Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPW Street Resurfacing ARRA 2009; Rejecting BidsCMn °F� Agenda Item No: 13
Meeting Date: August 17, 2009
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Public Works
Prepared by: �/' City Manager Approval<I 4 _
Director of Public Works ( DD )
File No.: 16.06.67
SUBJECT: REPORT ON BID OPENING FOR THE STREET RESURFACING AMERICAN
RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT 2009, CITY PROJECT NO. 11108, FEDERAL
AID PROJECT NO. ESPL 5043 (030), AND RESOLUTION REJECTING ALL BIDS
AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO REBID PROJECT.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution
BACKGROUND:
The Street Resurfacing American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009 project targets two arterial and
two collector streets throughout the City of San Rafael for resurfacing. The streets to be repaired are:
Kerner Boulevard from Bellam Boulevard to Canal Street, Las Gallinas Avenue from Montevideo Way to
Lucas Valley Road, Nova Albion Way from Las Gallinas Avenue to Northgate Drive, and Smith Ranch
Road from Old Redwood Highway to Silveira Parkway.
The City expects to receive $1,188,000 from the President's Economic Stimulus Program, which will be
spent on this street resurfacing project. There are constraints on the Economic Stimulus money such as
having to award the project 75 days and that the money can only be spent on arterial or collectors streets
that are listed on the Federal Highway Administration's list.
On April 20, 2009, the City Council adopted the plans and specifications for this project and authorized
the City clerk to call for bids. Caltrans sent the authorization to advertise on July 21, 2009, and the
project was advertised on July 22, 2009. The bid opening was on August 13, 2009. The following
contractors submitted proposals:
1. Ghilotti Bros, Inc. $1,148,825.17
2. Team Ghilotti, Inc. $1,198,784.70
3. Ghilotti Construction Company $1,220,170.15
4. J.A.Gonsalves &Son Construction Inc. $1,499,706.65
ANALYSIS:
We have determined that there are bid irregularities in the bid documents. Under the San Rafael
Municipal Code Section 11.50.100, the City has the sole discretion to reject all bids. Public Works staff
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
File No.:
Council Meeting: Oak c
Disposition: &Sot_0-1io,v tf f D_8 -:)_6
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Paye: 2
and the City Attorney's office concluded that it would be in the best interest of the City to reject all bids
and rebid the project.
The Contract Documents will be revised to include language that clarifies the ambiguity in the required
documents to provide as part of the Project Bid Proposal.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution rejecting all bids, and authorize staff to rebid
the project.
Enclosure: Resolution
RESOLUTION NO. 12826
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
REJECTING ALL BIDS FOR THE STREET RESURFACING AMERICAN
RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT 2009, CITY PROJECT NO. 11108,
FEDERAL AID PROJECT NO. ESPL 5043 (030) AND AUTHORIZING STAFF
TO REBID THE PROJECT.
WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of July, 2009, pursuant to due and legal notice
published in the manner provided by law, inviting sealed bids for proposals for the work
hereinafter mentioned, as more fully appears from the Affidavit of Publication thereof on
file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of San Rafael, California, the City Clerk of
said City did publicly open, examine, and declare all sealed bids or proposals for doing
the following work in said City, to wit:
"STREET RESURFACING
AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT 2009"
CITY PROJECT NO. 11108
FEDERAL AID PROJECT NO. ESPL 5043 (030)
in accordance with the plans and specifications therefore on file in the office of said City
Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the bid documents contained irregularities; and
WHEREAS, the San Rafael Municipal Code section 11.50.100 states that the
awarding authority has the sole discretion to reject all bids.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND RESOLVED that all
bids received for the Street Resurfacing American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009
Project will be rejected in accordance with the San Rafael Municipal Code section
11.50.100, and that staff will be directed to rebid the project, clarifying any ambiguities
within the Contract Documents.
I, ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that
the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular
meeting of the Council of said City held on the 17th day of August, 2009, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Brockbank, Connolly, Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk
LEONIDOU & ROBIN
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
777 CUESTA DRIVE
SUITE 200
MOUNTAIN VIEW. CA 94040
August 17, 2009
Via Facsimile
Mr. Parviz Mokhtari
City of San Rafael
Department of Public Works
111 Morphew St
San Rafael, CA 94901
Fax: (415) 485-3334
(650) 691-2888
FACSIMILE (650) 691-2689
Re: Bid ODeninl7 for Street Resurfacing (ARRA) - Proiect No. 11108
Dear Mr. Mokhtari:
This firm represents the lowest responsive bidder, Ghilotti Brothers, Inc. ("GBI")
in the above -referenced matter. It has come to our attention that the City of San Rafael
(the "City") considers GBI's bid documents to contain certain "irregularities" and is
proposing the drastic measure of rejecting all bids. As set forth below, GBI's bid
documents fully comply with the bidding instructions and contain no irregularities.
Further, even if GBI's bid does possess any irregularities, they can only be deemed minor
or inconsequential, whereby the City has complete legal authority and discretion to waive
such irregularities and to proceed with an award of the contract to GBI.
1. GBI's Bid Documents Fully Comply With The Bidding Instructions
The City appears concerned with the fact that GBI did not submit with its bid
documents Bid Proposal Item #11 — the UDBE form and information and Bid Proposal
Item #12 Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. Pursuant to the bid
instructions, however, neither of these items is reouired to be submitted at the time of bid
opening.
The Bid Proposal Checklist (Attachment A) states:
"All Bidders shall complete and submit each page in the Proposal section,
including any required attachments, by the time and date of the bid
opening. Failure to submit in its entirety will be grounds for finding the
bid or proposal nonresponsive." (Emphasis added.)
SAALRDOCS\20596\1 \00116458.DOC
Mr. Parviz Mokhtari
August 17, 2009
Page 2 of 3
Neither the UDBE form and information nor the DUNS number was a required
attachment that needed to be submitted at the time of bid opening. Rather, as specifically
instructed (Attachment B), the UDBE form and information are not yet due until the
fourth business day after bid opening, or in this case by or on Wednesday, August 19,
2009.
Similarly, the DUNS number is not due until the date of the contract and "must be
submitted with the executed contract." (Attachment C) It was also specifically clarified
by representatives of the City at bid opening that it is okay to provide the DUNS number
prior to the date of the contract.
Thus, pursuant to a plain reading of the bid instructions as a whole, a bidder was
instructed only to submit those attachments which were required at the time of bid
opening. This did not include the UDBE form and DUNS number. Even if there is an
apparent conflict within the instructions, under the principle of ejusdem generis, specific
provisions qualify those which are general. (Civ. Code section 3534.) Thus, the more
specific and narrow instruction on when an item is due controls over a broader and
general requirement. The City prepared the bid forms and, therefore, is bound to follow
the terms of the forms. (Pozar v. Dept. of Transportation, 144 Ca1.App.3d 269, 272
(1983) [requiring that public agency comply with requirements in its bid solicitation
concerning how bid amount was to be calculated].)
Accordingly, since GBI followed and complied with the instructions set forth
under the bid solicitation, there are no irregularities to deem the bid nonresponsive in any
manner.
2. The City Has Complete Legal Authority And Discretion To Waive Any
Irregularities Within GBI's Bid _Documents Because They Are Minor
And Inconsequential In Nature
It is well-established that a "a bid which substantially conforms to a call for bids
may, though it is not strictly responsive, be accepted if the variance cannot have affected
the amount of the bid or given a bidder an advantage or benefit not allowed other bidders
or, in other words, if the variance is inconsequential." (Ghilotti Construction Company v.
City of Richmond 45 Ca1.App.41h 897, 904 (1996).) An unfair advantage or benefit is
one which allows the bidder the opportunity to withdraw its bid without forfeiting the bid
bond. (Menefee v. County of Fresno, 163 Cal. App. 3d 1175, 1180-1181 (1985).) If the
bidder is unable to use the irregularity to avoid their bid, then there is no unfair advantage
gained from the defect and waiver of the variance should be permitted. (Id. [emphasis
added]) In MCM Construction v. City and County of San Francisco, 66 Cal. App. 4th
359, 374 (1998), the Court of Appeal ruled that the Commission was entitled to waive
any irregularities that do not facilitate corruption or extravagance, affect the bid amount
or the response of potential bidders, or allow a bidder to back out of its bid without losing
its bid security.
S:W LRDOCS\20596\1 \001 16458.DOC
Mr. Parviz Mokhtari
August 17, 2009
Page 3 of 3
Here, even if the UDBE form and the DUNS number were due at the time of bid
opening, these are minor and inconsequential variances with GBI's bid which can be
lawfully waived by the City in its vested discretion. This is because the failure of GBI to
submit these items in a timely manner would not have affected the bid price, nor allowed
GBI to withdraw its bid without forfeiting the bid bond. GBI was not, therefore,
provided with an unfair advantage not afforded to other bidders.
An agency has discretion to waive immaterial deviations from bid specifications
and may accept the bid under certain conditions. The point of discretion is that the agency
may properly act in either direction. It may waive or refuse to waive such deviations.
(MCM Construction, 66 Cal. App. 4th at 374.) Whether in any given case a bid varies
substantially or only inconsequentially from the call for bids is a question of fact. On
questions of fact, California courts defer to the findings of the public agency. (Id., at
374-375.)
GBI realizes that the City has the full discretion to either proceed with an award,
or reject all bids. (San Rafael Muni. Code section 11.50.100.) In this present case,
however, the City should waive such minor irregularities with GBI's bid, if any there are.
Such a decision will be given deference by a court should there be a challenge. The City
has a limited time frame by which to award this project under the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Given the clear-cut authority for the City to
waive any irregularities that may exist with GBI's bid, there can be no rightful challenge
to an award of the contract to GBI.
Thus, at the present moment, the City has, in hand, the lowest responsive bid,
which was submitted by GBI. GBI is a local, Marin -based contracting firm that has been
in business for over 95 years, and in that time has successfully completed hundreds of
millions of dollars of grading and paving work. The team that GBI has brought together
for this project is highly capable and has significant experience on similar projects.
For these reasons, GBI urges that the City forego with the drastic and wasteful
measure of rejecting all bids when it has a lowest responsive bid that conforms to all legal
requirements. The City should proceed with an award of the contract to GBI.
Very truly yours,
U0 -
ROGER
cc: Mayor Albert J. Boro, and all City Council Members
Enclosures:
S: W LRDOCS\20596\1 \00116458.DOC
---ncopy BID PROPOSAL CHECKLIST
copy
All Bidders shall complete and submit each page in the Proposal section, including any required
V attachments, by the time and date of the bid opening. Failure to submit in its entirety will be
grounds for finding the bid or proposal nonresponsive. The following are the required Proposal
sections that must be submitted as part of the bid.
1. Project Bid Proposal
2. List of Subcontractors ./
3. Prices of Items/
4. Equal Employment Opportunity Certification
5. Public Contract Code
a. Public Contract Code Section 10285.1 Statement
b. Public Contract Code Section 10162 Questionnaire
c. Public Contract Code 10232 Statement
Ir 6. Noncollusion Affidavit ✓
7. Debarment and Suspension Certification ✓
8. Nonlobbying Certification for Federal -Aid Contracts
9. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
' 10. Bidder's Bond
11. Local Agency Bidder -DBE -Information (Exhibit 15-G1, Exhibit 15-G2, Exhibit 15-11, and
Bidders List for Prime and Subcontractors)
12. Data Universal Numbering System (D -U -N -S) Number
! �x
If .
I.
a
City of San Rafael • California
Department of Public Works
EXHIBIT A
- -
;tie'EiAB.E'oaiinitinet'f#tri isi�of'sii7iiniEt_x�,'s1}isi;'eappatid''tfi'%i�zr
;
anis t ie3Fd38ry Kidd pRtetsinp�ate andsubmit Ili* BE G"txsrimtfplent'fbsFn t6 the AgcnG�+ C7f7BE
`anent term miistizerecciyed FIy t?se'Agerrey n latet+shtt}:ii� p m bn the 4tii httsttse day z�itbid
CSti�eT }Sdd4 do not nil d`[o submit'the UTE G4i7IF74I[n4eAt=fsrrn U1
al
r u ".ts ubsitaUDi3]r.Cgmm's,Fsncnt loin,t6rriir [he avutple(64.larrst witiiin 4 111unrs5
dais e`ucf
qw, tQn stmaltan_frpin etch U i3l staling }9C it is:p'aitii tpat�#g iti.th..e'cQnti$t t!:::Inc u e
vltaih the ICOM C..br=itirment Fa�ir� A. p7r cif UDk� 's cfno.te �vi31 se vL as wcitfez3
::r« P fib. tZtat:thc.Zli]EE'is partici atsn-3n,lhe ;cpr31r2crt'
y . _ s
�.nr .: en . o x rthin'.tht . reified-.1AFIAL, Z. $�r 1
.::cam• Y- Yr ,: ���' g..: .:.. --:. ...:. ,-.. - r.:;;; :i;-� �•-1_:'r..�.:..! - - -
a,r.,4.'kl..�z.._ _ z .
_.. ..-, -• -- - - -
r�rsra .OX
_ :-._
rp •.P.J3ylr9��-iit
..........
-� - -
E� r ::.. ��
"I"',
_
P_ 01A
leiie: =tom _:� �..
�. isset:the.....f;. y5�fl�_.I?.._....... ......��__.._.. �y�
,1!..� ._:..,_'. - c_..- .
�y
�._.. .�54_,_.._ri; Ewa i�'yr_�_�.: a}=, •• :•. •,. �f,..'' ;i::-?:;.:�... "'M
:i=!4• C:>n lid#�..�'F-'-�ti'•r,�: _�'-r•'>:�r7'.'!•rr'Tj'• - _
�:er.� 's!= "` = - =•sem i;-::�,.�1.� - _
-
._.:._ ' J:!- 'sr rxxr ...-. •:e �:.�:.._ . � . �.. i .._ a ..,.:. _ _ _?y.�� _ _ _
ri__."a-••:•:_n..i�,E - - - o��'i d.= '51117IIiil
�r -,�' �,.r,---�• ul*�:w.�i.�T7#�R:C_;h�iteini�it'�ati�i"nim:i�liSi��1r1�-���.�_h�'� � �?..- ._ _ - -,; ,.�' -
NEV.-- ! •:r'r:F; _.'._ --' .. 1.^50..... K,'!d.,,; ,.. .._.,!Si 'S"'..i- � s �..�r! _ ....r�•� •:._�.::_� ... ?--i��-,,,.--;,!;:,;vi:='�;-::::rc-:ci:::.�_:.:,:� <: ,':•" : _.
`�i�«,�-'�-"-+rt:r �'� Vi�..yy.:.•ar p
a:3�Y'•lF.a4:Csi�^.:�::•i:':�-Y' iGGL:. '�'Gp• r1 �" �.: �'1C.R!.sr� 19W��u�1?�.. r r�iii am�:s �j_...... .. .�,•r,.c..-,-.YE ,�.•,_..`�y�_r•R•�: - _
u:r
.mss:,.. rr..... a�-.r:........ _...,..., .,.,.. ,..... s: =-:..:..,.. - �_-':.::-^-==.Ei=W�`^n_>=�':•=-�:�
....:,:. �r .tom .:..::...._..,......_...... ._
-. _.._.....x, i-- t,:....n_ .i.'a _.-"r. .. •1 _. �.,.. _ ..... '. �::_::�_.� .:._ _...-..... W::. - ..� .�.,. �a
Him a:.en:rJ.::, ': "r.i:•i`__:e:Tl' ??� =_._.:••r.. 'mi ...
:. -. •r..:..�1-':.: -ter. .y__
- -. •�_.,.:� •�,�r,:� �:�: �r • t�'�lith effplts in�rineritata�7n�sttn�l�de �he:-1�'o�;i��_vag':iia�of�
1, items of work you. have. TliAdd: available. to C7%7�3E X rit€ii rii§r k rri g tl
iathetyise peiT}riil .x�?th its own f4Xces. aid, t1se• itclrl5ayaiice�
eco�ni dim? ily fea'sibl'e units to: faeilitnte.'UOU gait spat on 1Fq : Item h.§[ed;.siiotu t aq dtSl]
. nstiate?.fhak'st�fl7r?t .
lv'e and p scent# p of the tom ca�q�taat. `-It ss j�i�r,r.�s}�oss$ity trr demo , _ .. -
- Work to me�T the ott : N+as: xn.adc ava'Yatilemlb Ui3 suis; : •
43 .: '3rzcliEde,' _..__.
817
LCJ �. !S
oing.up,ital svt3eitatiaiTs=lu
rid.slates:vz°vvhieh:t, "•,"�':�;
them ,items of world teddmd: Descr•mlbe
dctnrinine with rt xr r TIM UTD3E� "+Ve€r�,�tit4z�eat��� aa�� I�� dates [�i�i�:f�t�$�+Tt}�. ', ch
RIF
supgortiag'd.o.cuspesxzis sue.ai}�pres iiiattersa,r��sYttCisi'm�Ie&c7y kip i `•.
- ' ; - ciy itn statemegfs aixd _ptFer:evidctsG� oi'saIicitatioz�` Ygis arcremin_de ta.so... h.c":'•. i,.. _i�_. �- T _.. ;- -: - '
-` 'Eki[r�tigl�all reas..oiiable. and ave ilable .means.; and'proi+id�,_aitHaent' bine .tQ.�ildvV`.:.._
pia
3. 144t* cgfs..dlected rim and its statas as a-UPi3E able> .inClUde
tiayme, address,. sna telephone rut intter:•of:each MBE` that providpd.A quote and -f}teirpice. giratcl.
If the firm selected for the item m is nota. Ul? ,.'p aii+ide. Tb
a5bb4.f6r iF a yciecd.Qn.
4;. Name -and. date of caeh publieatian'iu n+f icli yi�.u. qu d UF7F3.E pari ciPatioti-IQr Ekic projdci,
Attach:copies•ofthepubhhed adveeisements:
eie antbaed tom provide vsslstanCC in t:Qn�ctip%
5: 'Names .of agencies and tie# v� wh c}t: t}ley'u.
recn]ftiiig;.and-using i7)' AIE i"irmsm if jbiK egr c EF
were
�oriiaeted in vriitutj;,,: pr, i cvpii b
gpr}1t1 dDEt1p11Ctt[$,
S. Last pF efforts. made [o provide.:jnter'es d UDBEs uvi�tt adequate. information sb pur 4he plans, .
tpeoifeatxons and tequitcrnents p t}1C tuntiact to 'assist fhern q xespnntling.tu a gal citation. if
you )aaVe pir4rrided .infarmation, i e tify flee nasib of She [)DHE. a4dsted, the 66m of the
EXHIBIT
i : 3-7:Q2 P AtiTA UNMI RSALN�IVX RLNG S VSj�1tM {� 'U -' NUNxBL�R:
�.; For the purpose of. eoshplyiq Willi the American. RecOVctyand R�inVeStrilent-
e . 009, the Su erim.ro"vide the.5 a
P l�=r7-N-S numbor .
Complete and si f n to z.: = -
gn ��Lv�r�a Nue
.enc � , ....:1Vuii�laet• foxxa `
included ire the �.ontral t locum Itis, This - orni' tibi i .=Si f ith the exeetated'
If ynux company does not have 'a D-U-'_�- � number; you 'can obtnin am. by crr�tacfir��
D= B_zad.s.treet at:
, �+w... ..!_ '.s- ::" . • .:::.... .:.:. . . - '..... - ::. a "_vi :..' =� �-wn1! j'.� � ;x: r�,_F_;",._.aipa:v¢ �k- � F... _ .. _ - _
.3�, ��..:7r.:.•-.. ., ..... ... .. _. ........a .::.::.....:: r: .:1�.:,:-i-S� �� i•.::. r. •Na.$�r�c_:• r�4.E. -.... _ _ - ..
::•
r�.q. fir, .- ,_.t�u�-.�ST•.,s
-_.. :. .;� a .. .-."—�. �____: ..__._..;-#3�:9c�=._�.-: .P-T?-.,_fir:-�e ._'+: •a'r'ra :.=_. ;;.?:.. . _ -
.:..Oil::'. - - _.,� c.r• _ ''�u2Y:=:.'= iF'.R
=`�`.:.: - _ ...... �ltS
bfAah Rd
tI-D�
al.•.-..:: ".,,: ...iv. ae r�5r„-! ... �.:. �a�_i.:c:_i.,i'_T •1sxJid,::., ik.. _.xr_s_.. .. - . .
? ?�'ir� .r. _..::. ..: m=n ': i,. r,.rerivi:•:�"•- ._. 5 ^a_'_• e,lri-'s%'.. �r''�.---:��[: ^..s;r .. - .. i
. r }5 �:ev.'.eu_:.. .:>'. ... .. r.:.... • . •... _.. ... yrs, ••.:.:.. ....:: :... r �sY.'` :!�,iF. ys.: _: ?--c44e"-r"=::.._.. r...... ,a-_ :. _ _ _— ..
i*J _. c ... rn, .._.,_. .=..;r .__, . ._ .:. ::. ..: -. _. -: - �: r•x.w ^-F`r.��}s •"a -?i li'yp���:I•: l: -J4-,af`'_
'•v: ..::.... �'.+{!4! .. ... - .. _ _- _.. _. - ems. Ls. - -
m'k
r ,
-_!-?L
WIt_
:.. i
._ ., ,,�...._. _.. ,r.f,•.. -, ... ... _ ..... _ . . '-: -. [, , ��:�;=i-y'�-v �y`:g'-._: �?'Li :ate "i � r_?i !:: ,.�:::..• .:.'. - - .. .,
�i...
w......_..........__ .._..r_ .-: .:. . .. .:: _. .......:: .: _ .:`:: • ..':; .:; ; v•.. .. _ - :_ iff!�"NSi
ET - - - -
.. .. .'+.• ,�,� Vi.
_............._ - .: -,:. :.:. _ ,._..: ,. ............�..._-... r..���.......... _.y.r::.. •..'SSL ..�..;�,.;.=,�.F-
Fr
__..a ...... - �._...:_._...r• i{ - ..' rte•?,z`
':
..t- ,,.5.-rrr
_ -.: _
.. _ .,. ,..... .x:a:,;'•:-rrv;i.i:, _ 114+."'�.::!°ii!:.fa� ---,S•i'-•;PC't?
. +i ��-r "}''=..c� •^-ter�:5: "ij .. .1•�:'W°:cry.
—UP
gm
. 535 ...•.e•- ' 3 F. .
». .. ..-....... ' :::::� •:e'xn.;s: n.:�1}.' pie:; ir:!}=u,;� ::,ca—"•: ,_- -•-.w—'Im
_ •ar'ri.�i:�5e :!aryr':.:r':3!!i•:
�•': a: ._ -.. cis: -.:_:i"::. = ,. :: -'xi: :=:a::ji3:v�c �•-T - -e'.i'__.s: x. . =- ? Y. =:_-.., ±s riff :'i �'S .._ .r�l....:u:u:^ :r:..ss..- - i O_...j,���•i a _.ir_.. .h:r5'�,'i ._4�.M: ^.••_vili'se>,.' -- ••: {"�S'-5,:''!-.-.f ::__.`��?e::-:y_
r.:. .._.. -
• -:� � curs
r. �
_fL _
,•. - Mme.
!.... _ 3._. .
d
...c: �.-
R
EXHIBIT
City of San Rafael 8/17/09
Attention: City Manager
1400 Fifth Avenue, Room 203
P.O. Box 151560
San Rafael, CA 94915-1560
Reference: Street Resurfacing American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009
City Project fH 11108
Subject: Bid protest
Dear Mr. Nordhoff,
This letter serves as a formal bid protest of the apparent low bidder, Ghilotti Brothers Inc., on the
above referenced project bid on 8/13/09.
Upon the opening of the bids, it was stated by the City personnel that the apparent low bidder
(anal other bidders also) failed to provide the D -U -N -S Number.
Per the contract documents, specifically the Bid Proposal Check List, pg 84. 1,
`All bidders shall complete and submit each page in the Proposal section, including any required
attachments, by the time and date of the bid opening. Failure to submit in its entirety will be
grounds for finding the bid or proposal non-responsive. The following are the required Proposal
sections that must be submitted as part of the bid ...
12. Data Universal Numbering System (D -U -N -S) Number
Per section 6.05 Rids for Entire Project, TGI respectfully requests the City to reject the bid of
GBI as non-responsive as the bidder failed to subunit bid forms properly completed with all items
filled out. Furthermore, TGI did follow the directions required by the City and submitted the
required documents.
TGI is also disappointed iia a comment heard after the bid from a City official that they would
,most likely throw all bids out, the City will get better numbers that way'.
If the project is put out again, there is no incentive to the contractors to bid the project unless
they want to perform the job for less than the lowest number that the apparent low contractor bid
the fust time. We, are all forced to compete in a very difficult economic environment. For the
City to take this project and put it back out to bid is bad business and bad faith with the
contracting community.
Team Ghilotti, Inc. • 2531 Petaluma Blvd. South - Petaluma, CA 94952
Phone (707) 763-8700 - Fax(707)763-9711
www.teamghilotti.com
Due to the above stated, TGI respectfully requests the District to award the project to Tears
Ghilotti, Inc. as the low responsive bidder.
erely,
Paul R_ Donaldson
General Manager
Glerm Kabanuck — Esquire
Ghilotti Brothers Inc.
Ghilotti Construction Co
7A, Gonsalves & Son
Team, Ghilottx, luc. • 2531 Petaluma Blvd. South • Petaluma, CA 94952
Phone (707) 763-8700 - Fax(707)763-9711
www.teanoghilatti.com
Team Ghilotti, Inc.
2531 Petaluma Blvd, South
Petaluma, CA 94952
(707) 763-8700 phone
(707) 763-8711 fax
www_teamahilotti.com
FaX
To: V't c . P- (SP) At) � From:
�( c-� �{-- S+r�= 1�- �- �{' s�•�a-i.,4�g�1�- C`� c �� � 5� � Z� `� 2
Companyc�+�°fii ilv bic-�..! t
L415
_ C -"%'N '*w 5"
Fax: Pages:
Re:Email
❑ Urgent X For Review ❑ Please Comment 0 Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle
CdNr'101MJ&y_TJ'f§Z y_►��
ROUTING SLIP / APPROVAL FORM
INSTRUCTIONS: USE THIS FORM WITH EACH SUBMITTAL OF A CONTRACT, AGREEMENT,
ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION BEFORE APPROVAL BY COUNCIL / AGENCY.
SRRA / SRCC AGENDA ITEM NO. ,3
FROM:
DEPARTMENT:
DATE:
Nader Mansourian
Public Works
August 13, 2009
DATE OF MEETING: August 17, 2009
TITLE OF DOCUMENT: Report to Mayor and city Council on bid opening for the Street Resurfacing
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009 Project, City Project No. 11108, Federal Aid Project No.
ESPL 5043(030) and Resolution rejecting all bids and authorizing staff to rebid project.
Department Head (signature)
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
(LOWER HALF OF FORM FOR APPROVALS ONLY)
APPROVED AS COUNCIL / AGENCY
AG N A IT M:
. AA,
City anager (signature)
NOT APPROVED
REMARKS:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Q Aw. - e� —, .r��
City Attorney (signature) I{ �