Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Protest topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local vendor protests disqualification from Terrebonne Parish school nutrition contract
Summary
S and W Foods told the committee it was deemed 'nonresponsive' for omitting an addendum number in its bid and asked the Terrebonne Parish School Board to reconsider; staff said Louisiana procurement law and a confidential legal opinion constrained the board's ability to waive irregularities.
The Buildings, Food Service and Transportation committee heard a public protest May 19 from Nabi Panzato, senior vice president of S and W Foods, who said the company was marked "nonresponsive" on a Child Nutrition Program bid over a clerical omission and asked the committee for recourse.
"We did identify the addendum, and we did write the date and sign," Panzato said, describing the omission of the numeral "1" on the addendum line as a scrivener's error. He told the committee S and W is the largest independent locally owned distributor in Louisiana, employs Terrebonne Parish residents and estimated the company could lose roughly $300,000 in expected business if excluded from the award.
John DeFrancis, a school board member from another parish, also addressed the committee in support of S and W and said Louisiana law recognizes nonmaterial irregularities that can be waived, noting S and W's prior work for the district and lack of quality complaints.
Committee members and staff replied that the district must follow its bid specifications and public bid law. A staff representative said the board is not authorized in all cases to waive public bid requirements and cautioned that allowing a waiver could prompt litigation from other bidders. The staff member said the recommendation would proceed after a confidential legal review, and the committee recorded no objections when it moved the item forward.
The problem centers on a line-item procurement process: vendors bid by individual product lines rather than a single lump-sum price, and staff said awards and disputes can have different legal consequences than a single large contract. The committee did not change its recommendation at the meeting; staff indicated the board would rely on its legal opinion in any further consideration.
Next steps: the committee forwarded the award recommendation for the meat/frozen line items to the board, with staff noting any reconsideration would have to align with applicable procurement law and the district's confidential legal advice.
