Bid Protest Hearing - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

emphasized the specialized and complex nature of the Central Island Drainage and Street Improvements Project. For example, in Section 00020, Notice to Bidders, the prospective bidders were clearly notified that Bid No. 07-10-02 consisted of"milling and resurfacing, concrete sidewalks, construction of a new storm drainage system including 22 drainage wells..." The City Manager determined that Southeastern had the necessary qualifications and that Tran, failed to demonstrate fully the capacity and skill to perform this job. Furthermore, Section 00100, Instruction to Bidders, imposed a specific work performance requirement on all prospective bidders. In particular, Section 7, provides as follows: 7.1 The Contractor shall perform on the site and with his own forces, work equivalent to at least forty percent (40%) of the total amount of work to be performed under this contract. The Contractor shall specify in its proposal the list of construction items that represent the 40% of its contract bid amount. After the contract is awarded, and during the progress of the work, the Owner reserves the right to reduce the percentage of work performed by the contractor's own forces. This requirement was specifically considered during the course of the City's fact finding process. As noted in the attached affidavit of Rick Conner. the City Public Works and Engineering Director, "my preliminary fact finding also raised questions as to whether Tran had sufficient manpower and equipment to do the required work with its own forces. I conveyed this information to BH&A who in turn engaged in further fact finding regarding these issue."' Victor H. Guevara, the City's consulting engineer on this project, confirmed that "[d]uring the course of BH&A's fact finding process, issues were raised as to whether Tran would perform at least 40%of work with their own forces, as required by the bid documents."I2 The contract documents and specifications provided the City with authority to accept a bid "which is in the best interest of the [City[." The specifications further provided that "it is the intent of the [City] to award a Contract to the lowest responsible Total Base Bidder whose Bid is in conformance with the Bidding Documents and does not exceed the funds available." In conformity with the contract documents and specifications, the City Manager recommended that Bid No. 07-10-02 be awarded to Southeastern, the bidder deemed to be the lowest responsible and responsive bidder. Because the City strictly adhered with the contract documents and specifications applicable to Bid No. 07-10-02, the bid award should be affirmed. C. The City has the authority to reject the bidder with lowest price under the law The final reason the bid award should be affirmed is that bid award was neither arbitrary nor capricious. In Miami-Dade County v. Church & Tower. Inc., 715 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), the II See affidavit of Rick Conner, attached hereto as Exhibit "F" at`d 8. 12 See affidavit of Victor H. Guevara, attached hereto as Exhibit "G" at ![ 11. 5