Riviera Construction Group | CA LIC 984076 | 414 Olive Street, Suite 6, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 | 805.881.3065 | www.rivierabuilt.com
19th May 2026
City Clerk
City of Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive
Camarillo, CA 93010
Via Email: [email protected], [email protected]
RE: RIVIERA CONSTRUCTION GROUP’S FORMAL BID PROTEST OF SBS CORPORATION’S BID Project: ARNEILL ROAD HOUSING PROJECT
Public Project No. CUP-400
Dear City Clerk:
Riviera Construction Group (“Riviera”) hereby submits this formal protest concerning the bid submitted by SBS Corporation (“SBS”) for the above-referenced project (“Project”).
Based upon Riviera’s review of the bid submissions and Contract Documents, SBS’s bid is non-responsive and/or SBS has failed to demonstrate compliance with material bidder qualification requirements established by the Invitation to Bid (“ITB”). Specifically, SBS’s bid fails to comply with mandatory bid bond requirements, subcontractor listing requirements, subcontractor licensing requirements, and bidder qualification requirements.
Accordingly, Riviera respectfully requests that the City reject SBS’s bid and award the Project to Riviera as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.
I. SBS’S BID FAILS TO COMPLY WITH EXPRESS BID BOND REQUIREMENTS
The bid bond included within the ITB expressly states:
“ALL SIGNATURES ON THIS BID BOND MUST BE NOTARIZED USING APPROPRIATE 8½ x 11 NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM.”
SBS submitted bid bond documentation that, upon Riviera’s review, does not include notarization associated with the Principal’s execution of the bid bond as expressly required by the bid documents.
Bid security requirements constitute material bidding requirements intended to protect the integrity of the competitive bidding process and ensure enforceability of the bidder’s obligations. Compliance with expressly stated bid bond execution requirements is mandatory and not discretionary.
Because SBS failed to comply with the express notarization requirement contained within the bid bond form itself, SBS’s bid should be deemed non-responsive.
II. SBS FAILED TO IDENTIFY A REQUIRED LOW VOLTAGE / ELECTRONIC SECURITY
SUBCONTRACTOR
The Bid Proposal expressly provides:
“Failure to specify a subcontractor ... constitutes an agreement that the contractor is fully qualified and will perform that portion of the work.”
Riviera Construction Group | CA LIC 984076 | 414 Olive Street, Suite 6, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 | 805.881.3065 | www.rivierabuilt.com
SBS failed to identify any subcontractor for Division 28 Electronic Safety and Security work despite carrying a separate line item for low-voltage work totaling only $36,909.
The Contract Documents require furnishing and installation of a Verkada electronic security and network system.
Based upon Riviera’s review of the specified system requirements, publicly available pricing information, and industry procurement practices, the specified Verkada scope appears to substantially exceed the amount carried within SBS’s bid allocation for this work. Riviera further understands that Verkada systems are generally furnished and installed through approved vendors and qualified installers.
Despite the apparent value and specialized nature of this scope, SBS failed to identify any low-voltage subcontractor, structured cabling contractor, electronic security contractor, or approved Verkada installer.
By operation of the Bid Proposal, SBS therefore represented that it intended to self-perform the work and was fully qualified to do so. Riviera has been unable to identify information demonstrating that SBS is an approved Verkada vendor/installer or otherwise qualified to directly furnish and install the specified system.
Additionally, SBS’s allocation of only $36,909 for the low-voltage/electronic security scope raises substantial concern regarding whether the specified system and associated work were properly included within the bid, particularly where the Verkada equipment alone is estimated to exceed $150,000.
The apparent omission of a required low-voltage/electronic security subcontractor is particularly significant where the specified scope appears to exceed the applicable subcontractor listing threshold and involves proprietary systems requiring specialized integration and qualifications.
Accordingly, Riviera respectfully requests that the City independently review SBS’s compliance with the Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act and determine whether SBS improperly omitted a required subcontractor for this scope of work.
III. SBS LISTED SUBCONTRACTORS WHO MAY NOT POSSESS THE REQUIRED LICENSE
CLASSIFICATIONS
Riviera’s review also identified subcontractor licensing issues warranting independent verification by the City.
SBS listed Green World Windows (License No. 935359) for the Windows/Doors scope of work. Riviera’s review raises questions regarding whether the license classification held by Green World Windows is consistent with the scope identified in the Contract Documents.
Additionally, SBS listed Summer Construction, Inc. (License No. 597494) for Demo/Grading work. Riviera understands Summer Construction appears to hold a Class A classification despite the identified scope including demolition-related activities.
Licensing compliance on public works projects constitutes a material requirement. Riviera respectfully requests that the City independently verify that the listed subcontractors possess classifications appropriate for the scopes identified within SBS’s bid submission and the Contract Documents.
IV . SBS FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE RECENT COMPARABLE PROJECT EXPERIENCE OF SIMILAR
CHARACTER AND MAGNITUDE
The Bid Proposal required bidders to identify recent projects of similar character and magnitude.
SBS identified projects with reported values of approximately:
• $1,426,000
• $1,565,371
• $1,637,174
• $2,360,117
Riviera Construction Group | CA LIC 984076 | 414 Olive Street, Suite 6, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 | 805.881.3065 | www.rivierabuilt.com
SBS submitted a bid for this Project in the amount of $5,941,787.67.
The projects identified by SBS appear materially smaller in size and scope than the subject Project and therefore do not appear comparable in magnitude to the current procurement.
Additionally, the listed completion dates include 2018, 2019, and 2021, which do not constitute recent comparable project experience for a project of this size and complexity.
Further, the projects identified by SBS appear to consist predominantly of private work rather than public works projects involving prevailing wage compliance, certified payroll reporting, DIR compliance obligations, and administration of public contracting requirements.
Riviera therefore respectfully requests that the City independently evaluate whether SBS satisfied the Project’s bidder qualification and comparable project experience requirements.
V . CONCLUSION
The competitive bidding process depends upon strict compliance with material bidding requirements and equal treatment of all bidders.
For the reasons set forth above, Riviera respectfully submits that SBS’s bid failed to comply with material requirements of the ITB concerning bid security, subcontractor listing requirements, subcontractor licensing requirements, and bidder qualification requirements.
Accordingly, Riviera respectfully requests that the City reject SBS’s bid as non-responsive and/or non-responsible and award the Project to Riviera as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Maxwell Walshaw
Principal
Riviera Construction Group LLC
Riviera Construction Group | CA LIC 984076 | 414 Olive Street, Suite 6, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 | 805.881.3065 | www.rivierabuilt.com
19th May 2026
City Clerk
City of Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive
Camarillo, CA 93010
Via Email: [email protected], [email protected]
RE: RIVIERA CONSTRUCTION GROUP’S FORMAL BID PROTEST OF McGILLIVRAY CONSTRUCTION INC.’S BID
Project: ARNEILL ROAD HOUSING PROJECT
Public Project No. CUP-400
Dear City Clerk:
Riviera Construction Group (“Riviera”) hereby submits this formal protest concerning the bid submitted by McGillivray Construction, Inc. (“McGillivray”) for the above-referenced project (“Project”).
Based upon Riviera’s review of the bid submissions and Contract Documents, McGillivray’s bid is non-responsive because it fails to comply with material requirements of the Invitation to Bid (“ITB”), including mandatory bid bond requirements, subcontractor registration requirements, and subcontractor listing requirements.
Accordingly, Riviera respectfully requests that the City reject McGillivray’s bid and award the Project to Riviera as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.
I. McGILLIVRAY FAILED TO COMPLY WITH EXPRESS BID BOND REQUIREMENTS
The bid bond included within the ITB expressly states:
“ALL SIGNATURES ON THIS BID BOND MUST BE NOTARIZED USING APPROPRIATE 8½ x 11 NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM.”
McGillivray submitted bid bond documentation that, upon Riviera’s review, does not include notarization associated with the Principal’s execution of the bid bond as expressly required by the bid documents.
Bid security requirements constitute material bidding requirements intended to protect the integrity of the competitive bidding process and ensure enforceability of the bidder’s obligations. Compliance with expressly stated bid bond execution requirements is mandatory and not discretionary.
Because McGillivray failed to comply with the express notarization requirement contained within the bid bond form itself, McGillivray’s bid should be deemed non-responsive.
II. McGILLIVRAY LISTED A SUBCONTRACTOR THAT DOES NOT APPEAR TO MAINTAIN CURRENT
PUBLIC WORKS REGISTRATION
The Bid Proposal expressly provides that all listed subcontractors must be currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Labor Code section 1725.5 and further provides that a bid may be deemed non- responsive if a listed subcontractor is not properly registered as required by law.
Riviera Construction Group | CA LIC 984076 | 414 Olive Street, Suite 6, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 | 805.881.3065 | www.rivierabuilt.com
McGillivray listed Anacapa Drywall Construction, Inc. for drywall work and identified DIR Registration No. 1000974902.
Riviera’s review of DIR registration records indicates that the DIR registration associated with Anacapa Drywall Construction expired on June 30, 2023.
Accordingly, at the time bids were submitted, Anacapa Drywall Construction does not appear to have maintained current registration and qualification to perform public work as required by the Contract Documents and Labor Code section 1725.5.
This issue constitutes a material deviation from the bid requirements rather than a minor informality. McGillivray expressly represented within its bid that its listed subcontractors were properly registered and qualified to perform public work.
Riviera respectfully requests that the City independently verify the registration status of Anacapa Drywall Construction and determine whether McGillivray’s bid is non-responsive as a result.
III. McGILLIVRAY FAILED TO IDENTIFY A REQUIRED LOW VOLTAGE / ELECTRONIC SECURITY
SUBCONTRACTOR
The Bid Proposal expressly provides:
“Failure to specify a subcontractor ... constitutes an agreement that the contractor is fully qualified and will perform that portion of the work.”
McGillivray did not identify any subcontractor for Division 28 Electronic Safety and Security work.
The Contract Documents require furnishing and installation of a Verkada electronic security and network system.
Based upon Riviera’s review of the specified system requirements, publicly available pricing information, and industry procurement practices, the specified Verkada scope appears to substantially exceed the amount carried within McGillivray’s bid allocation for this work. Riviera further understands that Verkada systems are generally furnished and installed through approved vendors and qualified installers.
Despite the apparent value and specialized nature of this scope, McGillivray failed to identify any low-voltage subcontractor, structured cabling contractor, electronic security contractor, or approved Verkada installer.
By operation of the Bid Proposal, McGillivray therefore represented that it intended to self-perform the work and was fully qualified to do so. Riviera has been unable to identify information demonstrating that McGillivray is an approved Verkada vendor/installer or otherwise qualified to directly furnish and install the specified system.
Additionally, McGillivray carried only approximately $49,008 for the Electronic Safety and Security scope, which raises substantial concern regarding whether the specified system and associated work were properly included within the bid, particularly where the Verkada equipment alone is estimated to exceed $150,000.
The apparent omission of a required low-voltage/electronic security subcontractor is particularly significant where the specified scope appears to exceed the applicable subcontractor listing threshold and involves proprietary systems requiring specialized integration and qualifications.
Accordingly, Riviera respectfully requests that the City independently review McGillivray’s compliance with the Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act and determine whether McGillivray improperly omitted a required subcontractor for this scope of work.
Riviera Construction Group | CA LIC 984076 | 414 Olive Street, Suite 6, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 | 805.881.3065 | www.rivierabuilt.com
IV . CONCLUSION
The competitive bidding process depends upon strict compliance with material bidding requirements and equal treatment of all bidders.
For the reasons set forth above, Riviera respectfully submits that McGillivray’s bid failed to comply with material requirements of the ITB concerning bid security, subcontractor registration requirements, and subcontractor listing requirements.
Accordingly, Riviera respectfully requests that the City reject McGillivray’s bid as non-responsive and award the Project to Riviera as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Maxwell Walshaw
Principal
Riviera Construction Group LLC