Title
MOTION TO AWARD IFB # PSUT-26-03 "HUMAN SERVICES CAMPUS UTILITY REHABILITATION" TO THE MOST RESPONSIVE/RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, INSITUFORM TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $3,268,952.79, WHICH INCLUDES $29,450.03 TO PROVIDE A PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND, AND A 10% OWNER’S CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $294,500.25.
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 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 35.19 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 $100,000, shall require the approval of the City Commission, regardless of whether the competitive bidding or competitive proposal procedures were followed."
SUMMARY EXPLANATION AND BACKGROUND:
1. On May 6, 2026, the City Commission authorized the advertisement of IFB # PSUT-26-03 “Human Services Campus Utility Rehabilitation”, which was later advertised on May 14, 2026.
2. The purpose of the solicitation was to seek bids from qualified Contractors to rehabilitate the water and sewer infrastructure of the Pembroke Pines Senator Howard C. Forman Human Services Campus located at Poinciana Drive, Pembroke Pines, FL 33025.
3. The project includes, but is not limited to, the abandonment of approximately 15,800 linear feet of potable water mains of various sizes; the installation of approximately 4,700 linear feet of potable water mains varying from 8”, 6” and 4” C900 PVC; the reconnection of water service lines and fire hydrant assemblies; the rehabilitation of approximately 17,200 linear feet of gravity sewer mains and laterals with services including internal closed-circuit television (CCTV) inspection, cleaning and inspection, sewage bypass pumping, cured-in-place piping lining; and all other work required for a complete project.
4. Proper abandonment, installation, reconnections, and rehabilitation of the water and sewer infrastructure will be in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications in the Contract Documents prepared by the Engineer of Record, CPH Consulting, LLC.
5. On July 7, 2026, the City opened proposals from the following five (5) Contractors listed in ascending order:
|
Contractor |
Base Bid |
P&P Bond (%) |
P&P Bond ($) |
Total Bid w/ Bonds |
|
Insituform Technologies, LLC |
$ 2,945,002.51 |
1.00% |
$ 29,450.03 |
$ 2,974,452.54 |
|
Alexander and Johnson Project |
$ 3,189,724.43 |
1.90% |
$ 60,604.76 |
$ 3,250,329.19 |
|
Management and Development, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
Marcdan Inc. |
$ 3,200,762.00 |
2.00% |
$ 64,015.24 |
$ 3,264,777.24 |
|
The Stout Group, LLC |
$ 3,572,970.00 |
2.00% |
$ 71,459.40 |
$ 3,644,429.40 |
|
Basile USA LLC |
$ 3,588,002.26 |
100.00% |
$ 3,588,002.26 |
$ 7,176,004.52 |
6. Insituform Technologies, LLC submitted the lowest bid. The Utilities Department, together with the Procurement and Sustainability Department reviewed Insituform Technologies, LLC’s references and performance history, verified the work previously performed was of a similar nature and appropriate quality, and confirmed that the Contractor possesses the certifications and qualifications necessary to be able to appropriately carry out this construction, and deemed the Contractor a responsive and responsible bidder.
7. On August 5, 2026, the Utilities Department and Procurement and Sustainability Department held a pre-award meeting with Insituform Technologies, LLC to further discuss their bid submission and confirm their understanding of the scope of work requested by the City. During the meeting, the Departments validated the accuracy of the submitted pricing and confirmed that Insituform Technologies, LLC’s understanding of the scope was consistent with the City’s requirements.
8. The final project cost reflects the base bid submitted by Insituform Technologies, LLC, the cost for the required payment and performance bond, and a 10% owner’s contingency as outlined in the breakdown below:
|
Insituform Technologies, LLC |
|
Amount |
|
Bid Subtotal |
|
$2,945,002.51 |
|
Payment & Performance Bond |
1.00% |
$29,450.03 |
|
Contingency |
10.00% |
$294,500.25 |
|
Total Cost |
|
$3,268,952.79 |
9. Request Commission to award IFB # PSUT-26-03 “Human Services Campus Utility Rehabilitation” to the most responsive/responsible bidder, Insituform Technologies, LLC, in the amount not to exceed $3,268,952.79, which includes $29,450.03 to provide a payment and performance bond, and a 10% owner’s contingency in the amount of $294,500.25.
Financial Impact
FINANCIAL IMPACT DETAIL:
a) Initial Cost: Amount not to exceed $3,268,952.79, which includes $29,450.03 to provide a payment and performance bond, and a 10% owner’s contingency in the amount of $294,500.25.
b) Amount budgeted for this item in Account No: Funds are available in account # 471-533-6032-663233-0000-000-0000- (Water Main)
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.