Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council rescinds planned broker‑of‑record award, agrees to hear protest of RFQ process
Summary
After a months‑long procurement process for an employee‑benefits broker, council rescinded a staff recommendation to award a broker‑of‑record contract and directed staff to accept and hear a protest of the RFQ; council members questioned the city’s RFQ/protest policy and asked staff to explore cure/cure‑period practices used elsewhere.
The Riviera Beach City Council rescinded a pending award for a broker‑of‑record for employee benefits after vendors filed a protest over the city’s request‑for‑qualifications (RFQ) process. Council members directed staff to treat the vendor’s challenge as a protest and to bring the matter back to the council.
Procurement director LaTonya Ammons told the council the solicitation is the fourth time the city has sought the service and that, on this posting, six firms submitted statements; the procurement team deemed five nonresponsive and recommended awarding the contract to RSC Insurance Brokerage, the lone responsive firm. After the agenda packet was posted, procurement received a formal protest from a different bidder asserting the RFQ was protestable under the city’s procurement code.
Two vendors whose bids were disqualified — represented in public comment by attorney Hans Autonaut and by Mike Gellin of Gellin Benefits Group — told the council they had submitted materials that complied with the RFQ and argued the city misapplied responsiveness standards. Gellin said his team’s proposal complied with page limits and included required fee details and an insurance certificate; the firm has won similar municipal work elsewhere.
Council members questioned whether the procurement code allows protests for RFQs. City attorney Don Wynne said the city code explicitly references protests for invitations for bids (ITBs) and requests for proposals (RFPs), but it is silent about RFQs; legal staff advised that because the code is silent, the council could, at its discretion, accept a protest of an RFQ. Several council members said allowing the protest in this one case would establish a precedent and asked staff to update the code.
Mayor Douglas Lawson and other council members said the city should seek a level playing field for small and minority vendors and asked procurement to consider policies used in other jurisdictions that allow vendors to cure minor deficiencies (for example, a 48‑hour cure period) rather than be declared nonresponsive. After discussion the council voted to rescind the motion to award the contract and to allow the protest process to proceed; the clerk recorded the rescission as passing with Chair Lanier dissenting.
Procurement staff said they would respond to the protest and return to the council as the code’s protest process requires. Several council members asked staff to prepare policy changes to reduce the number of bids declared nonresponsive and to clarify protest rules before issuing future solicitations.
