My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4/22/1997
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1997
>
4/22/1997
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:10:04 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 10:04:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
04/22/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
106
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
800r 101 PAGE <br />Commissioner Adams recounted that it has been the Board's prerogative in the past to not take <br />the low bid and to use the local vendor if there were circumstances of a close bid and a local bidder. <br />Because there was only a $49 difference in the low bid and that of the local vendor, she wanted to see <br />the local contractor supported. <br />Commissioner Ginn agreed and pointed out that the local contractor has had a long history of <br />local projects and a good record. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED BY <br />Commissioner Ginn, to award the bid to Treasure Coast Contracting in the <br />amount of $405,269. <br />James Chambers, representing Tri -Sure Corporation of Auburndale, Florida, was very <br />surprised that the Board was considering any bid other than Tri-Sure's low bid. He had no idea that <br />the Board had a policy to make bid awards to local bidders. He recounted how his company had done <br />extensive and very good work in Indian River County, and that the crew lived here during the <br />weekdays of construction jobs and thus generated dollars into the economy of the county. <br />Commissioner Adams assured Mr. Chambers that her motion was not a reflection on the past <br />performance of Tri -Sure, merely that it was a very close bid and the local contractor would generate <br />most if not all of the dollars into the economy of Indian River County. <br />County Attorney Viitunac explained that some years ago the Board adopted an ordinance that <br />said the Board is not required to take the low bidder. The only restriction on their choice is that the <br />acceptance has to be in the overall best interest of the County. So, it is a policy matter of the Board to <br />decide when the second low bidder or the third low bidder is a better choice for the County <br />Mr. Chambers understood but felt that he could convince the individual Board members that it <br />was not in the best interest of the county. He cautioned that a policy such as this could be detrimental <br />to the county as there are not enough local contractors for the projects the county needs and out-of- <br />town firms will refrain from submitting bids. He stated Tri Sure does work throughout the state and is <br />able to do so because their bids are very competitive. He was shocked and thought Tri -Sure was being <br />treated unfairly. <br />Chairman Eggert explained her great concern for the economic development of the county. <br />Commissioner Adams hoped that the decision today would not prevent Tri -Sure from bidding <br />on other County jobs as they have done good work for the County in the past. <br />Karl Hedin, local businessman and elected official, urged the Board to reconsider and award <br />the bid to the low bidder. He reasoned that all bidders bid in good faith, and the low bid is always <br />accepted because we live in a competitive society. <br />14 <br />April 22, 1997 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.