Laserfiche WebLink
James E. Norman <br />Page 2 <br />September 2, 1999 <br /> <br />The correct legal procedure would have been: <br /> <br />1. To obtain at least two quotes for the anticipated purchase per M.S.§471.345, Subd. <br /> 4. <br /> <br />To award the bid (quote) to the lowest responsible bidder after considering the City's <br />requirements and the equipment quoted. <br /> <br />I am convinced that even though errors were made, none of the errors were done to <br />intentionally avoid the legal bidding process or to award a City contract for any one's <br />personal gain. <br /> <br />The difference between the bid amounts.is approximately $1,300.00 and therefore a <br />relatively small sum. Because LOGIS has paid Inacom, the equipment has been delivered <br />to the City and software has been installed in it, the options available to the City at this time <br />to redo the "deal" are minimal. <br /> <br />I recommend the City move forward with installation of the Inacom equipment and that the <br />City at the next possible meeting rescind Resolution 99-07. I believe rescinding Resolution <br />99-07 was the intent of the Council's discussion and motion on August 24, 1999, but this <br />action should be more explicit. <br /> <br />Finally, it should be noted that DataSource may have a basis to sue the City for failure to <br />properly follow the uniform municipal contracting law. However, under the law their only <br />remedy is to seek injunctive relief to void the Inacom contract. They are not able to sue for <br />damages for lost profit. I believe it is unlikely that DataSource will pursue'any legal action. <br /> <br /> <br />