|
Miami-Dade
Legislative Item File Number: 260591 |
|
|
Miami-Dade
Legislative Item File Number: 260591 |
Printable PDF Format
|
| File Number: 260591 | File Type: Resolution | Status: Amended | ||||||
| Version: 0 | Reference: | Control: County Commission | ||||||
|
||||||||
| Requester: Aviation Department | Cost: | Final Action: | ||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
| 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 | 6/2/2026 | 8A1 | Amended | ||||
| REPORT: | Commissioner Cohen Higgins moved to adopt the foregoing proposed resolution as amended. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and upon being put to a vote, passed by 11-0 (Vice Chairman McGhee and Commissioner Gilbert III were absent) The amended version of this resolution will be assigned Resolution No. R-464-26. | ||||||
| |
|||||||
| Aviation and Seaport Committee | 5/11/2026 | 3I | Forwarded to BCC with a favorable recommendation | ||||
| REPORT: | Chairwoman Cohen Higgins voiced her support for the item but requested clarification on the sole sourcing, efficiencies, and continuity of service concerns she had raised at the previous Board meeting. She asked Mr. Ralph Cutié to provide a status update outlining the savings the department anticipated. Mr. Cutie reported that the department had reviewed the more than 208 projects in its approximately $14 billion capital program and identified about 13 with significant long-term sole source components. He named the five most significant as the D60 project, both phases of the Central Terminal redevelopment, and the North Terminal gate optimization and gate infrastructure projects. He advised that the department’s consultant performed a comprehensive analysis of the potential savings and the operational and schedule impacts and noted the analysis projected savings exceeding $302 million, along with additional benefits from avoiding schedule delays and the removal of existing infrastructure to accommodate new systems. Mr. Cutie explained that the item would allow the administration, under a limited delegation of authority, to specify sole sourced components when advertising the projects listed in the exhibit, while other projects remained open to competition. He characterized the $302 million figure as conservative and cited building management systems, airfield lighting systems, and access control as components that would otherwise require significant infrastructure removal. Chairwoman Cohen Higgins inquired about MIA’s preparations for the 2026 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup. Mr. Cutie reported that a task force established earlier in the year had advanced beautification work throughout the terminals, including pressure cleaning, painting, striping, and lighting improvements, and that the department was working with the Greater Miami Convention and Visitors Bureau (GMCVB) on murals and LED digital signage. He estimated approximately 1.2 million additional passengers would utilize MIA during the event. On human trafficking, Mr. Cutie reported that the department continued its longstanding partnership with the State Attorney's Office to place awareness signage in restrooms and throughout the terminals and to rotate related messaging on digital signs. Addressing Chairwoman Cohen Higgins’s comments about the county's Super Bowl signage, he confirmed the airport would demonstrate a comparable level of commitment. Commissioner Gilbert III questioned whether the projects were legacy contracts in substance, despite not being labeled as such. Mr. Cutie responded that the existing airport systems were legacy systems and that the item involved sole source solicitations specifying some of them. Commissioner Gilbert III referenced his standing concerns about the county's frequent use of legacy awards. He took issue with accepting the administration's savings projections and delegating purchasing discretion to the Mayor, citing its inconsistent delivery record and his reluctance to lock in existing providers without weighing potentially better, less costly alternatives. Commissioner Hardemon questioned how sole sourcing could produce savings when there was nothing comparable to measure it against. Mr. Cutie explained that integrating new projects with existing proprietary systems, such as Honeywell's building management and airfield lighting systems, avoided removing and replacing that infrastructure, which produced the savings along with cost reductions from the shortened schedule. Commissioner Hardemon countered with an analogy to older and newer wiring, observing that newer technology generally required removing the older installation and purchasing both hardware and service. Mr. Cutie responded that these contracts could require the vendor to keep the county updated with current technology as part of maintenance, citing the existing Honeywell contract as an example. Responding to Vice Chairman Gonzalez's question about whether the projects had been advertised, Mr. Cutie explained that they had not. He noted that two contracts had been advertised and then placed on hold pending this item, while the remaining projects were listed in Exhibit A. He added that several procurements were still months away, including D60, and that the department's conclusions rested on the consultant's analysis completed within the prior few months Commissioner Gilbert III stated that the explanation had removed any doubt and confirmed his opposition, since each reference to sole source described what he regarded as legacy projects. He contended that the word legacy had been left out of the title to avoid a strong reaction from the commission, which had been working to move away from legacy awards. He maintained that the projects were not true sole sources, because alternatives existed for each and retention was simply the cheaper option. Mr. Morales attributed the sole source terminology to the governing Florida statute, explaining that the specification directed contractors to a single source for the particular product while the overall project remained competitively bid. He confirmed that Honeywell was a legacy contract and that the solicitation would require contractors to purchase its parts. Mr. Cutie added that any new systems installed would also have to integrate with the existing systems. Commissioner Gilbert III disputed the interpretation, drawing a distinction between going to one source, which he characterized as a directed purchase amounting to a waiver of solicitation, and a genuine sole source, which existed only where no reasonably attainable alternative was available. He noted that the commission had understood the administration's past sole source representations to mean that no alternative existed, and he called the discrepancy a serious matter of trust if the statute set a different standard. Mr. Morales clarified that the county had committed to particular systems years earlier and that only the original manufacturer could supply the compatible parts and upgrades, which was what rendered those components a sole source. Commissioner Gilbert III observed that the item went a step further by requiring every bidder to use the specified components. Drawing again on the wiring analogy, he explained that locking all bidders into the existing systems would foreclose any proposal based on newer technology and deny bidders the chance to argue that a more forward-looking option offered better long-term value. He cautioned that each legacy contract reaffirmed existing arrangements and that the request effectively delegated the Board's budgeting and procurement authority. He stated that he would not support the item in committee, though he remained open to further discussion. Mr. Cutie offered to brief Commissioner Gilbert III individually. He explained that the design documents issued with each solicitation would require the latest technology, that the delegated authority applied to only about 13 of the 208 projects, and that the larger projects included many components open to competition, such as concrete, steel, and roofing. Mr. Cutie noted that the affected legacy systems represented only a portion of a project such as the approximately $1.1 billion D60, and he described the request as a limited authority intended to produce fiscal and schedule benefits. Commissioner Gilbert III urged the administration to lead future requests with that rationale rather than the sole source designation, and Mr. Cutie confirmed that the cost and schedule justification was accurate. Chairwoman Cohen Higgins stated that she had reacted similarly when the item was presented for sponsorship and had raised it at the previous Board meeting to remain cautious about extending legacy contracts. She observed that the item referenced legacy systems throughout its fiscal impact section and read a portion into the record, explaining that the legacy systems spanned multiple project boundaries, that assigning a discrete cost to each project for a new terminal-wide system was impractical, and that replacing those systems to accommodate alternative manufacturers would be neither feasible nor economically justified. She cited the key card system as a persuasive example, noting that the item represented the first opportunity in 20 years to build new terminals at Terminal K and D60 and that installing a different system in one terminal from the rest of the airport was not logical, particularly where a properly structured contract required regular updates. She concluded that the outside analysis demonstrated genuine savings and efficiencies, expressed her support, and recommended a briefing for the commissioners before the matter reached the full Board. Vice Chairman Gonzalez stated that he largely agreed with Chairwoman Cohen Higgins’ conclusions and that his earlier question reflected a similar initial impression that the process avoided competitive bidding. He referenced two solicitations in the item, V100A and T012A, which had incorporated proprietary components but lacked the ability to integrate with the airport's systems, prompting bidders to challenge the specifications. He observed that those bidders could not have satisfied the requirements in any event, and he encouraged the administration to lead with a clear statement of the problem and solution, which Mr. Cutie accepted. Commissioner Gilbert III stated that the statute permitted a sole source determination only after the governing body weighed all available alternatives and where the specification was recommended by an architect or engineer. He maintained that the projects should be considered individually rather than approved together. At the Chairwoman's request, ACA Murray clarified that the statute used the term sole source and that the item tracked that language for compliance. He explained that legacy contracts were a creation of the Board that did not appear in state law, which accounted for the apparent disconnect, and that a legacy contract was treated as a type of sole source contract even though the statute referred to it as such. Chairwoman Cohen Higgins reviewed Exhibit A, titled Sole Sourced Materials and Systems, which listed 15 entries with associated legacy contract numbers. Mr. Cutie confirmed that the numbers identified contracts from prior competitive or legacy procurements, that the item did not extend any of those contracts, and that it instead allowed the specified legacy components to be incorporated into competitive solicitations for the larger projects. At Commissioner Gilbert’s III request, ACA Murray read the governing statute into the record. It provided that a Board could not specify sole source materials or systems unless the governing body, after considering all available alternatives, determined the specification justifiable based on cost or interchangeability, the specification was recommended by the architect or engineer of record, and the consideration and justification were documented in the project file. Commissioner Gilbert III cautioned that sole source and legacy should not be treated as interchangeable, since legacy components generally had alternatives while sole sources did not, and he expressed frustration with how the matter had been framed. Discussion ensued among the Committee members and staff regarding who drafted the item Chairwoman Cohen Higgins clarified that it was a staff initiative the administration had asked her to sponsor during a briefing, and that she had neither filed a legislative request nor participated in drafting it. Commissioner Hardemon stated that his concern was whether the research required by the statute had been performed and documented, and that the committee had not received sufficient information to confirm the item aligned with the law. Mr. Cutie reiterated that the consultant had performed a comprehensive analysis and prepared the cost estimate, that the engineers of record had submitted supporting letters attached to the item as the statute required, and that the due diligence addressed cost, schedule, and engineering considerations. He offered to provide a more detailed report. Chairwoman Cohen Higgins asked Mr. Cutie to brief all commissioners before the item reached the full Board so that their concerns could be addressed. Addressing Mr. Morales attempt to add comments related to Exhibit C, Commissioner Gilbert III cautioned on a point of information that additional explanation risked generating more questions, advising that the administration secure the vote and brief members afterward rather than prompt him to argue against the item. Hearing no further questions or comments, the Committee proceeded to vote on the foregoing proposed resolution, as presented. | ||||||
| |
|||||||
| Jimmy Morales | 4/6/2026 | Assigned | Office of Agenda Coordination | 4/6/2026 | 4/6/2026 | ||
| |
|||||||
| Office of Agenda Coordination | 4/6/2026 | Assigned | County Attorney | 5/5/2026 | |||
| REPORT: | MDAD - Commissioner Cohen Higgins sponsor - pending April cmte - County attorney Monica Rico Perez - attachments: exhibits A-C - PGS 61 | ||||||
| |
|||||||
| County Attorney | 4/6/2026 | Assigned | Monica Rizo | 4/7/2026 | |||
| |
|||||||
| Legislative Text |
|
TITLE RESOLUTION APPROVING, PURSUANT TO SECTION 255.04, FLORIDA STATUTES, THE SPECIFICATION OF CERTAIN SOLE SOURCE MATERIALS AND SYSTEMS IN PROCUREMENT DOCUMENTS FOR IDENTIFIED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (�CIP�) PROJECTS FOR THE MIAMI-DADE AVIATION DEPARTMENT; SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITION PRECEDENT, AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY MAYOR OR COUNTY MAYOR�S DESIGNEE TO ADVERTISE SOLICITATIONS FOR THE SPECIFIED CIP PROJECTS WITH THE SOLE SOURCE MATERIALS AND SYSTEMS AND RATIFYING ADVERTISEMENT OF TWO PENDING SOLICITATIONS WITH THE SOLE SOURCE MATERIALS AND SYSTEMS BODY WHEREAS, this Board desires to accomplish the purposes outlined in the accompanying Mayor�s memorandum and documents, copies of which are incorporated herein by reference, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: Section 1. The recital is incorporated herein by reference and is approved. Section 2. The Board, after consideration of all available alternative materials and systems, determines that the specification of the sole source materials and systems identified in Exhibit A to the Mayor�s memorandum for those capital improvement program (�CIP�) projects for the Miami-Dade Aviation Department (�MDAD�) identified and set forth in Exhibit B to the Mayor�s memorandum are justifiable based on the cost and lack of interchangeability among materials and systems, and are hereby approved pursuant to section 255.04, Florida Statutes. Section 3. Subject to receipt by MDAD of a written recommendation from the architect and engineer of record for each CIP project identified in Exhibit B to the Mayor�s memorandum, the Board authorizes the County Mayor or Mayor�s designee to advertise solicitations for the CIP projects identified in Exhibit B to the Mayor�s memorandum specifying the sole source materials and systems identified in Exhibit A to the Mayor�s memorandum (�sole source items�). This Board further ratifies those actions of the County Mayor or Mayor�s designee in advertising pending solicitations for Bid No. V100A � MIA CC J Gates Advanced Visual Docking Guidance System (A-VDGS) and Bid No. T012A � MIA CC H Gates & Internationalization specifying the sole source items. Letters from several architects and engineers of record for certain CIP projects are attached to the Mayor�s memorandum as Exhibit C. HEADER Date: To: Honorable Chairman Anthony Rodriguez and Members, Board of County Commissioners From: Daniella Levine Cava Mayor Subject: Recommendation for Approval of Sole Sourced Materials and Systems in Procurement Documents for Selected Miami Dade Aviation Department Capital Improvement Projects STAFF RECOMMENDATION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Miami International Airport (MIA) continues to rank among the fastest growing airports nationwide, reaffirming its role as Miami Dade County�s and the State of Florida�s largest economic engine, with an annual economic and jobs impact of $181.4 billion and 843,000 jobs respectively. To meet rising passenger volumes and expanding cargo demands, the Miami Dade Aviation Department (MDAD) has launched the Future Ready now $12 billion Modernization in Action (M.I.A.) Program. This long term initiative encompasses a comprehensive portfolio of capital projects to modernize MIA and the County�s general aviation airports (GAA), transforming them into world class facilities positioned to support the region�s economic vitality for decades. Sustained maintenance and lifecycle management of MDAD�s infrastructure and assets are essential to the success of this transformation. Proactive upkeep preserves operational reliability, extends asset life, minimizes service disruptions, and protects the County�s significant capital investments. As MDAD advances both modernization and maintenance efforts, strategic procurement decisions, including the specification of sole sourced materials and systems, play a critical role in ensuring compatibility, safety, performance, and long term cost efficiency. Following a comprehensive evaluation of the legacy materials and systems used in MDAD�s capital improvement projects (as detailed below in MDAD�s five (5) most significant capital projects), it has been determined that certain legacy electrical, security, and safety systems and infrastructure components are unique and available exclusively from a single supplier and retrofitting or replacing these legacy systems to accommodate alternative manufacturers is impractical and cost prohibitive. Conservative rough order-of-magnitude estimates indicate that such actions would result in approximately $302,736,853.00 in replacement costs, along with significant schedule delays that would adversely impact the on-time delivery of critical projects within MDAD�s ongoing modernization program. Furthermore, substituting these items would compromise compatibility, performance, and operational continuity. MDAD�s Five (5) Most Significant Capital Projects: � Project No. T180B Concourse D West Extension (D60): Building Management Systems, Matrix Security System, Public Address System, Automatic Door Controller, CCTV Camera Systems, Aircraft Visual Docking Guidance System (AVDGS). � Project No. BA061A MIA Central Terminal Redevelopment � Phase 1: Building Management Systems, Matrix Security System, Public Address System, Automatic Door controller, Closed Circuit Television Camera (CCTV) Systems. � Project No. V008C MIA Central Terminal Redevelopment � Phase 2: Building Management Systems, Matrix Security System, Public Address System, Automatic Door controller, CCTV Camera Systems. � Project No. AA048B MIA North Terminal Gate Infrastructure Upgrades - Building Management Systems. � Project No. AA048A MIA North Terminal Gate Optimization Phase 1: Matrix Security System, Automatic Door controller, CCTV Camera Systems, AVDGS. Accordingly, this item seeks approval from the Board of County Commissioners (�Board�) to: 1. Approve the sole-sourced materials and systems (noted in Exhibit A attached to this memorandum) to be specified in MDAD�s procurement documents for certain capital improvement projects. 2. Authorize competitive solicitations � permitting the County Mayor or County Mayor�s designee to advertise solicitations specifying the sole-sourced materials and systems identified in Exhibit A for the capital improvement projects noted in Exhibit B attached to this memorandum. 3. Ratify the actions taken by the County Mayor or County Mayor�s designee in the advertisement of two (2) competitive solicitations that include sole-sourced materials and systems. Both solicitations incorporated proprietary components necessary to maintain system compatibility, operational standardization, and integration with existing airport infrastructure. This became evident when bidders submitted inquiries challenging the mandated specifications. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board approve the attached Resolution authorizing the County Mayor or the County Mayor�s designee to: (i) specify the sole sourced materials and systems in MDAD�s procurement documents identified in Exhibit A, in accordance with Section 255.04 of the Florida Statutes, which permits a governmental body, after evaluating all available alternative materials and systems, to justify a sole source specification based on cost or interchangeability and upon the recommendation of the architect or engineer of record; (ii) advertise these sole sourced materials and systems in competitive solicitations for the capital improvement projects listed in Exhibit B; and (iii) ratify theSeptember 2025 advertisement of the following two competitive solicitations that included sole sourced materials and systems: Bid No. V100A � MIA CC J Gates Advanced Visual Docking Guidance System (A-VDGS) and Bid No. T012A � MIA CC H Gates & Internationalization. Supporting letters from the architects and engineers of record, recommending sole sourcing for certain capital improvement projects are noted in Exhibit C attached to this memorandum. These architects and engineers of record are engaged through professional services agreements issued by MDAD, and the preparation of these letters falls within the scope of their contracted responsibilities. The specification of sole sourced materials and systems for these capital improvement projects is in the County�s best interest. This approach ensures compatibility with existing airport infrastructure, preserves operational reliability and cost efficiencies, meets current safety and performance standards, and supports compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulatory requirements. SCOPE MIA is located primarily within District 6 which is represented by Commissioner Natalie Milian Orbis; however, the impact of this agenda item is countywide in nature as MIA is a regional asset. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY The attached Resolution delegates authority to the County Mayor or County Mayor�s designee to specify certain sole-sourced materials and systems in MDAD�s procurement documents for certain capital improvement projects, advertise those competitive solicitations specifying the sole-sourced materials and systems for certain capital improvement projects, and ratify the advertisement of those competitive solicitations. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE Approval of this item will not result in additional fiscal impact beyond the costs already anticipated within MDAD�s capital project budgets. Because legacy systems span multiple project boundaries, assigning a discrete cost to each individual capital project for integrating a new, terminal wide system is not practical. Moreover, updating or replacing existing legacy systems to accommodate alternative manufacturers would be neither feasible nor economically justified. Preliminary analyses indicate that undertaking such replacements would add approximately $302,736,853.00 in additional costs, along with significant schedule impacts that would impede the timely advancement of projects within MDAD�s ongoing modernization program. Although the precise cost associated with each sole sourced component cannot be fully quantified at this stage of project development, specifying compatible legacy systems avoids unnecessary capital expenditures, reduces operational and integration risks, and safeguards the County�s prior investments in existing infrastructure. TRACK RECORD/MONITOR Sylvia Novela is the Assistant Director of Procurement and Materials Management and will monitor the implementation of this item. BACKGROUND The successful execution of MDAD�s $12 billion Modernization In Action (M.I.A.) Program requires the procurement of numerous materials and systems that must integrate, communicate, or otherwise function seamlessly with materials and systems that have been installed at MIA over many decades. Many of these existing materials and systems are critical to airport safety and security operations. The attached exhibits provide Board members with the technical and factual foundation needed to support sole source justification for selected capital improvement projects. As mentioned previously, Exhibit A outlines the materials and systems proposed for sole sourcing and identifies the projects in which they will be used. Exhibit B lists the current and future capital improvement projects that will be impacted by specifying one or more of these materials or systems. Exhibit C includes letters from the architects and engineers of record recommending sole sourcing and detailing the technical basis for their recommendations. Together, these exhibits demonstrate that, after careful consideration of all available alternatives, the specified items are justified for sole source procurement under Section 255.04, Florida Statutes, because substitution would be costly and would compromise compatibility, performance, and operational continuity. Just as important is the fact that the retrofitting or replacement of any MDAD legacy system would be cost prohibitive. It is estimated that such actions would incur multi million dollar expenses and cause substantial delays to MDAD�s Future Ready $12 billion Modernization in Action (M.I.A.) Program. Attachments __________________________ Jimmy Morales Chief Operating Officer |
|
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
|
