The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutR-91-0720K J-91-777 { 9/24/91 RESOLUTION NO. rr U A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER'S DECISION TO REJECT THE PROTEST FROM URBAN CONSTRUCTORS, INC., IN CONNECTION WITH THE SECOND INFORMAL BIDDING FOR THE CURTIS PARK REDEVELOPMENT - FIELDWORK PROJECT, AS IT i HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE WITHOUT MERIT. WHEREAS, Resolution No. 91-126, adopted by the City Commission on February 14, 1991, waived formal competitive bid and selection procedures and confirmed the City Manager's finding that an emergency existed for the Curtis Park Redevelopment - Fieldwork project; and WHEREAS, the City sought and received informal bids from qualified contractors on August 15, 1991; and WHEREAS, bids received were in excess of the City's allocated budget for the project and the Public Works Department determined that was in the best interest of the City to rebid the project in order to stay within budget; and WHEREAS, a second informal bidding was extended to companies deemed appropriate for consideration, including Urban Constructors, Inc.; and WHEREAS, on September 10, 1991, the City of Miami received a protest from Urban Constructors, Inc., in connection with the second bidding for the Curtis Park Redevelopment - Fieldwork Project; and WHEREAS, Urban Constructors, Inc., stated, among other issues that, in the first bidding, bids were not accepted or rejected per normal bidding procedures; and WHEREAS, normal bidding procedures are not required for emergency purchases, pursuant to Section 18-52.6.; and WHEREAS, it has been determined by the Chief Procurement Officer, in her role as arbiter, pursuant to Section 18-56.1 of CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF OCT 8 1991 the City Code, that the protest filed by Urban Constructors, Inc. be rejected as it lacks merit; and WHEREAS, the City Manager and the City Attorney concur with i and approve the finding of the Chief Procurement Officer and recommend rejection of the protest filed by Urban Constructors, 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 to 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 received from Urban Constructors, Inc. in connection with the Curtis Park Redevelopment - Fieldwork Project is hereby approved. Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of October , 1991. CITY CLERK PREPARED AND APPROVED BY: CARMEN L. LEON / ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: ACTING CIT ATTORNEY AQJ:gb:M2509 - 2 - L. )SUARE�, MAYOR CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA 0 INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM C To oarE cCri Honorable Mayor and Members r 2 o '�gg1 FILE of the City Commission SUBJECT C sualECT Resolution of Protest - 4� Curtis Park Redevelopment `AY, Fieldwork Project ;:ROM REFERENCES Cesar H. Od City Manager ENCLOSURES It is respectfully recommended that the City Commission adopt the attached resolution approving the Chief Procurement Officer's decision to reject Urban Constructors, Incorporated's protest, in connection with the second informal bidding for the Curtis Park Redevelopment - Fieldwork Project. A protest was. received from Urban Constructors, relative to the second informal bidding of the above styled project. Pursuant to Section 18-56.1 of the City Code, the Chief Procurement Officer investigated the matter and determined that the protest lacked merit. The project was authorized by Resolution No. 91-126, which waived formal competitive bid and selection procedures and confirmed the City Manager's finding that an emergency existed. The City sought and received informal bids from qualified contractors; however, all bids received in response to the first bidding were in excess of the project's allocated budget. The Public Works Department determined that it was in the best interest of the City to rebid the project, substantially reducing the scope of services, in order to stay within budget. A second bidding was extended to companies deemed appropriate for consideration, including Urban Constructors. 1 Subsequently, Urban Constructors protested, alleging that, among other issues, normal bidding procedures were not followed, in the acceptance and rejection of bids received in the first bidding. Pursuant to Resolution No. 91-126, and in accordance with the emergency nature of the project, the City was not required to follow 'normal bidding procedures' in the completion of the Curtis Parks Redevelopment Project. The protest of Urban Constructors is therefore rejected by the Chief Procurement Officer. The decision has been approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. i Attachments: Proposed Resolution Copy of Protest Letter Iy-� CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM TO ; Cesar H. Od io, City Manager DATE : SEP 1 7 1991 FILE : A. Quinn Jones, Acting City Attorney : Protest of Second Bidding SUBJECT for the Curtis Park Redevelopment - Fieldwork Project FROM : Judy S. Cart r REFERENCES Chief Procure t Officer Department of eral Services ENCLOSURES an j SnI iA Waa a -- I hereby request your approval of my rejection of the bid protest by Urban Constructors, Inc., in connection with the second informal bidding of the Curtis Park Redevelopment - Fieldwork Project The grounds for my decision, as set forth in the attached letter, include among others, the fact that the City Administration was authorized by Resolution No. 91-126 to waive formal competitive bid and selection procedures and declare an emergency in connection with this project. APPROVED: Cesar H. Odio, City Manager APPROVED: A. Quinn Jones, Acting City Attorney TOi..... CITY OF HIANI PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. REs.....CURTIS PARK PROJECT SUBJs...PROTEST SECOND BIDDING ATTNt...ENRIKE NUNEB URBAN'S P J029 FAX............. HAIL........:.'.. HAND DELIVER....YSS DATD...09-10.91 ........WD HERE -BY sORMALLY PROTEST THE SECOND BIDDING AS PROPOSED ON 9-10-91,AS PER YOUR lAX. ........WE WERE THE LOWEST QUALIFIED BIDDER AS PER THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AT TOS FIRST BIDDING. ........THE BIDS AS PER THE FIRST BIDDING, WERE NOT ACCEPTED OR RIaJI CTI D AS PER YOU& NORMAL BIDDING PROCEEDURES. ... PAPERS. WE HADE NOts OF THIS IN THE,SECOND BIDDING PROPOSAL. ........THE LATE PH HE CALL AS TO IT§H f,19 TO 8E ADDED A8 PART Off THE SECOND BIDDING tS IRREGULAR. ........THE NEW PLAS1 ONLY DELETES ADD ITEMS i, 21 & 3 AND ADDRESS ITEM 1, 14, & 15 WITH A SLIGHTLY REDUCED SCOPE OF WORK. ........THE ABOVE H$NT'IONED ITEMS WERE BEING ADDRESSED AT THE HOSTING W1E HAD ON 9-4-91 AS US BEING THE LOWEST QUALIFIED BIDDER. ........A HOOTING T DISCUSS THIS NATTER IS VITAL TO EXPEDITE THE SPEEDY RESOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM. SINCERALY, Iva, JOSEPH LQVERHI, PROJECT NANhOER 4123 N. MIAMI AVENUE;* MIAMI. FLORIDA 33127 • PMC3NE: C305) 576-1408 / FAX: (305) 576-1392 91' 720 91- 721 { Y i Cat# of Ptaml RON E. WILLIAMS �• 'E 7�@�20SAR ATH. ODIO Administrator •) City Manager September , 1991 CERTIFIED MAIL Mr. Joseph D. Lovermi Urban Constructors, Inc. 4128 N. Miami Avenue Miami, FL 33127 Re: Protest - Curtis Park Redevelopment - Fieldwork Project, Second Bidding Dear Mr. Lovermi: I, as Chief Procurement Officer of the City of Miamir have read your protest of September 10, 1991, investigated the issues, and. reviewed pertinent documents, pursuant to my duties under Section 18-56.1, City of Miami Code, Resolution of Protest Solicitations and Awards. The issues stated in your letter are summarized as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Urban Constructors was the lowest qualified bidder and specs in the first bidding Bids were not accepted/rejected per normal bidding Not enough time to secure bid bond documents bidding Telephone call relative to addition of item #19 bidding is irregular per plans procedures for second in second Deleting items 1, 2, & 3, and reducing scope of add items 1, 14, & 15. z In response to your letter, I find the following: 1. Upon first submission of bids, a determination was made that budgetary limitations prevented the Department from accepting all bids, and accordingly the project was rebid, with a substantial reduction in the scope of work to be performed, } in order that the City of Miami stay within budget. The f second bidding was extended to companies deemed appropriate for consideration, including Urban Constructors. 2. Pursuant to Resolution 91-126, the City Commission waived formal competitive bid and selection procedures in connection with the Curtis Park Project and confirmed the City Manager's finding that an emergency existed, in order to expedite completion of improvements. Consequently, normal budding procedures were not required in this project. However, the Public Works Department did seek out qualified contractors, such as yourselves, to participate in an informal process inviting them to submit informal bids, 1 720 DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL, SERVICES ADMINISTRATION AND SOLID WASTE/Procurement Manageme"I jHM)tlor) 1590 N.W. Xith Street/Miami, Florida 33142/()DS) 575-5174/FAX: (3Q5) 5I5-51�IQ 7�� DATE Page 2 Urban Constructors 3. According to Public Works staff, you were informed that the bid bond from the first bidding was acceptable, since the project was downscaled and the total estimated amount of the project lowered. Items 4 & 5 were discussed with you in detail at a meeting on September 4, 1991, in which you were informed of the extent of the project's reduced scope and the telephone call relative to Item 19 was only a reminder to bid this item separately. The course of action taken by the City Administration falls within its jurisdiction to act as authorized by Resolution 91- 126. For the above reasons, your protest is determined without merit and is, therefore, rejected. The City Manager and City Attorney have approved my decision and the item is scheduled for the City Commission meeting to be held on October 3, 1991, in the City Commission Chambers, City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Dinner Key. Sincerely, Judy S. Carter Chief Procurement Officer