HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-Purchasing
CI"O' OF SAN BERNARDICP - REQUEOT FOR COUNCIL ACOON
From:
Dean R. Meech, Sr. Buyer
RIC'O. - ....,.. OFFllej ec tion of Bids
_ ItC,20 AM 0 52
- Diesel Powered
Motor Grader
Dept:
Purchasing
Date: December 12, 1984
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
None
Recommended motion:
That all bids received for the furnishing of one diesel powered motor grader
be rejected and the Purchasing Agent be directed to re-advertise for same.
Dean R. Meech
Signature
Contact person:
Dean R. Meech
Phone: 5085
Supporting date attached:
Yes
Ward:
N/A
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: N/A
Source: ~I A-
Finance:~" t:7 .,<./
Council Notes:
15-0262
"",'" 'em No-11.
CI10 OF SAN BERNARDICD - REQUIOr FOR COUNCIL AC'C)oN
STAFF REPORT
At the request of the Public Services Department a formal bid was administered
for the furnishing of One Diesel Powered Motor Grader. In co-ordination with
the Equipment Superintendent appropriate specifications were prepared, published
and furnished to distributors of heavy equipment. The following is a summary
of bids received:
VENDOR
EQUIPMENT
TOTAL BID
INCL. TAX
Johnson Tractor Co.
Whitney Machinery Co.
Caterpillar 130G
John Deere 670A
$117,497.82
91,981.50
Specifications as bid have been reviewed with the Equipment Superintendent and
the Director of Public Services who concur that the bid of Johnson Tractor meets
specifications and requirements however equipment offered by Whitney Machinery
Co. while not meeting some major aspects of the specifications is completely
acceptable. The acceptance of this bid which is considered the best buy would
be a major departure from the specification and result in an inequity to the
other bidder. The inequity occurs because the other bidder also has a class of
grader that is comparable to the John Deere 670A that could be bid at substant-
ially less cost.
It has always been our attempt to draw specifications so as to secure fair
competition upon equal terms from all bidders. Any public contract entered
into with the best bidder containing substantial provisions beneficial to him
which were not included in the specifications may be voided as not being the
contract offered to the lowest bidder by the advertisement.
Courts have generally held that awards on bidding must be made at the discretion
of the awarding body, on the basis of common standards made known to all bidders.
No such universal standard exists when some of the bidders have approval to de-
part from specifications while others are held to them.
In view of the foregoing it is recommended that the bids be rejected and the
Purchasing Agent be directed to re-advertise.
.... ......0:"