My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Reso 2019-2951
SIBFL
>
City Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
Regular
>
2019
>
Reso 2019-2951
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/27/2019 12:11:45 PM
Creation date
6/25/2019 11:26:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CityClerk-Resolutions
Resolution Type
Resolution
Resolution Number
2019-2951
Date (mm/dd/yyyy)
06/20/2019
Description
Adopt Proposed Recommended Order Relating to Bid Protest by Shiff Construct. For ITB 19-01-01
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• <br /> appellee sought to bid on a contract to install certain sanitary sewer services for the City of Opa- <br /> Locka. As a condition precedent to any bid being filed, a bidder had to have a certificate of <br /> competency from Dade County. Following submission of bids it was discovered that the appellee <br /> had submitted the lowest bid but did not possess the required ceitificate. The trial court enjoined <br /> the Cityfrom recognizing a « <br /> p b appellee's bid.In affirming the trial court,our appellate court stated, If <br /> the City may in its discretion waive this section it woulde <br /> b conducive to favoritism by allowing <br /> some bidders to qualify after their bids are accepted . . ." 193 So.2d at 32. The Opa-Locka case <br /> is legally somewhat analogous insofar as here the City required the submittal of the financial <br /> statement andro'ect schedule� as "must"submittals, that is,mandatory submittals to be tendered <br /> by each bidder when submitting its response to this ITB. Factual notice is taken that a responsive <br /> bid is commonly defined as one that conforms in all material respects to the solicitation, and <br /> includes the correct or required forms, signatures, and notarization. <br /> 19. Shiff suggests that the City should have notified them of the deficiency at the <br /> opening of the bids and provided them an opportunity to remedy any deficiency and that the failure <br /> to do constitutes a waiver of the ability to assert that deficiency. First,the evidence presented was <br /> Y <br /> the Bid Opening Report is confined with to the dollar amounts of the respective bids and not a <br /> detailed summary of all of these provisions. (Testimony of Genesis Cuevas) (Jt.Ex. 3). Further, <br /> there is no provision of the Purchasing Codewhich would mandate that the City allow a bidder to <br /> conform its submittal to the requirements of the ITB. Though Shiff was asked to provide omitted <br /> references and clarify its bid amount, this does not create an obligation where none previously <br /> existed. Merely because the City sought this information does not mean that it is now obligated <br /> to allow all proposers the opportunity to correct omissions in their bid. There has been no waiver <br /> of the ability to assert these deficiencies. Estoppel is seldom an effective mechanism to shackle <br /> 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.