We were struggling, trying to find out where the problem was. … They went through all of the process to get where we are now and didn’t charge us,” Zachery said. “Once we get them right, the revenue is going to come, and we are going to be compensated in the long run. I don’t see starting over.”
District 5 Council Member Kim Roberts agreed, saying the city loses $50,000 to $60,000 for every month the project is delayed.
“My concern is the money that we have lost. To me, this $148,000 is not that much when we are talking $2 million,” Roberts said. “City employees are not trained to go out there and change these meters. We have got to depend on somebody that understands these meters.”
