Local contractor appeals Whitehaven Clinic rejection, cites inconsistent solicitation language

At the public‑comment portion of the meeting, Jared Logan of W&T Contracting Corporation asked commissioners to review purchasing’s decision to deem his company nonresponsive on the Whitehaven Clinic solicitation (SBI00928). Logan said WT submitted a bid of approximately $19,600,000 but was rejected because the bid package did not include a copy of a Shelby County business license and because the county determined WT failed to meet the 20% LOSB participation goal.

Logan argued the solicitation’s Section 2, paragraph 24.1 requires firms located within Shelby County to possess a current county business license at the time of bidding, while paragraph 24.2 states that successful bidders “may be required” to furnish a copy of the license prior to award. “We are simply asking for a fair and transparent application of the solicitation documents as they were written,” Logan said, noting he had an active Shelby County business license during the solicitation period and that purchasing’s appeal process upheld the nonresponsive finding. Purchasing Administrator James Lawson said the office investigated appeals and sent written responses to vendors, and that legal review would be needed to parse policy questions raised by the vendor and commissioners. Several commissioners asked purchasing to provide a point‑by‑point written response to the vendor’s packet and to share that rationale with the commission when the contract returns to the agenda.