Laserfiche WebLink
approval from SJRWMD's governing Board for the $1.5 million Grant Agreement to aid in <br />construction of the project. <br />Director Davis reviewed the backup memorandum to provide the bid history of <br />this item, which involved a conflict between H & D Construction, Inc., the lowest responsive <br />bidder, and Close Construction, Inc., the second lowest bidder. He explained why staff felt that <br />the bid should be awarded to the second lowest bidder, Close Construction, Inc. <br />Commissioner Flescher questioned the prudence of not using the least expensive <br />bid, which would save $120,000 or $170,000, because not enough "T's" and "I's" were crossed. <br />He ascertained from Director Davis that the information has now been received from H & D. <br />County Attorney Will Collins presented explanation as to why H & D's bid was <br />determined by the Committee to be non-responsive at the time of submittal. He advised that the <br />Board has the authority to decide what were technicalities or irregularities, and waive such, but <br />the Committee's recommendation was that the original bid application was lacking in matters of <br />responsiveness. <br />County Administrator Baird explained to Commissioner Wheeler why, if H & D's <br />bid was determined to be inadequate, it was not immediately disqualified. <br />Commissioner Wheeler commented that if H & D was weak on their application, <br />he would question how strong they would be on the job. He felt that it was important to follow <br />policies and procedures. <br />Director Davis clarified for Commissioner O'Bryan why there were discrepancies <br />among the bids in the cost for various items which the construction companies would have to <br />purchase while doing the project. <br />37 <br />November 18, 2008 <br />