18750 Oxnard Street, Suite 405
West Valley Investment Tarzana, CA 91356
(818) 822-2425
(818) 705-0815 Fax
Group, Inc.
January 23, 2023
Mr. Rick Valte
Director of Public Works
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main St.
Santa Monica, CA 90401
RE: Bid Recommendation Protest
3200 Airport Avenue Renovation (SP2486)
Dear Mr. Valte:
Back in 2005 we bid on the Parking Structure #5 seismic retrofit project for the City of Santa Monica.
This was the first project that we bid on for the City, and we came in lowest. We were called for a meeting where we were grilled with all sorts of questions but we were eventually awarded the project.
At the end of the project, the project manager told me that he was the only one present at the meeting that recommended that we be awarded the project while everyone else was more inclined to award the project to the second-lowest bidder as they had already worked with him before on another project. At the end of the project, that project manager handed me a copy of an email of praise (attached) even from those who were against using our company from the beginning.
After that, we kept on bidding on Santa Monica jobs and under no circumstances were we not awarded a contract whenever we came in lowest, including, to name a few, the seismic retrofit of City Hall, as well as the renovation of the old City Jail, the seismic retrofit and renovations of Parking Structures #2 and 4, Parking Structure #5 Ground Floor Offices, the fabrication and installation of all the Big Blue Bus Stops throughout the City, and lately, and structural strengthening of the Santa Monica Pier, which was completed way ahead of schedule despite the fact that the project was put on hold for a couple of months for some design changes and despite the labor and procurement shortages that all contractors, including us, were faced with during the pandemic.
Last year, 17 years after we started working on Santa Monica projects, we were invited to bid on the 3200 Airport Avenue one-story building renovation project and were prequalified for that bid, which implies that we were vetted and deemed capable of taking care of such a project. And the project itsel is quite simple and very straightforward - just a core and shell project of a single-story building. We usually bid on far more complicated projects that other contractors shun away from due to their complexity.
We spent some two months negotiating with subcontractors to be able to come up with a well-studied and reasonable bid to the City, and came in as the lowest bidder. After waiting a couple more months to be awarded the project, we were shocked and disappointed to learn that the City is recommending that the project be awarded to the second-lowest builder, Swinerton Builders, with their bid exceeding ours by more than $1.1 million, an amount that, until now, I'm having difficulty figuring out how this can be justified to the City Council and the general taxpayers, especially when most cities are battening the hatches in anticipation for an upcoming recession.
Granted, Swinerton is a much larger company than ours, with much larger, prestigious offices, glossy brochures, and a PR department. What they lack, however, is the personal attention to all the details, • Page 2 January 23, 2023
with the owner being available on-site throughout the duration of the project, ready to make decisions on the spot without having to wait for approvals from his superiors. We have been informed that the only reason why it was recommended that the project be awarded to Swinerton is because their timeline was favored to ours. With a high daily liquidated damages rate, we have every reason to complete the project within the allocated period of time. We have also informed the City that we will not be involved with any other project while working on this one to make sure that all our available resources will be allocated here.
and potential overtime. This would have yielded an accelerated schedule with additional costs far lower than the over $1.1 million premium of Swinerton.
value for their money. However, there are procedures to be followed should the City decide not to We respectfully ask that the City revisits the award recommendation for this project.
Thank you,
Villie F. Tarazi
President
Barriga, Orosman
From: Allan Sheth [Allan. [email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 20056:59 PM
To: Barriga, Orosman
Cc: Gary Flora; Tina Rodriguez; Eberts, Ralph T.; Dave Britton Subject: FW: Passing along praise
Hi Orosman,
Keep up the great work !!! Please thank the Contractor as well. It has been a very positive team effort all around, but most of the praise goes to you and the contractor.
Thanks,
Allan
From: Bill Zein
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 4:54 PM
To: 'Eberts, Ralph T.'; 'Litzel, Jim'; Allan Sheth
Cc: Jim Creager
Subject: FW: Passing along praise
Thanks to all of you. Please pass the info to Orsman and the contractor.
From: Tony Antich
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 4:40 PM
To: Andy Agle
Cc: Craig Perkins; Bill Zein
Subject: RE: Passing along praise
Thank you Andy. I will pass this on those those staff involved in the project.
From: Andy Agle
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 1:46 PM
To: Jack Schroeder; Tina Rodriguez
Cc: Tony Antich; Craig Perkins
Subject: Passing along praise
I was at the Bayside Board Thursday night and one of the board members mentioned what | great job the City and its contractor are doing on the Structure 5 retrofit. In particular, they mentioned that there have been very Congratulations veniences to people who park there Thought you might ike the postive feedback Andy
9/21/2005