At the March 14 regular meeting of the Calhan Board of Trustees, Bill Louis, an attorney representing the Calhan Chamber of Commerce made an official request to change the townís procurement code. Louis said a bid process for the buildout of the townís pavilion prompted the request.Cindy Tompkins, Calhan town clerk, said the town made two attempts to secure bids in May, June and July of 2015 for the construction of the pavilion. The bids were published in the Ranchland News and the Gazette, she said.According to the projectís bid tabulation sheet, the town received bids from Medvolt, LLC, T-Bone Construction Inc., and Ransom Construction Inc. The bid amounts were $293,742, $290,230 and $248,419, respectively.In a separate interview with the NFH, Louis said the town had initially sent the project out for bid as two phases: phase I was the pavilion and phase II was the cover for the pavilion, and any other improvements. Tony Romano, senior project manager for Ransom Construction, said his company submitted their bid for both phases, after working on it for two weeks.Although his bid came in the lowest, Romano said no one from the town called.A few months later, Romano said he found a second request for a bid for the pavilion project posted on the Internet. He then reworked his bid based on the specification changes that had been made to the project design. Louis said the changes to the design eliminated phase II. Romano settled on a second bid of $205,767 for phase I only. ìThe problem is, the town only had $100,000 for the project,î Louis said. ìBut in the first advertisement, there was nothing in the invitation to bid stating that the budget was limited to $100,000. The bid request went out for a second time, and that time the advertisement announced the town only had a $100,000 budget.îOn April 15, 2014, the El Paso County Board of County Commissioners and the EPC Community Development Advisory Board granted the townís application for the Community Development Block Grant for $100,000. Louis said the money was all the town had available to complete the project.Romano said he attended the second bid opening at the Calhan town hall and was the only bidder there. ìI did not understand where the $100,000 budget came from and why I had bid the project twice and basically wasted my time,î he said.Louis said the second bid request was contradictory because it listed the limit of $100, 000 for the project, although the specifications for phase I were the same. ìBut there was no way to get this project built for $100,000 using those professionally prepared specifications,î he said.Tompkins then called a local contracting firm and asked if they could bid, Louis said. However, the contractor did not bid on the original specifications; instead, the contractor created his own specifications, Louis said. According to the proposal, the aforementioned contractor was B & N Construction Inc.The project was awarded to B & N Construction in the amount of $123,187.58. And the roof as part of phase II, eliminated on the second round of bidding, was included in B & N specs.According to the Colorado Secretary of Stateís website and B & N Constructionís proposal, the company is owned by Brad and Nancy Helton. Nancy Helton also works as the assistant town clerk for the town of Calhan.ìHere is the problem: There is no provision in the procurement code for the clerk to call another contractor and give him the authority to bid a completely different set of specifications; in this case, his own specifications,î Louis said. ìI do not actually know why the clerk was involved. Section 2.3 of the code states that the public works director is responsible for procuring real property and facilities.îCameron Chaussee, a member of the Calhan Board of Trustees, said the board received a total of four separate bids for the pavilion, three of which seemed too high cost-wise. ìThen low and behold, there was one in our wheelhouse,î he said. ìWe did not question why it was that low, and I think that something we have learned to do when there is such a big outlier like that is to ask more questions.îChaussee said the board did not know the contract had been awarded to a construction company that represented a conflict of interest. Tompkins did not tell the board that her assistant clerkís husband owned the company, he said.Tomkins refused to further comment on the situation.ìIn my opinion only, the board made the best decision we could with the resources we had at hand,î Chaussee said. ìI know that we are pretty conscious of our budget at all times, and we just wanted to give back to the citizens and take advantage of something that was a positive thing.îThe chamber has proposed changes to the procurement code to prevent another situation like this from happening again, Louis said. ìIf you are going to pick up the phone and call someone (for a bid), make sure that the policy says you have to call at least three bidders; and make sure they are all bidding on the same thing.î
