Laserfiche WebLink
In making the motion, Vice Chairman Stanbridge believed the local company to be <br />more sensitive to the historical significance of the project area. Also, with them being local <br />their performance can be closely monitored. <br />Additional discussion was held. <br />Commissioner Macht specified there were several concerns by the Commissioners <br />leading to the rejection of this bid. <br />THE CHAIRMAN CALLED THE QUESTION and the motion <br />carried unanimously. (Staff to negotiate a contract with the #2 <br />ranked firm, Carter Associates, Inc. and "throw out" the # 1 firm <br />Han-Padron Associates.) <br />Vice Chairman Stanbridge asked if going with a local company is sufficient reason <br />to by-pass the first bidder, and County Attorney Bangel explained that the Board has wide <br />latitude and discretion in bidding. <br />Vice Chairman Stanbridge understood then that all the Board needed as a reason was <br />the preference of a local company, and Commissioner Macht commented that a lot of big <br />firms have lawyers that can make life pretty miserable. <br />Commissioner Adams pointed out that this bid or RFQ probably went out in February <br />(actually January 2001) so they have had all this time to register. She was sure other <br />governments ask the same questions. <br />11.G.3. <br />T <br />Alv1LNDIVILIN'1' '1'O YLORIDA EAST COAST R <br />L.L.C. AGREEMENT <br />The Board reviewed a Memorandum of July 16, 2001: <br />July 24, 2001 <br />42 <br />BX I 18 RG 9 ba <br />IPE - <br />