Skip to main content
Loading…
This subsection is included in your selections.

a. The requirements of subsection 3-4.3 concerning competitive bidding shall not apply to the following:

1. Contracts involving the acquisition of professional or specialized services, such as, but not limited to, services rendered by architects, engineers, surveyors, construction managers, accountants, attorneys and other specialized consultants;

2. Where the City’s requirements can be met solely by a particular patented article or process or item or service available only from a single source;

3. Where no bids have been received following bid announcements in accordance with this section;

4. When the amount involved is twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) or less;

5. When an emergency requires dispensing with competitive bidding to protect the public health, safety and welfare;

6. When another public agency has administered a competitive bidding process within the past two (2) years for the same or substantially similar supplies, services or equipment, the City may purchase supplies, services or equipment in reliance on such executive process of such other public agency in lieu of compliance with this section;

7. When the City Council specifically waives the competitive bid process and authorizes staff to negotiate the purchase by a four-fifths vote;

8. The purchase of supplies, equipment, or services through a cooperative purchasing agreement or program, or by using a competitively awarded agreement of another local, State, or Federal government agency or joint powers authority made up of government agencies to obtain the same supplies, equipment or services at the same or lower prices (commonly referred to as “piggybacking”). Such programs and agreements include, but are not limited to, the California Multiple Award Schedules Program (CMAS), the Interlocal Purchasing Systems (TIPS), the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) Multiple Award Schedule Program, Sourcewell, and the U.S. Communities Government Purchasing Alliance; and

9. When competitive bidding pursuant to this section would be impracticable, infeasible, or otherwise unavailing, and provide no advantage for the public in accordance with legal doctrine discussed in Genevieve Graydon v. Pasadena Redevelopment Agency (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 631.

b. Any application to the City Council for an exception under this section shall include the nature of the contract, amount of the contract, and the reasons why competitive bidding is not feasible. (Ord. #2006-121; Ord. #206-2018; Ord. #227-2019, S1; Ord. #253-2021, S2)