Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-10-27; City Council; 14911; Cannon Road West Reach 1wa > & a, % . . E Y 2 ii! 3 B E % . . p Y e 5 00 AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR CANNON ROAD WEST REACH 1 AND APPROPRIATION OF ADDITIONAL FUNDS PROJECT NO. 3184 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Carlsbad Municipal Water District Board of Directors: Adopt Resolution No. /0aci accepting bids and awarding Project No. 3184 for the construction of Cannon Road West Reach 1 water and recycled water transmission mains to Hazard Construction Company. City of Carlsbad City Council: Adopt Resolution No. 78 - 3 5’6 accepting bids and awarding Project No. 3184 for the construction of Cannon Road West Reach 1 to Hazard Construction Company, and appropriating additional funds in the amount of $3,695,000. ITEM EXPLANATION: The project involves the construction of Cannon Road West Reach 1 from Station 63+00 to Faraday Avenue. The construction includes water and reclaimed water transmission mains, sewer collector line, storm drain, curb, gutter, sidewalk, an enhanced and landscaped median, roadway surface improvements and a 454-foot long double bridge structure. On June 9, 1998, the City Council approved the plans and specifications for Cannon Road West and directed the City Clerk to advertise for construction bids. On July 21, 1998 the water board authorized the inclusion of the water and reclaimed water transmission lines and the sewer collector line in the Cannon Road West construction project. The bid opening was delayed from the original opening date of July 31, 1998 to August 21, 1998 as several questions regarding the bridge construction were received by the City. On August 21, 1998, the following three (3) bids were received: 1. Brutoco Engineering and Construction, Inc. 2. Hazard Construction Company 3. West Coast General Corporation The Engineer’s Estimate for the project was $4,550,000. $5,737,330.00 $5,855,027.40 $6,895,654.10 Staff has analyzed the bids and concluded that the low bidder, Brutoco Engineering and Construction, Inc., has material defects in their bid as follows: The contract requires that 50% of the project shall be performed by contractor’s own forces. The bid instructions require the bidder to complete a “Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractors Bid Items” form in order for the City to make a determination as to whether this requirement has been met. The low bidder did not fill out the Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractors Bid Items form. The Amount of Item Subcontracted, Amount of Item by Contractor and the Overhead and Profit Amount were left blank on all the subcontractor forms, although the names of subcontractors were given. Therefore, the City has no way of determining what amount of the contract will be performed by Brutoco Engineering and Construction, Inc. The Instructions to Bidders specifically placed bidders on notice that their bid could be rejected as non-responsive if the “Designation of Subcontractor” form was not completed. Brutoco attended the pre-bid meeting held on July 16, 1998 at which time the question was asked, “Does the Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractors Bid Item form need to be completely filled out?” The City responded affirmatively and memorialized the statement in Addendum No. 2 which contained meeting notes from the pre-bid meeting. - Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. 1 y, ‘? // - Hazard, the second lowest bidder, did not attach an explanation sheet to two subcontractor forms as required. The purpose of the explanation sheets is to provide additional information where the general contractor is performing some of the work of a bid item and the subcontractor is performing the remainder. This additional information may be helpful in determining the 50% requirement where the total amount of work subcontracted for the job is close to 50%. In the case of Hazard, even if 100% of the two items for which no explanation was given were assigned to the subcontractor, the total subcontracted amount of work would only be 43% versus 41% if the “Amounts of Items Subcontracted” column on the Designation of Subcontractor form is totalled. Therefore, the failure to attach the explanations is only a minor irregularity which gave the contractor no advantage. Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the City Council declare the bid from Brutoco Engineering and Construction, Inc., non-responsive and award the contract to the second low bidder, Hazard Construction Company, in the amount of $5,855,027.40. Brutoco Engineering and Construction, Inc., has requested an opportunity to protest the award recommendation. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Planning Director has determined that the requested action is consistent with prior CEQA review. The project was reviewed in the Cannon Road Reach 1 Environmental Impact Report. Significant environmental impacts identified by those CEQA documents were determined to be mitigable to levels of less than significant. Permits from the resource agencies have been received. FISCAL IMPACT: TABLE 1 CMWD CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR 16.INCH POTABLE WATER PIPELINE AND 24-INCH RECYCLED WATER PIPELINES TABLE 2 CMWD CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR COLLECTOR SEWER PIPELINES PROJECT NO. 35831 Sewer Construction $152,940 Construction Contingencies $15,294 Project Administration and Inspection $10,706 Survey/Soils Testing $4,588 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS $183,528 Appropriations available as of September 30, 1998 $2,397,780 ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS -O- 2 Page 3 of Agenda Bill No. 14: 5 I 1. TABLE 3 The construction of this project is funded by several sources: TransNet Highway, Community Facilities District No. 1, Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 3, water connection fees and sewer benefit area funds for South Agua Hedionda Interceptor Phase I. The timing of the construction of the project has been moved up several years form the date originally programmed in the CIP due to the increased development of the area. Staff is recommending that City Council appropriate an additional $207,000 TransNet Highway Funds that the City has received for the project. In addition, staff is recommending that City Council authorize an additional appropriation from CFD #I ($588,000) and BTD #3 ($900,000). Staff is also recommending that $2,000,000 is loaned from the gas tax fund to BTD #3 and appropriated to the project. The loan will be repaid when funds are available from BTD #3 fees collected in the future. EXHIBITS: 1. 2. Location Map. Carlsbad Municipal Water District Board of Directors. Resolution No. /oa/? accepting bids and awarding project No. 3184 for the construction of Cannon Road West Reach 1 to Hazard Construction Company. 3. City of Carlsbad City Council. Resolution No. 98 -3.?d accepting bids and awarding project No. 3184 for the construction of Cannon Road West Reach 1 to Hazard Construction Company, and appropriating additional funds in the amount of $3,695,000. 3 PROJECT NAME PROJECT EXHIBIT CANNON ROAD WEST NUMBER 3184 I nw?,, I)“. NOT To SCALE - RESOLUTION NO. 1029 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING PROJECT NO. 3184 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF CANNON ROAD WEST REACH 1 WATER AND RECYCLED WATER TRANSMISSION MAINS TO HAZARD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. 6 WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Carlsbad Municipal Water District, Carlsbad, 7 California, has previously authorized combining a 16-inch water and 24-inch recycled 8 water transmission main with Cannon Road West Reach 1 plans and specifications, CMWD 9 Project No. 88-602, Contract No. 35341; and 10 WHEREAS, three (3) sealed bids were received on August 21, 1998 for said project; and 11 WHEREAS, the low bid received to construct said project submitted Brutoco Engineering 12 and Construction, Inc., was found to be non-responsive; and 13 WHEREAS, the contract documents require that 50% of the project shall be performed by 14 contractor’s own forces, however, the low bidder’s total subcontracted amount could not be 15 determined because the Designation of Subcontractor Form was not completed; and 16 WHEREAS, the low bidder did not fill out the Designation of Subcontractors Bid items 17 form. The Amount of Item Subcontracted, Amount of Item by contractor and the Overhead and 18 Profit Amount were left blank on all subcontractor forms; and 19 WHEREAS, the second low bid received to construct said project submitted by Hazard 2. Construction Company, did not attach an explanation to two subcontractors forms; and 21 WHEREAS, the total subcontracted amount of work would be 43% if the subcontractor 22 were to perform all work; and WHEREAS, the failure to attach the explanations is a minor irregularity which gave the 23 contractor no advantage; and 24 25 26 27 WHEREAS, the bid from Hazard Construction Company is considered responsive; and WHEREAS, all bid documents received from all bidders have been reviewed in detail and the Board of Directors does hereby find that the lowest responsive, responsible bid received for the construction of said project was submitted by Hazard Construction Company in the amount of 28 $493,591; and 1 WHEREAS, funds in the amount of $593,591 to include construction of a 16-inch water 2 and 24-inch recycled water transmission main, $50,000 for construction contingencies, and 3 $50,000 for inspection services, are needed to complete the project; and 4 WHEREAS, Subsection 3.28.1720(l) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code authorizes the City 5 Manager to approve change orders in the amount of the contingency set at the time of the bid 6 award. 7 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Carlsbad 8 Municipal Water District of Carlsbad, California, as follows: 9 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 10 2. That $593,591 remain available from the connection fee program for the 11 transmission mains. 12 3. That the bid amount of $493,591 submitted by Hazard Construction Company is 13 hereby accepted, and the President is hereby authorized and directed to execute the agreement, 14 therefore, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the Secretary. 15 4. That a construction contingency in the amount of $50,000 is hereby approved. 18 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the Carlsbad Municipal I7 Water District held on the 27th day of October , 1998 by the following vote, to wit: 18 AYES: Board Members Lewis, Nygaard, Kulchin and Hall 19 NOES: None 20 21 22 23 24 Al-TEST: II 25 2s ALETHA L. RAUTE 27 28 (SEAL) RESOLUTION NO. 98-356 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF CANNON ROAD WEST REACH I, PROJECT NO. 3184. 5 WHEREAS, plans and specifications have been reviewed by the City Council of the City 6 of Carlsbad for the construction of Cannon Road West, Project No. 3184; and WHEREAS, bids have been received by the City of Carlsbad for the construction of said I-.--..---.-------- 8 project; and 9 WHEREAS, the low bid received to construct said project submitted Brutoco Engineering 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 and Construction, Inc., was found to be non-responsive; and WHEREAS, the contract documents require that 50% of the project shall be performed by contractor’s own forces, however, the low bidder’s total subcontracted amount could not be determined because the Designation of Subcontractor Form was not completed; and WHEREAS, the low bidder did not fill out the Designation of Subcontractors Bid items form. The Amount of Item Subcontracted, Amount of Item by contractor and the Overhead and Profit Amount were left blank on all subcontractor forms; and WHEREAS, the second low bid received to construct said project submitted by Hazard 17 Construction Company, did not attach an explanation to two subcontractors forms; and 18 WHEREAS, the total subcontracted amount of work would be 43% if the subcontractor I9 were to perform all work; and 20 WHEREAS, the failure to attach the explanations is a minor irregularity which gave the 21 contractor no advantage; and 22 WHEREAS, the bid from Hazard Construction Company is considered responsive; and WHEREAS, THE Planning Director has determined that the requested action is consistent 24 with prior CEQA review; and 25 WHEREAS, funds in the amount of $3,922,891 are available for design, construction, administration, and inspection of said project; and 26 27 WHEREAS, TransNet funds are available for the Cannon Road West project; and 28 - 1 WHEREAS, Subsection 3.28.1720(l) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code authorizes the City 2 Manager to approve change orders in the amount of the contingency set at the time of the bid 3 award; and 4 WHEREAS, additional TransNet Highway funds, Community Facilities District No. 1 5 (CFD #I) and Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 3 (BTD #3) are available for the project. 8 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, 7 California, as follows: 8 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 9 2. That the low bid of $5,737,330 submitted by Brutoco Engineering & Construction, 10 Inc., for Project No. 3184 for the construction of Cannon Road West improvements is hereby 11 12 13 14 15 rejected. 3. That any minor irregularities in Hazard Construction Company’s bid are hereby waived. 4. That the second low bid of $5,855,027.40 submitted by Hazard Construction Company is hereby accepted and the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute a contract therefor. 5. That the award of this contract is contingent upon Hazard Construction Company 16 executing the required contract and submitting the required bonds and insurance policies, as 17 described in the contract, within twenty (20) days of adoption of this resolution. The City l8 Manager may grant reasonable extensions of time. 19 6. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to approve construction change 2o orders up to $536,144 of the construction total. 21 7. That the City Council authorize the Finance Director to appropriate $207,000 from 22 TransNet Highway Funds, $588,000 from CFD #I funds and $900,000 from BTD #3 funds. 23 Ill 24 Iii 25 Ill 26 I// 27 Ill 28 i/i 1 8. That the City Council authorize the Finance Director to loan $2,000,000 from the 2 gas tax fund to BTD #3 and appropriate these funds to the project. The loan will be repaid at a future date when funds are available. 3 4 5 6 7 8 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on the 27th day of October , 1998 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Nygaard, Kulchin and Hall NOES: None Council Membe 9 10 11 12 13 II ATTEST: 2. l&LzzLLn ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk ) (SEAL) 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 26 * 1 .” .eh \ . . ” 0 RONALD R. BALL CITY ATTORNEY D. RlCHARD RUDOLF ASSISTANT CITY A-ITORNEY JANE MOBALDI ASSISTANT CITY AlTORNEY 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-1989 (760) 434-2891 FAX: (760) 434-6367 pECEIVED SW 2 5 1998 jlpas, MAHONEV ~~Rv7@?d & SOLL September 22,. 1998 Paul M. Mahoney, Esq. Jones, Mahoney, Brayton & Soll P. 0. Box 940 Claremont, California 91711 RE: CARLSBAD CONTRACT NO. 3184 Dear Mr. Mahoney: I have received your letter of September 9, 1998 contesting staffs intention to recommend award of the above referenced contract to Hazard Construction, and have reviewed the bid documents with regard to your objections. I concur with staff that Brutoco’s bid is non-responsive, in that Brutoco neglected to complete the “Designation Of Subcontractor And Amount Of Subcontractor Bid Items” forms as instructed. The instructions for completing those forms clearly state that “Failure to provide complete and correct information may result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive.” The City’s contract requires that the prime contractor perform at least 50% of the work itself. The City must be able to make a determination as to whether or not the prime contractor has complied with this requirement from the face of the bid documents as submitted, without the necessity of resorting to outside information or investigation. The City calculates the percentage of work to be subcontracted by adding the amounts in the “Amount of Item Subcontracted” column and dividing this total by the total bid amount for the combined schedules. The “Overhead & Profit Amount” column, which should refer only to the prime contractor’s overhead and profit, is supplemental information which the City can utilize in its determination that the prime contractor is properly allocating the amount of work subcontracted. The City’s response to question 2.A.2. addendum no. 6 was in error, since second tier subs are not required to be listed on the subcontractor listing form, nor is the first tier subcontractor overhead and profit required to be listed. But in any event, nowhere in the City’s contract documents does it provide that the determination of the subcontracted amount will be calculated by adding overhead and profit to the bid item amount listed in column one. - t * I <- .\c, .- < . d. 3 i A review of the bid documents submitted by Brutoco, makes it impossible for the City to determine what amount of the work is being subcontracted by Brutoco because of Brutoco’s failure to complete the subcontractor listing form. A totaling of all bid item amounts in the schedules which were designated to be subcontracted on the subcontractor listing form equals 64.2% of the work. On the contrary, a determination of the amount of subcontracted work can be made from Hazard’s completed subcontractor designation form, which amounts to 40.7% of the work. Therefore your contention that Brutoco is the victim of favoritism is unpersuasive. The City is entitled to impose requirements above and beyond the .mandates of state law. MCM Construction, inc. v. Citv and Countv of San Francisco, et al (September I, 1998) 98. Daily Journal DAR 9329. In MCM Construction. Inc., the court held that the failure to state dollar amounts of work to be performed by seven of nine contractors was, like the misstatement of the correct percentage of work to be done by subcontractors in the Vallev Crest case, in the nature of a typographical or arithmetical error from which the contractor could have sought relief under the statute. The contractor therefore had an advantage not available to other bidders and the city was without power to waive the deviation. Likewise, Brutoco’s failure to state the dollar amounts of work to be performed by its subcontractors could allow Brutoco to seek relief from its bid pursuant .to Public Contracts Code section 5103, which the City would be obligated to grant. The City cannot award a contract to a bidder who could withdraw its bid, thereby giving that bidder an unfair advantage. On the other hand, these defects make Brutoco’s bid non- responsive. The matter is currently scheduled for the October I, 1998 City Council agenda and Brutoco is entitled to the hearing requested in your letter of September 21, 1998 at that time. Vmly yours RONALD R. BALL City Attorney rmh c: City Manager Public Works Director Summary Analysis of Hazard Construction’s “Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractor’s Bid Items” Forms Submitted in bid documents, Bid date 08/13/98 CANNON ROAD WEST, REACH 1. CONTRACT NO. 3184. Name of Subcontractor J.L. Dawdson North County Gunite Penhall Company Dywidag Systems John S Meek 1 Bid Item NO 2-6 Melchor Land Survey Progressive Concrete Valley Crest 2-6 2-6 2-6 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 1-23 Misc. 1-5 1-32 1-33 1-35 l-31 l-39 l-40 l-41 l-42 1-43 l-44 l-45 l-46 I-47 i-46 f-13 i-16 1-19 l-49 l-50 l-51 1-52 l-53 1-54 l-55 l-56 1-57 l-58 1-59 I-60 l-61 l-62 l-63 l-64 l-66 l-67 l-69 l-70 l-71 l-72 l-73 2-7 2-8 2-9 2-10 2-11 2-12 2-13 2-14 l-74 l-14 1-15 l-16 1.17 l-36 1-37 l-26 l-27 l-28 l-29 l-30 2 3 4 5 6 Hazard Construction’s Amount of Amount of Overhead Total of Extended bid amount Item Item by 8 profit Columns by Bid Item from S&JCOlll~aCled Contractor Amount 2-4 bid documents 360.000.00 1.985.500.00 491.337.00 2.955,ooo.oo 2,955.ooo.oo 37.683.00 17.500.00 62.980.00 26.442.50 33.664 00 375796.00 321.900.00 -2.400.00 23.600.00 9.412.00 21.000.00 2.137.50 2.800.00 18.362.55 150.290.50 3.400.00 4,096.oo 49.184.50 42.180.00 400.00 Atlas Fence 1.412.00 3.000.00 237.50 400.00 6.925.70 28.250.00 23.057.50 29.842.50 37.760.00 424.980.50 364.080.00 2.600 00 23.600.00 10.824.00 24.000.00 2.375.00 3.200.00 25.268.25 201.598.00 29.842.25 37,760 00 424.980.50 364.080.00 2.800.00 TC Construclion 636.630.00 71.196.00 707.826.00 Lekos Electric 117.386.00 15.614.00 133.000 00 44.300 00 5.920.00 50.220.00 Orange Co. Striping American Concrete 1.800 00 240.00 2.040.00 3.130 00 370.00 3.500.00 27.497.00 3.509.00 31.00600 10.823.80 24.000.00 2.375.00 3,200 00 25.298.25 9.000.00 155.00 748.00 1.045.00 22.000.00 107.000.00 135.000.00 33.000.00 4.850.00 10.300.00 1.885.00 1.545.00 8B8.00 36.190.00 10.830.00 56.700.00 11.560.00 1.071.00 2.920.00 6.120.00 3.380.00 2,600 00 8.400.00 11,440.00 5.141.00 8.140 00 7.920.00 7.140.00 1.670.00 380.00 890 00 1,690 00 5.222.00 11.454.00 5.230 00 2,100 00 137,700.00 3,800 00 132.720.00 73.500.00 13.950.00 27.510.00 6.940.00 97.200 00 133.000.00 21.000.00 4.500.00 7.720.00 17.000.00 2.040.00 3.500.00 7,998 00 10.237.50 792.00 9.975.00 2.004.00 220,600 00 Griffin Dewatering 2-1 86.324.00 112.250.00 22.026.00 220.600.00 Totals 2.383.035.05 2.126.000.00 744.505.20 5.253.540.25 Total of Hazard Constrwtion’s “Amount of Subcontracted” Column plus “Overhead L Profit” Column Hazard Construction’s Total Bid Amount Percent of work Subcontracted by Hazard Construction = 3.127.540.25 5.855.027.40 53% BRUTOCO ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION, INC. ‘- SUBCONTRACTING PLAN CANNON ROAD WEST, REACH I CONTRACT NO. 3194 CITY OF CARLSBAD. BID DATE 8113198 Sate Preparation &ark Mulch 5.gal Median Shrubs Meden Tree 24” Box Hydroaeed Mix 113 Hydroseed Mix #I Hydraseed Mix t2 Permanent Median trngabon System Medtan lrrlgatton Sleeves Mamtenanca 8 Plant Eslablishmenl 4” Conduits for Pat Sell Crossmg Condurt. wee. pull boxes EL Electrical Service Street Lights Brdge Lights 3” sch 60 PVC &Type S pull boxes Curb 6 GutlerlG-2 Type S 6”-6” Curb Trsnrrtion Concrete Driveway/G-I4A Structure Excavalwn Furnish Piles (HP 12x74) Drive Pites (HP 12x74) Furntsh Prtes (HP 14x117) Drrve Piles (HP 14x117) Reber Tube Rarkng Bid them Subcontractor Name, Address, San Diego. CA 92170 License U176374 Cadsbad Ltrc Xl 67300 Drmge. CA 92666 License # 346095 Carlsbed List Y None I-39 I-40 I-41 I-42 I-43 I-44 I-45 I-46 I-47 I-48 6450 Miramar Place San Diego. CA 92121 Liscense Y 133947 Cartsbad List II None I 1-14 Lekos ElecInc I-15 1370 Prormer I-16 1.17 I-36 ElCajon. CA 92020 (619) 447-7661 Llsca”se II 566410 Car&bed Ltsc II 1204372 Escrmdrdo. CA 92026 Llcerw? # 657359 Carlsbad Ltsc Y None 1311 GrandAw San Marcos. CA 92089 License il621641 Carlsbad List # 1001600 License II 416144 Carlsbad LIX: Y 1125500 1032 w ‘%” street Wmmgtm. CA 907441 Carlsbad Lltc # 1207242 (619) 562-2002 Liscense X 260142 Carlobad LIOC # 449500 2-6 IOSI) Dywtdag Systems Inlenattcnel 2154 Swth St Long Beach CA 90605 (562) 531.6161 License I273710 Carlsbad Lrsc I None 2-6 ACL Constmcbon 4030 E Grand Ave Pcmona. CA 91766 (909) 629-6169 License x 466640 Cadsbad LIX X Ncae 2-6 Ulmer lndustrres 15243 Valley Blvd Fontena. CA 92335 (909) 623-71 I I License U 704461 Cartsbed List Y Nane Percentage of Item Subcontrecied 61% Ioa% IWX 100% 100% 100% 66% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% IW% 100% 100% 94% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 93% 66% 91% 69% 80% 89% 67% 42% 100% 97% 100% 3% 3% 1% s 25.700.00 Amount f 5.718 w s 26.250.W f 1.710.00 s 10900.00 s 4,wo w s 3.200 00 s 6.600 00 s 1woo 5 1.7oow s 4oo.w s 20.000.00 s 100.000.w s 10.000.00 s 1.wo.w t 5.0x.00 s 6.OW 00 s 16.600 W s 4.5oo.oc s 7,200.OO s l&W0 00 t 6.sW.00 s 52.125.00 s 42.793.00 s 760 00 0 6.164.00 s 12.422.00 0 705.00 f 10.500 00 s 1.764 00 s 19,764.W s 315.000.00 s 21.15400 s 43,456 00 S 336,140.OO f 351.646 00 f 514.000Oc s 77.1oo.oa s 77.100.00 Site Prepmatron Pick out rocks in planler. grading ‘nstell Conduits Spdl Removal F-D-L A4C Pewmen, Place Dike Fumrsh Water Truck Buy AC matenel Form Purr MBdran Curb Form Pwr Curb 6 GtdIer Form Pour Curb Tmnsisitton Form Pour S&ewelk Form Paw Oliveway Fme Grade far curb EL backup Fme Grede far curb EL backup Fine Grade for curb 6 be&up Fine Grade for srdewetk 6 backup Frne G&e for drweway 6 backup Stamped concrete Frne Grade for stamped concrete 3 Instell 6 rerrmve porbon of shormg Post tensiomng structure concrete .s subcontractor sup,mI Fwm. Pour. Finish Concrete Barrier Slructure Concrete a sthmw0r support Furnish 6 Install tube re~lmg struclure concrete 6 Subcontractor support Total of Subcontracted Work f 2.171.033.00 Total Bid Amount f 5.737.330.00 Percent or v&k Subcontrected 36% THOMAS c. BRAYTON* PAUL M. MAHONEY= STEPHEN c. JONES* RlCl-iARD A. SOLL -A PROFESSIONAt. CORPOF!ATION JONES, MAHONEY, BRAYTON & SOLL A PAmwERS”1P wKL”DlNG PRol=Es51ONeL CORPO~TIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 150 WEST FIRST STREET. SVITE 280 P. 0. BOX 940 CLAREMONT, CALIFORNIA (9091 x99-9977 BY FAX AND U.S. MA& (760) 434-8367 October 20, 1998 Ronald R. Ball City Attorney CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, California 92008- 1989 . . .Re: CARLSBAD CONTRACT NO. 3184 My Client:.Brutoco Engineering & Construction Dear Mr; Ball: : .’ This letter will confirm our telephone conversation of October 20, 1998. You have advised me that the above-referenced contract is not on the agenda for the City Council meeting tonight. I will contact you later in the week to ascertain whether the matter will be on the agenda for the next City Council meeting on October 27, 1998. In the meantime, I appreciated the opportunity to discuss Brutoco’s position with you over the telephone. As I explained, Brutoco did not fully complete the forms entitled “Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractor’s Bid Items” because Brutoco was not sure how they were supposed to be filled out. Unfortunately, addendum No. 6 did not clarify the issue. You noted the error in your letter to my partner, Paul M. Mahoney, dated September 22, 1998. The instruction on the form states, “Failure to provide complete and correct information w result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive. ” As you know, the term “may” is discretionary, while the term “shall” or “will” is mandatory. This gives the City Council discretion whether or not it wants to reject the bid for not properly ffiling out the form. . Ronald R. Ball October 20, 1998 Page 2 On the other hand, the 50% requirement is mandatory. The specification states, “Any bid that proposes performance of more than 50% of the work by other than the contractor’s own organization will be rejected as non-responsive. n The City Council has no discretion to reject any bid that violates the 50% specification. Brutoco has submitted documentation to the City that clearly and unequivocally establishes that Brutoco is going to do 62% of the work with its own forces, and subcontract out 38% of the work to subcontractors. I have reviewed the bid submitted by Hazard Construction. According to the bid, Hazard is subcontracting out 53 % of the value of the work to subcontractors, not 40%. Hazard’s bid must be rejected as non-responsive. In the fina analysis, the facts have not changed. Brutoco was the low bidder, and Brutoco will be doing 62% of the work with its own forces. My client and I would like to make a presentation to you and to any staff you designate to explain why we believe the contract should be awarded to Brutoco. The presentation would not take more than half an hour, and we can clarify why we believe the bid forms are ambiguous, and why the City Council should exercise discretion in this matter. Please let me know if you can arrange such a meeting. Very truly yours, Richard A. Sol1 of JONES, MAHONEY, BRAYTON & SOLL RAS/ph ENGINEERING G CONSTRUCTION, INC. City of Carlsbad Mayors Office 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 - ALL RECElVED October 13,1998 Attention: Mayor “Bud” Claude Lewis Reference: .Cannon Road West (Reach 1) Reference is made to Mr. Ronald Ball’s correspondence of October 6, 1998. I am infuriated and bewildered regarding Mr. Ball’s proposed course of action in the award of the above referenced project. Mr. Ball has determined the City should spend an additional $117,877.00 on a project that is well over budget by awarding to the second low bidder on the job. Additionally Mr. Ball is willing to violate the Project Specifications, subject the project to potential delay and sully the City’s reputation of promoting fair play in it’s public works contracting. Bids for the subject project were received by the City on August 21, 1998. Three bids were received from the following Contractors for the amounts listed. Brutoco $5,737,000.00 Hazard $5,855,027.00 West Coast General $6,895,654.00 In its post bid analysis of the proposals the City is attempting to disqualify Brutoco’s bid because Brutoco did not fully complete “Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractor’s Bid Items” forms. Note that Brutoco did in accordance with Section 4104 of the Government Code name all of it’s subcontractors and designate the work to be subcontracted. What Brutoco did not do was to provide exact dollar amounts for the following breakdown of each subcontracted bid item. Amount of Item Subcontracted Amount of Item by Contractor Overhead and Profit Subsequent to the bid date Brutoco has submitted exact subcontracted amounts and shown clearly that Brutoco will subcontract out 38% of the bid and do 62% with it’s own forces. Please note that Brutoco gained no competitive advantage by not filling out the forms. The reason Brutoco did not fill out the forms was because the formswere vague, ambiguous and subject to interpretatidn. Finally please note that the last sentence of the first paragraph of the forms reads “Failure to provide complete information mav result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive” (underlining added by writer). Pn DnV”r)Cl Cnhll-AMA PAIIEnDhllA Or)Q’Zl,i m iCinO\QCn-QE?C . EAYIC,,,b\Qr)‘)A,QQl . ,)(“EkKShlA Ae3A777n The City at present plans to award the project to Hazard Construction at Hazards bid price which is $117,877.00 above Brutoco’s. Hazard did fill out the “Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractor’s Bid Item” forms at the time of bid. In reviewing Hazard’s bid however a serious problem becomes apparent. Hazard is subcontracting out $3,127,540.25 which is 53% of Hazard’s bid amount. The Project Special Provisions state “Any bid that proposes performance of more than 50 percent of the work by other than the Contractors own organization a be rejected as nonresponsive.” (underlining added by writer). It would appear that the City should not award to Hazard. The City, in its public works construction, relies upon the competitive bid process to receive fair prices for its projects. It is of utmost importance for any municipality to maintain an air of fair competition and to award to the low bidder on all jobs except in the case of major irregularities- The City may waive minor irregularities in bids and particularly in the case where an irregularity is minor and the City has culpability in creating the irregularity through unclear instructions, the irregularity should be waived. On the subject project the City received a total of only three bids, Brutoco, Hazard and West Coast General. Generally this type of public works project would receive from five to seven bids. Brutoco has not previously had the opportunity to work for the City but Brutoco bid this project and Brutoco wants to construct it. If Brutoco and the contracting community feels the City unfairly or unnecessarily disqualifies bids then certainly the tendency will be for the City to receive fewer bids. This cannot be to the City’s advantage. Brutoco has repeatedly requested a Public Hearing to review the proposed disqualification of Brutoco’s bid for the subject project. We have been informed by Staff that the Council meeting of October 20, 1998 will serve as the Public Hearing. Myself and other Brutoco representatives will be present and prepared to review the applicable specifications and to discuss Staffs’ recommendation to disqualify Brutoco’s bid and spend an additional $117,877.00 in order to award to the second bidder. I request your close attention and review. Sincerely, BRUTOCO ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION, INC. President MHtVkms cc: Ramona Finnila, Mayor Pro Tern Matt Hall, Council Member Ann Kulchin, Council Member Julie Nygaard, Council Member RONALD R. BALL CITY AITORNEY D. RICHARD RUDOLF ASSISTANT CITY AlTORNEY JANE MOBALOI ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-l 989 (760) 434-2891 FAX: (760) 434-9367 October 6,1998 Paul M. Mahoney, Esq. Jones, Mahoney, Brayton & Soll P. 0. Box 940 Claremont, California 91711 RE: CARLSBAD CONTRACT NO. 3184 Dear Mr. Mahoney: I have reviewed your letter of October 1, 1998 concerning the above referenced contract award. This item is currently scheduled for the City Council agenda on October 20,1998. With regard to the substance of your protest, your reliance on section 2-3 of the Standard Specifications is unpersuasive, since the City clearly states in the instructions for “Designation Of Subcontractor And Amount Of Subcontractor’s Bid Items” form that “The Bidder MUST complete each information field on this form” which “must be submitted as part of the bidders sealed bid. Failure to provide complete and correct information may result in rejection of the bid as nonresponsive.” The necessity for completing the subcontractor designation form prior to submitting the bid was reiterated and reinforced in Addendum No. 2 in response to a bidder question. The fact that SSPWB section 2-3 requires the contractor to submit a statement showing the work to be subcontracted to the Engineer before the work of any subcontractor is started, does not negate the requirement for providing subcontractor information in the bid package. The recent decision in MCM Construction, Inc. v. Citv and Countv of San Francisco, (September I, 1998) 98 DAR 9329 makes it clear that the City is entitled to impose requirements above and beyond the mandates of state law. Moreover, contrary to the assertion in your October 1 letter, the City is not interpreting the designation of subcontractor form with regard to “Overhead & Profit” to disqualify bidders. It is Brutoco, who is seeking to disqualify hazard Construction’s bid by adding the amounts listed in the Overhead & Profit column to the subcontracted items of work. a I do not understand the significance of your reliance on SSPWC section Z-3.1 in taking issue with the City’s methodology for determining what percentage of the work is being completed by the prime contractor. Nowhere in the standard specifications does it provide that the Contract Unit Price shall be defined as the amount of the item subcontracted plus the subcontractor’s overhead and profit. The City does not admit, as you assert, that its method of determining the subcontractor percentage is unclear, but only that an error was made in responding to a question posed by a contractor at the prebid conference. However, that error is inconsequential in that it did not bear on the methodology for calculating the percentages of work to be performed by the sub and prime contractors. I am unclear as to the point you are raising with regard to the Standard Specifications section 2-3.1. However, if you will elaborate I will give your analysis further consideration. Even though the City obviously desires to save money, as stated in my previous letter, the City cannot award the contract to Brutoco due to its total failure to complete the bid forms as instructed. Ve ly yours a -QQJ-L-QL RONALD R. BALL City Attorney rmh c: City Manager Public Works Director TI-IOMAS c. BRAYTON* PAUL. M. MAHONEY’ STEPHEN c. JONES~ RICHARD A. SOLL *fi PFIOFES510IIPL CORPDIATION JONES, MAHONEY, BRAYTON & SOLL A PPIFnNER5HIP INCIJJDING Pr?ocEssIoNeL coRFuK4TIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 150 WEST FlRST STREET. SUITE 280 P. 0. BOX 940 CLAREMONT. CALIFORNIA 91711 l9091 399-9977 FAX (9091 399-5959 September 21, 1998 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS Mr. Ronald Ball City Attorney City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Re: Carlsbad Contract No. 3 184 Contractor Brutoco Engineering & Construction, Inc. Dear Mr. Ball: On September 9, 1998, I wrote you concerning my representation of Brutoco Engineering & Construction, Inc. with regard to the above-mentioned contract. I requested confirmation that the City Council award hearing had been continued from September 22, 1998 to October 6, 1998, as Brutoco had been advised by the City’s representatives. I have not received a response to my letter. Under California law, including the appropriate Government Code Sections regarding bids and subcontractors, and Carlsbad law, including its municipal code, Brutoco is entitled to a hearing regarding its bid and the City’s plan to reject it prior to the award hearing in front of the Carlsbad City Council. Demand is hereby made that Brutoco be awarded such a hearing forthwith. The failure of the City of Carlsbad to afford Brutoco such a hearing violates Brutoco’s rights under the law. If it is the City’s position that there is no other formal hearing that must Mr. Ronald Ball City Attorney September 21, 1998 Page 2 be granted to Brutoco other than the City Council hearing when the contract is scheduled to be awarded, you should advise me of that fact immediately and also cite me the proper authorities to support your position. PMM:w JONES, MAHONEY, BRAYTON & SOLL * PAWNERSHIP lNaJJD,NO PROFESSION& CoRpo~mNs ATTORNEYS AT LAW THOMAS c. BRAYTON’ IS0 WEST FIRST STREET. SUITE 280 PAVL M. MAHONEY* P. 0. BOX 940 STEPHEN 0. JONES’ RlCHARO *. SOLL CLAREMONT, CALIFORNIA 91711 19091 399-9977 *A PmOrESSIONAL CQRPDRCITION October 1, 1998 FAX (9091 399-5959 Mr. Ronald Ball City Attorney City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Re: Carlsbad Contract No. 3 184 Dear Mr. Ball: This letter is in response to your letter to me of September 22, 1998. Your office had advised my office upon our request that the hearing on the award of Carlsbad Contract No. 3 184 is either going to take place on October 13 or October 20, 1998. Please let me know the correct date as soon as possible. In terms of the substance of your letter, it seems to me that several of tbe issues that you feel are important are not supported by the contract documents. Also, it appears that you are relying upon what your specification writer meant to say as opposed to what is actually written in the specifications. You point out that the City must be able to make a determination “solely by reviewing the bid documents” as to whether or not the contractor is doing 50% of the contract work with its own forces. This is not supported by the specifications. The Standard Specifications state in Section 2-3, Subcontracts, Mr. Ronald Ball City Attorney October 1, 1998 Page 2 “Before the work of any Subcontractor is started the Contractor shall submit to the Engineer for approval a written statement showing the work to be subcontracted giving the name and business of each Subcontractor and description and value of each portion of work to be so subcontracted. n Clearly, post bid submission of subcontracting information to demonstrate that the Contractor is doing 50% of the work is allowed by the specification. Such post bid submission does not lead to any competitive advantage. In fact, Caltrans, the County of San Diego, the Orange County Environmental Management Agency and Los Angeles County all request and receive such subcontracting information after the bid. On September 3, 1998, Brutoco submitted its subcontracting plan to the City of Carlsbad, which showed that its subcontractor percentage was 38 % . Also, the “Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractors Bid Items” form in the bid documents is unclear and the City admits it wrongly answered pre-bid questions by Brutoco regarding the form. The form has three columns: (1) Amount of Item Subcontracted; (2) Amount of Item by Contractor; and (3) Overhead and Profit Amount.” Regarding the “Overhead and Profit Amount” column, the most straight forward interpretation of the question of “What overhead and profit should be included” would be all overhead and profit. The City’s response to Brutoco’s pre-bid question backs up this interpretation. The way you and the City are now interpreting the form is vague and ambiguous and should not be used by the City to disqualify bidders. In its post bid analysis of the bids, the City determined the percentage of work Hazard Company was proposing to do with its own forces by deducting from Hazard’s total bid the total of the “Amount of Item Subcontracted” column of Hazard’s bid. The amount that the City determined to be the subcontracted amount was the total of the subcontractors’ costs and excluded the subcontractors’ overhead and orofits and the amount of overhead and urofit added bv the Contractor. The City’s methodology is not only Mr. Ronald Ball City Attorney October 1, 1998 Page 3 illogical, subjective, vague and discriminatory, it is in direct conflict with the clearly written Standard Specifications which stated in Section 2-3.1, Subcontracts, “Where the entire item is subcontracted, the value of work subcontracted will be based on the Contract Unit Price. When a portion of an item is subcontracted, the value of work subcontracted will be based on the estimated percentage of the Contract Unit Price. -This will determined from information submitted by the Contractor and subject to approval by the Engineer. n Clearly, since the Special Provisions are unclear as to how the subcontracting percentage should be determined (which the City admits), the Standard Specifications have to be used. If, in the analysis of Hazard’s bid, the applicable overheads and profits are added to the subcontractor’s costs, then Hazard’s total amount of work subcontracted is $3,127,540.25 or 53% of Hazard’s total bid of $5,855,027.40. The City of Carlsbad is therefore violating its own specification of requiring the prime contractor to do 50% of the work by awarding to Hazard. You indicated in your letter that the only hearing that Brutoco would get would be in front of the City Council. I would urge you, in view of the information contained in this letter and our strong legal position, to reconsider that position and set up a meeting between you, me and representatives of Brutoco and your staff to discuss this further. I cannot, for the life of me, see why the City of Carlsbad wants to spend $117,000 more on a project and also incur the expense and precedent that will be established of an adverse court ruling. Clearly, the City has ample evidence to award this contract to Brutoco and it is only by straining its interpretation of the specifications and showing favoritism to Hazard Construction that this job is about to be awarded to Hazard Construction. Brutoco is not going to let that happen and wants to do this project. Brutoco spent considerable time and Mr. Ronald Ball City Attorney October 1, 1998 Page 4 effort bidding this job and it is not interested in being shaken around by an unfair bid process. Hopefully, you see the benefit of a meeting. Your prompt response it requested. of JON& MAHONEY, BRAYTON & SOLL PMM:vv THOMAS c. BRAYTON* PAVL M. MAHONEY* STEPHEN 0. JONES* RICH*RD A. 50CL JONES, MAHONEY, BRAYTON & SOLL A i-N?mERSHIP INCLUDING mOFEs*I- COl?PoRATlONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 150 WEST FIRST STREET. SUITE 280 P 0. eox 940 CLAREMONT, CALIFORNIA 91711 19091 399-9977 September 9, 1998 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS Mr. Ronald Ball City Attorney City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Re: Carlsbad Contract No. 3184 Dear Mr. Ball: This letter is to inform you of my representation of Brutoco Engineering and Construction, Inc. In August of 1998, Brutoco bid Contract No. 3184 and was the low bidder. Subsequently, Brutoco received a letter from Sherri Howard (a copy of which is enclosed) indicating that Brutoco’s bid had not complied with the plans and specifications because the City allegedly could not determine whether Brutoco’s subcontractors were doing less than 50% of the work. The letter further stated that the City planned on awarding the contract to Hazard Construction, the No. 2 bidder. Enclosed is Brutoco’s breakdown showing that, in fact, its subcontractors are doing much less than 50% of the work. An analysis of Hazard Construction’s bid shows that its subcontractors are doing at least 53 % of the work. This is also enclosed. In the preparation of its bid, Brutoco found the “Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractor’s Bid Items” forms and the “Guide for Completing the Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractors Bid,” pages 35 through 37, Mr. Ronald Ball City Attorney September 9, 1998 Page 2 unclear and subject to interpretation. Rather than guess about how the forms should be filled out and be wrong, Brutoco submitted the information requested by Section 4104 of the Government Code. With respect to subcontractors Brutoco intended to use, whose subcontracts would be greater than one half of one percent of the bid amount, Brutoco listed the Subcontractor’s name, the location of their place of business and the portion of work Brutoco intended to subcontract. SSPWC Section 2-3, Subcontracts states: “Before the work of any Subcontractor is started, the Contractor shall submit to the Engineer for approval a written statement showing the work to be subcontracted, giving the name and business of each Subcontractor and description and value of each portion of work to be so subcontracted. n The specifications do not clearly state that the owner will attempt to utilize the “Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractors Bid Items” forms to 1, calculate the percentage of work subcontracted, as a prerequisite for award. At the time i of the bid, Brutoco fully intended to and did comply with the provision SSPWC Section 2-3 and Government Code Section 4104. On September 3, 1998, Brutoco submitted documentation to the City fully detailing Brutoco’s subcontracting plan. The documentation clearly shows the total amount of subcontracted work to be $2,171,033.00 or 38% of Brutoco’s total bid amount of $5,737,330. The City; in its post bid analysis of the amount of work subcontracted by the bidders apparently failed to follow the specifications in its calculation of the percentage of work subcontracted. Reference is made to the listing forms which required three dollar amounts to be listed: 1. Amount of Item by Subcontractor. Mr. Ronald Ball City Attorney September 9, 1998 Page 3 2. Amount of Item by Contractor. 3. Overhead and Profit Amount. It would seem that the first two columns provide for costs and the third column provides for overhead and profit amount, including both subcontractor and contractor. City Addendum No. 6 which included answers to bidders questions included questions asked by Brad Austin of Brutoco dated August 6, 1998. Mr. Austin asked: “A. What is considered the Overhead and Profit Amount? 1. 2. Prime Contractors Overhead & Profit? Prime Contractor’s plus first tier Subcontractor’s Profit & Overhead when listing a lower tier subcontractor?” The City’s response to both questions was yes. Apparently, the Overhead and Profit column is for all overhead and profit of the prime contractor and subcontractor. A review of Section 2-3.1, Subcontracts, of the SSPWC, shows the following specification regarding evaluation of the “Subcontract Amount” “Where the entire item is subcontracted, the value of the work subcontracted will be based on the Contract Unit Price. When a portion of an item is subcontracted, the value of work subcontracted will be based on the estimated percentage of the Contract Unit Price. This will be determined from information submitted by the Contractor, and subject to approval by the Engineer.” This specification, which should be considered as complementary to the Special Provisions, pages 35 through 37, clearly states that in determining the Subcontract Mr. Ronald Ball City Attorney September 9, 1998 Page 4 Percentage, the “value” of the work to be considered is the Bid amount or portion thereof including both costs as well as profits and overheads. This is important because in its analysis of Hazard Construction’s subcontracted amount, the City totaled the Amount of Item by Subcontractor column and came up with a total of $2,383,065.05 which is less than 50% of Hazard’s total bid of $5,855,027.40. However, the City, in its review of Hazard Construction’s subcontracted amount, must, :. I .. .. consider both the Amount of Item Subcontracted as well as the Overhead and Profit I :‘ ( I c ’ Column per the specifications. When that is done, the subcontracted amount comes to i $3,127,540.25 which is 53% of Hazards total bid of $5,855,027.40. Thus, if the City follows its snecifications as written, Hazard Construction is subcontracting out in excess of 50% of the work. In short, Brutoco has fully complied with the project plans and specifications. If the City’s position is that Brutoco’s bid was not clear in not designating how much of its work was to be subcontracted, the same is also true with regard to Hazard. Although municipalities can, under some circumstances, waive irregularities in the bid, they cannot waive the same irregularity on the part of the Number 2 bidder while disqualifying the lowest responsible bidder because of the same alleged irregularity. That would be discrimination not accepted under the law. Plain and simple, Brutoco is $117,000 lower on this project and it would be extremely unfair for a contractor such as Brutoco, who has been in business for over 30 years and has built a number of big projects, to have all of its time and effort in putting this bid together (which incidently would save the City money) wasted by the City in basically favoring Hazard over Brutoco when allegedly the same deficiency appeared in both bids. Mr. Ronald Ball City Attorney September 9, 1998 Page 5 Please contact me concerning this matter so that we can hopefully resolve this matter without the need of litigation. Also, it is my understanding that the City Council was to review this matter on September 15, 1998, but it has now been put over to the September 22, 1998, council meeting. Please advise me if I am incorrect. Paul M. Mahoney of JONES, MAHONEY, BRAYTON & SOLL PMM:vv Enclosures City of Carlsbad August 251998 Michael H. King BRUTOCO ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. 14801 SLOVER AVENUE P 0 BOX 429 FONTANA, CALIFORNIA 92334 CANNON ROAD WEST REACH 1 STREET AND BRIDGE, WATER, RECYCLED WATER TRANSMISSION MAINS AND COLLECTOR SEWER, CITY CONTRACT NO. 3184 The City of Carkbad has completed the review and analysis of the bids for the above project. Due to the following errors and omissions in your bid, staff will recommend that City Council find the bid submitted by Brutoco Engineering and Construction, Inc. as non-responsive. We will recommend the award of the contract to the second low bidder, Hazard Construction Company. The Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractors Bid hems forms are not completed. The City can not determine the amount of work subcontracted to determine whether or not it is less than 50%. The Amount of Item Subcontracted, Amount of Item by Contractor and the Overhead and Profit Amount have been left blank on all subcontractors forms. In addition, the address, phone number and California State Contractors License Number and designation have been left blank on the forms. This project will be submitted to the City Council for action at their meeting on September 15, 1998 beginning at 6:00 p.m. You may attend this meeting and request to speak to the City Council by filling out a “Request to Speak” form available at the meeting. If you have any questions, please call me at (760)438-l 161, extension 4427 or fax your inquiries to (760) 431-5769. w-Q_ SHERRI HoWARD Associate Engineer C. City Attorney Public Works Director Traffic Engineer Principal Civil Engineer, Richard Allen Hazard Construction Company 2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-l 576 - (760) 438-l 161 - FAX (760) 431-5769 Y :%. . /---. - x”+ .‘< ..: l-L& “-L~‘,.,..I- ~~~~~~~ ” ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION. INC. August 27, 1998 City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-I 576 Attention: Sherri Howard, Associate Engineer VIA FAX 760431-5769 81 U.S. Mail RECEIVED Au6 3 1 1998 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Reference: Cannon Road West Reach 1. Contract No. 3184 I am in receipt of your correspondence dated August 25, 1998. I strongly protest your intention to find Brutoco’s bid proposal non-responsive and I request the you reconsider your position on this issue. Regarding the specification provision that the Contractor perform with its own organization contract work amounting to at least fifty percent of the contract price, Brutoco fully intends to comply with this provision. Section 2-3.1 of the Standard Specifications states “Before the work of any Subcontractor is started, the Contractor shall submit to the Engineer for approval a written statement showing the work to be subcontracted giving the name and business of each Subcontractor and description and value of each portion of the work to be so subcontracted”. Brutoco will submit the required information in accordance with this provision. Your attention is directed to the Special Provisions, particularly the “Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractor’s Bid Items” form. Nowhere in, the. Specifications does it state that the City will attempt to determine the percentage of work the Contractor plans to subcontract out from these forms. The determination of the percentage of work is therefore determined per the provisions of said Section 2-3.1 of the Standard Specifications. It is frankly confusing to myself and others how the City could determine a Contractor’s subcontracting percentage from the “Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractor Bid Item” form. The format of the form is of itself confusing and subject to interpretation as to how a bidder should complete it. Brutoco’s bid fully complies with Section 4104, Identification of Subcontractors, of the Public Contract Code. The proposal of Brutoco Engineering & Construction Inc. represents a net $117,697.40 savings over the second bidder. While this may be only a small P.O. BOX 429, FONTANA, CALIFORNIA 92334 . (909) 350-3535 . FAX (909) 822-9881 l LICENSE NO. A-247770 percentage of the overall cost it is still a significant sum of City money which should not be given away. In order to avoid costly delays and litigation in the award of this project I request you re-examine Brutoco’s proposal giving at least equal credence to “what is included” as to “what is omitted”. It is proper to award to the low bidder. . I request a meeting with personnel involved as soon as possible. Call myself so we may schedule an appointment. Sincerely, BRUTOCO ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION, INC. President MHK/kms cc: Lloyd Hubbs, Director of Public Works Jones, Mahoney, Brayton & Soll RONALD R. BALL CITY Al-fORNEY D. RICHARD RUDOLF ASSISTANT CITY AlTORNEY JANE MOBALDI ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF CARLSBkD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-1989 (760) 434-2891 FAX: (760) 434-8367 September 22, 1998 Paul M. Mahoney, Esq. Jones, Mahoney, Brayton & Sol1 P. 0. Box 940 Claremont, California 91711 RE: CARLSBAD CONTRACT NO. 3184 Dear Mr. Mahoney: I have received your letter of September 9, 1998 contesting staffs intention to recommend award of the above referenced contract to Hazard Construction, and have reviewed the bid documents with regard to your objections. I concur with staff that Brutoco’s bid is non-responsive, in that Brutoco neglected to complete the “Designation Of Subcontractor And Amount Of Subcontractor Bid Items” forms as instructed. The instructions for completing those forms clearly state that “Failure to provide complete and correct information may result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive.” The City’s contract requires that the prime contractor perform at least 50% of the work itself. The City must be able to make a determination as to whether or not the prime contractor has complied with this requirement from the face of the bid documents as submitted, without the necessity of resorting to outside information or investigation. The City calculates the percentage of work to be subcontracted by adding the amounts in the “Amount of Item Subcontracted” column and dividing this total by the total bid amount for the combined schedules. The “Overhead & Profit Amount” column, which should refer only to the prime contractor’s overhead and profit, is supplemental information which the City can utilize in its determination that the prime contractor is properly allocating the amount of work subcontracted. The City’s response to question 2.A.2. addendum no. 6 was in error, since second tier subs are not required to be listed on the subcontractor listing form, nor is the first tier subcontractor overhead and profit required to be listed. But in any event, nowhere in the City’s contract documents does it provide that the determination of the subcontracted amount will be calculated by adding overhead and profit to the bid item amount listed in column one. A review of the bid documents submitted by Brutoco, makes it impossible for the City to determine what amount of the work is being subcontracted by Brutoco because of Brutoco’s failure to complete the subcontractor listing form. A totaling of all bid item amounts in the schedules which were designated to be subcontracted on the subcontractor listing form equals 64.2% of the work. On the contrary, a determination of the amount of subcontracted work can be made from Hazard’s completed subcontractor designation form, which amounts to 40.7% of the work. Therefore your contention that Brutoco is the victim of favoritism is unpersuasive. The City is entitled to impose requirements above and beyond the mandates of state law. MCM Construction, Inc. v. Citv and Countv of San Francisco. et al (September I, 1998) 98 Daily Journal DAR 9329. In MCM Construction. Inc., the court held that the failure to state dollar amounts of work to be performed by seven of nine contractors was, like the misstatement of the correct percentage of work to be done by subcontractors in the Vallev Crest case, in the nature of a typographical or arithmetical error from which the contractor could have sought relief under the statute. The contractor therefore had an advantage not available to other bidders and the city was without power to waive the deviation. Likewise, Brutoco’s failure to state the dollar amounts of work to be performed by its subcontractors could allow Brutoco to seek relief from its bid pursuant to Public Contracts Code section 5103, which the City would be obligated to grant. The City cannot award a contract to a bidder who could withdraw its bid, thereby giving that bidder an unfair advantage. On the other hand, these defects make Brutoco’s bid non- responsive. The matter is currently scheduled for the October I, 1998 City Council agenda and Brutoco is entitled to the hearing requested in your letter of September 21, 1998 at that time. vmly yours RONALD R. BALL City Attorney rmh c: City Manager Public Works Director .F ‘5 . . .:: si’i .S? GUIDE FOR COMPLETING THE “DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRACTOR’S BID” AND “DESIGNATION OF OWNER OPERATOR/LESSOR AND AMOUNT OF OWNER OPERATOR/LESSOR WORK” FORMS REFERENCES Prior to preparation of the following Subcontractor and Owner Operator/Lessor disclosure forms Bidders are urged to review the definitions in section l-2 of the SSPWC and of the Special Provisions to this Contract especially, “Bid”, “Bidder’, “Contract”, “Contractor”, “Contract Price”, “Contract Unit Price”, “Engineer”, “Subcontracto? and “Work” and the definitions in section l -2-of the Special Provisions especially “Own Organization” and “Owner Operator/Lessor.” Bidders are-further urged to review sections 2-3 SUBCONTRACTS of the SSPWC and section 2-3.1 of these Special Provisions. CAUTIONS Bidders are cautioned that failure to provide complete and correct information may result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive. Any bid that proposes performance of more than 50 percent of the work by other than the Contractor’s own organization will be rejected as non- responsive. INSTRUCTIONS Bidders shall use separate disclosure forms for each Subcontractor or Owner Operator/Lessor (O+O) of manpower and equipment that is proposed to be used to complete the Work. All items of information must be completely filled out. Where the bid item will be installed by more than one Subcontractor or Owner Operator/Lessor the percentage of the bid item installed by the Subcontractor or Owner Operator/Lessor being listed in the line of the form must be entered under the column “O/O of Item by Sub” or “O/O of Item by 0+0” as applicable. If a Subcontractor or Owner Operator/Lessor installs or constructs any portion of a bid item the entire amount of the Contract Unit Price shall be multiplied by the Quantity of the bid item that the Subcontractor or Owner Operator/Lessor installed. Suppliers of materials from sources outside the limits of work are not subcontractors. The.value of materials and transport for materials from sources outside the limits of work, as shown on the plans, shall be assigned to the Contractor, the Subcontractor, or the Owner Operator/Lessor as the case may be, installing them. The value of material incorporated in any Subcontracted or Owner Operator/Lessor installed bid item that is supplied by the Contractor shall not be included as any part of the portion of the work that the Contractor is required to perform with its own organitation. The item number from the “CONTRACTOR’S PROPOSAL” (Bid Sheets) shall be entered in the “Bid Item No.” column. When a Subcontractor or Owner Operator/Lessor has a Carlsbad business license the number must be entered on the form. If the Subcontractor does not have a valid business license enter “NONE” in the appropriate space. Bidders shall make any additional copies of the disclosure forms as may be necessary to provide the required information. The number of additional form pages shall be entered on the first form page of each type so duplicated. ~~ l/08/98 Ccntract No. 3184 Page 35 of 249 Pages . Bidder may, at its option, combine bid items on a single row in the chart on the disclosure forms, If using this option the Bidder must indicate the bid item numbers to which the information in the row pertains. This option may not be used where the sUbcontractor or Owner Operator/Lessors constructing or installing less than 100 percent Of a bid item. The percentages and dollar amounts may be the sums of the bid items listed in that row. When the Bidder proposes using a subcontractor or owner operator/Lessor to construct or install less than 100 percent of a bid item the Bidder must attach an explanation sheet to the designation . of subcontractor or designation of Owner operatOr/LeSSOr forms as applicable. The explanation sheet must cleariy apprise the Agency of the specific tasks, materials and/or equipment that are proposed to be so supplied. Determination of the subcontract and Owner Operator/Lessor amounts for purposes of award of the contract shall determined by the City Council in conformance with the provisions of the contract doc‘um6nts and these Special Provisions. The decision of the City Council shall be final. . ,:- a l/08/98 Contract No. 31 a4 Page 36 of 249 Pages . DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRACTOR’S BID ITEMS The Sidder MUST complete each information field on this fomr for each subcontractcr that it prcposes to use. Additional copies Of this form may be attached if required to accommodate [he Contractor’s decision to use more than One subcontractor. This form must be submitted as a par: of the Bidder’s sealed bid. Failure to provide ccmplete and correct infcrmation may result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid of the following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to perform the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications and section 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act-(’ The Bidder further certifies that no additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portron of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Jbhn s. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: meek $ w ~OaSfvUch~ Complete Address: Street State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carlsbad Business License No.: bcLlvk3 NE OWNER OPERATOR/LESSOR BID ITEMS Exdanation: Column 1 - Bid Rem No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractots own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. page- - I of 16 pages of this form DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRWTOR’S BID ITEMS Tine Sidder MUST complete each information field On this form for each subcontractcr that it crcposes to use. Additional copies of this form may be attached if required to accommodate :he Contractor’s decision to llse more tha? one subcontractor. This form must be submitted as a part ci the Bidder’s sealed bid. Farlure to provide complete and correct infcrmation may result in rejection; of the bid as non-responsive. ’ The Sidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid of the following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to perform the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications and section 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act-:; Fe Bidder further certifies that no additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portlon of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: =A c;. i- .. Complete Address: Street State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carlsbad Business License No.: OWNER OPERATOR/LESSOR BID ITEMS Exdanation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractor’s own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page 2 of pages of this form F r. i.; DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRACTOR’S BID ITEMS . The Bidder MUST complet e each information field cn ihis form fcr each subcontractcr that ;: prcposes to use. Additional copies of this form may be attached if required to accommodate the Contractor’s decision, to use more than One subcontractor. This fcrrn must be submitted as a part ci’ the Bidder’s sealed bid. Failure to provide COmpkte afld correct infcrma;icn may result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid Of the foilowing listed subcontractors in preparing this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to petiorm the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with appiicable provisions of the specifications and se&ion 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act:; The Bidder further certifies that no additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portIon- of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed wcrk will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: Complete Address: c I ecn City Street State zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carlsbad Business License No.: WNER OPERATORLESSOR BID ITEMS Amount of Item Exdanation: Column 1 - Bid ttem No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractor’s own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page -Of- 3 pages of this form .?A - - i. : ., DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRh~TOR’S BID ITEMS The Bidder MUST complete each information field on this form for each subcontractor that it xcposes to use. Additional copies of this form may be attached ii requirsd to accommodate ;he Contractots decision to use more than one subcontractor. This farm must ke submitted as a part of the Bidder’s sealed bid. Failure to pfovtde Complete and ccrrect infcrmatian may result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid of the following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to petiorm the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications and seotion 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act:; The Bidder further certifies that no additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portlon‘of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: Complete Address: W Street State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Cartsbad Business License No.: Hy~~SL~rucr OWNER OPERATOR/LESSOR BID ITEMS Exdanation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be pe?formed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractor’s own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. 4 page - of pages of this form c 2%. = .i DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRACTOR’S BID ITEMS The Sidder MUST complete each information field On this farm for each subcontractcr that ;: proposes to use. Additional copies Of this form may be attached ii required to accommodate the Contractor’s decision ta use mare than one subconiractcr. This form must be submitted as a pan cf - the Bidder’s sealed bid. Failure to prcvlde Complete and correct infcrmaiion may result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid of the following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid far the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used ta petiorm the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications and section 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act:; The Bidder further certifies that no additional subcontractor will be allowed to petiorm any partton of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: . CaNwddress: . \ c&elc. Street . \I\ MO City 3 State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carlsbad Business License No.: OWNER OPERATOR/LESSOR BID ITEMS Amount of Item Exdanation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contracto<s awn forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page 5 of pages of this form . DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTR%TOR’S BID fTEMS The 3idder MUST complete each information field on ihis form for each subcontractcr that it prcposes to use. Additional Copies OF this form may be attached if required to accommodate ;,‘re Contractor’s decision to us,e more thal One subcontractor. This form must be submit&d as a part OF the Bidder’s sealed bid. Failure to provide COmpkk and correct infcrmation may result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid OF the Following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid For the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to perForm the portions of the V/o& as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications and sec-tion 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act:; The Bidder further certifies that fl? additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portron of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: Complete Address: . Street I City State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carlsbad Business’ License No.: w%fwr -Mm= OWNER OPERATOR/LESSOR BID ITEMS ‘. I-Zl,I-b2 iq x s I $ f Exulanation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractor’s own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page (P of pages of this form Z$ ..- .. w ;.: -. DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRPicTOR’S BID ITEMS The 3idder MUST complete each information fieid On this form for each subcontractcr that ,t prcposes to use. Additional copies OF this form may be attached if required to accommodate the Contractors decision to use more than one subcontractor. This form must be submitted as a par: J: the aid&r’s sealed bid. Failure to provide COmpkte and correct information may result in rejection cf the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid Of the following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid For the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to petiorm the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications and section 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act:; The Bidder further certifies that no additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portion* of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: Complete Address: a~ccya - City Street State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carlsbad Business License No.: trJpo4tutto(L OWNER OPERATOR/LESSOR BID ITEMS. I-Lb l-Iv4 \ - : ‘3 . 1% $ ( $ I$ I Exdanation: Column 1 - Bid Jtem No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractor’s own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page 7 of -- pages of this Form -zi i..: _. DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRACXOR’S BID ITEMS The Bidder MUST complete each information field on this Form for each subcontractcr that i; proposes to use. Additional copies Of this form may be attached ii required to accommodate :,?e Contractots decision to use more than one subcontractor. This fcrm must be submitted as a pan of the Bidder’s sealed bid. Failure to provfde cCmplek and correct inicrmation may result in rejection cf the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid of the following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to petiorm the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications am! section 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Cede “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act-; The Bidder Further certifies that no additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portion of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: P . fCX,~sn 1 v’ P Complete Address: Street State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Cartsbad Business License No.: * WNER OPERATORfLESSOR BID ITEMS smwm -mL Amount of Item Amount of Item by Overhead & Profit Exrhnation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractor’s own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit For the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price cf the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page g of pages of this form + .._ i..: . DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRiWTOR’S BID ITEMS The Bidder MUST complete each information field Cfl this form for each subcontractcr that it proposes to use. Additional copies of this form may be attached if required to accommodate the Contractor’s decision to use more than one subcontractor. This form must be submitted as a part ci the Bidder’s sealed bid. Failure to provide COmpkte and correct information may result in rejection cf the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid of the following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to pefiorm the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications and seotion 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act:;’ The Bidder further certifies that no additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portton’of the Work and that no changes rn the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: Ph\n R F enca. Complete Address: . \rbcl City Street State zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carlsbad Business License No.: mmL w 60~N&q~ERATOR/LESSOR BID ITEMS Exdanation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractots own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page 9 of pages of this form DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRWTOR’S BID ITEMS The Bidder MUST complete each ii?fOrmatiOn field on this form for each subcontractor that it proposes to use. Additional copies of this form may be attached if required to accommodate the Contractors decision to use more than one subcontractor. This form must be submitted as a part of * the Bidder’s sealed bid. Failure to provide complete and correct information may result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid of the following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to perform the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications and section 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act::’ The Bidder further certifies that no additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portlon of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: kc L Con+ru&on Complete Address: n Street Fhbn~ City . State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carlsbad Business License No.: OPERATOR/LESSOR 0 ITEMS c-m QlbQlt\eLw:Y&m-eSle-c,N,a Exdanation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, paqes 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be peaormed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractor’s own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page AL of pages of this form t zz. = _i . DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTR&XOR’S BID ITEMS The aidder MIJST complete each information field on this form for each subcontractor that it prcposes to use. Additional copies of this form may be attached if required to accommodate the Contractor’s decision to use more than one subcontractor. This form must Se submitted as a part of the Bidder’s sealed bid. Failure to provtde Complete and correct infcrmation may result in rejection 3f the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid Of the following listed subcontractors in preoarins this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to petiorm the portions of :he Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications ant se&ion 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act:;’ The Bidder further certifies that no additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portlon of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upcn the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: MST dwdl rz h Complete Address: Lo@ bead- * Street City State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carfsbad Business License No.: I-krlsIorUJrr)& OWNER OPERATORlLESSOR BID ITEMS Overhead 8 Profit ExDlanation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractor’s own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page I I of pages of this form ;T. .- . . . . . DESIGtiATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRi%TOR’S BID ITEMS The aid&r MtJST complete each information field on this four for each subcontractor that ;t proposes to use. Additional copies of this form may be attached if required to accommodate [he Contractots decision, to use more thay one subcontractor. This form must be submitted as a part cf the aidder’s sealed bid. Fatlure to provrde Complete and correct information may result in r+ction of the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid Of the following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to perform the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications and section 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act-(’ The Bidder further certifies that r-t? additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portron of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: ( I\ nAkf m I v-s Complete Address: Fontcm. City Street State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carkbad Business License No.: OWNER OPERATOR/LESSOR BID ITEMS ruD\)w W@#\L Amount of Item Amount of Item by Exdanation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractor’s own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page 12 of pages of this form I . L- 1 .i DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTR%TOR’S BID ITEMS The Sidder MUST complete each information field on this fom for each subcontractcr tha[ ;t proposes to use. Additional copies Cf this form may be attached if reccired to accommodate :,‘le Contractor’s decision to use more than one subcontractor. This fcr: must be submitted as a part ci the Bidder’s sealed bid. Failure to provide complete and correct infcrmation may result in rejection of the bid as non-resoonsive. The Sidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid of the following listed subcontractors in preparrng this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to petiorm the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisicns of the specifications ant se&ion 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act-.” The Bidder further certifies that no additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any poriion’of the Work and that no changes in the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: Complete Address: Street City State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carlsbad Business License No.: OWNER OPERATOR/LESSOR BID ITEMS \. ‘-\ % s $ IS 3 ” Explanation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractors own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page A.2 of pages of this form DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRACZTOR’S BID ITEMS The Gidder MUST complete each infOrmatiOfl field Ofl this form for each subcontractcr that it proposes to use. Additional copies of this form may be attached if required to accommodate :ae Contractor’s decision to use more than one subcontractor. This form must be submit-ted as a part of the Bidder’s sealed bid. Failure to provide complete and correct information may result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid of the following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to petiorm the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications and section 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act-(’ The Bidder further certifies that no addrtlonal subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portion of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: MDne GZE ;..r .. Complete Address: Street City State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carlsbad Business License No.: OWNER OPERATOR/LESSOR BID ITEMS Amount of Item Exolanation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractors own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. pages of this form . ;. z.: DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRJiCTOR’S BID ITEMS The Bidder MUST complete each information field on this form for each subcontractcr that it proposes to use. Additional copies of this form may be attached if required to accommodate the Contractor’s decision, to use more than One subcontractor. This form must be submitted as a par: :f . the Bidder’s sealed bid. Failure to provide complete and correct infcrnation may result in rejecticn cf the bid as non-responsive. The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid Of the following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to petiorm the portions of :he Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisicns of the specifications and se&ion 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act:; The Bidder further certifies that no additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portron of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: Complete Address: Street City State Zip Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carlsbad Business License No.: c- se WNER OPERATOR/LESSOR BID ITEMS phmg \ Overhead & Profit Exdanation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractors own forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page .JL of pages of this form . The Bidder proposes to Contractor’s MUST complete each i;f~~z$ion field ?fl this @m For each subcontractor that it .I,.,. I use. Aaalrlonal cop% Or InIS rOrm may oe attached ii required to accommcdate The decision to use more thay One subcontractor. This form must be submitted as a part OF :he Sidder’s sealed bid. Failure to provide ccmplete and correct iniormation may result in rejection oF the bid as non-responsive. DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR AND AMOUNT OF SUBCONTRACTOR’S BID ITEMS The Bidder certifies that it has used the sub-bid of the following listed subcontractors in preparing this bid for the Work and that the listed subcontractors will be used to petiorm the portions of the Work as designated in the list in accordance with applicable provisions of the specifications and section 4100 et seq. of the Public Contracts Code “Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act-(’ The Bidder further certifies that n? additional subcontractor will be allowed to perform any portion of the Work and that no changes In the subcontractors listed work will be made except upon the prior approval of the Agency. Full Company Name of Subcontractor: . . rano~ rr, s&r-\nrnc, Complete Address: ot-ww. p* City Street State ZP Telephone Number plus Area Code: California State Contractors License No. & Classification: Carlsbad Business License No.: OWNER OPERATOR/LESSOR BID ITEMS Amount of kern Amount of Item b $ $ $ $ $ $ $ : d . Exdanation: Column 1 - Bid Item No. from the bid proposal, pages 7-28. Column 2 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by the subcontractor. Column 3 - The dollar amount of the item to be performed by Contractor’s own Forces. Column 4 - The dollar amount of the overhead and profit for the item. Total dollar amount of Columns 2, 3, and 4 must be equal to the dollar amount in the bid price of the item on bid proposal pages 7-28. Page I 6 of pages of this form ? d. *b _. ” I RONALD F?. BALL Cl-l-Y ATTORNEY D. RICHARD RUDOLF ASSISTANT Cl-i-Y Al7ORNEY JANE MOBALDI ASSISTANT CITY Al7ORNEY 3 3 CITY OF CAR-LSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-1989 (760) 434-2891 FAX: (760) 434-8367 FWX3ED SEP 2 5 1998 JONES. M&HONE+ mRlW@N a sou September 22, 1998 Paul M. Mahoney, Esq. Jones, Mahoney, Brayton & Soil P. 0. Box 940 Claremont, California 91711 RE: CARLSBAD CONTRACT NO. 3184 Dear Mr. Mahoney: I have received your letter of September 9, 1998 contesting staffs. intention to recommend award of the above referenced contract to Hazard Construction, and have reviewed the bid documents with regard to your objections. I concur with staff that Brutoco’s bid is non-responsive, in that Brutoco neglected to complete the “Designation Of Subcontractor And Amount Of Subcontractor Bid Items” forms as instructed. The instructions for completing those forms clearly state that “Failure to provide complete and correct information may result in rejection of the bid as non-responsive.” The City’s contract requires that the prime contractor perform at least 50% of the work itself. The City must be able to make a determination as to whether or not the prime contractor has complied with this requirement from the face of the bid documents as submitted, without the necessity of resorting to outside information or investigation. The City calculates the percentage of work to be subcontracted by adding the amounts in the “Amount of Item Subcontracted” column and dividing this total by the total bid amount for the combined schedules. The “Overhead & Profit Amount” column, which should refer only to the prime contractor’s overhead and profit, is supplemental information which the City can utilize in its determination that the prime contractor is properly allocating the amount of work subcontracted. The City’s response to question 2.A.2. addendum no. 6 was in error, since second tier subs are not required to be listed on the subcontractor listing form, nor is the first tier subcontractor overhead and profit required to be listed. But in any event, nowhere in the City’s contract documents does it provide that the determination of the subcontracted amount will be calculated by adding overhead and profit to the bid item amount listed in column one. c ,t’ <.. .,*. . I, -3 -2 A review of the bid documents submitted by Brutoco, makes it impossible for the City to determine what amount of the work is being subcontracted by Brutoco because of Brutoco’s failure to complete the subcontractor listing form. A totaling of all bid item amounts in the schedules which were designated to be subcontracted on the subcontractor listing form equals 64.2% of the work. On the contrary, a determination of the amount of subcontracted work can be made from Hazard‘s completed subcontractor designation form, which amounts to 40.7% of the work. Therefore your contention that Brutoco is the victim of favoritism is unpersuasive. The City is entitled to impose requirements above and beyond the .mandates of state law. MCM Construction. Inc. v. Citv and Countv of San Francisco, et al (September ‘l, 1998) 98. Daily Journal DAR 9329. In MCM Construction, Inc., the court held that the failure to state dollar amounts of work to be performed by seven of nine contractors was, like the misstatement of the correct percentage of work to be done by subcontractors in the Vallev Crest case, in the nature of a typographical or arithmetical error from which the contractor could. have sought relief under the statute. The contractor therefore had an advantage not available to other bidders and the city was without power to waive the deviation. Likewise, Brutoco’s failure to state the dollar amounts of work to be performed by its subcontractors could allow Brutoco to seek relief from its bid pursuant .to Public Contracts Code section 5103, which the City would be obligated to grant. The City cannot award a contract to a bidder who could withdraw its bid, thereby giving that bidder an unfair advantage. On the other hand, these defects make Brutoco’s bid non- responsive. The matter is currently scheduled for the October 1, 1998 City Council agenda and Brutoco is entitled to the hearing requested in your letter of September 21, 1998 at that time. Vmly yours RONALD R. BALL City Attorney rmh c: City Manager Public Works Director BRUTOCO ENGINEERING EL CONSTRUCTION, INC. - SUBCONTRACTING PLAN CANNON ROAD MST, REACH 1 CONTRACT NO. 3194 CITY OF CARLSBAD. BID DATE 9143199 I DeSCIiptiOll Bid item of Work Ennronmentat Fence Metal Beam Guard Ratlina Chain Lmk Fence (L Gates Crash Cushtons Access Cbntrol Gates I---- Final Srgn & Stnpmg Site Preparation Ball? Mukh S-gal Mexkan Shrubs Medran Tree 26’ Box Hydroseed Mix a3 Hydroseed Mix 111 Hydroseed Mix W2 Permanent Medran lrngabon System Medml lnigatlon sleeves Maintenance 8 Plant Estsbtishment 4” Conduks for Psc Sell Cmssing Conduit. tire. pull boxes 6 Electrical Service Street Ltghts Sndge Lights J” sch 60 PVC &Type S pull bakes Aggregate Base Asphalt Concrete Pavement Asphall Ccncrete Dtke Median Curb/G-6 E-1 Mod Curb & Gutter/G-Z Type Et 8”-6” Curb Trsnstbon StdewslUG-7 Concrete DrivewsylG-14A Msdtan Stamped Cone Structure Excavation I---- Furnish Piles (HP 12x74) Drive Pites (HP 12x74) Furntsh Ptles (HP 14x117) Drive Piles (HP 14x117) Rebar Post Tensnmng Tube Railing Subcontrector Percentage Nsme. Address Of t,*m Subcontract Numbers Phone, LicensM Subconimcted Amount l-5 [Atlas Fence I 81% IS 5.716.00 I-32 1211 S 32nd St. 100% s 26.250 00 l-33 San DIegO. CA 92170 1w%- s 1,710 00 1-34 (619) 232-,151 lW% s 10.000.09 t-35 Luxtse X176374 100% s 4.000.00 Cadsbad Ltsc L167300 I I I l-37 orange county stnpng 100% S 3.2oo 00 183 N Pixley St Orenge. CA 92666 (714) 6394550 Licmss Y 346095 Cartsbad List # Nare 1-39 740 1-41 142 143 t-44 145 146 1-47 148 Vattey Crest Landscape 8450 Mrramar Place San Dtego, CA 92121 (619) 45a:9900 Liscerss1t33947 Cartsbad List Y None 66% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% l-14 Lekos Etectric 94% l-15 1370 Ptorlser lW% l-16 El Cetcn. CA 92020 100% l-17 (619)447-7651 100% 1-36 Liscense # 566410 100% Carlsbsd List X 1204372 l-20 l-21 1-22 Romero General Cans.1 P 0 Box 460692 Escondtdo. CA 92026 ,760) 489-8412 Liccme # 657359 Cartsbad LISC Y None 100% 99% 93% 1-26 l-27 j-28 l-29 l-30 Amencan concrete ,311 GrmdAve San MBrcoS. CA 92069 1760) 471.9907 LtcenseL 521641 Cartsbad Lw II to01600 6B% 91% 89% ao% 89% 1-3, Prcqessive Conuele a7% 2418 ‘heyard Aye Escnndtdo CA 92029 (760) 747.6100 License 1415144 I I S 8.6w.00 S lW.00 S 1,700 00 S 400 00 S 20.000.00 s 100.000.00 s 10.000 00 S l.wo 00 S 5.wo w S 6.000 00 S 18.800.00 S 4.500.00 S 7.200 00 S f6,OW 00 S a.500 00 S 52,125 00 S 42,793 00 3 760 00 S a.164 00 S 12.422 00 a 705 00 S 10.500 00 S 1.784.00 S 19.784 00 Carlsbad Ltsc X 1125500 2-t 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 John S Meek 1032 w 7 street Wilmington. CA 907441 (310) 830-6323 Liscense X709151 Cartrbad LIX a 1207242 42% I 315.000.00 100% S 21.15400 97% S 43.456.00 100% S 338.140 00 99% s 351.648 00 2-6 J L Dandson 8641 N Magnoka Aye Santee. CA 92072 (619) 562-2002 Liscense 9 280142 Cadsbad Liw # 449500 20% s 514.000.00 2-6 (DSI) Dywidag Systems 3% s 77.100.00 Intenatlonal 2154 South St Long Beach CA 90805 (562) 531.6161 License 11273710 Cadsbsd LISC # None I I 2-6 ACL Constructron 4030 E Grand Aye Pomona. CA 91766 (309) 629.8189 License II 468840 Cansbad Ltoc 9 None 3% S 77.100 00 2-6 Lamer lndustrtes 15243 Valley Blvd Fontena. CA 92335 (309) 823.71 i t License 9 704461 Carlsbad Ltsc X None 1% 5 25,700 00 F Portton of Work done by Subcontractor ‘mvfde I tnstsll Envtronmental Fence srte preperstlcn Pick out mcks rn planter. gradtng nstall Conduits jpail Removal F-D-L AJC Psvement Furmsh Water Truck Place Dike Buy AC material Form Pour Medtan Curb Form Pour Curb 8 Gutter Form Pour Curb Transisition Fcrm Pour Sidewalk Form Pour Dweway Stamped wncrete Instell 8 remwe portwn of shcnng Dnve Piles Drive Ptles Furnish & tnstett rebar Post tenslbnlng Form. Pour. Fsnsh Concrete Semer Fumtsh & install Lube ratkng Portion of Work Fme Grade for curb 8 backup Ftne Grade for curb & backup ------I Fine Grade for curb 8 backup Fine Grade for sidewalk 8 backup Fine Grade ior dnveway & backup structure excevatlon Lsyout. cleanup =I Layout. cleanup structure concrete B S”bcontrsctw support S Submntractor supp-nti Total of Submntrscted Work 5 2.171.033 00 Total Bid Amount $ 5.737.330.00 Percent Of work s”bwntrected 36% Summary Analysis of Hazard Construction’s “Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractor’s Bid Items” Forms Submitted in bid documents, Bid date 08113198 Name of Subcontractor J.L. Oawdson North County Gunite Penhall Company Oywidag Systems John S Meek CANNON ROAD WEST, REACH 1. CONTRACT NO. 3184. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Hazard Construction’s Bid Amount of Amount of Overhead Total of Extended bid amount Item Item Item by a profit Columns by Bid Item from NO. Subcontracted Contractor Amount 2-4 bid documents 2-6 360.000.00 1.985.500.00 491.337.00 2.955.000.00 2,955.ooo.oo * Melchor Land Survey 2-6 2-6 2-6 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 1-23 37.683.00 17.500.00 62.980.00 26,442 50 33.664.00 375.796.00 321,900 00 2.400.00 23.800 00 9.412.00 21 .ooo.oo 2.137.50 2.800.00 18362.55 150.290.50 28.250.00 3.400.00 4.096.00 49.184.50 42.180.00 400.00 Atlas Fence Progressive Concrete Valley Crest 1-5 l-32 1-33 1-35 1-31 1-39 l-40 1-41 l-42 1-43 l-44 l-45 l-46 1-47 1-48 1-13 l-18 1-19 1-49 l-50 l-51 i-52 1-53 i-54 l-55 l-56 l-57 l-58 1-59 l-60 l-61 l-62 l-63 I-64 l-66 I-67 1-69 l-70 l-71 1-72 l-73 2-7 2-8 2-9 Z-10 2-11 2-12 2-13 2-14 1-74 l-14 l-15 l-16 1-17 I-36 1-37 l-26 l-27 1-28 1-29 l-30 29,842 50 37.760.00 424.980.50 364.080.00 2.800 00 23.600.00 10.824.00 24.000.00 2,375 00 3.200.00 25.288.25 201.598.00 29.842.25 37,760.OO 424.980.50 364.080.00 2.800.00 1.412.00 3.000.00 237.50 400.00 6.925.70 23.057.50 10.823.80 24,000 00 2.375.00 3,200 00 25.298.25 9.000.00 155.00 748.00 1.045.00 22.000.00 107.000.00 135.000 00 33,000 00 4.850.00 10.300.00 1.885.00 1.545.00 888.00 38.190.00 10.830.00 56,700 00 11.560.00 1.071 00 2.920.00 6.120.00 3.380.00 2.600 00 8.400 00 11.440.00 5,141.oo 8.140.00 7.920.00 7.140 00 1,670 00 380 00 890 00 1,690 00 5,222 00 11.454 00 5.230 00 2,100 00 137.700.00 3.800 00 132.720 00 73.500 00 13.950.00 27.510.00 6.940 00 97.200 00 133.000.00 21 .ooo.oo 4.500.00 7,720 00 17.000 00 2,040 00 3.500.00 7,998 00 10.237 50 792 00 9.975.00 2.004.00 220.600.00 Lekos Electric Orange Co. Striping American Concrete 636.630.00 71.196 00 707.826.00 117.386.00 15.814.00 133.000.00 44.300.00 5.920.00 50.220.00 1.800.00 240.00 2.040.00 3.130 00 370.00 3.500.00 27,497 00 3.509.00 31.006.00 Griffin Dewatering 2-1 86,324 00 112.250.00 22.028.00 220.600.00 Totals 2,383.035.05 2.126.000 00 744.505.20 5.253.540.25 Total of Hazard Construction’s ‘“Amount of Subcontracted” Column plus “Overhead 8 Proftt” Column Hazard Construction’s Total Bid Amounl Percent of work Subcontracted by Hazard Construction = 3.127.540.25 5.855.027.40 53%