Commission rejects La Luz south-reservoir bid after staff and engineer identify bid irregularities

The Alamogordo City Commission failed to award the La Luz South Reservoir replacement contract after the apparent low bidder’s pricing raised “red flags” during an engineer review, and the commission directed staff to reject the bids and rebid the project. Livingston Associates’ president Eddie Livingston told commissioners that the apparent low bidder had submitted unrealistically low unit prices for key bid items — most notably the outlet tower and tower gates — and later admitted it had not yet received supplier quotes for those components. The engineering consultant recommended against awarding to the low bidder because those low unit prices suggested an incomplete understanding of the work and a risk of later change orders or contract disputes. Two bidders were responsive. KENG submitted a higher overall bid; Livingston said KENG’s prices were consistently higher and, while not “low,” appeared to reflect realistic costs, whereas the other contractor’s pricing was internally inconsistent and included line items the bidder later said lacked supplier backup. Commissioners discussed whether to rebid the work and the time pressures on the water program: staff said construction now would allow winter draining and refilling windows and noted the project is part of a multiyear loan program tied to water rates and to other planned water projects. A motion to award the contract failed on a 3–4 vote. Staff confirmed the intent to reject the bids and re-advertise; the project team said rebidding would delay construction into next year and could push other water projects back, but that rebidding is the proper step when bid irregularities are suspected. Livingston and staff explained the contract includes specialized work (floating cover manufacture and vertical concrete outlet tower) that requires subcontractor expertise and is subject to recent material-price increases. Commissioners asked about the construction timeline (roughly 11 months) and local-preference calculations; staff noted a 10% local preference narrow the effective price gap between bidders but did not eliminate engineer concerns about unrealistic bid items.