Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - June 7, 1995coca a�`,P CITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION AGENDA TITLE: Contract Award and Rejection of Non -Responsive Bids for Civic Center Improvements (Phase II), City Hall Remodel ($1,853,310) MEETING DATE: June 7, 1995 PREPARED BY: Public Works Director RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council adopt the attached resolution rejecting the non- responsive bids from The McDonald Glenn Company and Broward Brothers, Inc. and awarding the contract for the above project to Leslie G. Delbon Company, Inc. in the amount of $1,853,310.00 (Base Bid plus Bid Alternates B and C). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This project is one of the last major phases of the Civic Center improvements. The work under this project includes the overall interior remodel (saving as many existing walls and offices as possible), structural upgrade, reroofing, installation of new energy- efficient HVAC system, windows and lighting, and ADA upgrades, including elevator and restrooms. As part of the bidding process, the City prequalified general contractors and the electrical, HVAC, elevator and plumbing subcontractors. The prequalification statement required contractors to provide information on their experience in historical renovations, the resume of their proposed project manager and project superintendent, their financial resources, their ability to meet the performance schedule of the contract, and a summary of all claims disputes within the last five years. Nine general contractors were prequalified as were five electrical, five elevator, four HVAC and five plumbing subcontractors. Addendum 2 of the specifications for this project stated that a general contractor's bid proposal would be considered non-responsive if it included a mechanical, electrical, elevator or plumbing subcontractor that had not been prequalified. The general contractors were provided with a listing of all prequalified subcontractors. Both The McDonald Glenn Company and Broward Brothers, Inc. listed Armstrong Plumbing as their plumbing subcontractor. Armstrong Plumbing was not prequalified by the City as a plumbing subcontractor. Interim City Attorney John Stovall has reviewed the specifications for this project as well as the bids that were received and has recommended that the City reject the bids from The McDonald Glenn Company and Broward Brothers, Inc. A copy of Mr. Stovall's review and recommendation is attached. The bid proposal for this project included three alternate bids. Bid Alternate A asked for a quote to enclose the north entry, Bid Alternate B would install new roof tile on the entire roof and Bid Alternate C would install terrazzo tile on the floors and ceramic tile on the walls of the men's and women's second floor toilet rooms. The tile in the toilet rooms would replace plastic vinyl floors, plastic laminate APPROVED: THOMAS A. PETERSON recycled paper City Manager CC -1 CAWARD.DOC 05/31/95 Contract Award and Rejection of Non -Responsive Bids for Civic Center Improvements (Phase II), City Hall Remodel ($1,853,310) June 7, 1995 Page 2 countertops and painted walls. Staff is recommending that Council award the Base Bid plus Bid Alternates B and C for this project to Leslie G. Delbon Company, Inc., of Sonora, and reject the bids of The McDonald Glenn Company and Broward Brothers, Inc. as being non-responsive. Plans and specifications for this project were approved on March 1, 1995. The City received the following five bids for this project: Bidder Location The McDonald Glenn Company Manteca Broward Brothers, Inc. Woodland Leslie G. Delbon Company, Inc. Sonora Mark Diversified Sacramento Diede Construction Woodbridge Engineer's Estimate Base Bid Plus Alternates B and C $1,835,615 $1,845,000 $1,853,310 $1,863,500 $2,004,596 $1,800,000 (Base Bid only) A recap of the bids received, including the bid alternates, is attached. FUNDING: General Fund, Development Impact Fees (General City and Police) and General Fund Capital Improvement Budget. NublJac. Ronsko Works Director Prepared by Wesley K. Fujitani, Senior Civil Engineer JLR/WKF/Im Attachments cc: Interim City Attorney Deputy City Attorney Finance Director Purchasing Officer Building and Equipment Maintenance Superintendent Weneli Mattheis Bowe The McDonald Glenn Company Broward Brothers, Inc. Leslie G. Delbon Company, Inc. Mark Diversified Diede Construction CAWARD.DOC 513195 SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 5-24-95 ; 3;01PM ; 12099484910- 33367954 2 NEU\dILLER St BEARDSLEE A ?ROFEnio\,AL CoRpomroN • ATTomm & C=Nsuom ESTmusH D 1903 60413-DO060 JOHN W. MVAZL STocxmv OFF= S09 W. WE= AVL STOMON, CA 95203-3166 May 24, 1995 (209) 948-8200 (209) 948-4910 FAX MAIL= ADDw& P.O. Box 20 STQQ=N. CA VIA TELEFAX (209) 333-6795 9S201-3020 Rich Prima Moo= Design Engineer (209) S77 -82W (209) $77-4910 FAx City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 212 West Pine Street Lodi, CA 95241 Dear Rich: I have reviewed the documentation you gave me with respect to the bids on the above -referenced contract and with respect to the fact that the two lowest bidders listed a non -prequalified subcontractor. Under the case of Konica Business machines v. Regents of the University of California 206 Cal.App.3d 449, a bid is determined to be non-responsive if a) it does not substantially conform to the specifications; or b) it does substantially conform but the variance affects the amount of the low bid or gives an advantage to the low bidder over other bidders. our contract Addendum 2 specifically provides that the failure to use a pre-qualifed subcontractor will be considered a nonresponsive bid. There is also the point that it is theoretically possible since those who did use pre -qualified people were restricted to a specialized list and the two lowest bids were not so restricted to that specialized list, that it could have affected the low bid or given an advantage to them. Therefore, I would have to say that in fact the two lowest bids were non-responsive. This brings up another issue. We have received, after the opening of the bids but prior to the award of the bide, a letter from the non -pre- qualified subcontractor ("Armstrong"), in which they "officially pulled" their bid. There is some question as to whether they can "officially pull" their bid. Even if they did pull or were allowed to pull their bid, however, this would leave the two lowest bids with no subcontractor for that area which would mean they would have to do it 39644-1 SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 5-24-95 ; 3:01PM ; 12099454910; 33367954 3 Rich Prima May 24, 1995 Page 2 themselves. I think there are significant problems as to whether Armstrong may pull their bid, but I don't think it is a key point here. The key point is whether they have pulled it after the fact or not, it is an attempt to correct what is a non-responsive bid. Therefore, I would indicate that I believe the best course of action is to reject the two lowest bid as non-responsive and award to the 3rd lowest bidder. The issue has further been raised, however, that the 3rd lowest bidder has as a subcontractor, Pinasco Plumbing, Inc. and the City of Lodi received on May 19, 1995, after the bids were opened, copies of documents indicating that Pinasco has been sued in Amador County on or about May 4, 1995, for allegedly failing to pay one of its subcontractors on another job. I would note for the record that McDonald -Glenn, the apparent low bidder for the whole job, was also named in that suit pro forma. The concern has arisen whether this bears on the fact that Pinasco is listed as a subcontractor in the third low bidder's bid. I do not believe it does. First off, the fact that they may have gotten into a dispute or even wrongfully withheld money on another job, absent some showing of a crime or violation of the statutes, does not make them an unresponsible or non -responsible bidder or party. Secondly, unless there was some mis-information given to or perjury committed in information they gave to the City, the City already prequalified them prior to becoming aware of this issue. Lastly, of course, this is so far merely a lawsuit. It may in fact be completely wrong and Pinasco may be totally innocent of any wrong -doing or failure to pay. We simply don't know that. To show that someone is "non -responsible," information must be provided to them and they are entitled to a hearing before the City Council on that issue. The real issue of course, will be whether they are Qualified to do the work. Qualified, in this case, means "do they possess the quality, fitness, and capacity to satisfactorily perform the proposed work?" it doesn't really relate to whether they have been sued or gotten into a dispute with a subcontractor of theirs. Therefore, it would appear to me that the best course of action would be to disqualify the two lowest bidders as non-responsive and award the contract to the third lowest 35614-t SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 5-24-95 ; 3;02PM ; 12099494910-+ 33367954 4 Rich Prima May 24, 1995 Page 3 bidder. Alternatively, of course, the City has reserved the right to reject all bids and re -bid the matter. If you were to re -bid the matter, it appears to me that the work you have already done in pre -qualifying people would not need to be done again and could simply publish a Notice Inviting Bids at least 10 days before the date of opening the bids in accordance with Public Contract Code section 20164. I am returning to you with the hard copy of this letter, the various documents you had given to me to peruse. Ptry you STOVALL Attorney -at -Law JWS:jlk Enclosure cc: (Via Facsimile) John Luebberke, Deputy City Attorney 35644-1 CITY OF LODI Public Works Department Tabulation of bids received May 18, 1995 PROJECT: CITY HALL REMODEL - PHASE 2 221 W. Pine St. Item Description 1 Remodel Existing 3 -story Lodi City Hal Bid Alternate A Enclose Covered Porch at North Entry Bid Alternate B Replace Existing Roof Tile with 'S' Mission Clay Roof Tile Bid Alternate C Substitute Tile for Finishes in Men's Toilet Room 312 Women's Toilet Room 320. Item Description 1 Remodel Existing 3 -story Lodi City Hal Bid Alternate A Enclose Covered Porch at North Entry Bid Alternate B Replace Existing Roof Tile with 'S' Mission Clay Roof Tile Bid Alternate C Substitute Tile for Finishes in Men's Toilet Room 312 Women's Toilet Room 320. Engineer's Estimate Qty Unit Price Total 1 LS $1,800,000.00 $1,800,000.00 1 LS 1 LS 1 LS LESLIE DELBON Sonora, CA Qty Unit Price Total 1 LS $1,833,000.00 $1,833,000.00 1 LS 23,135.00 23,135.00 1 LS 4,980.00 4,980.00 1 LS 15,330.00 15,330.00 BIDTAB.XLS MCDONALD-GLENN BROWARD BROS. Manteca, CA Woodland, CA Price Total Price Total $1,819,357.00 $1,819,357.001 $1,830,000.00 $1,830,000.001 10,145.00 10,145.00 20,000.00 20,000.00 2,697.00 2,697.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 13, 561.00 13, 561.00 13, 000.00 13, 000.00 MARK DIVERSIFIED DIEDE CONSTRUCTION Sacramento, CA Woodbridge, CA - Price Total Price Total $1,848,000.00 $1,848,000.001 $1,972,674.00 $1,972,674.001 19,500.00 19,500.00 22,744.00 22,744.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 12,100.00 12,100.00 13, 000.00 13, 000.00 19, 822.00 19, 822.00 i �N1 - Lic 4482475 June 7, 1995 CITY OF LODI City Hall, 221 West Pine Street Lodi, Ca 95241-1910 SUBJECT: Contract Award and Rejection of Non -Responsive Bids for Civic Center Improvements (Phase II), City Hall Remodel City Council Members, I come here tonight, appealing the Public Works staff's recommendation of DISQUALIFYING The MCDONALD GLENN Company as low bidder on the Civic Center Improvements (Phase II), City Hall Remodel project. This appeal is not a challenge, at this time, of the legal recommendation by interim City Attorney but an appeal to the City Council members to their common sense plus an obvious savings to the TAX PAYERS of Lodi. Our bid is being classified as "non-responsive", by your Public Works Staff and your interim City Attorney, because of our listing of a non pre -qualified subcontractor. As stated, we are not challenging the legality of the subcontractor listing, but there are two sides to every story. The pre -qualification of contractors, in our opinion, is definitely in the best interest of tax payers, a benefit to contractors and I sincerely hope the City of Lodi continues this practice. As with any new or different process, there is a learning curve that will have to be endured. In this particular case, the question of true intent of the pre -qualification and whom is to be pre -qualified caused confusion at bid time. SUMMARY OF THE BID PROCESS The original bidding documents required GENERAL CONTRACTORS, ELEVATOR, ELECTRICAL AND "MECHANICAL" subcontractors to be pre- qual-ified. The City produced addendum #2 that listed the City's pre -qualified contractors. The addendum also divided the once MECHANICAL subs into "Heating Ventilating/Air Conditioning" and "Plumbing" subcontractors. Addendum #3 increased the list even further. 22221 Oleander Avenue (209) 823-2772 The McDONALD GUNN COMPANY Manteca, California 95337 Fax (209) 823-1389 On bid day, The MCDONALD GLENN Company received a fax bid from ARMSTRONG Plumbing, we noted that Armstrong was not on the list of pre—qualified subcontractors. We placed an immediate call to Armstrong Plumbing, leaving a message with their secretary concerning the bid. NO RESPONSE FROM ARMSTRONG WAS RECEIVED BETWEEN RECEIPT OF BID AND @ 11:45 AM AND 2:00 PM. After receipt of Armstrong's bid we placed a call to Dennis Callahan. Instead of Mr. Callahan, we were put in contact with Mr.Gary Wyman. We were inquiring if the pre—qualification list of subcontractors had been expanded or changed, in particular was Armstrong on the list. From the conversation with Mr. Wyman, we interpreted that the "PLUMBING" subs were not critical and should not have been made part of the pre—qualification process. Thus we listed Armstrong and assumed other general contractors, if not all, would make the same type of inquiry. REBUTTAL After the bid was submitted, contact was made with Armstrong by The MCDONALD GLENN Company. He claimed ignorance of the pre— qualification requirements and subsequently pulled his bid from all general contractors (letter received the following day and a copy issued to the City). Please note, Interim City Attorney "pre—judged" this action as an attempt to circumvent the bidding requirements. Although your City Attorney is quick to pre—judge this action, he chooses to point out that a law suit filed against a subcontractor listed by the third low bidder is not a "judgement" but only alleged. It is my opinion that judgement on both issues should be made with the same open mind. CLOSING Obviously, because of our interest in this project, and because of prior working experiences with the City of Lodi, The MCDONALD GLENN Company would be pleased to accept a contract for the this project. In doing so the City would be saving $17,241.00 of tax payers money. And should all alternates be accepted the City could realize as much as $30,685.00 in savings over the recommended third low bidder. I realize that voting against city staff and legal council recommendations are not commonly done and may not be politically wise to do, but saving the tax payer's money is. So in closing I hope City Council will recommend that the project be re—bid. In doing this I can guarantee that the tax payers will save at least $17,241.00, because it would be the intent of THE MCDONALD GLENN Company to re—submit at least the same bid amount, if not lower. 4Gl renn McDonald President MEMORANDUM, City of Lodi, Public Works Department To: City Manager City Council From: Public Works Director Date: June 7, 1995 Subject: Contract Award and Rejection of Non -Responsive Bids for Civic Center Improvements (Phase II), City Hall Remodel ($1,853,310) Per the instructions of John Stovall, Interim City Attorney, I am forwarding to you prior to tonight's City Council Meeting a letter of protest from Stanton, Kay & Watson, the law firm representing Broward Bros., Inc., together with a response from our Construction Inspector related to our bid process. We will present to the City Council this evening additional information, some of which is attached, which shows that our recommended action in the Council Communication is appropriate. If you have any questions, please contact me. 't�z !� Ja L. Ronsko ubli Works Director JLR/I attachments cc: Interim City Att ;ney City Clerk Construction Inspector MCCAWARD.DOC 06!05",95 15:15 %2916 381 7880 SK&W LAW OFFICES OF STANTON, KAY & WATSON LAWRENCE If.; AYE; It P. W (- r F!1.{ 1,� 0 w +! i �. r3 7501 FOLSOM DOULEYARD. SUITE 350 JAMES M, •- ELMCR R. MALAKOFF SACRAMHNTO, CALIPORNIA 15126 Cl_AT P. 5RARLQY 381-78¢8 TELEPHONE (416)BRUCH 9. 1.910H FAX (916) 331-7890 WILLIAM L_ lBRTER CYNTHIA S. CONNER� SUSANJ,OLSOH RONAI.0 L. JLICHMAN S:RLLY A. RYAN THOMAS E. STANTON of"bum VIA FAX: (209) 333-6907 June 5, 1995 Hon. Steve Mann, Mayor CITY OF LODI 221 W. Fine Street P.O. Box 3005 Lodi, CA 95241-1910 Subject: Civic Center Improvements (Phase 13). City Hall Remodel Dear Mayor: fih001/D02 0S 95 co krrVW, 110 SUTTER STREHT, THIRD PL ' SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 44164 MBPHOmE t4151 785-3496 PAx (40) 7884174 This office represents Bmward Bros., Inc., s general building contractor located in Woodland, California. Browwd Bros, was recently notified by the Lodi City Council that its bid on the above -referenced project was considered non-responsive and was therefore rejected. I note that the City Council will have a meeting on June 7 to discuss this mattes. I therefore send this letter to you via fax. to ensure that it receives irrfm�iate attention. At the pre-bid meeting on this project, conducted by the City of Lodi, Broward Bros. was given the name and phone number of a Mr. Crary Hyman as the City's agent and contact for the project. During the bidding process, Broward Bros. contacted Mr. Hyman several times, at the project site and via the telephone, to have questions answered. Mr. Hyman was helpful and answered the +questions. However, it is now apparent than due to intended and reasonably anticipated reliance on the information Mr. Hyman provided, it has been recommended that the bid of my client be rejected as non-responsive. As bid time approached, Broward Bros- received a scope -of -work letter from Champion IndustrW Contractors, a subcontractor who was listed as an approved mechanical subcontractor. The scope letter stated that Champion Industrial would also be bidding phnnbing for the project, Upon receipt of the letter, Broward Bros. personnel telephoned Mr. Clary Hyman for clarification as to whether or not this was acceptable, since Champion was not listed as a pre -qualified phunbing subcontractor. Mr. Hyman stated that, "Pliunbing contractors do not need to be pre -qualified." Broward Bros. relied U4-05-1995 15:01 916 381 7880 P.01 06%05:95 15:15 0916 391 7880 SK&W 1200-21002 Hon. Steve Mann, Mayor City of Lodi June 5, 1995 Page 2 on Mr. Hyman's statement in preparing its bid, and haat is why it listed Araaastrong Plumbing on the bid. Were it not for Mr. Hyman's statements, Armstrong Plumbing would not have been listed on Broward Bros.' bid. Because the City of Lodi informed Broward Bros. that its contact person, Mr. Hyman, would answer questions relating to bidding, it obviously did not occur to my client that the information provided would be erroneous and that reliance upon these answers would result in loss of the bid. I have reason to believe that other bidders received equivalent erroneous bidding information from Mr. Hyman. On the basis that requested, anticipated, and reasonable reliance upon the information provided by the City of Lodi's contact person may cause Broward Bros_ to lose its bid, it is our position that the only appropriate remedy would be for the City of Lodito reject all Rids and have the project m -bid. I believe the project could be rye -bid and awarded within. ten days, at little additional cost under Public Contract Code section 20164. This would certainly be more cost-effeetive than litigation. In any event, please he advised that, should the City proceed to adopt a resolution rejecting Broward Bros.' bid as non- responsive, onresponsive, Broward Bros. will pursue all available legal action against the City due to its mishandling of this matter. Very truly yours, STANTON, KAY & WATSON William L. Porter Attorney-at-Uw 1'i'1004111 JUN -05-1995 15:02 916 381 7BBO P. 02 (D MEMORANDUM, City of Lodi, Public Works Department To: Public Works Director From: Construction Inspector Date: June 6, 1995 Subject: Contract Award and Rejection of Non -Responsive Bids for Civic Center Improvements (Phase II), City Hall Remodel ($1,853,310) Today I received a copy of a fax from a legal firm representing Broward Bros., Inc. I feel I must respond to correct certain items and inaccuracies. First, I have reviewed the video tape of the prebid meeting. I was introduced as the City's full-time on-site construction inspector. My phone number was given as the person to contact to set up appointments to tour the City Hall building. At no time was I presented as the City's "agent'. There was a statement made by Dennis Callahan, Building and Equipment Maintenance Superintendent, after discussing access to the building that, 'Questions about the building be directed through Gary Wiman.' At no time during the prebid meeting was it stated that I would answer questions. At the prebid meeting, there were questions about prequalification. One contractor asked, "How do you define mechanical subcontractors?' The answer was mechanical HVAC and plumbing. It was then asked, 'What if a qualified general lists a non-qualified electrical, mechanical? That's going to be thrown out? Non-responsive?' The response was, 'Right.' As noted in the fax, I did receive numerous questions from various contractors, subcontractors and suppliers during tours and phone calls. I only answered questions about where to find things on the plans or in the specifications. I was asked, but did not answer, questions about conflicts on the plans, in the specifications, and about substitutions; I passed those questions along to Wes Fujitani, Senior Civil Engineer, to be answered via addendum, or asked the questioner to call the architect, Larry Wenell. Addendum 2 was issued on April 28, 1995. Item 3, attached as Exhibit A, states: 'Mechanical' subcontractors required for pre -qualification is defined as mechanical HVAC Contractors and plumbers, not fire sprinkler contractors. Item 4 states: Prequalifications: The following list of contractors have been prequalified. Others may be added in a future addendum pursuant to ongoing evaluation. Failure of a general contractor to use pre -qualified subcontractors will be considered a non-responsive bid. Item 4 goes on to list the prequalified contractors by category, including PLUMBING. Broward Bros., Inc. signed the receipt of addendum form (attached as Exhibit B). Page 1 of the Instructions to Bidders states: The Owner, Department of Public Works, will send written instructions to all bidders. Neither Owner or its representative will be responsible for any oral instructions. It goes on to say:... so that all inquiries can be answered in writing and distributed to all bidders in the form of addenda to the contract ... (attached as Exhibit C). Finally, I did not make the statement quoted in the fax. I had many conversations with many people regarding the prequalification process and results. I referred all questions to the addenda or the architect. Gary R. Wiman Construction Inspector attachments cc: Interim City Attorney Building and Equipment Maintenance Superintendent MCCPRTST.00C EXHIBIT A CITY OF LODI CMC CEVTER RaROVEMENiS ADDENDUM #2 CITY HALL REMODEL April 28,1995 1. Bid opening has been extended to Thursday, May 18, 1995 at 2:00 pm. 2. Space on a first come -first serve basis will be provided two hours before the bid opening for bidden to prepare their bids. No phones will be provided. 3. "Mechanical" subcontractors required for pre -qualification is defined as Mechanical HVAC Contractors and plumbers, not fire sprinkler contractors. 4. Prequalifications: The following list of contractors have been prequalified. Others may be added in a future addendum pursuant to ongoing evaluation. Failure of a general contractor to use pre -qualified subcontractors will be considered a non-responsive bid. General Broward Brothers, Inc. Diede Construction JA Grover J.L. Bray and Son, Inc. Leslie G. Delbon Co., Inc. McCarthy Construction McDonald Glen Company Rock Construction Electric Bockmon and Woody Collins Electric Con J. Franke Electric, Inc. Pacific Metro Electric Elevator Dover Otis Elevator U.S. Elevator Mechanical Champion Industrial Contractors CITY OF LODI CIVIC CENTER IMPROVEMENTS ADDENDUM #2 CITY HALL REMODEL April 28, 1995 J.H. Simpson Modern Air Mechanical Plumbing G.G. Hust and Sons HRM Plumbing Pinasco Plumbing M. Santos and Son Williams Plumbing 5. Section to bidders. Section 1773.1 of the labor code of the State of California § 1773.2. Specification of general wage rate in call for bids, in bid specifications and in contract; post at job site The body awarding any contract for public work, or otherwise undertaking any public work, shall specify in the call for bids for the contract, and in the bid specifications and in the contract itself, what the general rate of per diem wages is for each craft, classification or type of workman needed to execute to contract. In lieu of specifying the rate of wages in the call for bids, and in the bid specifications and in the contract itself, the awarding body may, in such call for bids, bid specifications, and contract, include a statement that copies of the prevailing rate of per diem wages are on file at its principal office, which shall be made available to any interested party on request. The awarding body shall also cause a copy of the determination of the director of the prevailing rate of per diem wages to be posted at each job site. (Added by Stats. 1971, C. 785, p. 1538, § 2. Amended by Stats. 1974, C. 876, p. 1869, § 1; Stats. 1977, c. 423, p. 1435, § 1.) 6. Prequalification - Mechanical 15020-4 paragraph 1.10 - Change to read "Contractor shall submit, ilk the bid, a written........... 7. Construction Contract Article VIII change to read "...... prosecute to completion within 305 calendar days". -2- EXHIBIT B t. CITY OF LODI PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECEIPT OF ADDENDUM PROJECT. CMC CENTER IMPROVEMENTS, CITY HALL REMODEL. PHASE II Received from the City of Lodi ADDENDUM NO. 2 to the plans and specifications for the above referenced project Date: S- iSi-4 -cwcwd &4ksovs, 7 . NOTE: This acknowledgment must be submitted with the Bid Proposal. ACO2RC?T.00C 0412"S City of Lodi, Civic Center Improvements, City Hall Remodel Instructions to Bidders INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS EXHIBIT C Bids: Bids, to receive consideration shall be made in accordance with the following instructions: a. Bids shall be made on the bid form provided by the Owner, a copy of which is included with these documents. All items on the form should be filled out; numbers should . be stated both in writing and in figures and the signatures of all individuals must be in longhand. The completed form shall be without interlineations, alterations, or erasures. b. Bids shall not contain any recapitulation of the work to be done, and alternative bids will not be considered unless called for. C. Should a bidder find discrepancies in or omissions from the drawings or other contract document, or should he be in doubt as to their meaning, he shall at once notify the architect/engineer, Wennell, Mattheis, Bowe Architects. The Owner, Department of Public Works, will send written instructions to all bidders. Neither Owner or its representative will be responsible for any oral instructions. No interpretations will be issued later than seven (7) calendar days prior to the bid date so that all inquiries can be answered in writing and distributed to all bidders in the form of addenda to the contract in ample time before the bid opening date. d. All addenda issued during the bidding period are to be included in the bid, and they will become a part of the contract for the project. e. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 4100 to 4113, inclusive, of the Government Code, every bidder shall in his bid set forth: (1) The name and location of the place of business of each subcontractor who will perform work or labor or render service to the bidder in or about the work in an amount in excess of one-half of one percent of the total bid. (2) The portion of the work which will be done by each subcontractor. If the bidder fails to specify a subcontractor for any portion the work to be performed under the contract in excess of one-half of one percent of the total bid, he agrees to perform that portion himself. The successful bidder shall not, without the consent of the Owner: (a) Permit any subcontract to be assigned or transferred or allow it to be performed by anyone other than the original subcontractor listed in the bid. (b) Other than in the performance of change order, sublet or subcontract any portion of the work in excess of one-half of one percent of the total bid as to which his original bid did not designate a subcontractor. 19 City of Lodi (January, 1995) Page 1 CITY COUNCIL STEPHEN J. MANN, Mayor DAVID P. WARNER Mayor Pro Tempore RAY C. DAVENPORT PHILLIP A. PENNING JACK A. SIECLOCK CITY OF LODI CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET P.O. BOX 3006 LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 (209) 333-6706 FAX (209) 333-6842 June 1, 1995 SUBJECT: Contract Award and Rejection of Non -Responsive Bids for Civic Center Improvements (Phase II), City Hall Remodel THOMAS A. PETERSON City Manager JENNIFER M. PERRIN City Clerk BOB MCNATT City Attorney Enclosed is a copy of background information on an item on the City Council agenda of Wednesday, June 7, 1995, at 7 p.m. The meeting will be held in the City Council Chamber, Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street. This item is on the consent calendar and is usually not discussed unless a Council Member requests discussion. The public is given an opportunity to address items on the consent calendar at the appropriate time. If you wish to write to the City Council, please address your letter to City Council, City of Lodi, P. O. Box 3006, Lodi, California, 95241-1910. Be sure to allow time for the mail. Or, you may hand -deliver the letter to the City Clerk at 305 West Pine Street If you wish to address the Council at the Council meeting, be sure to fill out a speakers card (available at the Carnegie Forum immediately prior to the start of the meeting) and give it to the City Clerk. If you have any questions about communicating with the Council, please contact Jennifer Perrin, City Clerk, at (209) 333-6702. If you have any questions about the item itself, please call Dennis Callahan, Building and Equipment Maintenance Superintendent, at (209) 333-6706. L' Jack . Ronsko Publi Works Director JLRIIm Enclosure 1� cc: City Clerk " Building and Equipment Maintenance Superintendent NCAWARD.DOC THE MC DONALD GLENN COMPANY BROWARD BROS INC 22221 OLEANDER AVE MANTECA CA 95336 20432 COUNTY RD #99 WOODLAND CA 95895 WENELL MATTHEIS BOWE LESLIE G DELSON CO INC ATTN LARRY WENELL 222 W LOCKEFORD ST STE 9 P O BOX 3127 LODI CA 95240 SONORA CA 95370 MARK DIVERSIFIED INC 110 COMMERCE CR SACRAMENTO CA 95815-4202 DIEDE CONSTRUCTION P O BOX 1007 WOODBRIDGE CA 95258 RESOLUTION NO. 95-70 A RESOLUTION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AWARDING CONTRACT FOR CIVIC CENTER IMPROVEMENTS (PHASE II), CITY HALL REMODEL AND REJECTING TWO NON-RESPONSIVE BIDS WHEREAS, in answer to notice duly published in accordance with law and the order of this City Council, sealed bids were received and publicly opened on May 18, 1995 at 2:00 p.m. for the bid for Civic Center Improvements (Phase II), City Hall Remodel, described in the specifications therefor approved by the City Council on March 1, 1995; and WHEREAS, said bids have been compared, checked, and tabulated and a report thereof filed with the City Manager as follows: The McDonald Glenn Company Broward Brothers, Inc. Leslie G. Delbon Company, Inc. Mark Diversified Diede Construction Engineer's Estimate (Base Bid Only) I E0ZK:71Y (IN Manteca Woodland Sonora Sacramento Woodbridge Base Bid PLUS ALTERNATES B & C. $1,835,615 $1,846,000 $1,853,310 $1,863,500 $2,004,596 $1,800,000 WHEREAS, the bidding process required prequaliftcation of all general contractors, electrical, HVAC, elevator and plumbing contractors; and WHEREAS, nine general contractors, five electrical, five elevator, four HVAC and five plumbing subcontractors were prequalified; and WHEREAS, Addendum 2 of the specifications for this project state that a general contractor's bid proposal would be considered non-responsive if it included a mechanical, electrical, elevator or plumbing subcontractor that had not been prequalified; and WHEREAS, both The McDonald Glenn Company and Broward Brothers, Inc. listed Armstrong Plumbing as their plumbing subcontractor, who was not prequalified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Lodi City Council that the non-responsive bids from The McDonald Glenn Company and Broward Brothers be rejected and the award of the contract for Civic Center Improvements (Phase II), City Hall Remodel, be and the same is hereby awarded to Leslie G. Delbon Company, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $1,853,310.00. Dated: June 7, 1995 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 95-70 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held June 7, 1995 by the following vote: AYES: Council Members - Davenport, Pennino, Sieglock, Warner and Mann (Mayor) NOES: Council Members - None ABSENT: Council Members - None ABSTAIN: Council Members - None J CQU LINE L. TA R A ting ty Clerk 95-7