The IBT-Zamboanga City

The Integrated Bus Terminal
By: Rommel S. Reyes

A good general not only sees the way to victory: he also knows when victory is impossible. –Polybius

The proposed integrated bus terminal located at Divisoria, Zamboanga City having its prequalification last November of 2008, and followed by a pre bidding conference on December 10, 2008. The opening of bid was held on January 19, 2009 at around one o clock in the afternoon and followed by the deliberation of the presenters. A team of jury also known as the design build committee was called for by the local government last January 14, 2009 to lay down the necessary ground rules for the deliberation. From the team of jury there are about four (4) Architects and four (4) Engineers representing the technical profession while the rest represents the people of the entire cross section of the City, these includes public and civil servants. Zamboanga City mayor Celso Lobregat sat as member of the jury, as the meeting started the mayor inform the members the criteria for the proposed design and build scheme of the bidding. The criteria for judging were breakdown into two, first, was the aesthetic merit and the other one was the technical merit, under the aesthetic merit the item there, where classified into four category like the moderness, representative of Zamboanga architecture, green architecture and other which escape from my mind, while on the technical merit the item there were the functionality, engineering innovation, and others.
There were about thirteen bidders who submitted their intent to bid and only nine were qualified. From nine these were reduced to five and during the opening of bids only three where submitted their bid, from three one where disqualified for non compliance which is now the subject of debate whether or not the award will push through.
What is the issue here? The issue here is about the compliance, there are rules to follow under RA 9184 otherwise known as the Government Procurement Reform Act of 2003. The contractors are bound to submit two envelopes, the first envelope contain the different documents listed under the checklist as provided for by the agency concerned. In the case of the City Government their checklist provided at least twenty one documents in order a contractor to be considered as complying. For a regular bidding there are sixteen documents needed, there from, the City Government added four more documents in order to consider a contractor as complying. The purpose of adding was that, the bidding of the local government was more about the design and build concept, meaning, whoever wins in the bidding as the lowest bid and advantageous to the government is required to produce the building plans which was the added item (numbered as seventeen in the checklist) not only that, he must also produce the value engineering analysis which was also the added item (numbered as eighteen) and for item nineteen the performance specification parameters, if he will present such documents he will make the oral presentation in front of the jury as pre requisite and this oral deliberation numbered as item twenty of the checklist and after that the evaluation of the design build committee which is item twenty one of the checklist, this checklist was given prior to the pre bidding conference, and if he successfully complied all the requirements set forth then the opening of the second envelope will follow. And if found out that he has the lowest calculated bid then he is entitled to be awarded but subject to the recommendation of the Bids and Awards committee who is the overall in charge and the one who oversee the conduct of the bidding. In the bidding of the proposed integrated Bus Terminal the contractor who was disqualified for non compliance failed to present the documents specifically item eighteen and item nineteen, there from he was given the time to submit as a due process and the opportunity to submit motion for reconsideration by submitting the same item eighteen and which is the pre requisite. But things when wrong, the BAC found out that the contractor also failed to submit item nineteen of the checklist which is another ground for his disqualification. Because of that, confusion comes and what the contractor did was to announce or reveal his bid price to the media which is a desperate move and not supposed to do so.
So, who will suffer now? It is the riding public who will suffer, because, the mayor has the discretionary power if he feels that litigation is inevitable and he may award or not to award the project to one of those two contractors who complied the requirements and who spend there time, effort and the money involved just to come up the proposal. With the given time frame of less than two months preparation, these two contractors faithfully submitted their bid and complied the requirement while the non complying contractor cried that the two contractors should be the one to be disqualified for non compliance. The revelation that his bid which is less by about thirty million from the government approved budget for the contract (ABC) should be the one to be awarded to him that is his freedom to speak off, even though he did not explain his proposal to the team of jury. The cry of overprice is beyond only to one’s imagination because on the first place there is no overprice. If I were to give opinion, overprice will only come in when the project cost will exceed the government approved budget for the contract (ABC) not to the project cost of the contractor who bidded the substandard price and did not even present and explain the quality of his work that he arrived at, and also the degree or level of standards to be apply for the project. Meaning, when we buy goods we have to scrutinize the goods check the label and the workmanship and the quality of the materials to be use for the goods, especially when it involves the people’s money.