Agenda 07/08/2014 Item #16E147/8/2014 16.E.14.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to accept the Hearing Officer's recommendation in the appeal of Invitation to
Bid (ITB) 13 -6113 Janitorial Services; award the contract to ISS Facility Services, Inc; and,
authorize the Chairman to execute a County Attorney approved contract.
OBJECTIVE: To obtain janitorial services for County owned and leased buildings at the best value.
CONSIDERATIONS: The Department of Facilities Management manages janitorial services for
approximately 140 County -owned buildings totaling 1,500,000 square feet.
On October 10, 2013, the Purchasing Department solicited bids for janitorial services. The selection
was based upon the lowest qualified bidder, as outlined in the solicitation. A total of three hundred
forty -seven (347) notices were sent, fifty -three (53) downloaded, and seven (7) submissions received.
The order of the bidder's from lowest to highest price was:
Vendor
Offer
ISS Facility Services
$1,177,682.83
USSI
1,290,226.36
ABM
1,302,672.42
American Facility
1,412,866.90
American Maintenance
1,447,799.22
DTZ
1,453,060.01
Grosvenor
1,638,446.01
While ISS Facility Services was the lowest bidder, the firm was not a local vendor. Per the Board's
Purchasing Ordinance (Section 15: Procedure to Provide Preference to Local Business in County
Contracts), staff extended the Local Vendor Price option, to the second lowest bidder, USSI [within
ten (10 %) of the lowest offer]. USSI declined to accept the ISS Facility Services bid minus one
($1.00) dollar. Staff posted the intended recommendation on Thursday, February 6, 2014, and
subsequently received a protest to the recommendation from an attorney with the law firm Vernis &
Bowling representing the third lowest bidder and current vendor, ABM.
After review of all of the issues raised in the protest, and the facts pertaining to each, the Purchasing
Director supported the staff's position of merely applying the originally bid unit price to correctly
calculate the low bid amount. Accordingly, the Purchasing Director denied ABM's protest and
directed staff to move forward with the award of ITB 13 -6113 Janitorial Services.
The Board's Purchasing Ordinance (Section 23, F and G) allows the protesting party to appeal the
Purchasing Director's decision. Thereafter, as permitted by the Ordinance, the County Manager
directed the appointment of a hearing officer to consider the appeal and make a final recommendation
for the Board of County Commissioners.
On March 11, 2014 (Item 16E1), the Board extended the ABM Janitorial Services — Southwest LLC
through August 31, 2014 or until the Board awards a new contract (whichever is sooner).
The Hearing was conducted on May 7, 2014 with Special Magistrate Brenda C. Garretson serving as
the Hearing Officer.
Packet Page -2128-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
During the evidentiary portion of the hearing, ABM presented live testimony from Connie Bires and
Ben Carver; the County called Joanne Markiewicz, Collier County Procurement Director and Adam
Northrup, Collier County Procurement Strategist. The hearing lasted the entire day. Immediately
following the conclusion of the hearing, each party submitted closing statements in writing to Judge
Garretson by Wednesday, May 28, 2014. On June 16, 2014, the Hearing Officer issued a twenty -five
(25) page decision in the matter that included the following recommendation:
"Having reviewed the records, transcripts, audio CDs, exhibits and documents
submitted by the parties, having heard the testimony presented and the arguments
offered by the parties in their Bench Briefs, it is the recommendation of the
undersigned Hearing Officer that the Formal Written Protest filed by ABM Janitorial
Services Southwest, LLC be denied on the ground that neither ITB No. 13 -6113 nor the
County's actions in connection with the solicitation of that procurement were arbitrary,
capricious, illegal or fraudulent and that, in accordance with the Purchasing Ordinance
and the ITB, the low bid of ISS Facility Services, Inc. be upheld and reported to the
Board of County Commissioners for its final consideration to award a contract for the
janitorial services for Collier County."
Staff recommends that the Board accept the hearing officer's decision and authorize the Chairman to
execute the contract with ISS Facility Services. In order to effect an orderly transition, staff also
recommends that the contract with ISS Facility Services go into effect on September 1, 2014, and that
the ABM contract be terminated on August 31, 2014.
FISCAL IMPACT: The base annual amount of the contract is estimated to be $1,177,600 plus any
additional services. Funds are budgeted in the Department of Facilities Management Operating
Budget 001 - 122240.
The total hearing costs were $7,726.46. The County and ABM will each pay one -half of the $3,316.46
court reporter services ($1,658.23). Since the County was the prevailing party before the Hearing
Officer, ABM is also required to pay the Hearing Officer's fee of $4,410, as provided for in Section
23G of the Board's Purchasing Ordinance.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved as to form and legality, and requires majority vote
for Board approval. —SRT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact associated with this
Executive Summary.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners
recommendation in the appeal of Invitation to Bid (ITB) 13 -6113
contract to ISS Facility Services, Inc; and, authorizes the Chairman
Attorney approved contract.
Prepared By: Joanne Markiewicz, Director, Procurement Services
Dennis Linguidi, Manager, Facilities Management
Attachment:
• Hearing Officer Decision
• Revised Bid Tabulation
• Agreement
Packet Page -2129-
accepts the Hearing Officer's
Janitorial Services; awards the
to execute the attached County
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 16.E.15.
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
Item Summary: Recommendation to accept the Hearing Officer's recommendation in the appeal
of Invitation to Bid (ITB) 13 -6113 Janitorial Services; award the contract to ISS Facility Services, Inc;
and, authorize the Chairman to execute a County Attorney approved contract.
Meeting Date: 7/8//2014
Prepared By
Name: JoanneMarkiewicz
Title: Director - Purchasing /General Services, Purchasing & General Services
Approved By
Name: pochopin_p
Title: Administrative Assistant, Administrative Services Division
Date: 6/17/2014 2:59:45 PM
Name: Camp_S
Title: Director - Facilities Management, Facilities Management
Date: 6/17/2014 3:37:25 PM
Name: DennisLinguidi
Title: Manager - Facilities, Facilities Management
Date: 6/17/2014 3:42:19 PM
Name: JoanneMarkiewicz
Title: Director - Purchasing /General Services, Purchasing & General Services
Date: 6/18/2014 7:05:28 AM
Name: AdamNorthrup
Title: Procurement Specialist, Purchasing & General Services
Date: 6/18/2014 11:23:57 AM
Name: KelseyWard
Title: Procurement Specialist, Purchasing & General Services
Date: 6/19/2014 8:52:20 AM
Packet Page -2130-
Name: JohnsonScott
Title: Manager - Procurement, Purchasing & General Services
Date: 6/20/2014 3:15:18 PM
Name: MarkiewiczJoanne
Title: Manager - Procurement, Purchasing & General Services
Date: 6/23/2014 12:05:51 PM
Name: TeachScott
Title: Deputy County Attorney, County Attorney
Date: 6/23/2014 1:35:41 PM
Name: PriceLen
Title: Administrator - Administrative Services, Administrative Services Division
Date: 6/24/2014 5:37:27 PM
Name: KimbleSherry
Title: Administrator - Administrative Services, Administrative Services Division
Date: 6/25/2014 10:30:19 AM
Name: KlatzkowJeff
Title: County Attorney,
Date: 6/26/2014 5:09:08 PM
Name: OchsLeo
Title: County Attorney,
Date: 6/30/2014 2:13:26 PM
Packet Page -2131-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
BRENDA C. GARRETSON. E
• Florida Supreme Court Certified Mediator
Appellate, Circuit Civil, Family 81 County
` Special Magistrate ` ,Arbitrator
• Hearing Officer
June 16, 2014
VIA EMAIL:
Dirk Smits, Esq. Scott R. Teach, Esq.
DSmits( )Forida- law.com scottteachncolliergov.net
Theron C. Simmons, Esq. Kevin. L. Noell, Esq.
tsirnmons a( Florida- Law.com KevinNoell!colliergov.net
Vernis & Bowling of the Florida Keys, P.A. Office of the County Attorney
RE: Collier County ITB # 13- 6113, "Janitorial Services"
Bid Protest by: ABM Janitorial Services — Southwest, LLC
Dear Counsel:
Attached please find your copies of my Final Recommended Order in the above'-
referenced matter. Please acknowledge your receipt of same in writing to confirm delivery was
made today. The original will be sent to the County Attorney's Office for presentation to the
Board of County Commissioners for their consideration.
Since this concludes my duties as Hearing Officer, I have also attached my Invoice for
my services through June 16, 2014, The Invoice is directed to both parties, but based on ABM's
failure to win its' appeal, I believe ABM bears the responsibility for payment of this Invoice.
Please advise me if there is disagreement on this point. Such Invoices are normally paid within
thirty days. Thank you for allowing me to serve as your Hearing Officer.
If 1 can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact me. I enjoyed working with all
parties, including witnesses, and appreciate all courtesies extended to me.
Sincerely,
Br nda C. Garretson, Esq.
Hearing Officer
4915 Rattlesnake Hammock U. #127 bk_garret @.%mail.com
Naples/ FL 34113 1239) 227-81S1
Packet Page -2132-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
ABM JANITORIAL SERVICES
SOUTHWEST, LLC,
Petitioner,
V. ITB# 13 -6113
COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
Respondent,
RECOMMENDED ORDER
THIS MATTER came before the Honorable Brenda C. Garretson for final hearing on
May 7, 2014, in Naples, Collier County, Florida, pursuant to a bid protest filed by ABM
Janitorial Services Southwest, LLC ("ABM'), regarding the recommendation to award a contract
for provision of janitorial services for Collier County facilities in response to Invitation to Bid
No. 13 -6113 ( "ITB ") issued by the Collier County Purchasing Department. Having thoroughly
reviewed and considered the records, audio CDs, exhibits, transcripts, briefs submitted by the
parties, testimony of witnesses presented, argument of counsel and legal authority, and being
otherwise fully advised in the premises, the undersigned makes the following findings of facts,
conclusions of law- and recommendations for submission to the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners:
Packet Page -2133 -
APPEARANCES:
For Petitioner:
ABM Janitorial Services:
For Respondent:
Collier County Board of County
Commissioners:
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
Dirk M. Smits, Esq.
Florida Bar No. 911518
Theron Simmons, Esq.
Florida Bar No. 623385_
Vernis & Bowling of the Florida Keys, P.A.
Islamorada Professional Center
81990 Overseas Hwy., P Floor
Islamorada, Florida 33036
Kevin L. Noell, Esq.
Assistant County Attorney
Florida Bar No. 13811
Scott R Teach, Esq.
Deputy County Attorney
Office of the Collier County Attorney
3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 800
Naples, Florida 34112
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
1. Whether the Invitation-to Bid ( "ITB ") issued by Collier County ( "County ") and the
County's incorporation of ISS Facility Services, Ine.'s ( "ISS ") bid unit prices from an
earlier version of the ITB Bid Schedule, into the correct final version of the Bid
Schedule, was arbitrary, capricious, illegal or fraudulent such that the ISS bid should be
nullified?
? Whether the first lowest bid from ISS and second lowest bid from USSI should be
rejected as non- responsive for failure to use the correct Bid Schedule when submitting
their bids, and ABM, as the third lowest bid, should be reported to the Collier County
Board of County Commissioners as the responsible and responsive vendor submitting the
lowest responsive bid?
Whether ABM's bid protest should be denied and ISS' low bid be upheld and reported to
the Board of County Commissioners for award of a contract under ITB No. 13 -6113 as
the responsible and responsive vendor submitting the lowest responsive bid?
Packet Page -2134-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
The County's Department of Facilities Management manages janitorial services for
approximately 140 County -owned buildings totaling 1,500,000 square feet. On October 10,
2013, the Collier County Purchasing Department ( "Purchasing ") solicited bids for janitorial
services under ITB No. 13 -6113. Seven bids were submitted, including timely bids from ABM
Janitorial Services Southwest, LLC ("ABM") and ISS Facility Services, Inc. ( "ISS "). Pursuant
to the County's bid procedure regarding ITBs, the bids were opened and tabulated, resulting in
the following ranking from lowest bid submitted to highest:
Vendor Bid Amount
ISS
$1,177,682.83
USSI
$1,290,226.36
ABM
$1,302,672.42
American Facility
$1,412,866.90
American Maintenance
$1,447,799.22
DTZ
$1,453,060.01
Grosvenor
$1,638,446.01
On February 6, 2014, . the County Purchasing Department posted its intention to report
ISS as the low bidder to the Board of County Commissioners. This matter arises as a result of a
Formal Written Protest timely filed on February 13, 2014, by ABM to challenge the County's
intention to award the contract to the lowest bidder, ISS (Exhibit 5 of ABM's Exhibit Notebook).
ABM was the third lowest bidder and is the current vendor providing janitorial services for the
County. The exact grounds asserted by ABM in its Formal Written Protest are set forth in
Exhibit 5 of ABM's Exhibit Notebook, and are re- stated here as follows:
1. The low bidder, ISS (as well as USSI), made post -bid material changes by
submitting a different price on 1.2110,'13 and (1112112013) and ISS was given
an opportunity to change their responses which ABM was not afforded.
3
Packet Page -2135-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
2. Post -Bid meetings were held outside the Sunshine without Notice or
opportunity for Public Attendance and Input.
3. The bid by ABM included costs not accounted for by the low bidder.
4. The responses did not include the expense of operating a vehicle fleet to
service outlying facilities.
5. A large variance in the annual bid total by ISS was due to the ambiguity of
certain scope items. This resulted in inaccurate pricing of the overall project.
On February 20, 2014, after a review of ABM's Protest and as required by Section 23 of
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinance No. 2013 -69 (the "Purchasing Ordinance "), the
Purchasing Director issued her "Protest Decision Regarding Solicitation 13 -6113 Janitorial
Service" (Exhibit 2 of County's Exhibit Notebook). Thereafter, ABM filed a Notice of Appeal
to Protest Decision (Exhibit 6 of ABM's Exhibit Notebook) and the County Manager directed
the appointment of a Hearing Officer to consider the appeal of the Formal Protest as provided in
Section 23G of the Purchasing Ordinance. With the consent of the Petitioner, the undersigned
Hearing Officer was hired to consider this appeal and during a pretrial conference call conducted
by the Hearing Officer on April 1, 2014, this matter was scheduled to be heard on May 7, 2014.
Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, all of the exhibits included in each party's
Exhibit Notebook were admitted into evidence. During the evidentiary, portion of the hearing,
ABM presented live testimony from the following witnesses: Connie Bires, Project Manager for
ABM, and Ben Carver, Regional Branch Manager for ABM. The County presented live
testimony from Adam Northrup, the Procurement Strategist in the County's Purchasing
Department who prepared and issued the ITB, and Joanne Markiewicz, the Collier County
Purchasing Director.
4
Packet Page -2136-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
In lieu of closing arguments, which were waived by the parties, Recommended. Findings
of Fact and Order were submitted to the Hearing Officer within 10 business days following
receipt of the hearing transcript. The transcript of the hearing was received on May 16th, 2014.
Based upon a review of the documents, briefs, exhibits, legal authority submitted by the
parties and the evidence presented at the hearing, as well as a complete examination of the record
as a whole and consideration of the parties' Recommended Orders, the undersigned males the
following Findings of Fact:
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Collier County Purchasing Ordinance was adopted by the Collier County
Board of Commissioners on December 10, 2013.1 The intent of the Board in enacting the
Ordinance is found in Section Two: Purpose, which states, in part: "The purpose of this
Purchasing Ordinance is to codify and formalize Collier County's Purchasing Policy, to provide
for the fair and equitable treatment of all persons involved in public purchasing by the County, to
maximize the purchasing value of public funds in procurement, and to provide safeguards for
maintaining a procurement system of quality and integrity."
2. ABM is the current vendor providing janitorial services for the County. ABM's
contract was scheduled to terminate at the end of February 2014 but the County extended that
agreement for up to an additional six (6) months until this bid protest could be resolved.
3. On October 17, 2013, the Collier County Purchasing Department posted an
Invitation to Bid ( "ITB ") requesting unit price based bids from interested and qualified firms, to
perform janitorial services at various County -owned properties. The Purchasing Ordinance
2 While this Purchasing Ordinance was enacted after the commencement of the bidding process there was no
substantial change in purchasing policy that affects this Bid Protest.
5
Packet Page -2137-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
defines an ITB to mean "a written or electronic solicitation for sealed competitive bids with the
title, date, and hour of the public bid opening designated and specifically defining the
commodity, group of commodities, or services for which bids are sought. It includes instructions
prescribing all conditions for bidding and will be distributed to registered bidders
simultaneously. The invitation to bid shall be used when the agency is capable of specifically
defining the scope of work for which a contractual service is required or when the agency is
capable of establishing precise specifications defining the actual commodity or group of
commodities."
4. The County held a publicly noticed pre -bid meeting on October 22, 2013 to give
the bidding community an opportunity to ask questions and familiarize themselves with the
janitorial services being solicited. Various prospective vendors were in attendance, including
representatives from both ABM and ISS.
S. Due to questions submitted to the County on its online forum, issues discussed in
the pre -bid meeting and clarifications from the Collier County Contract Manager, three
Addendums were made to the ITB throughout the open bid period. Addendum 41, posted
October 28, 2013, issued a revision to the ITB and bid schedule, issued a cleaning schedule for
all sites that were discussed in the pre -bid meeting and extended the open bid period to
November 13.2013.
6. Addendum 42 to the ITB, posted on ?~November 6, 2013, issued a second revision
to the ITB and the bid schedule and included another extension to the bid period until November
18, 2013. Addendum 42 also addressed some of the issues with the scope of the work, such as
the number of days a particular location needed to be cleaned and provided for a cleaning
C'
Packet Page -2138-
7/8/2014 16. E.14.
schedule. Importantly, the revised bid schedule located in Addendum #2 was the final bid
schedule that listed out all of the areas to clean and frequencies, which included changes to the
facilities identified and to the frequency of cleaning for some of the locations. Addendum #3,
posted on November 7, 2013, simply extended the online question and answer period to
November 1.3, 201.3.
7. The ITB closed on November 18, 2013 with seven vendors submitting timely bid
proposals, initially ranked as follows:
#
Company
Pricing
1
ISS
1,173,382.78
2
USSI
1295,086.40
3
ABM
1,302,672.42
4
American Facilities Services
1,412.866.90
5
American Maintenance
1,452,856.42
6
F7
DTZ
1,463.568.49
Grosvenor
1,638,446.01
8. The submissions by the prospective vendors were reviewed on November 19,
2013 by the County Procurement Strategist, Adam Northrup, to determine responsiveness to the
ITB. Upon examination, it was discovered that four of the seven vendors had incorrectly used
the initial version of the bid schedule (either the one that was included in the original ITB or the
first revision of the bid schedule that was included in Addendum #1) rather than using the final,
corrected bid schedule that was included in Addendum #2.
9. The cause of this mistake by a majority of the bidders is unknown. As admitted
by the County, the bid .Addenda included some incorrect numbering and dates, which
theoretically could have caused confusion to some of the bidders, but no evidence was presented
to this effect.
7
Packet Page -2139-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
10. The intended award recipient, ISS, as lowest bidder, and the next lowest bidder,
USSI, used the incorrect bid schedule. Petitioner ABM, the third lowest bidder, used the correct
bid schedule as set forth in Addendum 2 to the ITB.
11. According to the ITB, at paragraph 11, "County reserves the right to reject any
and all bids, to waive defects in the form of the bid, also to select the bid that best meets the
requirements of the County. Vendors whose bids, past performance or current status do not
reflect the capability, integrity or reliability to fully and in good faith perform the requirements
denoted may be rejected as non- responsive. Bids that do not meet all the necessary requirements
of this solicitation or fail to provide all required information, documents or materials may be
rejected as non- responsive." None of the seven bids were rejected by Purchasing as non-
responsive.
12. While both parties agree that the original bids by ISS and USSI included the
incorrect bid schedule with different buildings and days of service, they disagree on whether
these changes to the bid schedule constituted a material change, justifying the rejection of the
ISS' bid because it was changed, as argued by ABM, or whether the substitution of the correct
bid schedule was merely the correction of a ministerial mathematical error, as argued by the
County.
13. Both the Procurement Strategist and the Purchasing Director`testified that in order
to fairly and equally compare all the submitted bids, it was necessary to ensure that all the
vendors used the bid schedule in Addendum #2 because only the final revised bid schedule
accurately reflected the frequency of cleaning and square footage of the areas to be cleaned.
14. To accomplish a uniform comparison, the Procurement Strategist transferred the
E
Packet Page -2140-
7/8/2014 16. E.14.
unit prices per square foot of all vendors who submitted the incorrect bid schedule, into the
correct bid schedule included in Addendum 42.
Vendor
ISS
USSI
ABM
American Facility
American Maintenance
DTZ
Grosvenor
Those unit prices are as follows:
Unit Price
$ 0.00417
$ 0.004568
$ 0.00462
$ 0.00499
$ 0.00514
$ 0.005156704
$ 0.00577
15. The Procurement Strategist did not change ISS' or any of the other vendors'
proposed unit price for any of the services, but rather each vendor's original unit price was
incorporated into the correct Addendum #2 bid schedule, so that the County's computer
program's formula could calculate the submitted unit prices and automatically arrive at the
accurate total bid amount for all vendors.
16. Wages 11 and 12 of the ITB expressly state, that it is "the intent of Collier County
to award to the lowest, qualified and responsive vendor(s)" and that the qualified bidder with the
lowest amount in the line 117 Bid Total will be awarded the bid.
17. The ITB provides that mathematical miscalculations may be corrected by the
County to allow for accuracy in the comparison of the cost to the County of the submitted bids.
Any error in calculations which occurs on the Bid Response Pages must be recalculated by the
Counter's computer program in relation to the unit price quoted by each bidder.
9
Packet Page -2141-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
18. Both the Procurement Strategist and the Purchasing Director, Joanne Markiewicz,
testified that they believed incorporating ISS' unit prices into the correct Bid Schedule and
allowing the program to automatically populate and calculate the total bid amount was a
ministerial mathematical correction.
19. Section l OF of the Purchasing Ordinance and numbered paragraph 1 I of the ITB
allows the County to waive irregularities in formal bids within lawful guidelines, to waive
defects in the form of bid and to select the bid that best meets the requirements of the County.
The Purchasing Director determined it was appropriate to waive the vendors' use of the incorrect
bid schedule form and to apply all vendors' unit prices to the correct bid schedule to achieve
accurate calculations for ranking purposes.
20. Once each vendor's unit prices were plugged into the correct bid schedule, the
amount of the total pricing changed, but the vendor rankings did not change from their initial
rankings. The updated ranking of the vendors showing the corrected price totals and showing
which vendors' bid schedule was corrected is as follows:
#
Company
Pricinp,
% from #1
Corrected
Local?
1
ISS
1,177,682.83
-
Yes
No
2
USSI
1.290.226.36
.0956
Yes
Yes
3
ABM
1,302,672.42
.1061
Yes
4
American Facilities
Services
1,412,866.90
.1997
No
5
1 American Maintenance
1,447,799.22
' .2294
Yes
No
6
1 DTZ
1,453.060.01
.2338
Yes
No
7
1 Grosvenor
1,638,446.01
.3912
No
21. After determining that ISS was the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.
County staff met with ISS at two meetings that were neither noticed nor open to the public.
In
Packet Page -2142-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
22. On December 19, 2013 a transitional review and plan meeting was held by the
Procurement Strategist and three other County staff with an ISS representative that was
described in testimony elicited at the hearing as an opportunity to place a face with the bidder or
a "meet and greet" because ISS was a new vendor to Collier County.
23. On January 17, 2014, a second meeting took place between an ISS representative,
the Procurement Strategist and a staff member from the Facilities Management Department to
discuss the general form of the contract and general security related issues involving maintaining
government facilities.
24. In her Response to Bid Protest, the Purchasing Director indicated that the
meetings served to clarify the bid offering, the scope of work expectations and to finalize the
contract for recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners.
25. No evidence was presented to indicate that ISS received any special treatment or
unfair advantage by meeting with count- staff after the bids had been opened and ranked. Both
meetings occurred after the Procurement Strategist incorporated unit prices into the correct bid
schedule so the meetings had no effect on the rankings.
26. Neither of those two post -bid opening meetings involved two or more persons
authorized to make determinations as to the qualifications of bidders or make decisions that
would be recommended for adoption by the Board of County Commissioners.
27. Because the terms of the ITB and the Purchasing Ordinance provided that ITBs
are to be awarded to the lowest, responsive qualified bidder, which had already been determined
at bid opening, the County staff could not be deemed a ``selection committee' required to comply
with the meeting notice requirements of Florida's "Sunshine Law ".
11
Packet Page -2143-
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
I. Standard of Review
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
In the context of a government procurement dispute, a public body has wide discretion in
soliciting and selecting bids, and when based on an honest exercise of discretion, will not be
overturned even if it may be erroneous, and even if reasonable persons may disagree. Liberty
County v. Baxter's Asphalt & Concrete. Inc., 421 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 1982). As a result of this
ride discretion, the Florida Supreme Court has declared that a reviewing court's scope of review
in such proceedings is limited to only determining "whether the agency acted fraudulently,
arbitrarily, illegally, or dishonestly. "2 Department of Transportation v. Groves- Watkins
Constructors, 5' )0 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 1988); see also, Moore v. State Dept. of Health and
Rehabilitative Servs., 596 So.2d 759, 761 (Fla. 1" DCA 1992); The Apex Mgmt. Group of New
Jersev, Inc. v. Agencv for Health Care Admin., CASE No. 95- 0596BID, 1995 Fla. Div. Adm.
Hear. LEXIS 4586, * 10 (DOAH March 16, 1995). An arbitrary decision is one that "is not
supported by facts or logic, or is despotic." Agrico. Chem. Co. v. Dept of Envtl. Rea, 365 So.2d
759, 763 (Fla. I" DCA 1978)., - This threshold has been described as a "very high bar." See.
Sutron Corp. v. Lake County Water Authority, 870 So. 2d 930 (Fla. 5'' DCA 2004).
As long as the County has not acted arbitrarily or capriciously, and has acted in good
faith. its decision should not be subject to review. Wood- 1Iopkins Contracting Co. v. Roger J Au
& Sons, Inc. 354 So. 2d 446 (Fla. 1978); City of Pensacola v. Kirby, 47 So. 2d 533 (Fla. 1950).
Arbitrary and capricious has further been defined to include acts taken with improper motive,
'This limited scope of review of the Hearing Officer is also provided for in Section 23G of the Purchasing
Ordinance. While this purchasing policy was enacted after the commencement of the bidding protest, the parties
have stipulated that the revised policy is substantially the same as the previous policy for purposes of bid protest
procedures.
12
Packet Page -2144-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
without reason, or for a reason that is merely pretextual. City of Sweetwater v. Solo
Construction Corp., 823 So. 2d 798; citing Decarion v. Monroe Counts,, 85' ) F. Supp. 1415 (S.D.
Fla. 1994). Moreover, it is well established that "so long as ... a public agency acts in good
faith, even though [it] may reach a conclusion on facts upon which reasonable men may differ,
the courts will not generally interfere with [the agency's] judgment, even though the decision
reached may appear to some persons to be erroneous." Culpepper v. Moore, 40 So. 2d 366, 370
(Fla. 1949).
During their testimony, both witnesses for ABM stated emphatically that they believed
the County's failure to reject ISS' bid as non- responsive was clearly "erroneous ", but their
testimony failed to show that the County acted in bad faith. In the absence of bad faith, the
County's actions must be upheld, even though, as in Culpepper, supra, this may be yet another
instance of "a conclusion on facts upon which reasonable men may differ ".
Notably, the ITB solicitation grants great deference to the County to accept the low bid
proposal deemed the most advantageous to the public. In part, Section 11. Rejection and
Waiver, states: _
The County reserves the right to reject any and all bids, to waive defects in the
form of bid, also to select the bid that best meets the requirements of the County.
ITB, page 15. (emphasis added)
In this case, although low bidder ISS erred by submitting the original Bid Schedule
included in the ITB rather than the correct revised Bid Schedule provided with Addendum 2, the
Procurement Strategist used the unit price ISS submitted with its Bid Schedule to "automatically
populate" the bid price in the correct Bid Schedule as expressly governed by pages 11 and 12 of
13
Packet Page -2145-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
the ITB solicitation document and the Bid Schedule Addenda. In fact, regardless of whether the
ISS' unit price is calculated applying the original Bid Schedule or the corrected Bid Schedule
revised by Addendum 2, the ranking of qualified bidders remained the same; although ISS' bid
actually increased under the formula applied using Addendum 2, ISS was still the low bidder.
Based upon the vendors' bid submissions, there is no evidence that the County acted
fraudulently, arbitrarily, illegally, capriciously, dishonestly, in a despotic way or in bad faith.
Therefore, there is no basis to reverse the Purchasing Director's decision denying ABM's bid
protest and her recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners accept ISS' low bid
and award it the contract for ITB No. 13 -6113.
II. ABM's Formal Written Bid Protest
The Purchasing Ordinance limits ABM's formal bid protest to the five (5) grounds raised
in its February 13, 2014 Form Written Bid Protest. (See Purchasing Ordinance, Section 23D,
"The formal protest shall contain all arguments, facts or data supporting and advancing the
protestor's position. Under no circumstances shall the protestor have the right to amend,
supplement or modify its formal protest after the filing thereof. "). To the extent that ABM raised
issues for the first time at the hearing that were objected to by the County, such evidence or
arguments cannot serve as a basis to overturn the proposed award to low bidder ISS.
During the bid protest hearing, the County interposed an objection to questions regarding
whether an ITB was the proper procurement mechanism for the subject janitorial services as this
issue was never raised by ABM in their written protest, as required. Ruling on this objection was
reserved by the Hearing Officer at the time made. This objection is now sustained. The
County's Motion to Strike, in the Alternative, is denied as moot.
14
Packet Page -2146-
7/8/2014 16. E.14.
Each of ABM's grounds raised in its formal Protest is addressed below seriatim.
A. ISS Made Post -Bid Material Changes to Its Price
ABM's first contention in its' Bid Protest is as follows:
1. The low bidder, ISS (as well as USSI), made post -bid material changes
by submitting a different price on 12/10/13 and (11/21/2013) and ISS
was given an opportunity to change their responses which ABM was
not afforded.
ABM alleges that the County permitted low bidder ISS to make a material change to its
submitted bid price on December 10, 2013. Specifically, ABM claims that ISS' original bid
submittal contained pricing that resulted in a bid amount of $1,162,833.56, but that on December
10. 2013, it submitted a new higher price of $1,177,682.83. At the hearing, ABM did not present
any evidence showing that ISS submitted, and the County accepted, a post -bid change to its
submitted unit bid prices. Rather, it was the County that integrated ISS' bid price based on the
unit price submitted in its bid submission into the correct Bid Schedule required by Addendum 2.
This ministerial act of recalculating a bid submission has been the subject of case lace in other
bid protests. _
In Guiding Licht Enterprises. Inc. v. Dept. of Transportation, Case No. 04- 2163BID,
Div. Adm. Hear. (Slip Opinion August 25, 2004), an ITB was issued for janitorial services at
two State Department of Transportation ( "DOT") office buildings. Guiding Light challenged the
proposed low bid award on the grounds that DOT procurement staff recalculated the bid
submissions of two vendors who submitted their bids based on a monthly price basis rather than
s ABM's protest also alleges that second low bidder USSI was also permitted to make a post -bid material change to
its original bid price. USSI made no such post -bid change to its price for the same explanation provided above as to
ISS.
15
Packet Page -2147-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
an annual basis. Guiding Light claims that both bids should have been rejected because the
submission of a monthly price constituted a post -bid material variance from the ITB.
In reviewing the issue, the Administrative Law Judge ( "ALJ ") noted that it was Guiding
Light's burden to establish that the proposed award was "clearly erroneous, contrary to
competition, arbitrary or capricious." Slip Op. at pg. 3. The AU further noted that it was
reasonable for the DOT procurement specialist to observe that the bids submitted had incorrectly
reflected monthly costs rather than annual costs, so "she performed a mathematical calculation to
extend the monthly prices to an annual period." Id. Further, the ALJ found that the "arithmetic
extension of pricing for the two monthly bids permitted an exact comparison of the bids," the
failure of the vendors to submit their bid on annual rather than monthly basis was a minor
irregularity that DOT had the authority to waive and that no bidder gained any competitive
advantage or benefit through DOT's correction of the irregularity. Id. at pia 4.
Similar to the facts in Guiding Light, the Award Criteria on page I I of the County's ITB
solicitation's instructions states:
Prices will be read in public exactly as input on the electronic bid responses corm
or written on the manually submitted Bid Response Page(s) at the time of the bid
opening; however, should an error in calculations occur whatever unit
pricing and price extensions are requested, the unit price shall prevail.
(emphasis added)
In this instance, the Procurement Strategist merely correctly applied 1SS' submitted unit price to
the Addendum 2 Bid Schedule formula, which automatically calculated the bid amount. The
Procurement Strategist`s action was based upon an honest exercise of the limited authority under
the ITB solicitation instructions, allowed an exact comparison of the bids submitted and did not
provide any bidder a competitive advantage or benefit through the correction of this minor
16
Packet Page -2148-
7/8/2014 16. E.14.
irregularity. Although ABM attempted to show at the hearing that the "scope" of the ITB was
changed post -bid by recalculating ISS' bid utilizing the correct Bid Schedule, the scope of the
ITB was fully established in Addendum 2; which both ISS and ABM agreed to follow when they
submitted their unit price bids.
ABM was unable to show, how a mere recalculation by County staff, consistent with the
solicitation's instructions, and which actually resulted in a higher bid price gave ISS a
"substantial advantage" or any advantage at all over the other bidders. See Tropabest Foods,
Inc. v. Dept. of General Services, 493 So.2d 50, 52 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)( "[A]thhough a bid
containing a material variance is unacceptable, not every deviation is unacceptable, not every
deviation from the invitation to bid is material. It is only material if it gives the bidder a
substantial advantage over � the other bidders and thereby restricts or stifles
competition. ")(emphasis added), Therefore, in the absence of a finding of illegality, fraud,
oppression or misconduct, Liberty CounjL 421 So.2d at 507, the recommended award to low
bidder ISS should not be overturned.
B. Post -Bid Meeting Occurred Outside the Sunshine Law
ABM's second contention in its' Bid Protest is as follows: -
2. Post -Bid meetings were held outside the Sunshine without Notice or
opportunity for Public Attendance and Input.
ABM claims that the County violated the Florida Sunshine Law, F.S. 286.011, by
engaging in a non - publicly noticed post -bid meeting with ISS. The specific Sunshine Law
provision governing procurement states:
17
Packet Page -2149-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
Notwithstanding s. 119.071(1)(b), the state or any county or municipality thereof or
any department or agency of the state, county, or municipality or any other public body
or institution shall:
(1) When opening sealed bids or the portion of any sealed bids that include the prices
submitted that are received pursuant to a competitive solicitation for construction or
repairs on a public building or public work open the sealed bids at a public meeting
conducted in compliance with s. 286.011.
(2) Announce at that meeting the name of each bidder and the price submitted in the
bid.
(3) Make available upon request the name of each bidder and the price submitted in
the bid.
F.S. § 255.0518
ABM did not assert any allegations in its bid protest that the County failed to lawfully open and
announce the sealed bids at a public noticed meeting.
The County admits that it met with ISS on two occasions after the bid opening to clarify
the bid offering, the scope of services and to finalize the contract. The first meeting with ISS on
December 19, 2013, was to clarify ISS' provision of services as authorized in the solicitations
Award Criteria on page I I ("The County's Purchasing Department reserves the right to clarify a
vendor's proposal prior to the award of the solicitation." ). The second meeting held on January
17, 2014, was to commence contract negotiations to promote a seamless transition from the
current vendor providing services, ABM.
The County staff asserted that these meetings were not subject to the Florida open
meetings law as the staff had no decision making function ... "staff merely reviews and
identifies the low bid. "4
`Petitioner Exhibit 4, Correspondence from Joanna Markiewicz dated February 14, 2014, acknowledging receipt of
Protest, p.3.
1$
Packet Page -2150-
7/8!2014 16.E.14.
ABM argues that the Sunshine Law applied to those post -bid opening meetings by
characterizing the decision to award as being the result of a "selection committee." Clearly, the
county staff attending these meetings could not be described as a "selection committee" because
this solicitation was a bid based on the low bid price and not on qualification criteria. Staff
merely reviews and identifies the low bid and then reports the lowest responsible and responsive
bidder to the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the foregoing, ABM's arguments
regarding the County's failure to comply with the Sunshine Law, are without merit.
C. ABM Claims That ISS Failed to Include All Costs in Its Bid
ABM's third contention in its' Bid Protest is as follows:
3. The bid by ABM included costs not accounted for by the low bidder.
ABM's argument on this point is two -fold. First, ABM claims that it included costs in its
bid that were not accounted for by ISS. Secondly, it claims that the solicitation was unclear and
could lead to misinterpretations of the ITB that could skew the contract price unfairly in favor of
the lover bidders. Both of those arguments fail.
When the low bidder submitted its "Vendor Submittal. — Bid Response Form ", it declared,
proposed and agreed to perform in full according to its submitted unit price. It is premature and
anticipatory for ABM to suggest that ISS will not be able to perform in accordance with its bid.
As to ABM's argument that the ITB was unclear or ambiguous, the testimony presented
by ABM at the hearing was to the contrary. The representatives of ABM clearly understood
what was required of them under the ITB, but instead were concerned that many of the items of
19
Packet Page -2151-
7/8/2014 16. E.14.
the ITB were unclear to ISS resulting in their lower bid. Other than the supposition of ABM, no
evidence was offered to support this argument. If,, in fact, ABM had questions or concerns they
needed clarified for themselves, the Solicitation provided bidders an opportunity to seek
clarification or protest the terms of the solicitation, as follows:
9. Questions
If the vendor should be of the opinion that the meaning of any part of the Bid Document
is doubtful, obscure or contains errors or omissions it should report such opinion to the
Procurement Strategist before the bid opening date. Direct questions related to this ITB
only to the Collier County Purchasing Department Internet website:
w--x,w.colliergov.net/bid Questions will not be answered after the date noted on the ITB.
Vendors must clearly understand that the only official answer or position of the County
will be the one stated on the Collier County Purchasing Department Online Bidding
System website. For general questions, please call the referenced Procurement Strategist
identified in the Public Notice.
10. Protests
Any actual or prospective respondent to an Invitation to Bid, who has a serious and
legitimate issue with the ITB shall file a written protest with the Purchasing Director
prior to the opening of the bid or the due date for acceptance of bid. All such
protests must be filed with the Purchasing Director no later than 11:00 a.m. Collier
County time on the advertised date for the opening of the bid or the acceptance date for
the Request for Proposals. (emphasis added)
Original ITB at pp. 14 -15.
Further, numbered paragraph 9 of page 14 of the ITB provided an opportunity and
instructions to prospective vendors on a procedure to raise any questions or concerns should they
"be of the opinion that the meaning of any part of the Bid Document is doubtful, obscure or
contains errors or omissions" by reporting their concerns to the Procurement Strategist before the
date of bid opening.
20
Packet Page -2152-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
According to the clear language of the solicitation, ABM should have raised any concerns
or filed any protest regarding the terms of specifications of the ITB prior to the opening of the
bid. They choose not to do so. As a result, ABM's bid protest on the grounds that the ITB was
unclear or ambiguous is untimely and is now barred.$
D. The Bid Responses Did Not Include the Expenses of Operating Fleet
Vehicles to Outlying Facilities.
ABM's fourth contention in its' Bid Protest is as follows:
4. The responses did not include the expense of operating a vehicle
fleet to service outlying facilities.
ABM's Formal Protest further argued that the ITB failed to include all the material facts
necessary for the bidders to properly calculate a reasonable bid price to operate a vehicle fleet
that services all the County's facilities. At the hearing, ABM offered testimony that its
experience providing the janitorial services to the County led it to believe that the service could
only be accomplished by operating fleet vehicles; but that evidence was countered by the fact
that utilizing fleet vehicles was not a requirement of the ITB. Rather the bidders were instructed
as to what facilities needed to be serviced and it was up to the individual bidders to determine the
means and methods to accomplish those services. ABM`s belief in their ability to provide
services which would fully meet Collier County's needs while ISS's services, as bid, would be
insufficient is an opinion. The Regional Manager stated quite clearly that he was convinced
Collier Countv was making a mistake in choosing ISS over ABM. Regardless, it is well
established that "so long as ... a public agency acts in good faith, even though [it] may reach a
5 As noted previously, the Purchasing Ordinance also includes a deadline to protest the terms, conditions and
specifications contained in a solicitation prior to bid opening. See Purchasing Ordinance at Section 238.
21
Packet Page -2153 -
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
conclusion on facts upon which reasonable men may differ, the courts not generally= interfere
with [the agency "s] judgment, even though the decision reached may appear to some persons to
be erroneous." Culpepper v. Moore, 40 So. 2d 366, 370 (Fla. 1949).
To the extent that ABM is again challenging the terms of the ITB as unclear or
ambiguous, it failed to timely assert its objection consistent with the terms of the ITB and the
Purchasing Ordinance, and has waived its right to protest this claim.
E. A Larne Variance in ISS' Bid was Due to the AmbiLruity of Certain Scope
Terms in the ITB.
ABM's fifth contention in its' Bid Protest is as follows:
5. A large variance in the annual bid total by ISS was due to the
ambiguity of certain scope items. This resulted in inaccurate pricing
of the overall project.
This final "catch -all" claim that the bidders were not provided with sufficient information
to formulate an accurate bid is unfounded. During the course of the procurement process, there
were pre -bid meetings, three issued addenda, and numerous opportunities to ask questions and
obtain answers for clarification. At no time did ABM (or any of the other bidders) submit any
objections or a timely protest to the terms of the solicitation materials. Therefore, as previously
noted above, ABM's attempt to attack the terms of die solicitation at this late date has been
waived.
Various additional points were raised by ?.BM during the course of the hearing that were
not points raised in its formal written Protest and therefore are irrelevant and ,\gill not be
addressed here.
22
Packet Page -2154-
7/8/2014 16. E.14
RESOLUTION OF ISSUES
1. Whether the Invitation to Bid (`ITB ") issued by Collier County ( "County ") and the
County's incorporation of ISS Facility Services, Inc.'s ( "ISS ") timely submitted bid
unit prices from an earlier version of the ITB Bid Schedule, into the correct final
version of the Bid Schedule, was arbitrary, capricious, illegal or fraudulent such that
ISS' bid should be nullified?
Neither the ITB nor the County's integration of ISS' unit prices into the
correct Bid Schedule is found to be arbitrary, capricious, illegal or
fraudulent and should not be nullified.
2. Whether the first lowest bid from ISS and second lowest bid from USSI should be
rejected as non - responsive for failure to use the correct Bid Schedule when
submitting their bids, and ABM, as the third lowest bid, should be reported to the
Collier County Board of County Commissioners as the responsible and responsive
vendor submitting the lowest responsive bid?
Because the pivotal factor in determining the lowest bid was the unit price,
the use of the incorrect Bid Schedule by ISS and USSI was a minor
irregularity and does not justify the conclusion that their bids were non-
responsive nor result in a determination that ABM is the responsible and
responsive vendor submitting the lowest responsive bid.
3. Whether ABM's bid protest should be denied and. ISS" low bid be upheld and
reported to the Board of County Commissioners for award of a contract under ITB
No. _13 -6113 as the responsible and responsive vendor submitting the lowest
responsive bid?
ABM's formal Protest should be denied and ISS' low bid should be upheld
and reported to the Board of County Commissioners for its consideration to
award ISS the contract for janitorial services.
23
Packet Page -2155-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
RECOMMENDATION
Having reviewed the records, transcripts, audio CDs, exhibits and documents submitted
by the parties, having heard the testimony presented and the arguments offered by the parties in
their Bench Briefs, it is the recommendation of the undersigned Hearing Officer that the Formal
Written Protest filed by ABM Janitorial Services Southwest, LLC be denied on the ground that
neither ITB No. 13 -6113 nor the County's actions in connection with the solicitation of that
procurement were arbitrary, capricious, illegal or fraudulent and that, in accordance with the
Purchasing Ordinance and the ITB, the low bid of ISS Facility Services, Inc. be upheld and
reported to the Board of County Commissioners for its final consideration to award a contract for
the janitorial services for Collier County.
DONE AND ORDERED on this t day of J "tIC , 2414, at Naples,
Collier County, Florida.
A—re caring Officer
Conformed Copies to:
Dirk M. Smits, Esq., Counsel for Petitioner
Theron Simmons, Esq., Counsel for Petitioner
Kevin L. Noell, Assistant County Attorney
Scott R. Teach, Deputy County Attorney
24
Packet Page -2156-
1- m r*l
IT Ln
M .. N
C
i Cu O
C "O 'N
N(O N
O 'E
N
O O
N
u
w
O
Z
l7
O N
N Cu
Do
D u
W
H
C
O �
.z O
A .J
7 _
a
'O
0
'
..a ri
m
N M
N N
.j
Ol
Q'
kt
3 D
to O
N
C O
C Z
m E
O m
w Q
c c
2 E
u v
N u
O O
D_ 0.
O_
O
m o
m m
� m
0 1
N p
0 N
0
i--I 0
c-I �
d �
vi
L Cu
O N
Z
E o
m C
I N
a m`
ai Cu
m m
a -o
c c
Cu Cu
Q. a
00
Packet Page -2157-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
e-i
0
1,
O
1-1
1-1
Il
O
O
O
O
O
�
O
O
v
V
o
V
a
Oj
O
M
U)
00
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O
iA
(D
lD
>
>
>
C
>
T
>
>
>
>
>
U)
�
�
to
vt
O
O
O
O
t\
to
r,
W
V)
LDD
N
1-4
lz
M
p
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Q
111
O
M
- t/}
M
V
M
l!1
w
>
N
T
N
T
O
C
w
T
w
T
O/
>>
w
O1
T
w
T>
N
p
ti
ri
a6
v�
an
N
N
O
N
C
Ln
N
Ln
lD
m
C
p
0O
Cl
01
O
tn
M
�
1C
!f
eP
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
C
f0
E
Q
i/?
+T'
00)
O
001
001
C
O
l0
lD
N
O
Cu
N
O
Cu
O1
Cu
Cu
O)
N
O
(n
14
Q
n
{n
N
O
N
N
o
a
v
a
O
n
C
o
,-i-1
u1
Ln
1-1
tD
L
m
O
-
O1
M
N
Cu
O!
N
Cu
N
N
Cu
61
CJ
Ol
Cu
Q
- lA
01
N
O
M
>
>
>
>
>
T
>
>
>
>
>
to
V}
t/}
Co
Q
N
w
-.D
01
V
M
a
Cl
N
O
N
O
lD
1-1
lD
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
0
ti
I
01
>>
T>
>
>>
T
T
T>
D
l?
N
N
r
to
V}
N v
1-
O
M
M
'-1
N
lD
O0
O
M
M
N
N
O
^
^
d l
U /
N
O
U 1
U 1
N
w
N
N
N
'I
ti
-
in
in "
vti
O1
Cr
O
N
C
0
Cu
N
a
Q
+
U
N
�
�
C
N
u
IO
O
C
u
a
E
rn
C
0
`
m
E
Ln
I-
a
C
00
m
C
F
J
C
C
C
E
E
E
O
�__
y0
'°°_
>EEE
EEE���
C
CL
.0
c°
O
Y
s
s
s
s
r
r
C
C
C
o
>
H
L
u
u
u
u
u
u
N
N
O/
CD
aNi
•�
u
D
x
Y
y-
:°
y
-'
a
-'o
'o
c
a
a-
m
W
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
m
ar
�
r14
r-4
c
J
O_
O
m o
m m
� m
0 1
N p
0 N
0
i--I 0
c-I �
d �
vi
L Cu
O N
Z
E o
m C
I N
a m`
ai Cu
m m
a -o
c c
Cu Cu
Q. a
00
Packet Page -2157-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
e-i
0
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
A G RE E ME NT13-6113
for
Janitorial Services
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this day of 2014, by
and between ISS Facility Services, Inc., authorized to do business in the State of Florida,
whose business address is 2739 US Hwy 19, Suite 422, Holiday, Florida, 34691, (the
"Contractor ") and Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, (the
"County "):
WITNESSETH:
1. COMMENCEMENT. The contract shall be for a one (1) year period, commencing on
March 1, 2014 and terminating one (1) year from that date.
The County may, at its discretion and with the consent of the Contractor, renew the
Agreement under all of the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement for three
(3) additional one (1) year periods. The County shall give the Contractor written notice
of the County's intention to extend the Agreement term not less than ten (10) days prior
to the end of the Agreement term then in effect.
3. STATEMENT OF WORK. The Contractor shall perform County wide janitorial
services in accordance with the terms and conditions of Bid #13 -6113 - Janitorial
Services, the Contractor's proposal and Exhibit B, referred to herein and made an
integral part of this agreement. This Agreement contains the entire understanding
between the parties and any modifications to this Agreement shall be mutually agreed
upon in writing by the Contractor and the County Project or Contract Manager or his
designee, in compliance with the County Purchasing Ordinance and Procedures in
effect at the time such services are authorized.
4. THE CONTRACT SUM. The County shall pay the Contractor for the performance of
this Agreement based on the unit prices set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof, subject to Change Orders as approved in advance by the County. Payment
will be made upon receipt of a proper invoice and upon approval by the Facilities
Manager or his designee, and in compliance with Chapter 218, Fla. Stats., otherwise
known as the "Local Government Prompt Payment Act ".
4.1 Payments will be made for services furnished, delivered, and accepted, upon
receipt and approval of invoices submitted on the date of services or within six (6)
months after completion of contract. Any untimely submission of invoices beyond
the specified deadline period is subject to non - payment under the legal doctrine of
Page 1 of 8
Packet Page -2158-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
"laches" as untimely submitted. Time shall be deemed of the essence with respect to
the timely submission of invoices under this agreement.
5. SALES TAX. Contractor shall pay all sales, consumer, use and other similar taxes
associated with the Work or portions thereof, which are applicable during the
performance of the Work.
6. NOTICES. All notices from the County to the Contractor shall be deemed duly served
if mailed or faxed to the Contractor at the following Address:
ISS Facility Services, Inc.
2739 US Hwy 19, Suite 422
Holiday, Florida 34691
Attention: Jim Williams, Managing Director
Telephone: 727 - 943 -3910
Facsimile: 727- 943 -3911
All Notices from the Contractor to the County shall be deemed duly served if mailed or
faxed to the County to:
Collier County Government Center
Purchasing Department
3327 Tamiami Trail, East
Naples, Florida 34112
Attention: Purchasing & General Services Director
Telephone: 239- 252 -8975
Facsimile: 239 - 252 -6480
The Contractor and the County may change the above mailing address at any time upon
giving the other party written notification. All notices under this Agreement must be in
writing.
7. NO PARTNERSHIP. Nothing herein contained shall create or be construed as creating
a partnership between the County and the Contractor or to constitute the Contractor as
an agent of the County.
8. PERMITS: LICENSES: TAXES. In compliance with Section 218.80, F.S., all permits
necessary for the prosecution of the Work shall be obtained by the Contractor. Payment
for all such permits issued by the County shall be processed internally by the County.
All non - County permits necessary for the prosecution of the Work shall be procured
and paid for by the Contractor. The Contractor shall also be solely responsible for
payment of any and all taxes levied on the Contractor. In addition, the Contractor shall
comply with all rules, regulations and laws of Collier County, the State of Florida, or the
U. S. Government now in force or hereafter adopted. The Contractor agrees to comply
Page 2 of 8
Packet Page -2159-
c,�
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
with all laws governing the responsibility of an employer with respect to persons
employed by the Contractor.
9. NO IMPROPER USE. The Contractor will not use, nor suffer or permit any person to
use in any manner whatsoever, County facilities for any improper, immoral or offensive
purpose, or for any purpose in violation of any federal, state, county or municipal
ordinance, rule, order or regulation, or of any governmental rule or regulation now in
effect or hereafter enacted or adopted. In the event of such violation by the Contractor
or if the County or its authorized representative shall deem any conduct on the part of
the Contractor to be objectionable or improper, the County shall have the right to
suspend the contract of the Contractor. Should the Contractor fail to correct any such
violation, conduct, or practice to the satisfaction of the County within twenty -four (24)
hours after receiving notice of such violation, conduct, or practice, such suspension to
continue until the violation is cured. The Contractor further agrees not to commence
operation during the suspension period until the violation has been corrected to the
satisfaction of the County.
10. TERMINATION. Should the Contractor be found to have failed to perform his services
in a manner satisfactory to the County as per this Agreement, the County may terminate
said agreement for cause; further the County may terminate this Agreement for
convenience with a thirty (30) day written notice. The County shall be sole judge of
non - performance.
In the event that the County terminates this Agreement, Contractor's recovery against
the County shall be limited to that portion of the Contract Amount earned through the
date of termination. The Contractor shall not be entitled to any other or further recovery
against the County, including, but not limited to, any damages or any anticipated profit
on portions of the services not performed.
11. NO DISCRIMINATION. The Contractor agrees that there shall be no discrimination as
to race, sex, color, creed or national origin.
12. INSURANCE. The Contractor shall provide insurance as follows:
A. Commercial General Liability: Coverage shall have minimum limits of $2,000,000
Per Occurrence, $2,000,000 aggregate for Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage
Liability. This shall include Premises and Operations; Independent Contractors;
Products and Completed Operations and Contractual Liability.
B. Business Auto Liability: Coverage shall have minimum limits of $1,000,000 Per
Occurrence, Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage
Liability. This shall include: Owned Vehicles, Hired and Non -Owned Vehicles and
Employee Non - Ownership.
C. Workers' Compensation: Insurance covering all employees meeting Statutory
Limits in compliance with the applicable state and federal laws.
Page 3 of 8
Packet Page -2160- c9
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
The coverage must include Employers' Liability with a minimum limit of $1,000,000 for
each accident.
Special Requirements: Collier County Government shall be listed as the Certificate
Holder and included as an Additional Insured on the Comprehensive General Liability
Policy.
Current, valid insurance policies meeting the requirement herein identified shall be
maintained by Contractor during the duration of this Agreement. The Contractor shall
provide County with certificates of insurance meeting the required insurance
provisions. Renewal certificates shall be sent to the County ten (10) days prior to any
expiration date. Coverage afforded under the policies will not be canceled or allowed to
expire until the greater of: ten (10) days prior written notice, or in accordance with
policy provisions. Contractor shall also notify County, in a like manner, within twenty -
four (24) hours after receipt, of any notices of expiration, cancellation, non - renewal or
material change in coverage or limits received by Contractor from its insurer, and
nothing contained herein shall relieve Contractor of this requirement to provide notice.
Contractor shall ensure that all subcontractors comply with the same insurance
requirements that he is required to meet.
13. INDEMNIFICATION. To the maximum extent permitted by Florida law, the
Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless Collier County, its officers and
employees from any and all liabilities, damages, losses and costs, including, but not
limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees and paralegals' fees, whether resulting from any
claimed breach of this Agreement by Contractor, any statutory or regulatory violations,
or from personal injury, property damage, direct or consequential damages, or
economic loss, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentionally
wrongful conduct of the Contractor or anyone employed or utilized by the Contractor in
the performance of this Agreement. This indemnification obligation shall not be
construed to negate, abridge or reduce any other rights or remedies which otherwise
may be available to an indemnified party or person described in this paragraph.
This section does not pertain to any incident arising from the sole negligence of Collier
County.
13.1 The duty to defend under this Article 13 is independent and separate from the
duty to indemnify, and the duty to defend exists regardless of any ultimate liability of
the Contractor, County and any indemnified party. The duty to defend arises
immediately upon presentation of a claim by any party and written notice of such
claim being provided to Contractor. Contractor's obligation to indemnify and defend
under this Article 13 will survive the expiration or earlier termination of this
Agreement until it is determined by final judgment that an action against the County
or an indemnified party for the matter indemnified hereunder is fully and finally
barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
Page 4 of 8
Packet Page -2161- �`�
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
14. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION. This Agreement shall be administered on behalf of
the County by the Facilities Management Department.
15. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Contractor represents that it presently has no interest and
shall acquire no interest, either direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner
with the performance of services required hereunder. Contractor further represents that
no persons having any such interest shall be employed to perform those services.
16. COMPONENT PARTS OF THIS CONTRACT. This Contract consists of the following
component parts, all of which are as fully a part of the contract as if herein set out
verbatim: Contractor's Proposal, Insurance Certificate, Performance and Payment
Bonds, Bid #13 -6113 - Janitorial Services - addendum 2, Detailed Scope of work,
Exhibit A of this contract, Exhibit B of this contract and Addenda 1, 2 and 3.
17. SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION. It is further understood and agreed by and between
the parties herein that this agreement is subject to appropriation by the Board of County
Commissioners.
18. PROHIBITION OF GIFTS TO COUNTY EMPLOYEES. No organization or
individual shall offer or give, either directly or indirectly, any favor, gift, loan, fee,
service or other item of value to any County employee, as set forth in Chapter 112, Part
III, Florida Statutes, Collier County Ethics Ordinance No. 2004 -05, and County
Administrative Procedure 5311. Violation of this provision may result in one or more of
the following consequences: a. Prohibition by the individual, firm, and /or any
employee of the firm from contact with County staff for a specified period of time; b.
Prohibition by the individual and /or firm from doing business with the County for a
specified period of time, including but not limited to: submitting bids, RFP, and /or
quotes; and, c. immediate termination of any contract held by the individual and/or
firm for cause.
19. IMMIGRATION LAW COMPLIANCE. By executing and entering into this agreement,
the Contractor is formally acknowledging without exception or stipulation that it is fully
responsible for complying with the provisions of the Immigration Reform and Control
Act of 1986 as located at 8 U.S.C. 1324, et seq. and regulations relating thereto, as either
may be amended. Failure by the Contractor to comply with the laws referenced herein
shall constitute a breach of this agreement and the County shall have the discretion to
unilaterally terminate this agreement immediately.
20. OFFER EXTENDED TO OTHER GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES. Collier County
encourages and agrees to the successful proposer extending the pricing, terms and
conditions of this solicitation or resultant contract to other governmental entities at the
discretion of the successful proposer.
21. AGREEMENT TERMS. If any portion of this Agreement is held to be void, invalid, or
otherwise unenforceable, in whole or in part, the remaining portion of this Agreement
shall remain in effect.
Page 5 of 8
Packet Page -2162-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
22. ADDITIONAL ITEMSISERVICES. Additional items and/or services may be added to
this contract in compliance with the Purchasing Ordinance and Procedures.
23. DISPUTE RESOLUTION. Prior to the initiation of any action or proceeding permitted
by this Agreement to resolve disputes between the parties, the parties shall make a good
faith effort to resolve any such disputes by negotiation. The negotiation shall be
attended by representatives of Contractor with full decision - making authority and by
County's staff person who would make the presentation of any settlement reached
during negotiations to County for approval. Failing resolution, and prior to the
commencement of depositions in any litigation between the parties arising out of this
Agreement, the parties shall attempt to resolve the dispute through Mediation before an
agreed -upon Circuit Court Mediator certified by the State of Florida. The mediation
shall be attended by representatives of Contractor with full decision - making authority
and by County's staff person who would make the presentation of any settlement
reached at mediation to County's board for approval. Should either party fail to submit
to mediation as required hereunder, the other party may obtain a court order requiring
mediation under section 44.102, Fla. Stat.
24. VENUE. Any suit or action brought by either party to this Agreement against the other
party relating to or arising out of this Agreement must be brought in the appropriate
federal or state courts in Collier County, Florida, which courts have sole and exclusive
jurisdiction on all such matters.
25.
25. KEY PERSONNELIPROJECT STAFFING: The Contractor's personnel and
management to be utilized for this project shall be knowledgeable in their areas of
expertise. The County reserves the right to perform investigations as may be deemed
necessary to ensure that competent persons will be utilized in the performance of the
contract. The Contractor shall assign at a minimum of three (3) total supervisors; two (2)
daytime and one (1) night time. The Contractor shall also staff as many people
necessary to complete the project on a timely basis, and each person assigned shall be
available for an amount of time adequate to meet the dates set forth in the Project
Schedule, The Contractor shall not change Key Personnel unless the following
conditions are met: (1) Proposed replacements have substantially the same or better
qualifications and/or experience. (2) that the County is notified in writing as far in
advance as possible. The Contractor shall make commercially reasonable efforts to
notify Collier County within seven (7) days of the change. The County retains final
approval of proposed replacement personnel.
26. ORDER OF PRECEDENCE: In the event of any conflict between or among the terms of
any of the Contract Documents, the terms of the Agreement shall take precedence over
the terms of all other Contract Documents.
27. ASSIGNMENT: Contractor shall not assign this Agreement or any part thereof, without
the prior consent in writing of the County. Any attempt to assign or otherwise transfer
Page 6 of 8
Packet Page -2163- cq
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
this Agreement, or any part herein, without the County's consent, shall be void. If
Contractor does, with approval, assign this Agreement or any part thereof, it shall
require that its assignee be bound to it and to assume toward Contractor all of the
obligations and responsibilities that Contractor has assumed toward the County.
Page 7 of 8
Packet Page -2164- S
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Contractor and the County, have each, respectively, by an
authorized person or agent, hereunder set their hands and seals on the date and year first
above written.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST: COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Dwight E. Brock, Clerk of Courts
By:
Dated:
(SEAL)
First Witness
TType /print witness nameT
Second Witness
TType /print witness nameT
Approved as to Form and Legality:
Assistant County Attorney
Print Name
Tom Henning, Chairman
ISS Facility Services, Inc.
Contractor
Signature
Type/ print signature and title
Page 8 of 8
Packet Page -2165-
U)
U
a)
cn
Q .M
�_ O
x f0
W --j
1
M
r
C'7
r
ck
r' Cl et
0)
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
W
th IO
O a
m V
V
N m
m m
N N
N
W W
m N
W W
N r
M r
M V
M V
W n
r M
n
O W
W V
V N
m W
M W
O N
W V
m
O O
V m
m M
W M
n m
m
N W
r W
M
r W
V W
V n
n
n1 pi
n to
m W
W m
V M
ICl W
G N
W V
W V
V n
N V
V l0
W h
W W
n�
N N
m M
N V
W m
CD W
n W
W V
W
CO N
M
Ch
m
IO r
V NNMON�W
O M
m O
W O
n V
N t0
N V
�r
r O
V
In W
N
M W
mnhr
N W
01 0
V V
01 O
N NNrul
O ICl
0 M
.-M
W M
N V
N
69 V3
N 1A
f9
lf1 V
Vl f9
n
69
C9 4)
fR
tl3
to
IFT tl9
f9 g
fA
to V3
t9
Vi 19
to to
H N
IR
w
V!
H Vi
W
C
Q
�
�'I V
mO
OO1001
WNm
V
rQ
rV
M N
nN
Ii NM
W
c
O W
W ?
r10N
W Nhh
V
W OnNM
hl
V
OhORh
m WOOD
I
IIIMNhrM
I a
00
L N
C O
NlD
n N
mO
M W
MNN1
N
N W
W T
I O O
O W
W M
�mOWNmnMMm�
O M
M M
W M
n N
W
W
M
O M
V m
Nvi
n M
t7
N r
u7
O m
tpn
M r
OY'1
M m
O:i
M V
��V�VM
V)
-0
N to
Cp
fA
V V
wrR
r(ymM
U9
MN)fH
V rnW
FA
lA CAr
V
uiwwwwwwwwwrrtRw
f9
V MN
rV
Mm
Vf
V rro9
V!
d 0
n m
o m
W M
V 0
O M
W N
d. O
l n
M V
N
M O
N M
N M
O
m O
W too
m m
M
n W
N N
0 W
m V
V m
m N
W W
W
r n
M m
m m
m N
V M
N m
hn
hmn
oV
m_
mnrNmn
W NMI-h.
W
f�Oln
O
W m
W NN
V'
V!
o
y4Y
y
W W
W m
0 W
v�N
O
O O
V W�nO
N�100�
h W
mnlO
h mOiOr
MM
Mm
WaiO
N
W
nO
M NMN
m W'-F
�rN
NnrMrrMM
Vs M N
L' T y
M M
M M
M M
M M
M M
M M
M h
M M
M M
M M
M M
M M
M M
M M
M M
M M
M M
y0 }�
J+
mCDo'D
N
O W
M n
W N
V
OM
W V
V M
V n
.
V O
M V
o M
mNO
m W
m N
O N
N
W M
M
N N
mn
M N
W ONn
m m
0 In
W
O M
R
Q
mm
W N •
W IOMMa!
(7
0rin
nt,
l
mm
Or
OWCVV
N
IOnr
V
In OOM
O'
a0 CV
NM
'R lU
O
N
(D tV
Il) O
Oi O CV
C
w
m m
m O
o
MNMN
�MM
nrM
rul
lnrrMNr
•-M
N V
V y
N
rv�vg$�gvv
mEco
0
00
gvvvvvvZooc
00000000000000000000000
aaavvcavve•ca
c1 p p
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
d
m
IO W
on
W M
IO W
W M
m M
W M
W V
W V
O n
co
010
M O
M 'Di"
N
O W
T M
M m
m W
o n
0 '-
m O
m CV
M m
O at
W I O
W 'Q
N
m n
N W
r W
N n
IO IO
M 10
m O
0 V
O m
N V
W N
O N^
W r
I n
V
0 0
W r
W
10 V
O n
M r
O N
V n
R tp
7
W n
OIO
W
nO>rm
h W
W W
r
nN
W N
V NnNnm
r
N
V MMNn
C,
V
M
m NNr
N
cr w
co
W
-
n
i
v
m
m
m
N N
tO N
'N •W
10 •N
'm •N
N l�0
"p
d
'N N
C
O
m
v m
a
F
cl
co
O
E
F
F
w`
4)
W
to
.? 'a
E E
y
m
d
m m
C9
m
w
r'
m L
E
z m
N
CO tO
E E
CO tO
E E
WO W
E E
tO N
E E
N !O
E E
N lO
E E
m N
Em—>
m
fO t0
E E��
O
m
"
=
c�
an
•-
m menu)
W
m iu
, �'y
t0 c
o
y
>,0e
Q
N W
F-�-FF
W CO
CO CO
Fh
N CO
M WO
tO N
E N
O
W
"> c
m N
•„m,
O ,I,,Q
"_° d
F
O
.. S
C O
•o >
-L
O
ro
LiuiuiuiuiuiuiuiuiuiuiuiUui0
F
r
Nuiuim�Emm
I-F-�
c_
E c
v
mmWrmUui
w
O S.
�m
76
E
E
.o
Mr
mnmMMlO
�F-F-F-
u•,
Inn
ul
o�
Ino
W oln>Z'oca'V5,
-t5
`m
.a
orm
MMNMM
N
M N
N,7;
(7 MMO
MM
MM
O m
mMtOO
Ol ml07
NNmOMM
V Or
W
nn
Or
me-OM
W n0
W M
I) `V
'V'Wm0
O
Q
M M
M M
M M
M M
M M
M M
N M
n N
M M M
r
N M
V n
m r
r U1
N N
N Q
V r
G
O
U U
U U
U U
U U
U U
U U
U U
U
_
a
V
m m
m m
m m
m m m m
m m m
m m m
m m m m
m m=
U
U U U
U
U U
W m
M W
fn W
m m
CO W
m m
O
J
L
U
0
N
>
C
U)
Q
o`
_
O
O
O
U N
U
�
°
W
'G
au
O
.y..
m .m
U
dO LL
t
rn
Nm
'C
Cp
C
"O
Y
r N
m
m
U
y` N
C]
y
yy11
O U
L
c 'C
—�'a
O
E W
�F
cu)w)u)
"Emva
LL
Fo .
m=
mDLL
CAS�YJ�S�
_m
vo
[0
Y,
m'cm
hQ
alcp
C.�
rN
UU>
v
C
m
a) F
IO-
C
m��mm
-VI
mtn_
(U m
4)
��m
d W
3
W
C
C C
C C
C C
C C
C C
Y N
y
m (` .
LL F
a c,
C C
C
c O
Ci t0
Z
'C
L
'a
Y W
a:
N Z
N
V
:v --o
as
a
v-o
p'oa
o
V �UF
EPvv
p
m•��
�
p
�m
o
O
U
O��u)
m
mmmmmmmm
mm�
mm
UoommiL
UpZ2w
EW >cUi�U?cUiU
U U
> >
U U
> >
U U
> >
U U
> >
U U
> >
U U
> >
m m
0 0
m m
0 0
m m
0 o
mm
m o
m mu
u
m m
y u
a� m
o
m m
o m
m m m
u o u
m
u
m m
u m
W m
� v
co CO
a
co co
W> v
m m
W y
W co
u u
It
Ft
00
00000000000000000000����Pa��9��
E SG is
�
� fE
.0
v c)
v cl
a a
a Q.
n. amaa.aaa.
7t
m r N M V W
m n
W m
O r
N M
V M
m h
m m
O r
N M
V N t0
h
m m
0 •-
N M
V
�aaa -71 FlF-
;1
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
V W
O Mm
m n
mm
m IA
V
m
W OMm
N n
W N
OMmm
m
O V
d. rd:M
ON
W h
W mO
V M
VIn
W to
Mm
0 m
W
V m
NmInM
N n
O m
NU)
M Io
W m
M U)
V IAN
N m
rd:
U1
f�
V V
M a
O M
(hmM
W m;
V
h
00MIA
V N
IO U
rID
n V
V rNn
m:;:;:
rmNetm
IA V
M m
V m
W N
n
m
W W
O aO
m W
U)
W M
W W
-or-
rhrM
W
W NU)N
W nM
W
V Nhm
M W
�Omrmm
n
N1-
W M
W U)OmO
W M
W
MIA
m
W
N n
MU)
M m
V m
Mi 2
W
W Mm
mMN
V
Nhim
Om
U)nmmin
W mOMnn
V wU
ntnO
00
V'
W V
V Nn
W
V
O W
m
hnN
V C
I OMw
hh
V U)N_O
-
mM.
N W
-m�7
V m
V NW
OmC
n W
MUN
r+-ON
W mmmmV
(DrONU]O
W IAM
V
O�V
nr
W
M
hnmh
V NMO
W ON
N V
m WNW
V OfAMMO
b9
N
W U1MOOmd)O
Nm
N
C;
UM
4 M
Ld
�r
NIf.
v
N
dV j
d! d3
o
dd
V
di 63
fR V )
N 69
fA
(R
m 0
U) n
V W
r (O
N n
m M
(D n
(O
m U1
W N
m m
n M
m O
r W
O m
N O
M V
O V
M
m m
N V
V (n
M W
h n
W r
O m
O O
m O
M N
m V
W O
W W
m W
N U 1
V O
l A M
V m
m N
W W
N W
m m
m N
m
r m
U1
m i
n h
(O (
0 V
N I A
O U)
(D O
N M
W V
N m
O W
N W
V r
M N
M U'1
N IA
O
W m
W W
1
n m
W n
V O
W M
N N
W M
N mM
co
Mm
(n
h0ol
t,
Oi
U)m
V V
MN
W W
V W
V
W O
m
V (V
t0 V
MNM
mNU)
m W
oin
W
m(O
m(OOn
Q�NI(1m
QUO.
-GN
OM
m
M
MU)n
Ui
V m
M di
(fl
V m
r d)
M
N W
r (A
d)
r
d3
d)
n M
U) M
M d}
di
N W
.- W
dj d)
N N
N h
di
d)
0 0
IO r
W d)
di
N
N N
« M
d) d)
M m
n M
.- d3
dt
O M
M
(A d3
O V
h m
d3 fR
W N
N d3
FA
N U)
N
d3 di
n W
V 0
IA d�
N U)
M
fR (9
m W
O
fA
d)
m N
M V
(A W
n r
N di
r
69
V M
Vi d}
M O
r M
dt d)
O m
m
EA (9
M W
dt
dt
din
n
d)
N m
0 tl9
r
bt
N V
fA di
M W
d3 d)
O h
O d)
di
69 W
d3
N h
df O
W
d3
V
d3 M
M
69
W W
V N
di Cfl
W m
M h
di (9
0 N
r
N 49
(A
r N
r d3
(R
0 V
d)
dt
h h
0 M
m U J
r
0 r'
n O
m
U) m
V
0
O N
N V
I A
N m
V
O N
N W
O n
W W
h N
IUIJ
h M
M In
n
m W
m
W M
IV
I'1
I O
'1
W N
h W
N
N
O
V
V M
M
W m
h W
n
m M
U) V
m
W '
^NO
O
N
m
n
M N
m N
M M
M N
V'W
M W
�, N
n M
N W
W N
U) O
O M
M m
Unwmm
U) O
NM Ir A
W
i
VN
�n
W r
MM ON O
(ON W m
O
m V
O O r
W W
O
O mm
UN ) h
N(o mc
6V NV
N V
m0 m N
W
N N W
6
U)
W hm
UhM )
m M m
Urm W dW ,
N N mO!
M M V m
N
N h W N m m
M b r
W m h
W m M 7 ON
W o
W rr
(ON D
NI'
N rM Ih
Vr
m V O
M N
n
W O W Om
�•
dW MW ;
NW UM O )
N W W
W V V C
V W r
N V M
W
O
W
r O
UN
N n
V
h
m r
) M
N m
V N
m0
N
M n
N
N
r
N
r
rO ,
N
N
V
h
V
N
N r
W V
W U7
IO U)
V h
W M
M M
M M
M M
U) M
M M
M M
M M
M M
M I-1-1-
M M
M M
M M
M M
M M
M M
n h
h W
M W
m n
n n
n n
W n
h M
M n
n W
h n
n W
W n
h n
M M
m N
mO U7
N
W II
W V
W N NI�
r OU r M
O
n MIV
M m
N h
O N
mUIA ) mm IO
hm N 1V O )
U) W r
r O m
V
OI() W V
mUm N
N
r m m W U)
M W m V
M
M mm
m m
m '0 0
M V W V
Mm N O
M O W
V W O W
V M V V
mO m
W N n M
r_ V O
M u7 V M
Um J
N V m V
V N
n N
m M
V U)
M N
W
V M
N
-1-MN
N
m V
N
r
M V
--.N
M
m
r N
M
V
"M
m N
r
r N
OD N
M
O W
r 0
N
0 m
N
m W
r
r 0
r M
0 IA
m
M O
W M
n n
n n
h n
n h
n 1�
h n
n n
n h
n n
n nl�n
n n
n n
n n
h n
h n
n n
n n
n n
n h
h h
n n
h n
n n
n n
n n
h h
n n
n h
n n
n n
n n
n n
n n
n n
n h
vaeocvvvvvvvvvavvvvv.
td 'vvvvvvvavavvvvvvvvervovvv00
OC
0�
o 0
000
0 0�
vv
o
o�
e
o c�ic4i
vavavvvcv
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
o d
o 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
d o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
c o
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
d o
o c
n IO10
M
O O
O n
O N
n 0
MI
O V
h V
U) N
O W
0 0
O r
0
W
n n
O O
O N
O W
O
h
N
W 0
n m
0 0
O O
0 W
m h
O O
W N
C, W
N
O
M N
Ul O
O N
O n
O h
m O
N 0
m
U) V
W 0
n O
0 W
W N
M V
W
V
O r
m n
M O
0 0
0 0
0 0
m W
W M
U) I
O M
n m
M N
C O
m O
N W
O m
V O
m O
O N
O
m O
N n
h M
U
m )
W O
O n
U M
n W
U W
W
n
V M
N h
N o
m
M 0
W O
W M
V N
m N
m W
M (O
M
h W
U1 n
r n
r M
M W
M
N W
O n
r W
O r
N
'1
M 0
W
r n
M
N W
M r
V r
V N
W O
N W
M O
N
h t,:,6
N
N U]
n
O
n
m
m
W
V
O
M
M N
N n
m r
CC
Q)
@
_
N
m
�
wD
m
m m
o v
-mNr
O
O
m
m
0
0
0
�
m
Lu
co
a
o
'
L L
m cc
0 0
>
m
a
X YO
a'
?
m 0
m
0
C
U N
m
J
E
m mCo
�� a>mN
am
m
>
OC
N
>
U-m
Q C
(v m
m m
c
U
L
Fm
�
m m
m
a
m
c
0
0 (n
Y
c
p
N
`m
>
cm
m
i
O
E -
O .
CD
j
y
=
r
b
m
m_
.W
mOm u
�Um °
mm
LN
>
u!
cmL mn
� E
C
'oU m
_p ELa-
o
uOOmm
>
>omm
W
N >O
vjZ
O O
OW
W
rm
mNm Z
Q
�N3u�N
¢1(i
� 0M>
pmm
O
a
M00
�
JU OC
00
r
000
Z
O
W
- W
NO>
W
UM
'Y
n
N M
n
V
MN
(on
O
co
OLO
MM
O
m
V N
m0
m W
IA
O N
O h.'�
0m
0
O
O(C
N W
]
O W
Or-
O M
.to
V W
m m
O.L_
NW
O
r
0
N V�
0
C M
N m
c N
m
m V
M
MM0M
O N
N
UV
W
V MU)m
M
N
N U1
d W
N N
0
0 0
0 N
y y
_
0 0
0
m
N m
m N
N N
N N
N N
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y .Y
@ @
@@
m m
@ @@
m
U
m m
U U
m m
U U
m m
U U
m
U
D
^2
U U
«L
C
U -
5_
�_
m
_ N
m
- -_
-
-_ " -_
- -
-_ -
-_-
- -_
_ ._
- �_
._ ._.
'- _
._ ._
(0 (0
a a
m @
s U.
@ N
O. O.
@ IO
O. O.
@ @
O. O_
@ @
d d
@ [0
O. O.
@ @
O. a
@ @
d a.
lV IO
a o_
N l0
a a
@ (0
a a
@ 19
a LL
(0 10
o_ a
10 (0
n. a
J J
J J
J J
J J
J O
O O
O O
O O
O
¢ a¢_
M
_=
7=
O ==
O
O O
E
00
in
m
cx
N
U
O
O
7
p
-5 p
3
O
C
m
UOUmv
U_ C
m
N
C
C
m
EC
m
=_
=�'u
y
(�Y
E
mEEoYmE
N
m E
V(
N
!/) C
E m
E
M
UI
X
m
C
m m
U w
,CD o
'm
m
a
to LL
LL
Vp
N
C
m
y
o
Q
Vim`
m a
.
d.
0 0
o
O`
a
a 0
0
D
pUd0mmd
°-
n'cU�
N DO
O LL
E
« m
ca
E
o
m
m
E
�EEEEa
E E
v U
m
acmmaf
m�
9>
me
t
E�oEm'm
E E
LL
E
E
n
-a�°
c
m
U
U
m
c
m�
(/1
c7
cam
C
S
N
nmmL'cma�
m
N m«
o
p
Y
(��Eu"���UcUID
m
m
o m
m
O
o m
rr
rl!
W
J
N
l0
(0
m
... d
L
j
J
0
m m
>>
C
U
y ._
Z
X E
m
L W
C
OO
pi
S
m
m
O 'C
O
'C D
p N
m
tl1 m
>>
m U
U m
U C
m m
m
�i
m
m
W
c
C C
m U
C
O m
O.
Y
O
m
(6 LL
m
J O
m E
E ,(
E m
m
Q' Y
Y
L
U m
m
E m
a:
t
❑. Y
L (0
m O
m Y
�C.. U
O
O
'O E
W E
N m
.0 U
Y M
U
m O
d' J
L J
m-
J n
J .d
rn J-
W N
C�
0 0>
U! (IJ
O m
U)
C
O
Q
�p
m C
.�
C m
m m
O m
LL
4i
Q .�
' Q
.- 7
O'O
pl m
d-
LL N
V U
U
U
=
m U
m
LL U`
Y
Y 'C
E
- p
O a
U m
L
p
m n
an d
m
E L
O (�
U L
m U
7 LL
LL U
IL J
Y O
O
C
a
m !n
U U
C N
N N
J
f0 ...
O J
C
m
m
m
l9
p mY
._ .�
m
Ul
m
_
U
U
U C
m W
S..
C
C
+' "O
c
�-
U
L
C O
._
O
C m
m m
Q�
(n
m
C
m m
_
C
m J
C m
7 m
m
N .+=
.-• _=
m
= U
m
m-
C Q'
._
m at
U
N
m (6
Y
m p
Q.
Ero
J
U
N
m m
N L
m
m
m
m
m«
m
m
U m
N m
m C
m
m
O 815-222
L_
N-
�p m
m m
LL m
m
m m
m U)
m
�i m
N N
m
ro
C9�
C
�, -C9
N
m
C O
mC7
c
0-
U U
m
c
y m=
c m-
V
m mom
y LL
U a7
m
- m
ro>
C
E p
V .�
my
- m
m
-vm
m m
mm
N
o
U
p
U
m;...
�
-�
m
(�. mm
U C
@
(n >i
mLL
J C
>+ E
u,
D c
In�
m m
«maU
o
Cp
-p _
(p m
o
E°
C
p op.
W
U
C7
W C
C7(�
C C
E
032-1
C
Y
C U
N
m
m
p
m
L m
m L
O
L O
p
'� .O
Y
O
a N
C
O-
Y-
O
N O
N
L
•_
U
•C --
U m
m m
mZ
m
m «.
m
m
LD 0
U_
(� m
S L
p
O (
." U
'=
m
r
m m
L
U7 m
•oav�EE
m m
'D O
m
O O
m
a O
m m
z wC�
o m
>S
E-
m
E(.7
°ro3�-
o m
=(n
o o
C7wz
.cEmoUE�m01mEa�
m o
E
E EU,�
o
�C�C9K
D
o
E�'Uw�w
a x
m>
>
�wZ�O.(n
m m
o
oc�.o
0 0
Z(n
0 0
Z a
3 m-
a. Z�
Z
m
m
Z 5
ro o
win
m z
m M
o w
05
Xp=
m o
0md
m
ccncr
>C7
>rui�F-
ZZC?C�C71i
m o
0 o
E
-
E>
-(n
m
o N
(n
m m
m
m m
w w
m m
u
>
m (A
o a
>
W W
o p
> >
W W
o o
> >
W W
u u
W W
u a
W W
u u
>
m W
u o
> >
6 m
0 0
> >
W m
0 0
> >
W w
o u
>
W W
o
>
m W
>
M m
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
>
Y
> >
@ @
@ @
@ @
@ @@
U
U U
U U
U U
U
U U
U U
U U
U U
U U
U U
U U
U U
U U
U U
U U
V U
a. amEas
`m m
`m W
m `m
O.dE
`m mm
`mm
E0_O.LLaLL
`m
mmm
U
U U
@ ro
@ @@
ro
n. cL
m m
a.
JJJJJJJ,J�
000
O O
O O
Oa>
j
>>
j
�>
j
��
�n
�a
�a
=a.°a.o
�LLa
aaaaaao.
o.
m o.
a a
a a.
a s
n. o.
a a
a Q.
o. m
m a
a a
as o.
(L a
vn (p
t� W
01 O
� N
M R
Iti t0
I� QJ
O
4;H+
N (D
(O UJ
n
ID
r
m OI
m O
m O!
m QI
m r
r r
r r
r e
r r
r r
r r
r .-
D�,I, -+ D,RO _79 C.7_
I ale
ti
T
T
N
N
C
O
d
N
G
•
F.
T
N
r
PacketPage -2168-
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
9'
Exhibit B
Additional Scope
Trash Removal
7/8/2014 16.E.14.
On all service days, upon completion of service in the Government Center Complex, trash must
be taken from each individual buildings to the trash compactor located behind the Collier County
Jail (Building J).
Scheduling, Employee Work Hours and Wages
The cleaning of the following locations shall not observe the County Holiday schedule. These
facilities shall be cleaned according to their normal schedule at all times.
1. All Sheriff Substations
2. Criminal Investigation Division (CID)
3. Sheriff's office (CCSO) Fleet
4. All beach restrooms
5. All general Park facilities
6. 911 Call Center in the ESC building
Packet Page -2169- cA