Laserfiche WebLink
a public entity's efforts to comply with its bidding obligations. This is true even if a public <br /> employee misconstrues information and misinforms a bidder. When a bureau chief, for example, <br /> told a prospective bidder to submit a bid despite the bidder's lack of a necessary license from the <br /> Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board, the public entity was permitted to reject the bid <br /> for noncompliance with the licensing statute in Greenhut Construction Co.v.Henry A.Knott,Inc., .•• <br /> 247 So. 2d 517 (Fla 1sT DCA 1971. I do not find that the exchanges between City Purchasing <br /> Agent Genesis Cuevas and Shiff professional staff rise to the level of creating an estoppel or <br /> waiver precluding the City from establishing material variances or omissions in the Shiff ITB <br /> response prior to a recommendation by the Manager for an award. The essential elements of <br /> estopppel recognized by case law are simply not present based on the evidence presented at the <br /> hearing. See, Quality Shell Homes&Supply v.Roley, 186 So.2d 837,841(Fla. 151 DCA 1966). <br /> 20. Though section 62-9 of the Purchasing Code does require written notification under <br /> certain circumstances,that requirement applies only when a bidder who would have been awarded <br /> the contract is deemed non-responsible and does not apply where the bidder was found to be <br /> unresponsive. (It. Ex 14). <br /> 21. Shiff also suggests 'that the requirement of the Financial Statement was not <br /> necessary as it had agreed to a provide a bid bond. However, the ITB was clear as to what <br /> information was required from all bidders. It is the City's responsibility Y p y t o determine what <br /> information the solicitation required so as to best evaluate the responsive bids and responsible <br /> sponsible <br /> bidders. The ITB was clear that the latest Financial Statements were required. Yet, they were <br /> simply omitted from Shift's bid response. Though Shiff argues that Nunez Construction's • <br /> Financial Statement should not be considered as it was marked as a draft, the submission satisfied <br /> the minimum requirements of the ITB. <br /> 11 <br />