What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Virginia
U]Background:[/u]
A sealed bid of GCs on a County construction project to result in award to lowest bidder contracting with the County on a Fixed-Sum (AIA A201 contract). However, addenda to the A201 General Conditions included significant deletions and additions. One of these was an Audit Section of GC, all sub-contractors and all suppliers. Though, again, this is not a negotiated government job or cost reimbursement contract but a fixed price lump sum contract done persuant to the sealed bid opening procedures under the Virginia Public Procurement Act.
All GC's proposing bids, sign the bid form and bid bond stating: "Enclosed herewith is the following security, offered as evidence that the undersigned will enter into Agreement for the execution and completion of the Work in accordance with the Drawings and Project Manual."
The County Board of Supervisors then issued a resolution accepting the low bid and stating: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Administrator and County Attorney are authorized to negotiate the specific contract language for this ______ project;" and it states the fixed lump sum.
But then say the County Attorney is unwilling to "negotiate the specific contract language" as directed in the Supervisor's Resolution of award and cites the original signed Bid Form.
Questions:
1) Is there precedence on a Bid Form of a Va PPA sealed bid for a lump sum fixed price contract including an Audit provision?
2) Is there precedent on a Board of Supervisors resolution/ authorization being subordinated by the County Attorney or Adminstrator? Can they do that legally?
3) Are there any appropriate methods of recourse to compel the "negotiate specific language of the contract" on the part of the County's designated personnel in the resolution?
Any other information with reference to earlier/similar cases would be appreciated.
U]Background:[/u]
A sealed bid of GCs on a County construction project to result in award to lowest bidder contracting with the County on a Fixed-Sum (AIA A201 contract). However, addenda to the A201 General Conditions included significant deletions and additions. One of these was an Audit Section of GC, all sub-contractors and all suppliers. Though, again, this is not a negotiated government job or cost reimbursement contract but a fixed price lump sum contract done persuant to the sealed bid opening procedures under the Virginia Public Procurement Act.
All GC's proposing bids, sign the bid form and bid bond stating: "Enclosed herewith is the following security, offered as evidence that the undersigned will enter into Agreement for the execution and completion of the Work in accordance with the Drawings and Project Manual."
The County Board of Supervisors then issued a resolution accepting the low bid and stating: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Administrator and County Attorney are authorized to negotiate the specific contract language for this ______ project;" and it states the fixed lump sum.
But then say the County Attorney is unwilling to "negotiate the specific contract language" as directed in the Supervisor's Resolution of award and cites the original signed Bid Form.
Questions:
1) Is there precedence on a Bid Form of a Va PPA sealed bid for a lump sum fixed price contract including an Audit provision?
2) Is there precedent on a Board of Supervisors resolution/ authorization being subordinated by the County Attorney or Adminstrator? Can they do that legally?
3) Are there any appropriate methods of recourse to compel the "negotiate specific language of the contract" on the part of the County's designated personnel in the resolution?
Any other information with reference to earlier/similar cases would be appreciated.