Board rejects roofing bids after city publishes two different scopes

The Board of Works voted to reject all bids for storm-damage roofing repairs on Aug. 17 after members discovered two different scope documents had been circulated publicly, producing large, unexplained discrepancies among contractor bids.

Members said Go Big Exteriors bid on nine buildings and was lowest on most line items, while other firms—Amos, SPG and Pinnacle—submitted widely varying totals. Staff noted Amos included roughly $220,000 of supplemental work it believes is recoverable from the insurer, and that Amos provided time-stamped photos taken close to the storm. Board discussion focused on whether the city could legally decline the apparent lowest bids when the published scope differed among bidders.

The meeting transcript records the board's decision to restart the procurement process: "I'm going to make the motion to reject all bids and start process over." The motion was seconded and taken by the board. Members cited two central problems: (1) an outdated or incomplete version of the itemized bid packet was published, and (2) the insurer's Excel price‑breakdown did not match the line‑item scope used for bidding, producing mismatched dollar totals.

Staff recommended two options: award per-roof to the lowest responsive bidder (which would fragment work across multiple contractors) or reject all bids and re-issue a single corrected solicitation. Members favored rejecting and re-advertising to ensure a single, clear scope and wider review before awards. The board instructed staff to obtain the complete insurer documentation and to coordinate a corrected packet for republication with the appropriate publication schedule.