Laserfiche WebLink
April 1, 2010 <br />Page 3 <br />might benefit the public. See, e.g., Phipps Prod. Corp v. Massachusetts Bay Transp. Authority, <br />443 N.E.2d 115, 118 (Mass. 1982). <br />The requirement for responsiveness is a bedrock principle at the foundation of public <br />procurement law. Responsiveness promotes competition by ensuring a level playing field for all <br />competitors. Toyo Menka Kaisha, Ltd. v. United States, 597 F.2d 1371, 1377 (Ct. Cl. 1979). <br />Increased competition tends to decrease prices, which directly benefits the public. See id.; see <br />also Griswold v. Ramsey County, 242 Minn. 529, 534-35, 65 N.W.2d 647, 651 (1954). Most <br />importantly, responsiveness prevents fraud, waste, and abuse in public procurement by limiting <br />the discretion of public officials. Griswold at 536, 652. Minnesota courts do not tolerate erosion <br />of the responsiveness principle. Id. <br />In short, the City's acceptance of Gohman's bid is a violation of the law. Consequently, <br />the City must rescind its acceptance of Gohman's bid, and may not execute the Project contract <br />with Gohman, but must instead accept Peterson's bid as the lowest responsive, responsible <br />bidder. If the City does not do this, Peterson will take immediate legal action to enforce the <br />Minnesota procurement laws. <br />Please let me know what the City intends to do by April 8, 2010. I look forward to <br />hearing from you. <br />Very truly yours, <br />~~ <br />M. T. Fabyanske <br />Hannah R. <br />Encl. <br />HRS/ <br />cc; Jon Peterson, President, Peterson Companies Inc. <br />Ron Orfei, Peterson Companies Inc. <br />M. T. Fabyanske, Fabyanske, Westra, Hart & Thomson, P.A. <br />W. Gohman Construction Co. <br />\\filel\vol l\PL\83746\83746-001\1032385.dce <br />