From time to time, when I have read agendas or Minutes of the Woodstock City Council meetings, I have seen that a contract has been (or is to be) awarded to the “lowest responsible bidder.” I recall wondering what “responsible” meant. Although I figured “of course, the bidder must be responsible”, but I never pursued it beyond that.
So, what is a “responsible bidder”?
It turns out that “responsible” does mean something. Subconsciously, I guess I knew that. Why else would such a word appear in documents where every word must be screened legally and be passed by Woodstock’s legal advisor?
A general definition of “responsible bidder” for a starting point of discussion can be found at www.businessdictionary.com. It reads, “Contractor, supplier, or vendor, qualified on the basis that it
(1) has adequate financial resources to perform a contract,
(2) is able to comply with the associated legal or regulatory requirements,
(3) is able to deliver according to the contract schedule,
(4) has a history of satisfactory performance,
(5) has a good reputation regarding integrity,
(6) has or can obtain necessary data, equipment, and facilities, and
(7) is otherwise eligible and qualified to receive award if its bid is chosen.”
Does the City of Woodstock have a Responsible Bidder Ordinance? Apparently not, even though it uses the term “responsible” in awarding a contract to the “lowest responsible bidder.” Would it be a good idea for Woodstock to define “responsible” and adopt such an ordinance?
The Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/8-9-1) reads, in part: “In municipalities of less than 500,000 except as otherwise provided in Articles 4 and 5 any work or other public improvement which is not to be paid for in whole or in part by special assessment or special taxation, when the expense thereof will exceed $20,000, shall be constructed either (1) by a contract let to the lowest responsible bidder after advertising for bids…”
There are those three pesky words again. “Responsible bidder” and “lowest responsible bidder” don’t seem to be defined in Section 5; perhaps they are, elsewhere.
What would be some of the elements of a “responsible bidder”?
• Providing evidence of adequate general liability insurance, worker’s compensation insurance and vehicle liability insurance;
• Complying with the Illinois prevailing-wage law on public projects;
• Not having been found in violation of the prevailing-wage law more than twice in a three-year period, for at least two years;
• Having an apprenticeship and training program for the type of work to be performed under the contract;
• Requiring drug testing;
• Properly classifying workers as employees or as independent contractors;
• Providing health & welfare and retirement plans for employees on the project;
• Providing required professional or trade licenses for the area of work in the project.
Illinois law was modified, effective 1/1/10, by House Bill 163 (Public Act 96-0437) regarding notice requirements (and imposing penalties for Notice failures) and by Senate Bill 223 (Public Act 96-0058) pertaining to public projects funded by bonds, grants, loans, etc. provided by the City.
If there were no downside to a Responsible Bidder Ordinance, should Woodstock adopt one?
