Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 79-10 Historic Park Negotiate AgmtRESOLUTION NO. 79 - 10 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN *********** AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT FOR COMPLETION OF THE DUBLIN HISTORIC PARK PHASE I PROJECT WITHOUT CONDUCTING A SECOND COMPETITIVE BID PROCESS WHEREAS, the City of Dublin, after conducting a public bidding process in compliance with Public Contract Code sections 20160 et seq., awarded a contract to Elite Landscaping, Inc., with compensation set at $2,476,690 for the completion of certain work constituting the Dublin Historic Park Phase 1 Project (the "Park Project"); and WHEREAS, subsequent events necessitated that the City terminate said contract with Elite Landscaping, Inc.; and WHEREAS, the Park Project site currently contains a large, open trench, which is adjacent to a parking lot owned by the City and rented to a nearby business; and WHEREAS, said open trench poses a safety hazard to any person who may enter upon the~ project site and is also impacting the condition of the adjacent parking lot such that it too may pose a safety risk as well as a potential City liability; and WHEREAS, the Park Project site also contains four unsecured buildings in various states of repair, which buildings constitute an attractive nuisance and could cause serious harm to persons trespassing on the site, as well as the possibility af significantly increased costs to the City in repairing any damage that may be done sa said buildings; and WHEREAS, the Park Project site also contains a large amount of unsecured materials delivery boxes which, if the site is unattended, could be stolen, thus further increasing the City's costs to complete the Park Project; and WHEREAS, the Park Project site also contains a variety of unsecured historical artifacts which, if stolen, could not be easily replaced; and WHEREAS, the City is also completing work on the East and West Dublin BART Corridor Enhancement Project (the "Enhancement Project"), a portion of which is adjacent to the Park Project; and WHEREAS, the portion of the Enhancement Project adjacent to the Park Project includes a pedestrian crosswalk, pedestrian crossing lighting and certain landscaping work performed on the street median; and WHEREAS, comptetion of the adjacent portions of the Enhancement Project is dependent on completion of the Park Project for provision of electricity to the pedestrian crossing lighting and landscape irrigation system; and Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, the electricai contractor on the Enhancement Project has sent notice to the Enhancement Project's general contractor stating that failure to complete work on the electrical component of the Park Project may require the electrica( contractor to revisit the Enhancement Project site at additional cost to the City; and WHEREAS, conducting a second public bidding process for the completion of the work not yet perFormed under the initial Park Project agreement would require a minimum of 60 days before work on the Park Project could recommence; and WHEREAS, a well recognized exception in Common Law to the competitive bidding requirement for public entities exists where the nature of a contract or project is such that competitive proposals would be unavailing or would not produce an advantage, thereby rendering any advertisement for competitive bidding undesirable, impractical or impossible (see Graydon v. Pasadena Redevelopment Agency (1980j 104 Cal. App. 3d 631, 635; 164 Cal. Rptr. 56, 58); and WHEREAS, the rationale for the adoption of the above exception is found in the purposes of the provisions requiring competitive bidding in letting public contracts. Those purposes are to guard against favoritism, improvidence, extravagance, fraud and corruption; to prevent waste of public funds; and to obtain the best economic result for the public (see Graydon, 104 Cal.App.3d. at 636); and WHEREAS, it has also been recognized by Common Law that where competitive proposals work an incongruity and are unavailing as affecting the final result of the public works project, or where competitive proposals do not produce any advantage, or where it is practically impossible to obtain what is required and to observe sucht form, competitive bidding is not applicable (see Graydon, 104 Cal.App.3d. at 636); and WHEREAS, in addition to the Common Law exception listed above, Public Contract Code Section 22050 permits a city to forego formal competitive bidding requirements if its City Council passes a resolution by a four-fifths vote declaring that the public interest and necessity demand immediate expenditures of city funds to safeguard life, health or property, without giving notice for bids to let contracts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of Dublin City Council does hereby make the following findings: A. The circumstances surrounding the uncompleted Park Project are such that the necessary delay entailed by conducting a second competitive bid for the Park Project for completion of the remaining portions of the Park Project would impose significant additional financial burdens, impose a risk of additional liability to the City, pose an unacceptable safety risk to the public, such that the conduct of said bid process would be unavailing, undesirable and would not be to the City's advantage, and that waiver of the public bidding requirements in this instance would not produce any advantage to the City. B. That such a proposed negotiation of a contract would not constitute any sign of favoritism, improvidence, extravagance, fraud or corruption. Page 2 of 3 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby authorize the City Manager to negotiate an agreement for the comp~etion of the Historic Park Phase I Project without conducting a second competitive bid process. Once negotiated, the agreement shalf be presented to the City Council for approval. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1 st day of June, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Biddle, Hart, Hildenbrand, Scholz, and Mayor Sbranti NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: ~ ` ~ \~ ~^-~ ~ Mayor , , ~ / ~ ~ City Clerk Reso No. 79-10, Adopted 6-1-10, Item 4.9 Page 3 of 3