2002-12ORDINANCE NO. 2002 -12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA,
PROVIDING FOR THE CITY TO OPT OUT OF AND EXEMPT
ITSELF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 2-
11.1(T) OF THE MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CODE
CONCERNING CONE OF SILENCE REQUIREMENTS
RELATED TO PURCHASING TRANSACTIONS; AMENDING
THE CITY CODE BY ADOPTING SECTION 2-260 "CONE
OF SILENCE" OF CHAPTER 2 "ADMINISTRATION,"
PROVIDING CITY'S CONE OF SILENCE REQUIREMENTS
RELATED TO COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE CITY
DURING PURCHASING TRANSACTIONS; PROVIDING
FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN
CODE; PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Miami-Dade County, Florida,
has recently adopted an amendment to Section 2-11.1(t) of the Miami-Dade County
Code (the "County Code"), so as to remove any question of municipal autonomy in
pumhasing transactions, and to enable municipalities to opt out of and exempt
themselves from the requirements of Section 2-11 .l(t) "Cone of Silence" of the County
Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission finds that any necessary restrictions upon
bidder or proposer communications with the City during the competitive bidding or
proposal process related to pumhasing transactions may be provided by municipal
ordinance and by including appropriate provisions within the specifications for the
pumhasing transaction, rather than being mandated by a County ordinance which is not
tailored to meet local concerns and procedures.
IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Ordinance No. 2002-t2
Page 2
Section 1. Recitals Adopted.
and adopted.
Section 2. Opt Out Invoked.
Each of the above recitals is hereby confirmed
It is hereby provided that the provisions of
Section 2-11 .l(t) "Cone of Silence," of the Miami-Dade County Code shall not apply to
the City of Aventura. This opt out provision shall prevail over any conflicting City
O~inance.
Section 3. City Code Amended. That the City Code of the City of Aventura is
hereby amended by creating Section 2-260 "Cone of Silence" of Chapter 2
"Administration" to read as follows:
Section 2-260. Cone of Silence.
(a) Definitions. "Cone of Silence", as used herein, means a
prohibition on any communication regarding a particular
Request for Proposal ("RFP"), Request for Qualification ("RFQ")
or bid, between:
a potential vendor, service provider, proposer, bidder,
lobbyist, or consultant, and:
the City Commissioners, City's professional staff including,
but not limited to, the City Manager and his or her staff, any
member of the City's selection or evaluation committee.
(b) Restriction; Notice. A Cone of Silence shall be imposed upon
each RFP, RFQ and bid after the advertisement of said RFP,
RFQ or bid. ,At the time of imposition of the Cone of Silence, the
City Manager or his or her designee shall provide for public
notice of the Cone of Silence by posting a notice at the City Hall.
The City Manager shall issue a written notice thereof to the
affected departments, file a copy of such notice with the City
Clerk, with a copy thereof to each City Commissioner, and shall
include in any public solicitation for goods or services a
statement disclosing the requirements of this section.
(c) Termination of Cone of Silence. The Cone of Silence shall
terminate at the beginning of the City Commission meeting at
which the City Manager makes his or her written
recommendation to the City Commission. However, if the City
Ordinance No. 2002-12
Page 3
Commission refers the Manager's recommendation back to the
Manager or staff for further review, the Cone of Silence shall be
reimposed until such time as the Manager makes a subsequent
written recommendation.
(d) Exceptions To Applicability. The provisions of this section
shall not apply to:
(1) oral communications at pre-bid conferences;
(2) oral presentations before selection or evaluation
committees;
(3) public presentations made to the City Commissioners
during any duly noticed public meeting;
(4) communications in writing at any time with any City
employee, unless specifically prohibited by the
applicable RFP, RFQ or bid documents. The bidder or
proposer shall file a copy of any written communication
with the City Clerk. The City Clerk shall make copies
available to any person upon request;
(5) communications regarding a particular RFP, RFQ or bid
between a potential vendor, service provider, proposer,
bidder, lobbyist or consultant and the City's Purchasing
Agent or City employee designated responsible for
administering the procurement process for such RFP,
RFQ or bid, provided the communication is limited
stdctly to matters of process or procedure already
contained in the corresponding solicitation document;
(6) communications with the City Attorney and his or her
staff;
(7) duly noticed site visits to determine the competency of
bidders regarding a particular bid during the time period
between the opening of bids and the time the City
Manager makes his or her written recommendation;
(8) any emergency procurement of goods or services
pursuant to City Code;
(9) responses to the City's request for clarification or
additional information;
(10) contract negotiations during any duly noticed public
meeting;
(11) communications to enable City staff to seek and obtain
industry comment or perform market research,
provided all communications related thereto between a
potential vendor, service provider, proposer, bidder,
lobbyist, or consultant and any member of the City's
professional staff including, but not limited to, the City
Ordinance No. 2002-12
Page 4
Manager and his or her staff are in writing or are made
at a duly noticed public meeting.
(e) Penalties. Violation of this section by a particular bidder or
proposer shall render any RFP award, RFQ award or bid award
to said bidder or proposer voidable by the City Commission
and/or City Manager. Any person who violates a provision of
this section may be prohibited from serving on a City selection
or evaluation committee. In addition to any other penalty
provided herein, violation of any provision of this section by a
City employee may subject said employee to disciplinary action.
Section 4. Severability. That the provisions of this Ordinance are declared to
be severable and if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall for
any reason be held to invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining sections, sentences, clauses, and phrases of this Ordinance
but they shall remain in effect, it being the legislative intent that this Ordinance shall
stand notwithstanding the invalidity of any part.
Section 5. Inclusion in the Code, It is the intention of the City Commission,
and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and made a
part of the Code of the City of Aventura; that the sections of this Ordinance may be
renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intentions; and that the word "Ordinance"
shall be changed to "Section" or other appropriate word.
Section 6. Effective Date.
adoption on second reading.
Section 7. Notification.
This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon
That the City Clerk shall provide a copy of this
Ordinance to the Miami-Dade County Ethics Commission.
The foregoing Ordinance was offered by Commissioner Holzberg, who moved its
adoption on first reading. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cohen and, upon
being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Commissioner Arthur Berger
Commissioner Jay R. Beskin
Commissioner Ken Cohen
Commissioner Manny Grossman
Commissioner Harry Holzberg
Vice Mayor Patdcia Rogers-Libert
Mayor Jeffrey M. Perlow
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
Ordinance No. 2002-z_~.2
Page 5
The foregoing Ordinance was offered by Commissioner Rogers-Libert:
who moved its adoption on second reading. The motion was seconded by Commissioner
Cohen
, and, upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows:
Commissioner Arthur Berger
Commissioner Jay R. Beskin
Commissioner Ken Cohen
Commissioner Manny Grossman
Commissioner Harry Holzberg
Commissioner Patricia Rogers-Libert
Mayor Jeffrey M. Pedow
absent
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
PASSED AND ADOPTED on first reading this 5th day of March, 2002.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on second reading this 2nd day of April, 2002.
~I~I;~REY I~. PERLOW, MAYOR
ATTEST:
i~%SA M. SOF~
LERK L
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
CITY ATTORNEY