A capital project that would select Advanced Roofing, Inc. to protect a portion of the Key Biscayne Community Center’s roof with a silicone-based coating system, not to exceed $123,300, was approved by a 5-2 vote of Village Council members during a recent meeting.

Village Public Works Director Chris Miranda said the project is limited to the flat roof, a 33,400 square-foot area, or 45% of the building. He said that by adding this coating, it would extend the life of the roof another 10 years.

While the coating was not in question, the process to get the bid was.

The Village is actually “piggybacking” on another contract being worked on at Broward Community College, which selected the lowest bidder for its project, Miranda explained.

The cost of a new flat roof would be estimated at $1.2 million and Miranda said he was told it’d be $2 million to re-roof the rest of the area.

The coating system appeared to be a good option.

“Is it a good price?” asked Councilman Ed London. “How do we know?”

“We did not go out and get three contracts (to compare),” Miranda said.

“We have a purchasing department,” said London, who “was 1,000% against this.”

He wanted to defer the item (that motion failed 5-2 later) and get the bids, as is done with other capital projects.

“We differ on this,” Mayor Joe Rasco said.

London said the “biggest waste of money” is on contracts related to school systems, so he was hesitant to approve this one.

Councilwoman Nancy Stoner asked if there was an urgency on getting the roof coated.

Miranda said there are no leaks now, but it would take 6-9 months, including 40-50 hours to write the scope of the project and 30 days to evaluate it, if the Village were to send out an RFP (request for proposal) to get bids and select the best company, well after rainy season had begun.

“It’s mind-boggling to take this much time when we have a procurement department,” Councilman Michael Bracken said.

“We have many other contracts (being worked on),” Village Manager Steve Williamson said. “Taking advantage of piggybacking … it’s likely the best price we can get.”

London disagreed.

“I believe we are shortchanging ourselves by not doing (the bids),” he said. “This is a small job (relatively speaking) where there are like 50 roofers in the area who would do that job. The larger (overall project)? Maybe six.”

Councilman Frank Caplan said, “From my perspective, I don’t think this process is one size fits all, some subjective decisions being made about complex alternatives. … I see a competitive bid process as less necessary.”

In a piggybacking project, the contractor already has gone through the initial contract and permitting stages.

“All cities do it this way,” Rasco said. “Don’t we want to be efficient?”

The motion carried 5-2 with Bracken and London opposed.