CC_Minutes_2012_1210 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,December 10, 2012 Page 9 As low bidder for this project, Mr. Van Gilder noted their firm's previous use of an abatement contractor that did not make their firm legally bound to use that particular firm; and offered their willingness to switch to a MnDOT approved contractor. Mr. Van Gilder noted that five of the nine contractors had missed that specific condition on page 218 of the bid documents; and reviewed the Ur- ban Companies' many projects within the metropolitan area and their expertise. Mr. Van Gilder asked, as indicated in the letter, for an opportunity to switch to a MnDOT approved contractor; and referenced the letter from their firm's legal counsel showing precedents allowing them to do that. At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Van Gilder advised that noth- ing on their bid would change with the exception of the abatement contractor to one approved by MnDOT. At the request of Councilmember Johnson, City Attorney Gaughan reviewed the process issue for consideration of this item. City Attorney Gaughan reviewed the fourth paragraph of the Urban Companies letter as distributed, their firm's rationale as to why they should be awarded based on waiving minor irregulari- ties; and the City Attorney review and finding that this is not a minor irregulari- ty and that the City was not able to waive it as requested. Mr. Gaughan re- viewed potential risk to the City from other bidders that they may deem any such action by the City as a material change and give rise to exposure for the City. City Attorney Gaughan reviewed the choices before the City Council: award the bid as recommended by staff or reject all bids. If the City Council awards the bid tonight, they should do so based on awarding the contractor who complied with the specifications for MnDOT approved contractors on the list. At the request of Councilmember McGehee, City Attorney Gaughan advised that if the City chose to rebid the project, there would be next to zero liability exposure to the City by rejecting current bids and rebidding it. At the request of Councilmember Willmus, City Engineer Bloom advised that she was unaware of any time constraints for the projects other than the projected drop in steel prices after the first of the year; with the work proposed for winter since there were no foundations to dig up and the work would consist primarily of knocking down walls. Ms. Bloom estimated that it would require approxi- mately three weeks to advertise and rebid the project; further clarifying the MnDOT approved list , with opening the end of January and award in February of 2013. At the request of Councilmember Pust, City Engineer Bloom reviewed staff's rationale in requiring MnDOT approved contractors for this work, even though other communities don't use that specific list. In working with Mark Vogel