I think everybody would agree that the primary contact was Ewing Cole, at least from our standpoint it was. And they asked, you know, they asked us for pricing and we provided them pricing; they asked us for a specific, you know, rotation conversion schedule and we provided that to them.
You heard about the pricing? Do you have a comment on $13 a square?
In terms of process, you received something in writing opening up the bid process.
You received a phone call; you never received anything in writing.
And consequently, you never received any information 106 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 about the specs in writing.
At the end of, I will now say, "the alleged process," did you receive anything in writing indicating that you were not the awardee?
No. It was probably the single thing that bothered us the most because we did put a lot of time into it, and I actually had to call Ewing Cole to find out who was awarded the job. We heard, but I wanted to confirm it with them.
Did any of you receive anything in writing indicating that the process had reached closure and a judgment had been reached on who the awardee would be? How were the other testifiers informed?
Councilor Brown, last year, leading up to approximately this time in the year, we attempted to contact City Council. We were doing everything we could, 'cause we also had heard that an award or a contract was going to be issued, and I believe there were quite a few letters sent by Mr. Fineman's office about it. And, again, this is quite astonishing to 107 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 me to hear today that while we were going through that effort to try and to find out what was going on 'cause we couldn't get any calls back from Ewing Cole, not in writing, not voicemail or anything, it's astonishing to hear that, in fact, the contract had been let and have to hoar about it here. One year later.
And just so the record is clear, there was a period of time, so I don't know want -- Mr. McCabe's probably back there chomping at the bit since he and I have been adversaries on other occasions, but he's a good lawyer. There was a period of time where I was retained by Mr. Gilman's firm, and we did find out that the City had put out a no-bid contract, and we did make an objection to the City of Philadelphia that we thought that that was an inappropriate procedure. And we did receive a response from the City. And that all is part, I believe, of the City Controller's report, but it is certainly part of the public record.
Madam Chair. I'd like to follow up. You described a process where your primary contact back and forth 108 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 for all of you appeared to be Ewing Cole. In your business experience -- since the City of Philadelphia was your customer, is it the norm that the engineering firm be that contact, or would normally a procurement department somehow be involved?
Yes. Very often, you will deal with an architectural firm as your primary contact. You normally have some contact with the purchaser. In this case, both the Eagles and the Phillies were not the purchasers; they were the users. So it was quite unique that there was no 14 contact with the purchaser.
And we all heard that the Procurement Department -- basically the Commissioner said that he handled this personally but had never had any direct contact with any of you; you already answered that for the record.
All of the information that we have provided on both pricing, you know, conversion schedules, I ultimately saw that information, or portions of that information, had been taken and worked into Ewing Cole's report to the City.
You all did -- you did 109 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 submit a price?
I believe it's in the packet of information that we provided previously. I don't have it in front of me but I want to tell you that it was somewhere in the $3 million range.
Well, understand, that was a price to install the field and then do all of the conversions during the course of, you know, the season.
FieldTurf, can you share a price with us? How much was it a square foot? Pull out all the extras and get right to the square foot.
Well, all right. Thank you, Councilor Rizzo, for asking that specific question. And, Councillor Nutter, I think you'll be glad to hear that this leader of the company, I do know my prices and I know my prices on every single deal 110 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 just about. We sell and install product for $5 a square foot, give or take to 50 cents. And that 5 25 to 50 cents a square foot sometimes is made up of 6 increases or decreases, depending on the user of 7 whether they want hash marks inlaid, logos in the 8 end zones, logos at center field, things of that 9 nature. That's what changes the price. 10 But the price for FieldTurf is 11 approximately $5 a square foot. The Seattle 12 Seahawks are paying approximately $5 a square foot 13 for their new stadium that they're in the middle of 14 construction right now. And that will be a 15 convertible field because they'll have Major League 16 soccer playing in that stadium along with the 17 Seahawks. 18 The Detroit Lions will be playing on 19 FieldTurf next year, and that is at $5 a square 20 foot. They are also attempting to get a Major 21 League soccer team in there and that will be a 22 convertible system, one that we have guaranteed that 23 they will convert within eight hours from football 24 to soccer. 25 I'll grant you, converting to baseball 111 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 with baseball dirt cutouts is a little bit more difficult and a little bit more expensive, but our price is essentially $5. We bid somewhere in the range of $1.4 million. Now, $5 a square foot times about 135 or 145,000 square feet doesn't get you to 1.4, but you have a problem here. We're not competing apples to apples or anything even near. We weren't told exactly what had to be done, we weren't told what we read later on about the limited amount of work that the Southwest Recreational people would actually be doing. In our $1.4 million bid, it included all of the conversion, as I stated before, with almost all of the people and all of the labor being our people, just using some extra labor to do some of the heavy grunt work, but not to do any of the technical work. All the technical staff for each of the conversions would be done by FieldTurf. Another factor in our 1.4 million, and somebody can do the math. I believe that we were asked to do 12 conversions a year. Now, I can't remember specifically how much we factored in the 12 112 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 conversions a year, but I can tell you that if you take the amount of square footage and multiply it by $5, and it's 135, 145,000 square feet, I believe, inside the stadium and you're up to about $700,000, a little less, the balance of it was made up to do conversions -- not 3, 12. And that's how our 8 price got to be what it was, with us doing it all, 9 not apples to apples. 10
And you did not have 11 the information to do -- you didn't know we didn't 12 truly need 12 conversions or -- in other words, you didn't have the data that the other companies didn't have either, right?
We were summarily thrown out of the process. And when I did get the opportunity to read the Ewing Cole report and listen to the testimony last time, again, I would say it's astonishing and I could use words like "it's a joke" to have our product, which has gained the kind of worldwide acceptance around the world to be summarily thrown out as something just like that 113 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 when the NeXturf product had not been on the market. Mr. Seaton stated that PGE Park in Portland, Oregon had been done and he left the impression that it had been done prior to the Phillies. No. They got the contract for PGE Park in Portland, Oregon after Veterans Stadium was issued to them. They used the Veterans Stadium contract as a selling tool to get other contracts for NeXturf. The same goes for the University of Oregon Odeson (ph) Stadium. Based on the fact that the Veterans Stadium people issued a contract for NeXturf, they were given the contract for Odeson Stadium and they were given the contract for PGE Park. And by the way, I have newspaper articles here. Guess what? PGA Park had a problem with its drainage.
Before you finish your testimony, I would like you to go back and just make sure that I'm understanding clearly about whose turf and what turf is in Jack Russell Stadium, 'cause I believe I heard today, and I'm going to check my notes, that another product --
Councilman, Jack Russell 114 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 Stadium is a grass field. Jack Russell Stadium has been there for, I don't know, as long as -- you know, I'm about 50-some years old now. You know, the Phillies have been playing at Jack Russell Stadium for some period of time. It's a grass field. What was constructed, having been there, seen it with my eyes, walked on the field, what was constructed is outside of Jack Russell field, in essence, in the back of Jack Russell field, is an infield, just an infield. You couldn't play baseball on there, you couldn't play a little league game in that area -- maybe you could play a little league game. There is a small area that is an infield. The infield is constructed from NeXturf.
I wish to expand on that, on Jack Russell Stadium. It is -- as David Fineman said, it isn't a stadium, it's just an infield. Ruben Amaro requested the need to have the same product put down at Clearwater so that their infielders could get used to playing on the field that would be chosen to be put into Veterans Stadium. There was also a need to make people like Scott Rollin happy. Scott 115 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 Rollin was very unhappy playing on the old Astroturf field; he stated it many times in newspaper reports over and over again. So there was a need by the Phillies to have the field that would be in Veterans Stadium in the practice area down in Clearwater. There was also -- it was also told to me that the exact same surface had to be put in to Clearwater, and I'm segregating Clearwater from Jack Russell, so that they could make sure that it's the exact same field. There's a little bit of three-card Monte going on here. What's in Veterans Stadium is not the same product that is outside of Jack Russell Stadium. I went there myself, the morning after the Super Bowl, when this infield outside the stadium was being installed. What the vendor did, what Southwest Recreational did to satisfy Ruben Amaro's needs and the Phillies' needs to have an infield was, they went to this infield outside of Jack Russell Stadium, it had Astroturf. They removed the old Astroturf on top of a big, thick pad -- a big, thick pad -- and they put down NeXturf. I was there. I watched them do it. 116 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 And you know what else I did? They threw samples in a waste bin, and I took the cuts out of the waste bin, and I took them back with me, and I sent them to a lab in Dalton, Georgia, and you know what? The carpet outside the stadium at Jack Russell is a different carpet than what you got in Veterans Stadium. Maybe that's the reason it's all bleached out. It's a different carpet, different fiber.
Are you suggesting that we got something differently than we specked?
That's speculation. All I can state is what I saw. We were told that we had to put in the same carpet outside of Jack Russell Stadium as what would go into the Vet, and what you have is different.
We'll check on that. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you very much. I would like to check with my colleague Councilman Michael Nutter. Do you have any questions for this panel? 117 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533
Madam Chair, I think given the nature of some of the testimony that we've heard, my questions at the moment would probably be for, at a minimum, Ewing Cole, possibly the City. I'd like to better understand, as you've characterized it, Madam Chair, as "the alleged process" and get some clarity on some of the issues that have been raised. I don't have any questions for the moment of the current panel.
And depending on what comes out of the next group. I may need to have them back.
Very well. Gentlemen, if you would please recess to your chairs, we would like to invite up representatives of Ewing Cole. I too have questions for our procurement commissioner, Mr. Applebaum. If you would please report to the panel, please. Yes, sir, Mr. Griffith.
Pardon me, Madam Chair. Jim Griffith for Southwest Recreational. You did offer us five minutes to follow 118 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 up. We are not going to have any follow-up questions.
We'll be pleased to do that after we've heard from Ewing Cole and Mr. Applebaum.
I appreciate it, but we don't have any follow-up. My clients, however, do have a plane to catch so they will be leaving and we thank you for your time today.
My clients have a plane to catch and we thank you for your time here today.
Excuse me, Councilwoman, there was another chart that we wanted to make as part of the record. These are the projects for 2000-2001 FieldTurf.
We will accept that for the record. And Councilman Rizzo, do you have follow-up questions for this panel?
So we'll ask 119 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 Councilman Nutter to proceed with questions for this panel. Thank you, sir.
Thank you, thank you Madam Chair. Gentlemen, let me try to keep some of the players straight here and also refresh my recollection from the last time that we had the pleasure of your company. Tell me your name again.
Okay. With a last name like mine, I'm very sensitive to, you know, saying other people's names correctly. Now, last time you were here Mr. Pradeep, I did ask you some questions with regard to your role in all of this. Just very quickly refresh my memory. 120 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 You were the consultant for Ewing Cole on behalf of the City to oversee who the contractor was going to be on the installation of the turf; is that correct?
We had a contract with the Capital Program Office to do two-phase work related to Veterans Stadium playing field surface. The first phase was playing surface investigation, review and recommendation. And the second phase was preparing the construction documents and observation during the installation.
Okay. Now, my other recollection is that your firm has consulted on behalf of the City for previous conversions? Did you do work on a conversion project maybe in the '80s or in the early '90s?
We were involved in the conversion of the -- in the Astroturf8 installation, at the previous installation at the Veterans Stadium.
'95. And is that the 121 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 one that we were supposed to get seven years out of but it started showing wear and tear about Years 4 and 5?
Gotcha. Okay. Now, were you involved in the much-discussed -- I think we've now figured out it's not in Jack Russell Stadium, it's actually outside Jack Russel Stadium or near Jack Russell Stadium and the infield and any of that.
In addition to your work for the City, do you do work for the Phillies?
Yes, we are consultants for the Phillies for the new stadium. We are architectural consult for the Phillies for the new stadium.
For the new stadium, all right. And that will be grass; is that right? 122 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 That will be grass?
Now, you heard some of the testimony earlier. Is it true that there was virtually no contact with the other firms about the process that was going to be utilized to go through the bidding and the review? And did you actually interview all of the various firms that may have expressed an interest in this project?
Well, let me start with the process we went through, Councilman. As we had as we have stated in our proposal to the Capital Program Office, we say we will review several hard data from different suppliers. We will meet the representatives of several systems, natural grass as well as artificial turf. We will conduct the site visits (indiscernible) of some of the products which we believe we need to look at more. We will share 123 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 information with the City as well as the teams. And prepare a report of our finding for the Capital Program Office.
We looked at natural-grass products, we looked at combination of natural grass and artificial products.
I understand that. Where did you get the products, where did you get them from? Did you go to the people who make them or supply them?
We called the representatives, we had the product library in our office of several products.
Of the natural-grass product as well as the artificial product.
They sent the product 124 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 information to us. We talked on telephone to several of them. We also invited other product suppliers where we felt that it was a way to find out more information about the products in our office.
And we did go through the process. In our opinion, a very balanced process.
Okay. Answer this question: Did you meet with the principals or designated representatives in person of the various companies that supply the wide variety of products that may be applicable to this situation?
I did meet some of them, and my colleagues met some of them. I did meet the principal of FieldTurf, I did meet principal of Hummer Grass, I did meet with the principal of NeXturf.
Okay. And at what point did you decide that there was no reason to have either further meetings or discussions or get any additional information from any of the other 125 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 firms, with the exception of NeXturf?
And we got information from them. We met with Hummer Grass on several, more than one. We also visited their facility in Hershey.
So based on all of the product information we had and more questions asked from the teams -- we were not the only people involved. The team representatives from Eagles and Phillies --
-- as well as representative from stadium director office and Capital Program Office were working with us and in concert.
What did you tell them the process was going to be that would lead to a successful bid?
The first phase we were conducting, Councilman, is, we were looking at all of the product, compiling all the data, and our professional knowledge of Veterans Stadium facility 126 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 for a long time, we were determining the appropriateness of our product, which could be installed in the time schedule we had and all the other restraints of Veterans Stadium conditions we had and preparing a report following that.
And did you explain all of those items in details and what the components of your decision-making process and all of the elements that you would take in consideration to each of the firms when you met with them?
To the best of my knowledge, in the meetings we had specifically with FieldTurf as well as NeXturf, Astroturf, and Hummer Grass, we did explain that.
Did they have documents that laid out what the process is and what the expectation is and those kind of issues?
Our first phase was limited, Councilman, to the preparation of the report, and we were not going any further than the preparation of the report and making our recommendations with the 127 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 Capital Program Office.
I understand that; that's as it relates to the City. I'm asking you, what letter, document, memo, or any other form of communication was written out that said, It's nice to meet you, we have your product, this is the process that the City is going through in order to reach a conclusion that is good for the City and good for the teams. Tell me about that.
I -- We did -- we did not have any formal notification given to each supplier, if that's what the question is.
We were in an information-gathering mode and compiling and preparing our report, and that's what we did.
Let me say, with every respect, because, you know, unlike other people that have been at the table, you, I think, do legitimately try to answer questions and have a reasonable exchange. I mean, it's not like we were out buying peaches. This is a fairly large purchase for the City. 128 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533
What was the total price on this? What was the total price? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: It was approximately $1.8 million.
Okay. And I guess from my perspective, I mean, I've never obviously bought anything through the City system. I think the last thing I ever got was probably some business cards, and I talked to Mr. Applebaum about that many years ago and I haven't had a problem with that ever since. I mean, I guess it's just a little astounding that for a $1.8 million purchase, we wouldn't have the most detailed of documents and information to be handed to someone at a moment's notice to say, This is everything we expect from you, this is a process that we're going through. Were the potential bidders aware of exactly what your role was and what you would be doing in Phase and Phase 2, and if there was a Phase 3 or anything? I mean, I guess I'm trying to understand for such a not only a large purchase but, quite frankly, a very controversial purchase. I 129 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 mean, if you are rated as having the worst stadium in the United States of America for the National Football League, if you have the owner of the team, who at a previous point in time when, you know, maybe things weren't kind of going so well, with some of comments about the stadium, I mean, wouldn't you want to exercise the most incredible amount of caution and almost over-information about something like this?
Councilman, in our opinion, we did a thorough investigation, and our report, which you probably should have, in our opinion, was a very though report.
Well, then I guess I'm only left at the end to ask, if that's your view and you think you did everything you possibly could, and if we put aside for the moment any perspective that someone might have that -- the panel that was up at the table earlier, which I do not belive is just about, Well, we didn't get the job so we're upset about it. I'm really more concerned about the legitimate process issues, not just for this, but anything that we might do going forward. I mean, what is your response to the 130 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 statements that were made earlier about who knew what when and when they were informed of it? And, for instance, did anyone call the unsuccessful bidders directly and tell them that they were unsuccessful?
Well, I -- that was the next phase of the issue, and to the best of my knowledge, I believe it was the responsibility of the CPO to inform people formally.
The Capital Program Office who (indiscernible) from the successful bidders because we were only receiving information, we were receiving the -- we were responding to the questions, but all of the decision-making, the final decision-making, was really at the Capital Program Office and Procurement.
Who made the recommendation to the Capital Program Office? 131 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533
We made the professional recommendation to the Capital Program Office for the product and final determination of who the contract was going to be awarded to was made in the Capital Program Office and the Procurement Office.
Okay. I am compelled to follow up on Councilman Nutter's questioning around process. What is the procedure in your office? How do you notify prospective awardees that a bid us up for consideration? What's your SOP, standard operating procedure?
We did not notify the other product suppliers because this was -- this was a process which was a special process selected by the City and they were the one who were going to advise the successful or other people.
Recognizing that your office made the ultimate recommendation, what practices or provisions or contingencies do you put in place to ensure that the dissemination of information is pure and void of inconsistencies?
Are you asking that we had a process by which we had reviewed all of the product, 132 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 conducted with a fairness --
What I heard from those who were before you was that, A, phone calls were given -- phone calls were used as a means of communication versus what seems to be the practice of the department's prospective vendors get something in writing so that everyone is reading from the same sheet of music with regards to what the expectation and specs are. So again I ask the question, do you have in place in your practice when you're dealing with several different vendors, what do you do to ensure that all vendors are reading from the same sheet of music at the same time?
I'm Reeder Fox, counsel for Ewing Cole. I think we're perhaps getting mixed up between a request of Ewing Cole as a consultant to the City to go out and learn as much as they can about products that are available that could be used as a playing surface at the Vet versus a bid. Now, we're talking about going out and getting product information. That's what Ewing Cole did, and they submitted a report, and they submitted 133 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 a short list. After that, the City decides, are we going to send out requests for bid to those two firms? Are we going to single-source it? What are we going to do? Many of the questions you're both asking assume that they're bids, and I don't think that there's anything that really says that they were going out getting bids. Specifications relate really to bids.
All right. And -- (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)
This, in our view, is the best product, knowing what we know about the Vet and knowing what we found out about the product.
Allow me to redirect the question to the Procurement Commissioner. What practices or procedures do you have 134 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 in place to ensure that there is some consistency in information that's disseminated to those that want to do so business with the City of Philadelphia? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Well, obviously, you're speaking about our normal bid process. Under a normal bid process, specifications are put together in a bid package. They're advertised on the Web and they're mailed to various potential bidders.
Was that done with this? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: That was not done with this, but this is not a normal, regular competitive bid process. This was a -- they use the term "sole-source bid"; it was a sole-source procurement. We, the Procurement Department, the Capital Programs Office, the Recreation Department, and the teams relied upon a very complete and what we consider accurate report prepared by Ewing Cole. That was their program to report to us in details as to what their recommendation is as far as a new turf for Veterans Stadium.
Okay. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: They issued their 135 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 report and we asked additional questions, we had follow-up. And at the end of the day, the report and Ewing Cole recommended that we provide and we procure NeXturf for Vets Stadium. And that's what we did.
Can someone help me understand why -- when we heard from the others who were a part of the conversation that this was a business opportunity, they were not informed of the specs. Whose lap does that sit in to ensure that prospective individuals doing business with the City all receive consistent information on the specs? Whose responsibilities is that? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: This is the responsibility of our consultant who we hired to select for us the best possible product. They went out and they notified and spoke to all of these companies in their style, in their form, and they came back and reevaluated, visited. We had demonstrations of some of these products at Vets Stadium. And they put this all together and they studied it and made recommendations. You must recognize one important thing: 136 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 We're dealing in a situation where we might have disappointed bidders or disappointed companies. Everybody cannot come to the table and be awarded -- not everyone can be awarded the same project. We made a decision based on Ewing Cole's recommendation and we awarded the contract to NeXturf.
Was your recommendation one company, or was it a -- you said it was a short list. Define "short list." COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: There was many companies that they looked at, and they ended up putting in their report specifics about what they would consider the short list, but even with the short list, there was one product that they recommended for Vets Stadium, and that was NeXturf. And we acted on their report.
Then my question is -- COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Being in a position in the City, I would assume that all of us as professionals, if we spend money, we hire professional talent, and ask for professional services, and they do what we consider a thorough, 137 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 good job and report back to us. We would be negligent in our duties if we didn't study that report, question the report, and if we found nothing wrong with it, act on the recommendations. That's what we did. And I believe as responsible citizens, we did the right thing by acting on their recommendations.
I don't question at all the importance and value of bringing on experts around a particular matter. Again, I ask the question, when you presented your recommendation, was it one vendor or -- I need you to define "short list" separate from the product. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: It's in the report. It was one vendor.
It was one vendor. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: It was one make. The one vendor, Southwest, has two products: Astroturf12 and NeXturf. But it was -- so it was not Southwest, it was NeXturf.
Okay. What credit, what provisions, what considerations are given -- currently in the City of Philadelphia, what 138 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 provisions, what considerations are given to local companies, local businesses here is in the City of Philadelphia in the review or assessment process? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We are, under the law, precluded from making particular provisions for local companies.
I see. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Of course, we look to see local companies win. And in my mind local companies are Philadelphia companies that pay Philadelphia taxes, not Conshohocken or out-of-town companies.
Sure. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: But we are not permitted to allow that to enter into the decision under the current City Charter, under the current laws.
Commissioner, you heard the President of Southwest say that no one in this government asked them for any consideration for a credit towards the short life, and then he blamed the fact that we abused the playing surface by 139 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 pulling bleachers, running trucks over that playing surface. I can't imagine that we didn't ask for some consideration and defended the accusation that our maintenance people had some fault in the short life of that playing surface. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: It was my understanding on that issue that the original Astroturf8 that was installed had an estimated life, an estimated life warranty of seven years. I believe we got six years' use out of that. And when NeXturf presented their price to us for their product, they were to include and factor in a differential or a reduction due to that loss of year. But there was no credit asked for. It was a credit, it was my understanding, that was embedded in their price.
I did not detect that tonight in NeXturf's testimony. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: In discussing that with the Vets Stadium, with Greg Grillone, that's what we sort of come out of that.
Well, I think that that really needed to be spelled out in language that 140 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 there was some consideration given for that because the taxpayers of this city are certainly -- I think it would be interesting to know that that initial expenditure they made for an Astroturf8, that they deserve some consideration, whether it was a credit towards the new job, and tonight we're hearing from you that that is the case. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: It was my understanding that it was a slight reduction in their bottom price. Realize it might have been somewhat unfair, looking at it from the competitors' standpoint, if we would have favored them because of that one-year product, so that's the other edge of that.
Commissioner, I come from these hearings tonight with the distinct impression that SprinTurf, FieldTurf, and Hummer weren't treated very well, I'll be real candid with you. I heard tonight that there could have been a an adjustment made to their product to do exactly what NeXturf could have required. I didn't see any effort from Ewing Cole to try to work with these people and say, Look, here's what we need, can you provide us the -- can you come 141 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 up -- can you meet this specification? I heard three companies tonight tell me, tell this panel that they basically had nothing to work with, no 5 information. They were asked by Ewing Cole to -- and I almost chuckled when I heard "mail us your product." We're talking about close to a $2 million purchase and you think you're shopping at QVC. You know, the UPS guy shows up with the samples of the product. I don't believe Ewing Cole -- and, again, this is my impression, that they really worked hard with these other companies that weren't allowed to present their product to try to bring them on. I think that is also -- if we're paying a consultant, they also have a responsibility to try to get the City of Philadelphia the best buy and try to tweak a particular product to work. And what I'm hearing here from these three companies is that they possibly could have worked with Ewing Cole -- forget Ewing Cole for a moment -- worked with our consultant to make their products work. You heard about -- again, some of the vendors chuckled when they talked about the stands, that you couldn't roll the bleachers out over the 142 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 stands. When I saw the expression on their faces, I got the distinct impression that they could have dealt with that issue. So I'm coming from this hearing tonight thinking that these folks weren't treated very, very well. And I think that, unfortunately, our consultant didn't really try hard enough, in my opinion -- this is my opinion -- to get the best value for the taxpayers of the City of Philadelphia. And I'm hoping, going forward, that this whole process of sole-source changes in the City of Philadelphia and the way -- if we're focused on one particular product and exclude other people, these people spent a lot of money in trying to do business with the City of Philadelphia, and I think they got treated terribly. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Could I respond, Councilman?
Sure. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: I and you were not there or were not privy to what occurred during the presentations. If you read the report and look at it in detail that we received, there's indications in here that the companies -- particular 143 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 FieldTurf, Hummer Tiles -- were brought to Vets Stadium. We have pictures and you have it in your book, pictures of their product at Vets Stadium that worked, that they were working with Ewing Cole and other representatives to work on the product. So they were there. I and you were not privy to the conversations and what occurred there, but I know that we have bleachers that come out of the stadium, I'm familiar with that 'cause we just had to reinforce them and put in a lot of money to strengthen them. Those bleachers were there. The representatives from the various competitors, the companies that we saw today, were at Vets Stadium, and they saw the bleachers; it's not that they didn't see it. They knew the requirements. 'Cause they're in the business, they know more about it than you and I know. They were given every opportunity to meet the requirements, and in the report. All of the details are there, plus pictures. Here's a picture of the FieldTurf product laying at Vets Stadium. So they're acting and talking that they didn't have a shot. The reality is I think they 144 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 were there and --
That may have been the one that was received by UPS, I don't know that. I'm not sure how that sample got there. Commissioner, all I'm telling you is my impression of what I heard here today. I think Councilman Nutter made a comment -- and I don't mean to quote the Councilman, but I don't think this is all about sour grapes, I don't think this is entirely about losing. I think that from what I heard here at our first hearing and this hearing that this doesn't smell good. Thank you.
And I must admit that the crux of the problem is that there was conversation and discussion versus, again, at the very outset, what is provided to prospective vendors in writing with regards to specifics around a particular bid, contract, whatever. What is provided in writing so that we all start out at the same place on the same page. I haven't heard an answer to that question.
Well, the information for each 145 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 product is different. There was no uniform thing which you can give out to four different (indiscernible) that this is what is required. That is why we made sure we looked at the product information. We invited them to the field. They looked at the condition. We had meetings with them. We did review the information. If they -- if they believed that they did not have specific information, I have a tough time to understand that. But they were there, we have samples rolled out. Team officials were there from both teams, Eagles and Phillies. And we had very clearly explained, This is the field playing surface, this is where the existing substrate, which is porous asphalt, which is the drainage barrier in the Veterans Stadium, and these are the existing stands which we pull out in a football mode and which has to be pulled back in the baseball mode. These conditions were explained to each of the suppliers that their product is unique to different requirement. Like, for example, Hummer Grass, Hummer Grass's requirement -- before I try spell out the synthetic turf requirement of Hummer Grass, most of them are not applicable to them, 146 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 which means they (indiscernible) they can do the job at the Veterans Stadium complying with the existing restraint, which they did. They said now they can provide (indiscernible) which can only weigh so many pounds. You can lift it, we can remove it when we put the stands out. So Hummer was very clearly understanding all of the requirements. They knew how many panels they had to remove when the stands are moved out. So they clearly knew about it, and we did the same thing as everybody else. There are other conditions at the stadium regarding the football-to-baseball conversion where teams had input. We tried very hard to see whether natural grass like Hummel Grass could be installed at the Veterans Stadium, considering all of the conversion aspect. When we did approach the teams, Eagles clearly said, Well, we cannot budge on the conversion time. That's in the report. We say, if Hummer Grass system could be used and it is a viable system, but you definitely need 48 hours because we cannot control rain or bad weather, and that is essential. We also asked permission from Eagles, can 147 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 they play on the clay infield during the pre-season till Phillies season is over before we can convert to a full Hummer Grass field, and Eagles responded to us they will not waive that requirement.
Okay. It's clearly obvious we will not fix the past. As we move forward, what is the lesson? I will pose to you the same question I posed to the Office of the City Comptroller. What are the lessons learned? Given where we have ended up, what are the lesson in this experience? What needs to be done differently and/or better as we go forward with a next sole-source contract? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: We'll probably never have a sole-source contract again, but that's probably not the viable solution. What I have learned is that prior to going out -- the first job that we would have our consultant do, whoever that might be able, is to write up a very complete, detailed specification and requirements and that package be delivered to the various vendors, because that is something we do in a formal, competitive bid; I didn't see that here. So in the future as a minimum, I think the 148 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 consultant, whoever it may be, that goes out to study the marketplace or study a product should have very detailed specifications to the best of their ability so that we can try to create a level playing field.
Is that a recommendation you would be willing to not only share but to put in place for your successor at the Procurement Department, given this experience? COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Absolutely, but I realize that the hiring and the retaining of the consultants happens in the operating departments, Capital Programs, Public Property, or whatever. But I certainly would endorse that, and I think that going forward, those departments should look at that. And in all professional service contracts for professionals that we bring in, there should be good specifications of what we expect them to do and what we expect the result to be. There's no question about that.
And just to add to that, we as members of Council, we're also going to look at legislative what we can do to prevent 149 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 something like this from occurring again.
That's part of the purpose for these hearings. Councilman Nutter, please.
Thank you. Okay, let me ask this question. Tell me about the -- I had asked the gentleman -- what was his name, Mr. Seaton? I had asked him about the experience with the product in the northeastern, I think the word is "climes"? And he said that, you know, it was relatively new, a couple years, but it's in Michigan, you know, somewhere, and I think it actually snows in Michigan. Tell me about snow removal. He talked about, I think, a rubber-tipped shovel or something like that. In your research, what did you find about the characteristics of this particular product in rain and snow, in Northeast-type weather, freezing? Is there a proper way to treat the product in terms of snow removal or ice removal? Are there inappropriate ways to conduct those same activities? What testing did you do about this product given the Northeastern United States installation? 150 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533
Well, Councilman, the product -- most of the product has a couple of playing characteristics.
For baseball, (indiscernible), roller ball. That is normally played not in snowing conditions so therefore, it is no to your question. As far as the other characteristics which are important are whether they're resistant to sliding.
And we did look at those qualities based on the information we had for all of the products, just not only for NeXturf. We also had an opinion from the Eagles' consultant, which I mentioned last time, a professor from Penn State University, Professor McNate (ph). And he also had his opinion about it based on the tests he has conducted. And all of the friction resistance of the product for NeXturf or Hummer Grass or FieldTurf, they would -- they were all -- they would comply with the bad condition of the field. 151 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 As far as (indiscernible) is concerned, by the league rules --
By the league rules, they are supposed to cover the field overnight and not leave it open before the game. And that's what they are supposed to do in bad weather or {indiscernible).
Well, wait a minute, Mr. Pradeep. Now, you know, I don't get to see as much football as I'd like, but I guess I have these images dancing in my mind, and they're not sugar plums, of Green Bay Packers, Minnesota Vikings, you know, snow all over the place, running up and down, you know you can't figure out where the sideline is. I mean, are these fantasies of my childhood or from old John Facenda tapes or something that I saw? (Laughter.)
I think maybe I misunderstood your question, Councilman. What I answered is, what are the things which teams must do to make sure that the effect of snow or ice are taken care of before the game. 152 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533
During the game, if it snows or ices, as far as I can see, this product or other product or natural grass will have similar issues that are no different. COMMISSIONER APPLEBAUM: Councilman, I --
Hold on for a second. I deeply appreciate the response, but it did not answer my question. The question was: What tests were conducted to determine the reaction and response, behavior of this particular product in a Northeast United States environment subjected to rain, ice, and snow in anticipation a game being played on the turf?
This product in rain, ice, and snow has been tested in some respect in Philadelphia because it's a synthetic turf and --
Now, Mr. Pradeep, you're going to cause me to step outside of myself and disrupt our very nice relationship. I am asking you, what tests were conducted specifically on this 153 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533 particular product in a Northeastern United States environment subject to rain, ice, and snow, with the anticipation of a game being played on that surface? Were there any tests conducted or not? And if they were, tell me who conducted them?
You're asking for tests performed before his report was submitted?
I'm asking for tests conducted either before he submitted his report, during the time he was conducting his report, or any time after his report. I mean, I think I've covered the full circle.
The test -- this is what I'll repeat again, Councilman. The test are traditionally conducted for traction and wet traction, and those tests are in the report and that's what --
By whom? 154 12/18/01 PARKS & REC. COMMITTEE - RES. 010533
When were they conducted and where were they conducted?