Miami-Dade
Legislative Item File Number: 111129 |
Printable PDF Format Clerk's Official Copy |
File Number: 111129 | File Type: Resolution | Status: Adopted | ||||||||||
Version: 0 | Reference: R-544-11 | Control: Board of County Commissioners | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Requester: Procurement Management Department | Cost: | Final Action: 7/7/2011 | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Sunset Provision: No | Effective Date: | Expiration Date: |
Registered Lobbyist: | None Listed |
Legislative History |
|||||||
Acting Body | Date | Agenda Item | Action | Sent To | Due Date | Returned | Pass/Fail |
|
|||||||
Board of County Commissioners | 7/7/2011 | 8O1G | Adopted | P | |||
|
|||||||
Internal Mgmt. & Fiscal Responsibility Committee | 6/14/2011 | 3AA | Forwarded to BCC with a favorable recommendation | P | |||
REPORT: | Assistant County Attorney Jess McCarty read the foregoing proposed resolution into the record. Commissioner Suarez questioned the method used by the County to interpret local preference and whether a vendor’s principal office must be located within Miami-Dade County. Ms. Miriam Singer, Director, Department of Procurement Management, explained that local preference applied to all bids where the mean scores were allowed by law; however, some federal funding sources prohibited this practice. She noted that a firm was not required to be headquartered within Miami-Dade County; however, they were required to have a County occupational license for one year and that certain parameters existed in terms of the firm investing locally. Commissioner Bell noted reciprocity between Miami-Dade County and Broward County businesses in terms of the benefit derived from each other’s vendor relationship was essential. Commissioner Jordan expressed concern that the County was losing more than it was gaining in terms of reciprocity and the existing local preference language needed to be strengthened. She asked Ms. Singer to provide her with information on methods used in other communities to address reciprocity issues. Hearing no further questions or comments, the Committee proceeded to vote on the foregoing proposed resolution as presented. | ||||||
|
|||||||
County Attorney | 5/19/2011 | Assigned | Hugo Benitez | 5/24/2011 | |||
|
|||||||
County Manager | 5/19/2011 | Assigned | County Attorney | 7/7/2011 | |||
REPORT: | DPM; PENDING COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENT; SPONSORSHIP: COMMISSIONER BELL; ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY HUGO BENITEZ | ||||||
|
|||||||
County Manager | 5/19/2011 | Assigned | Wendi Norris | 5/19/2011 | |||
|
Legislative Text |
TITLE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A TWO YEAR EXTENSION OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH BROWARD COUNTY FOR RECIPROCITY IN THE EXTENSION OF LOCAL PREFERENCE TO COUNTY VENDORS BODY WHEREAS, this Board desires to accomplish the purposes outlined in the accompanying memorandum, a copy of which is incorporated herein by reference, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that this Board approves a two year extension of the Interlocal Agreement with Broward County for reciprocity in the extension of local preference to County vendors, in substantially the form attached hereto and made a part hereof; and authorizes the County Mayor or designee to exercise same for and on behalf of Miami-Dade County and to exercise the cancellation and renewal provisions contained therein. HEADER Date: To: Honorable Chairman Joe A. Martinez and Members, Board of County Commissioners From: Alina T. Hudak County Manager Subject: Resolution Authorizing a Two Year Extension of the Interlocal Agreement Between Miami-Dade County and Broward County for Reciprocity of Local Preference STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommendation It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners (Board) adopt the attached resolution authorizing a two year extension of the Interlocal Agreement between Miami-Dade County and Broward County for reciprocity of Local Preference. Scope The impact of the accompanying resolution is countywide in nature. Fiscal Impact/Funding Source The accompanying resolution will have no fiscal impact on Miami-Dade County. Track Record/Monitor The Department of Procurement Management is responsible for the administration of the Local Preference Ordinance and the implementation of the agreement with Broward County. MANAGER'S BACKGROUND Background The original Interlocal Agreement (Agreement) between Miami-Dade and Broward Counties became effective in 2002 and established reciprocity of local preference upon the execution of a statement by both counties affirming that each county had adopted a substantially similar Local Preference Ordinance. The terms of the Agreement require each county to extend and apply its Local Preference Ordinance to the local vendors of both counties. The original Agreement was effective from 2002 through 2005. Since 2005, the Board has extended this Agreement through September 30, 2011. Approval of this amendment will extend the term of the Agreement for two years, through September 30, 2013. The local preference policies of each county are to apply equally to the vendors of each county. Since the implementation of the reciprocity program, five contracts were awarded by Broward to Miami-Dade vendors and 10 contracts were awarded by Miami-Dade to Broward vendors due to reciprocity. Since this is an agreement between two governmental entities, the requirements of Resolution 130-06, which requires an executed contract prior to Board consideration, are not applicable. __________________________ Assistant County Manager |
Home |
Agendas |
Minutes |
Legislative Search |
Lobbyist Registration |
Legislative Reports
Home | Using Our Site | About | Phone Directory | Privacy | Disclaimer
E-mail your comments,
questions and suggestions to
Webmaster
|