Title
MOTION TO AWARD IFB # ED-25-01 "KITCHEN EQUIPMENT FOR CHARTER SCHOOLS" TO THE MOST RESPONSIVE/RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, DOUGLAS EQUIPMENT, IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $53,370.64
Summary Explanation and Background
PROCUREMENT PROCESS TAKEN:
- Chapter 35 of the City’s Code of Ordinances is titled “PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES, PUBLIC FUNDS.”
- Section 35.15 defines an Invitation for Bid as “A written solicitation for competitive sealed bids with the title, date and hour of the public bid opening designated therein and specifically defining the commodities or services for which bids are sought. The invitation for bid shall be used when the city is capable of specifically defining the scope of work for which a service is required or when the city is capable of establishing 15 precise specifications defining the actual commodities required. The invitation for bid shall include instructions to bidders, plans, drawings and specifications, if any, bid form and other required forms and documents to be submitted with the bid.”
- Section 35.18 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "COMPETITIVE BIDDING OR COMPETITIVE PROPOSALS REQUIRED; EXCEPTIONS.
- Section 35.18(A) states, "A purchase of or contracts for commodities or services that is estimated by the Chief Procurement Officer to cost more than $25,000 shall be based on sealed competitive solicitations as determined by the Chief Procurement Officer, except as specifically provided herein."
- Section 35.19 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "SEALED COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCEDURE."
- Section 35.19(A) states "All sealed competitive solicitations as defined in § 35.18 shall be presented to the City Commission for their consideration prior to advertisement."
- Section 35.21 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "AWARD OF CONTRACT."
- Section 35.21(A) of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "City Commission approval.
- Section 35.21(A)(1) states, "An initial purchase of, or contract for, commodities or services, in excess of $25,000, shall require the approval of the City Commission, regardless of whether the competitive bidding or competitive proposal procedures were followed."
SUMMARY EXPLANATION AND BACKGROUND:
1. On March 5th, 2025, the City Commission authorized the advertisement of IFB # ED-25-01 "Kitchen Equipment for Charter Schools", which was advertised on March 12th, 2025.
2. The purpose of this solicitation was to seek proposals from qualified firms to provide the requested Kitchen Equipment for Charter Schools. The new kitchen equipment is to replace the outdated and malfunctioning units, which are no longer operating effectively. Upgrading to new, more advanced equipment will not only improve functionality and safety but also enhance the efficiency of food preparation.
3. On April 8th, 2025, the City opened fourteen (14) bids from the following vendors (listed in ascending order):
|
Vendor |
Total Cost |
|
Douglas Equipment |
$53,370.64 |
|
Sam Tell and Son Inc |
$55,320.43 |
|
Chefs Depot Inc |
$55,770.82 |
|
Singer Equipment Company |
$55,973.56 |
|
National Interior Solutions LLC |
$58,287.90 |
|
Stafford-Smith Inc |
$63,332.88 |
|
Allure Hospitality Supplier Inc |
$64,199.00 |
|
Fazaq Inc |
$64,995.00 |
|
TriMark USA LLC, fka Strategic Equipment LLC |
$65,565.00 |
|
YRY Homes, LLC |
$66,989.81 |
|
Respect Management Inc |
$68,662.07 |
|
ConServ Company |
$71,068.00 |
|
Agni Enterprises, LLC (dba) Head to Heels Safety Supplies |
$71,321.44 |
|
ASC American Sun Components Inc |
$76,500.00 |
4. The Charter Schools have reviewed the proposals and deemed Douglas Equipment, to be the most responsive/responsible bidder.
5. In addition, Douglas Equipment has also completed the Equal Benefits Certification Form and has stated that the "Contractor currently complies with the requirements of this section."
6. Request Commission to award IFB # ED-25-01 “Kitchen Equipment for Charter Schools” to the most responsive/responsible bidder, in the amount not to exceed $53,370.64
Financial Impact
FINANCIAL IMPACT DETAIL:
a) Initial Cost: Amount not to exceed $53,370.64
b) Amount budgeted for this item in Account No:
Funds are available in Account #:
East Campus: 170-569-5051-664115-7600-641-0000-00550
West Elementary: 170-569-5051-664115-7600-641-0000-00551
West Middle: 171-569-5052-664115-7600-641-0000-00553
Central Elementary: 170-569-5051-664115-7600-641-0000-00552
Central Middle: 171-569-5052-664115-7600-641-0000-00554
Academic Village Campus: 172-569-5053-66415-7600-641-0000
FSU Campus: 173-569-5051-664115-7600-641-0000
c) Source of funding for difference, if not fully budgeted: Not Applicable.
d) 5 year projection of the operational cost of the project: Not Applicable.
e) Detail of additional staff requirements: Not Applicable.
FEASIBILITY REVIEW:
A feasibility review is required for the award, renewal and/or expiration of all function sourcing contracts. This analysis is to determine the financial effectiveness of function sourcing services.
a) Was a Feasibility Review/Cost Analysis of Out-Sourcing vs. In-House Labor Conducted for this service? Not Applicable.
b) If Yes, what is the total cost or total savings of utilizing Out-Sourcing vs. In-House Labor for this service? Not Applicable.