Thank God this was withdrawn. Who ever heard of a $30 Million Dollar Change Order on a $50 Million Contract? By Geniusofdespair

This was supposed to be heard today. It looks as though it was withdrawn. You can't do this to bidders. If the change order is that big, it should be rebid. This is called cheating.

Subject: Change Order No. 1 to Miscellaneous Construction Contract, MCC-8-10, with Munilla Construction Management, LLC increasing the contract by $30 million


..RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners (Board) approve and authorize the attached Change Order No. 1 to the Miscellaneous Construction Contract, MCC-8-10, with Munilla Construction Management (MCM), LLC, increasing the contract by $30 million.

Committee discussion:
Assistant County Attorney Geri Bonzon-Keenan read the foregoing proposed resolution into the record. Chairman Bovo opened the floor for public comments and called for persons wishing to appear before the Committee on the foregoing proposed resolution. The floor was closed after no one appeared wishing to speak. Commissioner Zapata asked for clarification about the proposed change order and the original $50 million funding source. Mr. Pedro Hernandez, Division Director, Facilities Development Management, Miami-Dade Aviation Department (MDAD) clarified that the change order was for an additional $30 million, representing an increase from $50 million to $80 million. He noted that the initial funding source was North Terminal Capital Improvement funds and reserve maintenance funds. Commissioner Zapata questioned why the project was underestimated. Mr. Hernandez explained that MDAD was unaware that they would receive a flat, low cost contract with an 8 percent markup. He further explained that large North Terminal emergency rehabilitation funding expenses were incurred. Mr. Hernandez noted a decision to expand the current contract was made rather than to secure a new agreement at a higher markup.

Commissioner Zapata noted concern that the bid was not originally offered at $80 million, thus attracting contractors offering lower markups. He pointed out that this process encouraged vendors to initially underbid contracts and inflate the contract later. Commissioner Zapata said that the intended amount of work should have been included in the original bid and that there was no attempt made to rebid the contract. Mr. Carlos Jose, Assistant Director, Facilities Management, MDAD, explained that funds were used to cover the cost associated with large emergency expenditures at the North Terminal. Commissioner Zapata commented that the procurement process encouraged companies to submit low initial bids and then find reasons to raise the contract amount later. He pointed out that the proposed change order represented more than 50 percent of the original contract amount, noting that this proposal was not a good policy decision. Commissioner Heyman inquired whether MDAD or the contractor initiated the request for work order changes or funding. She also inquired whether the intent was to expand the existing contract to cover maintenance, operations, emergency, and construction costs associated with an existing project. Mr. Jose responded that MDAD initiated the request and that an existing contract was being expanded. Commissioner Heyman noted that she objected to change orders; however, pointed out that this request was associated with ongoing projects and that some of the money from the initial project was redirected to other purposes. She said that the current request was to replenish funds allocated to the original project that were used for other purposes and that the original scope was not being changed. Mr. Jose clarified that the statements just made by Commissioner Heyman were accurate. Commissioner Heyman stated that the proposal could have been documented to reaffirm that the change order was not impacting the previously approved scope of work but to replace funds that were used for other purposes. Chairman Bovo once again opened the floor for public comments and called for persons wishing to appear before the Committee on the foregoing proposed resolution. The floor was closed after no one appeared wishing to speak. Hearing no further questions or comments, the Committee proceeded to vote on the foregoing proposed resolution, as presented.

How did this get out of Committee? It passed 3 to 1 in the finance committee. Who were those 3???? Bad government at its best.