Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-92-0253Mt J-92-306 4/17/92 92- 253 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER'S DECISION TO REJECT THE PROTEST OF MIDTOWN TOWING OF MIAMI, INC., IN CONNECTION WITH REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ("RFP") NO. 90-91-107, TO PROVIDE TOWING AND WRECKER SERVICES TO THE CITY OF MIAMI, AS IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE WITHOUT MERIT. WHEREAS, on May 23, 1991, the City of Miami advertised for proposals to provide towing and wrecker services to be used by the City of Miami; and WHEREAS, on June 10, 1991, the City of Miami received fourteen (14) responses to the RFP and, after review, determined that several proposals, including the proposal submitted by Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc., did not meet the minimum qualifications in the RFP's specifications and special conditions; and WHEREAS, on March 19, 1992, the City of Miami received a protest from Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc., in connection with said RFP; and CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF APR 3 0 1992 Resolution No. 92-- 253 WHEREAS, the Chief Procurement Officer, pursuant to Section 18-56.1 of the City Code, in her role as arbiter, investigated the matter and determined that Midtown Towing did not meet and still does not meet the minimum requirements of the RFP's specifications; and WHEREAS, the Chief Procurement Officer has determined that the protest is without merit and has rejected the protest; and WHEREAS, the City Manager and the City Attorney concur with and approve the finding of the Chief Procurement Officer and recommend rejection of the protest filed by Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc.; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the Preamble of this Resolution are hereby adopted by reference thereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth in this Section. Section 2. The Chief Procurement Officer's decision to reject the protest from Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc., in connection with RFP No. 90-91-107, to furnish towing and wrecker services to the City of Miami, is hereby approved. s f _( Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective — immediately upon its adoption. 3 E to `? 5 3 2 - PASSED AND ADOPTED this 30th da,- of /' Aorrt?::,� 1992. ATT T• MAT Y HIRAI CITY CLERK PREPARED AND APPROVED BY: CARMEN L. LEON / ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: A. QW11NN JOJ4ES, III CITY ATTO EY CLL:ra:M2893 3 - XAVIER Lj SUAREZ,- MAYOR CITY OF 101AM1, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM Honorable Mayor and Members 'O of the City Commission F ROh' Cesar H. Odi City Manager RECOMMENDATION DATE APR 2 "t 19 V [.. FILE Resolution of Protest SUBJECT to Provide Towing and Wrecker Services REFERENCES ENCLOSURES It is respectfully recommended that attached resolution approving the decision to reject Midtown Towing connection with RFP No. 90-91-107, services to the Miami Police and Services Departments. BACKGROUND the City Commission adopt the Chief Procurement Officer's of Miami, Inc.'s protest, in to provide towing and wrecker Fire, Rescue and Inspection On June 10, 1991, fourteen (14) proposers responded to the City's RFP on the above noted service. The Chief Procurement Officer sent out disqualification letters to seven (7) proposers who did not meet the requirements in the RFP's specifications. One of these disqualified proposers, Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc., submitted a protest to the Chief Procurement Officer on February 25, 1992, relative to his proposal. In his protest the owner stated that although he did not meet the requirements at the time he submitted his proposal, the specifications allowed a thirty day period to remedy the deficiencies that he had. The RFP contained no provision to allow for correction of deficiencies. Pursuant to Section 18-56.1 of the City Code, the Chief Procurement Officer investigated the matter and determined that the protest lacked merit because Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc., did not meet the minimum requirements of the RFP's specifications at the time of proposal submittal and to date still does not meet the minimum requirements. Attachments: Proposed Resolution Copy of Protest Letter s� CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM To Cesar H. Odio, City Manager. DATE` April 10, 1992 r,`r A. Quinn Jones III, City Attorney Protest on Towing and sua'ccT Wrecker Services RFP No. 90-91-107 FRO'. Judy S . Carte PEKE= , s Chief Procur Officer Department o General Services E ,aosu� s and Solid Waste I hereby request your approval of my rejection of the protest by Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc., in connection with the above rioted proposal to furnish towing and wrecker services. The basis for my decision, as set forth in the attached letter, is the fact that Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc., did not meet the minimum qualifications as required in Section 5, Qualifications of Applicants, of the Special Conditions and Specifications of the RFP document. APPROVED: Cesar H. Odio, City Manager APPROVED: 9. Quinn" nes II, City Attorney G L I 4fti4 Roti E. \litlWd 1� 1 I.. Apr i 1 14, 1992 "- CERTIFIED MAIL Mr. Jesse J. McCrary, Jr. McCrary Blizzard b Mosley 2800 Biscayne. Boulevard, 8th Floor Miami, FL '3137 (.I1,4R H. Uhlu (lry 11,map, r Re: Protest in connection with RFP No. 90-91-107 - Furnisihing Vehicle Towing and tIrecker. Services - Dear Mr. McCrary: 1, as Chief Procurement Officer of the City of Miami, have rea(1 your protest dated March 19, 1992 on behalf of Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc., heard your arguments at the meeting of March 27, 1992, reviewed pertinent documents, talked with employees and researched the issues, pursuant to my duties under Section 18- 55.1, City of Miami Code, Resolution of Protest Solicitations and Awards. For your information, Section 5, Qualifications of Applicants, cited in your letter as the hasis for your protest, to wit: A11 Towing Agencies that submit applications for consideration shall either meet the following minimum qualifications, or provide for each deficiency, an affidavit stating that deficiencies shall be made up withir 30 days of bid z,wa.r.-Ir I the minimum qua 1i f icat ions are nn`- :ak�'c, or ai+: irl a,t 1.ts not submitted, the applic, t.;.:/n will be rejected... is not contained in RFP N,,. 90-91-107. The above prevision was found in R7P No. 90-9 — fl; -;7, which was rescinded by Resolut:l.on No. 91-73 on January 24, 1991, when the City Commission rejec'ce-< all proposals and instrutcted that a new RFP be prepared and isv:re-d. Requirements for t:,e new RFP were approved by the Commission at its meeting of t.}:�ril 11, 1991. In our March 27 meeting, P-Ir Lichtman, Midtown Towing's President, admitted to having received my January 24 letter on the rescission and the new issuance. Section 5, Qualifications of A plicants, 'Specifications in the Special Conditions andof RFP No. 90-91-107, the new RFP issued by the City and responded to by your client, Midtown Towing, states: All Towing Agencies that submit applications for consideration shall m qualifications. If the met the application will Clearly, the above provision cure period' a7id required that at the time applications were eet the following minimum minimum qualifications are not be rejected... makes no reference to a 'thirty-dav the minimum qualifications be met submitted. 5, DEPAR..M TENT OF GENFRAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION AND SOLID WASTE/Procurement Man.3gement Dr. ,ion 1390 NAV 20th Stref t/Alrami, Florida 33142/(305) 575-5174/FAX: (3051 575.5180 S VIA . U�55VIUk-L at y , Ot . Page 2>> April 14, 1992 Midtown Towing did not meet thesL- requirements on June 10, 1991, when it submitted its proposal, as specifically stated in my notice of disqualification dated March 4, 1992. As of this date, Midtown Towing still does not meet the* qualifications. I consider these qualifications, i.e. zoning requirements, appropriate licenses, etc., substantive requirements which cannot be waived as 'minor irregularities'. Based upon the fore -going, I have determined that your protest is without merit. The City Manager and City Attorney have approved my decision. During the meeting of March 27, 1992, you brought up a new argument in support of your client's position, which had not been cited in your protest letter, namely, that the thirty days provided for in Section 2, Contract Term, Special Conditions & Specifications of RFP No. 90-91-107 allowed your client a 'cure period' for correcting any deficiencies, if awarded the towing services contract. Contrary to your interpretation, the thirty - day period referred to in this Section is provided to ensure a smooth transition of towing services from the. previous contractor (s) to those vendors selected under the new agreement and to satisfy any other administrative requirements. The resolution approving my decision to reject your protest shall be placed on the Thursday, April 30, 1992, City Commission agenda for consideration. The meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. and will be held in the City Commission Chambers, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami. Please contact me if you have any further questions. Sincerely, Jud S. Carter Chi Procuremen Officer cc: Carmen L. Leon, Assistant City Attorney Ron E. Williams, Administrator, GSA/SW Department Nancy Bahn, Assistant Director Officer Arthur Moe, Police Department File IN MAW: 2.800 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD ElaHTH FLooR MtAaa, FL 33137 'IhuPHom (305) 576-1505 FACSDAILE: (305) 576-3550 March 19, 1992 MCCRARY BLIZZARD & M OSLEY REPLY To: Miami Judy S. Carter Chief Procurement Officer Department of General Services Administration and Solid Waste Procurement Management Division 1390 N.W. 20 Street Miami, FL 33142 Re: Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc. Dear Ms. Carter: IN OCALA: 704 Soumwssr3Rm AVENUE S urm 200 OCALA, FL 32670 TELEPHONE: (904) 35 ] -3444 This letter comes as a follow up to our letter of protest dated March 18, 1992. In our letter of protest, we indicated that we would provide you with a detailed outline of our reasons for urotest. In your rejection letter of March 4, 1992, you listed as reasons for rejection the following: 1. The qualifying property, 551 N.W. 72nd Street, was not properly zoned to store vehicles. 2. There was no proof of valid license(s) for automobile storage. 3. No signs on the extension of the structure, i.e. visible from the adjacent access road. 4. No payment office located at 551 N.W. 72nd Street, the qualifying property. We interrupt your letter to indicate that the aforementioned conditions existed as of June 10, 1991. Assuming that some of your observations were correct on the date you cited, these obs.erydtiQn!i are not correct as of the date of your letter. I will treat them in the order addressed in your letter. Judy S. Carter March 19, 1992 Page two - — Zoning of the Qualifying Property. At the time the bid response was filed, the subject property was zoned commercial. Since that time, the property owner, Howard Lichtman, has applied for a zoning change/special exception (Industrial) to allow for a towing facility. This matter was heard before the Citizens Advisory Board and heard by the Zoning Board on March 16, 1992. The Zoning Board recommended the requested change. This positive recommendation has been forwarded to the City Commission and will be hard on March 26, 1992. —_ Licensq(.q for. Automobile Storage. The property owner/bidder does in fact have an occupational license for the premises. His current -= license doaz not allow for outside storage but would allow for e s storage inside of the structure. A physical inspection of the premises would reveal that ample space e:-ists inside the building in which to store vehicles. Additionally, the occupant has a - license to use the building as office space. No Signs on the Extension of Structure. Throughout this process, the occupant has been rehabilitating what was a dilapidated but -- sound structure. The refurnishing included, but was limited to, -- structural repairs, electrical rewiring, window replacements, painting and rubbish removal. We have both before and after photographs to substantiate this claim. It is clearly the intent of the bidder to have signs in ulace should he be awarded the contract. No Payment Office At the Qualifying Office. During the renovation period, t:he old offices were stripped and new, modern offices were built providing, among other things, a comfortable waiting room for customers or others wishing to conduct business at the location. ucFeful—In , we have addressed all of the :natters raised in your letter. We are protesting and requesting that Midtown Towing be declared a responsive bidder. We firmly believe that the Division is in violation of the provision of the bid specification, more particularly, Section 5: "5. QUALIFICATION OF APPLICANTS All Towing Agencies that submit applications for =_ - considerat_on shall either meet the following minimum qualifications, or provide for each deficiency, an affidavit stating that deficiencies shall be made up -- within 30 days of bid award. If the minimum. oualifications are not met, or affidavits not submitted, =- the application will be rejected." ,raRee�r� Judy S. Carter March 19, 1992 Page three This section clearly indicates that if one is the successful bidder, a period of thirty (30) days is allowed to correct such deficiencies. =- Based on all of the foregoing, we are requesting a meeting with = you, the city attorney and any other appropriate official to present our evidence in mitigation of your determination. Please let us hear from you at your earliest convenience. Very sincerely, McCRARYWBD & MOSLEY ByJ� ssary,�.Zr., E cc. Howard Lichtman FOA ti t . RON E. MLLIAMS AdmmmiJl Or March 4, 1992 Mr. Howard Lichtman, President Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc. 261 N.W. 79th Street Miami, FL 33150 Dear Mr. Lichtman: USAR 11 t/111U This letter serves to advise you that your firm's application foi- towing services, RFP #90-91-107 has been rejected for failure to meet the following minimum qualifications as stipulated in SPECIAI, CONDITIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS, Section 5, QUALIFICATIONS OF APPLICANTS and SECTIONS VII and XI of the Sample Towing Agreement which contain the following specifications for the provision of towing services: All Towing Agencies that submit applications for consideration shall be fully licensed to perform the work described herein. STORAGE AREAS Storage facilities and qualifying offices shall be within the confines of the same property. All Towing Agency's storage areas must conform to City of Miami Zoning requirements existing now and in the future. LICENSES, PERMITS, ETC. Towing agencies must comply with the City of Miami Code Chapter 42, Article V. Towing of Motor Vehicles; possess a valid current license for City pursuant to said article and any other permits or licenses which may be required to do business in City. Towing agency must also possess all the licenses, permits, etc., necessary from Metropolitan Dade County to operate' said Towing Agency. When applications/proposals were received on June 10, 1991, Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc., which lists its qualifying property as 551 N.W. 72nd Street, was not properly zoned to store vehicles. Your firm's proposal also reveals no proof of valid license(s) for automobile storage. These special conditions, specifications, and sample towing agreement also contain further specifications for the provisions of towing services which have not been met as follows: 92-- 253 DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION AND SOLID "'ASTE/Ptonrrement Management Divki,m 1390 N.W. 20hh Stn•j-t/Mi.mli. Ilulitla 33142/(305) 575.5174JAX: (305) S75.5180 J Mr. llowarr+ Lichtma» Page 2 of 2 March 4, 1992 Towing agency premises must he properly identified by signs on the extension of. the structure i.e. visible from the adjacent access road. STORAGE AREAS Towing Agency storage areas must display identifying signs clearly visible from the street in conformance with zoning regulations... Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc. qualifying property is not properly identified by signs on the exterior of the structure. Finally, Midtown Towing of Miami, Inc. lists its payment office as 551 N.W. 72nd Street. Our investigation shows there is no payment office located at this address. Thank you for your interest in supplying services to the City of Miami. r Sincerely yours, d S. e C ' Procurem t Off cer cc: Ron E. Williams, Administrator Humberto Hernandez, Assistant City Attorney Officer Arthur Moe, Police Department RFP File bcc: Nancy Bahn, Assistant Director, GSA/SW ti