9/27/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

k00K J 3 PAGE 1 7 The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. Attorney Gary B. Sack, representing Advanced Water Engineering, Inc., in Palm Bay, notified the Board that his client is qualified to do the job specified in Bid -#4100 pursuant to the invitation to bid. His client submitted the lowest bid on the project and the bid was in accord with all requirements. His client's bid was recommended by the Purchasing Department, the Utilities Director, and General Services Director Dean, but for some reason was not accepted. The Board awarded the contract to another bidder with a substantially higher bid. That company was not fully qualified according to the conditions in the bid. Mr. Sack stated that the bid should be awarded to Advanced Water Engineering, Inc. at this time, if that is able to be done. His client is ready to do the work for Indian River County. If that cannot be done, the client would be entitled to an award of damages and they will bring the matter to Court for disposition, but they would prefer to receive the contract. Administrator Chandler responded that bids were presented August 2, 1994, and a determination was made that it served the County's best interest to award the bid to a local company. The project is close to being completed and there is no question that All Rite Water Conditioning was qualified. Commissioner Adams reminded the Board that there were two parts to the bid, and General Services Director Dean further explained that the bid called for a single tank or duplex tank system. Advanced Water Engineering, Inc. bid a single -and a duplex tank system. All Rite Water bid a duplex and a quad tank system in which the duplex price of All Rite matched the single price of Advanced and the quad price of All Rite matched the duplex price of Advanced. The system will be in operation this week. A 4 -tank system was installed to service the jail with no increase in cost of operation. County Attorney Charles Vitunac advised that Section 103.03 of the County Code states the County Commission does not have to accept any bid, nor choose the low bid. The award should go to the bidder in the best overall interest of the County, and the Board is required to state the reason for awarding the bid. The Board made a statement regarding the use of a local bidder, which meets the test of the County's code, and there is no applicable state law. SEPTEMBER 27, 1994 28 M M M