HomeMy WebLinkAboutWall_letter2
- )
Ms. Geri Sams
Page 2
Aprilll,2001
trousers. However, in Item 2, you have 75 different sizes of shirts. The way the bid tabulation
sheet is laid out, therefore, the shirt prices will give undtle emphasis in determining the low bid.
For instance, assume that for purposes of determining t11e bid tablllation that a
bidder bids $50.00 per shirt for each size in Item No.2, and $60.00 per pair of pants for each size
in Item No.1, for a total bid of $4,170.00 (75 x $50.00 = $3,750.00; 7 x $60.00 = $420.00;
$3,750 + $420 = $4,170.00). Assume that a second bidder bids only $45.00 per shirt (75 x
$45.00 = $3,375.00), but bids $75.00 for each of the categories of pants (7 x $75.00 = $525.00),
for a total bid of $3,900.00. From an analysis of the bid tabtllation sheet as presented, the bid
would be awarded to the second bidder because he has the lo\ver overall total of $3,900.00
compared to $4,170.00.
Ho\vever, \vhen the llniforms are actually ordered, since the shirts have been
weighted disproportionately, there would be a greater cost to the County. For instance, assuming
an eqllaI nllmber of shirts, although of different sizes, are ordered for t11e pants, the first bidder's
total for an order of 3,000 shirts and pants \vould be $330,000.00 ($50.00 x 3,000 shirts =
$150,000.00; 3,000 pants x $60.00 per pair = $180,000.00, for a total of $330,000.00). The
apparent low bidder under the form presented (bidder number 2), hovvever, would have a total
price of $360,000.00 for the same order (3,000 shirts at $45.00 = $135,000.00 and 3,000 pants at
$75.00 per pair = $225,000.00, for a total of $360,000.00).
Further, since there are two categories of shirts, each with 75 items listed
separately, and only 28 items ofppants (items 1,4,5, and 6) the discrepancy between the bids is
greater. Thus, comparing only items 1 and 2 llnder the two scenarios sllbmitted above indicates
only a $270.00 difference in the total bid price ($4,170.00 - $3,900.00 = $170.00). When the 150
different sizes of shirts and 28 different sizes of pants are compared under the same scenario, the
total bid differs by $330.00. This is simply to point Ollt that the difference in the bid evaluation
compollnds as the number of items listed separately is increased.
rh~~.Jli9~gpul~tiQ~11~heets (pr the 199?.. uI1i(Qrmbidssl191!ldagain be, uJili~for
the.~n my o~ini~_n, absent a b~is for esti~ting the_ dim~rent q~~es ~ ea~~~
!hat wOllle! l?e J>llrch~~s~Q. To do this, I aITl tol?,wouldbe ~uess:vor~.?ince th~~~~l"iff~gffice ---
~oesn~~~~~qu~sm~~bemdere~~e'~i~~~~~l~
bid, separating out the uniforms from the accessories:and allowing a comparison of each
5(:u~ ~ ~
-5-L