File #:
|
24-1175
Version:
1
|
Name:
|
Award IFB # TS-24-12 “Axis Cameras”
|
On agenda:
|
1/15/2025
|
Final action:
|
1/15/2025
|
Title:
|
MOTION TO AWARD IFB # TS-24-12 "AXIS CAMERAS" TO THE MOST RESPONSIVE/RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, GNM HOUGH INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $44,128.
|
Title
MOTION TO AWARD IFB # TS-24-12 "AXIS CAMERAS" TO THE MOST RESPONSIVE/RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, GNM HOUGH INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $44,128.
Summary Explanation and Background
SUMMARY EXPLANATION AND BACKGROUND:
- 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)(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."
- Section 35.37 of the City’s Code of Ordinances is titled “Military Veteran’s Preference”
- Section 35.37(A) states, “For the purpose of this section, the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning: VETERAN OWNED SMALL BUSINESS. A business entity which has received a Determination Letter from the United States Department of Veteran Affairs Center for Verification and Evaluation notifying the business that they have been approved as a veteran owned small business (VOSB).”
- Section 35.37(B)(1) states, “Competitive bid. For bid evaluation purposes, vendors that meet the definition of veteran owned small business, as defined herein, shall be given a 2.5% evaluation credit. This shall mean that if a veteran owned small business submits a bid/quote that is within 2.5% of the lowest price submitted by any vendor, the veteran owned small business shall have an option to submit another bid which is at least 1% lower than the lowest responsive bid/quote. If the veteran owned small business submits a bid which is at least 1% lower than that lowest responsive bid/quote, then the award will go to the veteran owned small business. If not, the award will be made to the vendor that submits the lowest responsive bid/quote. If the lowest responsive and responsible bidder IS a local Pembroke Pines vendor or a local Broward County vendor as established in §35.36 of this Code, entitled "Local Vendor Preference", then the award will be made to that vendor and no other bidders will be given an opportunity to submit additional bids as described herein.
SUMMARY EXPLANATION AND BACKGROUND:
1. On August 7th, 2024, the City Commission authorized the advertisement of IFB # TS-24-12 " Axis Cameras", which was advertised on August 14, 2024.
2. The purpose of this solicitation was to seek proposals from qualified firms to provide the Technology Services Department with the requested network cameras, as listed below:
Line # |
Description |
Qty. |
1 |
Axis Camera Model # Q1808-LE |
16 |
2 |
Axis Camera Model # P3738-PLE |
16 |
3. On September 10, 2024, the City opened forty-four (44) proposals, from the following vendors (listed in ascending order):
Vendor |
Line 1 |
Line 2 |
Total |
GHA Technologies, Inc |
$ 23,137.60 |
$ 21,444.00 |
$ 44,581.60 |
GNM Hough Inc. |
$ 23,328.00 |
$ 21,600.00 |
$ 44,928.00 |
Howard Technology Solutions |
$ 23,792.00 |
$ 22,048.00 |
$ 45,840.00 |
Netsync Network Solutions, Inc. |
$ 24,300.32 |
$ 22,521.44 |
$ 46,821.76 |
vPrime Tech Inc |
$ 24,487.36 |
$ 22,696.64 |
$ 47,184.00 |
Sandoval Custom Creations, Inc |
$ 22,894.40 |
$ 24,702.40 |
$ 47,596.80 |
AVI-SPL LLC |
$ 24,739.52 |
$ 22,930.24 |
$ 47,669.76 |
DAB Consulting, Inc. |
$ 24,720.00 |
$ 22,960.00 |
$ 47,680.00 |
Gresco Utility Supply |
$ 24,771.68 |
$ 22,958.08 |
$ 47,729.76 |
Technical Security Integration, Inc |
$ 25,128.96 |
$ 23,289.28 |
$ 48,418.24 |
ProTech Security, Inc. |
$ 25,618.56 |
$ 23,689.60 |
$ 49,308.16 |
Secured Technologies Inc |
$ 24,240.00 |
$ 25,760.00 |
$ 50,000.00 |
Titanium Technologies. |
$ 26,720.00 |
$ 24,880.00 |
$ 51,600.00 |
Noble Tec, LLC |
$ 26,950.08 |
$ 24,977.28 |
$ 51,927.36 |
Southern Computer Warehouse, Inc. |
$ 27,139.68 |
$ 25,152.96 |
$ 52,292.64 |
Hypertec USA Inc. |
$ 27,216.32 |
$ 25,223.84 |
$ 52,440.16 |
Office Depot, LLC |
$ 27,230.88 |
$ 25,237.44 |
$ 52,468.32 |
B & H Foto & Electronics Corp. |
$ 26,864.00 |
$ 25,744.00 |
$ 52,608.00 |
MicroAge |
$ 27,990.56 |
$ 25,941.28 |
$ 53,931.84 |
Orion Connectivity Services Inc. |
$ 28,384.32 |
$ 26,306.40 |
$ 54,690.72 |
SECG LLC |
$ 28,512.00 |
$ 26,416.00 |
$ 54,928.00 |
FOCUS CAMERA |
$ 28,546.56 |
$ 26,457.12 |
$ 55,003.68 |
PMD Books LLC DBA PMD Services LLC |
$ 28,800.00 |
$ 26,960.00 |
$ 55,760.00 |
SOLOTECH SALES & INTEGRATION |
$ 29,040.00 |
$ 26,928.00 |
$ 55,968.00 |
EZ SECURITY CORP |
$ 29,040.00 |
$ 26,960.00 |
$ 56,000.00 |
Questivity |
$ 32,305.60 |
$ 24,095.68 |
$ 56,401.28 |
Imperium Data Networks |
$ 29,329.92 |
$ 27,183.84 |
$ 56,513.76 |
PLANET HOLDING INC |
$ 27,240.80 |
$ 29,368.00 |
$ 56,608.80 |
Archis, Inc. dba Archis Technologies |
$ 29,388.16 |
$ 27,550.08 |
$ 56,938.24 |
Kintronics Inc. |
$ 31,984.00 |
$ 26,224.00 |
$ 58,208.00 |
Special Services Group LLC |
$ 30,320.00 |
$ 28,000.00 |
$ 58,320.00 |
Integrated Opening Solutions |
$ 30,292.42 |
$ 28,074.82 |
$ 58,367.23 |
Everon LLC |
$ 30,555.52 |
$ 28,324.48 |
$ 58,880.00 |
SILMAR ELECTRONICS |
$ 30,675.04 |
$ 28,429.44 |
$ 59,104.48 |
PointsTek LLC |
$ 31,012.00 |
$ 28,692.00 |
$ 59,704.00 |
0369 Security Solutions Services LLC |
$ 31,686.88 |
$ 29,775.20 |
$ 61,462.08 |
Computer Design Center |
$ 31,359.04 |
$ 30,511.04 |
$ 61,870.08 |
Trove 360 LLC |
$ 32,591.04 |
$ 30,238.88 |
$ 62,829.92 |
Synergy Telcom Inc. |
$ 33,889.12 |
$ 31,408.32 |
$ 65,297.44 |
Allstate Power |
$ 37,680.00 |
$ 27,680.00 |
$ 65,360.00 |
R&M Best Deals LLC |
$ 36,384.00 |
$ 29,728.00 |
$ 66,112.00 |
Enterprise Security Inc |
$ 36,191.04 |
$ 33,242.24 |
$ 69,433.28 |
Taza Supplies Inc. |
$ 39,648.00 |
$ 33,040.00 |
$ 72,688.00 |
Tadeos Engineering LLC |
$ 39,004.48 |
$ 36,149.12 |
$ 75,153.60 |
4. The City considered awarding the project on a split order basis, which would have resulted in a total project cost of $44,338.40, as outlined below:
Line # |
Vendor |
Pricing |
Line 1 |
Sandoval Custom Creations, Inc |
$ 22,894.40 |
Line 2 |
GHA Technologies, Inc |
$ 21,444.00 |
Total |
|
$ 44,338.40 |
However, in attempting to proceed with a split order, the two overall lowest priced vendors, GHA Technologies, Inc. and GNM Hough, Inc. informed the City that they would not be able to sell individual line items at the listed unit prices as they include manufacturer discounts based on quantities, therefore they required both line items to be purchased together. As a result, the next lowest pricing for line 2 was from Howard Technology Solutions at $22,048. With this change, the total for the split award would increase to $44,942.40, which exceeds the cost of awarding the entire project to GHA Technologies, Inc. at $44,581.60. Therefore, a split award was deemed not feasible.
5. Additionally, it was determined that GNM Hough, Inc. qualified for the Veteran Owned Small Business Preference (VOSB) because their prices were within 2.5% of the lowest responsive bid submitted. As outlined in City Ordinance 35.37(B)(1), if a VOSB meets the criteria for submitting a second bid, the VOSB is given the opportunity to beat the lowest responsive bid by at least 1%.
According to Section 35.37(A), "For the purpose of this section, the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning: VETERAN OWNED SMALL BUSINESS. A business entity that has received a Determination Letter from the United States Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Verification and Evaluation, notifying the business that it has been approved as a veteran owned small business (VOSB).”
The Veteran Business Certification submitted by GNM Hough, Inc. was issued by the Florida Department of Management Services (DMS) Office of Supplier Diversity, which has a primary focus on supporting small businesses in Florida and has the authority to certify certain businesses as “Veteran Business Enterprises.”
As noted, the definitions in the City's code apply unless the context clearly indicates a different interpretation. While the City has not received a Determination Letter from the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, as required by the Code, the City Attorney’s Office has reviewed the Veteran Business Certification submitted by GNM Hough, Inc. and has advised that it is an acceptable document that satisfies the veteran-owned business requirements under the City’s Procurement Code.
As a result, GNM Hough Inc. was contacted and given the opportunity to beat GHA Technologies, Inc.’s price by 1% and they confirmed they would provide the requested Axis cameras at a total price of $44,128:
Line # |
Description |
Qty. |
Unit Price |
Total |
1 |
Axis Camera Model # Q1808-LE |
16 |
$ 1,431.50 |
$ 22,904.00 |
2 |
Axis Camera Model # P3738-PLE |
16 |
$ 1,326.50 |
$ 21,224.00 |
|
|
|
Total |
$ 44,128.00 |
6. In addition, GNM Hough Inc. has also completed the Equal Benefits Certification Form and has stated that the "Contractor currently complies with the requirements of this section."
7. Request Commission to award IFB # TS-24-12 “Axis Cameras” to the most responsive/responsible bidder, GNM Hough, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $44,128.
Financial Impact
FINANCIAL IMPACT DETAIL:
a) Initial Cost: Amount not to exceed $44,128.
b) Amount budgeted for this item in Account No:001-513-2002-552650-0000-000-0000-00308 (Non-capital Equipment)
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.
|