Court Exempts Call Box Bidding
Competitive bidding was not necessary in the awarding of a contract to install call boxes on San Diego County freeways, an appellate court ruled Friday.
The decision could clear the way for Comarco Inc. of Anaheim to begin work on the system, which has been delayed for about five months.
For the record:
12:00 a.m. April 3, 1988 For the Record
Los Angeles Times Sunday April 3, 1988 San Diego County Edition Metro Part 2 Page 2 Column 1 Metro Desk 3 inches; 75 words Type of Material: Correction
In a Feb. 28 commentary, it was reported that Cubic Corp. sued the San Diego Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies in order to prevent the installation of freeway call boxes by Comarco, a competing firm. In fact, Cubic, which was low bidder, argued in conjunction with a court validation action brought by SAFE that competitive bidding practices were required. The state Court of Appeal recently ruled that, even though the law did not explicitly exempt SAFE from competitive bidding procedures, competitive bidding is not required.
Cubic Communications Inc. had obtained an injunction preventing the work from proceeding and requiring San Diego Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies to seek competitive bids on the contract. Cubic was the low bidder at $8.5 million. Comarco bid $9.6 million on the job of installing 963 solar-powered call boxes along 300 miles of the county’s freeways.
But the SAFE board of directors, made up of local elected officials, awarded the contract to Comarco on June 30. The board told the appellate court that Cubic was unqualified to receive the contract because its equipment failed field tests and did not fit the contract’s specifications.
The board also argued that the Legislature has exempted public agencies from competitive bidding rules when they are buying telecommunications equipment.
Justice Edward T. Butler agreed, writing that the “freeway emergency telephone system required by SAFE to fulfill its statutory responsibilities is not subject to competitive bidding because it is unique, one-of-a-kind, and the public . . . would not be served by a competitive bid requirement.”
