The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPW 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{ �