Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
, 1 <br /> ■ <br /> , 1 <br /> 1 <br /> 60011 or at, <br /> 6(1!" <br /> I MEMORANDUM <br /> cttV <br /> g goo'. <br /> Orange County TO: Ken Thompson, County Manager <br /> eig---- <br /> 106 E. Margaret Lane FROM: Albert Kittrell , CD Director <br /> Hillsborough, N. C. 27278 <br /> DATE: September 1 , 1983 <br /> SUBJECT: Landfill Reclamation Bid Rejection <br /> On August 10, 1983, bids were received and opened for the <br /> ! Northern Fairview Landfill Reclamation Project. The bids <br /> were as follows: Mellott Trucking Company $535,000.00, <br /> Propst Construction Company $630,160.00. The bids exceeded <br /> the allocated Landfill Reclamation Budget. <br /> 1 County staff met with Mellott to see to what extent the <br /> project could be scaled down. It was found that to bring it <br /> 1 within budget would have required major alteration of plans <br /> Community 1 and specifications and scope of work. Essentially, it would <br /> Development 1 have been a different project. Authority to negotiate with <br /> D rtment i the low bidder under State law does not apply to such exten- <br /> epa <br /> 1 sive alteration. Therefore, staff recommended that bids be <br /> rejected. This the Board did in August. <br /> Subsequently, Calvin Mellott, of Mellott Trucking <br /> questioned the County's decision to reject the bids. He <br /> contended that his company's bid should not have been re- <br /> jected because his company had entered into negotiations <br /> with the County and had revealed their proposed bid on a <br /> revised project. Generally, he would be reluctant to bid <br /> again since his company had already prepared two bid <br /> packets. <br /> (919) 732-8181/9361 <br /> Chapel Hill 967 9251 Mellott Trucking has not been placed in a dis- <br /> 968-4500 advantaged position as a result of negotiations with the <br /> Durham 688-7331 County. In fact, Mellott has an advantage because his <br /> Mebane 227-2031 1 company is aware of the County's needs, the specific bud- <br /> Ext. 425 get limitations and the most appropriate means of perform- <br /> ing the work at a low cost. Realistically, Mellott has a <br /> competitive advantage over other bidders. Secondly, <br /> 1 although Mr. Mellott has gone through two bidding cycles , <br /> bids were not opened at the first scheduled bid opening <br /> August 1 , 1983. For the second bid opening, August <br /> ' 10,1983, Mr. Mellott could have and probably submitted the <br /> same unopened bid. The two bidding periods should not <br /> have caused a hardship on Mr. Mellott or reluctancy to bid <br /> again. <br /> . 1 <br /> .. ..7-41 <br /> it/6>i.. <br /> i <br /> Preservation/Revitalization <br /> i <br />