HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-05-05 HRA Closed Meeting MINUTES
OF THE SPECIAL CLOSED MEETING OF THE
EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY HELD AT CITY HALL
MAY 5, 1997- 6:30 P.M.
Pursuant to the call of Chairperson Smith, the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority held a
Special Closed Meeting on Monday, May 5, 1997, at 6:30 p.m. preceding the Regular Meeting.
Chairperson Smith called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Commissioners present were: Faust,
Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold and Smith. Staff present were: Manager Rosland, Assistant Manager
Hughes, Assistant to Manager Smith, Engineer Hoffman, Attorney Gilligan and Clerk Mangen.
Chairperson Smith stated he had called this Special Closed meeting to discuss the motion
requesting a temporary restraining order filed by Shafer Contracting Company.
Attorney Gilligan informed the HRA that the Centennial Lakes Grading project was advertised and
bids opened on April 27, 1997. He stated seven bids were received. Five bidders submitted a ten
percent bid bond with bids and two bidders each submitted a $50,000 bid bond. Attorney Gilligan
continued explaining that the City's specifications and advertisement for bids requested the ten
percent bid bond while the proposal form the bidders returned requested the $50,000 bid bond.
Shafer Contracting was the third lowest bid, however they submitted the $50,000 bid bond and
maintained the first and second low bidders who each submitted a ten percent bid bond were not
responsible bidders. Staff determined the irregularity could be waived and not affect the outcome of
the bid tabulations. This determination was communicated to Shafer Contracting who then filed a
motion requesting the temporary restraining order. Attorney Gilligan noted that Judge Crump
denied the requested temporary restraining order in his order dated May 2, 1997 because no bid
had been awarded.
In addition, Judge Crump stated the City did authorize an amount equal to ten percent of the total
base bid. The bid bond was solely for processing the bids and not for performance on the contract.
Finally, Judge Crump concluded that bids for municipal contract must substantially comply with
requirements of statutes, charter provision, ordinance and advertisement. In his opinion the bid
complied and the requirement of bond was not material.
The HRA discussed the possibility that Shafer may pursue litigation after the bid is awarded,
whether or not the HRA should move forward, and if the ability to re-bid the project is waived by
awarding the bid. Consensus was to move forward at this time. No action was required at this
meeting.
No other business was discussed or action taken. Chairperson Smith declared the meeting
9
adjourned at 6:51 p.m.
�I
II
E cutive Director