Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Standpipe topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves waiver of bidding on standpipe rehab after online‑bid glitch; consultant recommended TMI Coatings
Summary
After staff reported a March 19 online‑bidding platform glitch and concerns that the apparent low bidder was not registered in Illinois, trustees rejected the public opening and voted (5‑yes, 2‑no) to waive competitive bidding and proceed with the consultant‑recommended contractor.
The Village of East Dundee Board voted April 6 to waive competitive bidding and move forward with staff and consultant recommendations for a standpipe rehabilitation project after a technical problem prevented an open bid reading earlier in March.
Staff reported that on March 19 a glitch with the QuestCDN bidding platform prevented the bid amounts from being read openly; although contractors’ names were visible, bid totals were not immediately accessible. Staff and the village’s consultant, Dixon, reviewed the submissions later and recommended rejecting the bids because the required public opening did not occur as advertised.
Staff also said the low bid’s submittal appeared to show a mismatch among corporate names and that the submitting entity was not registered in Illinois, which could complicate enforcement or warranty claims. The village therefore identified TMI Coatings, a contractor registered in Illinois and known to Dixon, as the preferable award if the board approved waiving competitive bidding.
Trustees pressed staff for additional vetting and for work‑history documentation from all three bidders; some trustees asked to postpone two weeks to allow time for additional due diligence. Others expressed confidence in the consultant and staff recommendation and said postponement risked losing competitive pricing.
On roll call the board recorded Yes votes from Trustee Coonsie, Trustee Mahoney, Trustee Sauter, Trustee Sabiano and President Dan Pearson; Trustee Oakland and Trustee Guma voted No. The board noted that waiving competitive bidding requires a two‑thirds majority and that the recorded vote met that threshold.
The board rejected the bids for procedural reasons and authorized staff to proceed consistent with the consultant’s recommendation; staff said the matter and supporting documentation would be recorded in the project file and that staff would confirm any registrar/registration issues before final contracting.
