TITLE
RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. R-385-95 TO MAKE COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990 AND OTHER LAWS PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY A CONDITION OF AWARD BY INCLUDING EXISTING REQUIREMENTS IN THE CONTRACT TERMS

BODY
WHEREAS, the Miami-Dade County Commission passed Resolution No. R-385-95 on April 4, 1995 reaffirming the prohibition of discrimination on the basis of disability, reassigning responsibility for the implementation of the ADA of 1990 and creating new policy prohibiting contracts with firms violating the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and other laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability; and

WHEREAS, the Resolution requires employers doing business with the County to comply with its terms; and

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 Sections 2 and 3 of Resolution R-835-95 are deleted and the following substituted therefore:

Section 2. Definitions

For purposes of this resolution, the following definitions shall apply:

a) The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA): Pub. L. 101-336, 104 Stat 327, 42 U.S.C. 12101-12213 and 47 U.S.C. Sections 225 and 611 including Title I, Employment; Title II, Public Services; Title III, Public Accommodations and Services Operated by Private Entities; Title IV, Telecommunications; and Title V, Miscellaneous Provisions.
b) The Rehabilitation Act of 1973: 29 U.S.C. Section 794.
c) The Federal Transit Act, as amended: 49 U.S.C. Section 1612.
d) The Fair Housing Act as amended: 42 U.S.C. Section 3601-3631.
e) County: Miami-Dade County and agencies and instrumentalities thereof, and all entities wholly funded by the County.
f) Firm: Any person, corporation, partnership, or any other type of business entity or organization, including not-for-profit organizations.
g) Certifying Firm: Any firm that certifies information pursuant to this resolution.
h) Acts: The statutes listed in this section.

Section 3. Restrictions

a) Successful bidders and proposers shall, as a condition of award, accept the contract terms, certifying that the firm is not in violation of any provisions of the Acts.
b) If any certifying firm, or any owner, subsidiary, or other firm affiliated with or related to the attesting firm, is found by the responsible enforcement agency, the Courts or the County to be in violation of the Acts, the County will conduct no further business with such attesting firm. Any contract entered into based upon false information pursuant to this resolution shall be voidable by the County. If any certifying firm violates any of the Acts during the term of any contract such firm has with the County, such contract shall be voidable by the County, even if the certifying firm was not in violation at the time it certified the information.
c) It shall be a requirement that all County contracts for goods and services contain specific language as to "voidability" should a post contract violation of any of the Acts occur.
d) For the purposes of Section 3, "owner" shall mean any firm having any ownership interest in the attesting firm, and "subsidiary" shall mean any firm in which the attesting firm has any ownership interest.
e) Failure to comply with the requirements of this section may result in debarment of those who knowingly violate this policy or falsify information.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Board amend Resolution No. 385-95, Section 2, to make compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and other laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability a condition of award and including said language as part of the contract terms.

MANAGER'S BACKGROUND
At the Board's workshop on June 10, 1999, I advised of my intention to streamline the legislative requirements affecting the procurement process. As you are aware, the numerous forms requiring execution by bidders or proposers are often cause for delaying contract awards and discouraging companies from conducting business with the County. In an effort to consolidate a bidder's responsibility, I proposed incorporating policy requirements, wherever possible, into the contract terms. Thus by signing one document, bidders can comply with multiple County requirements.

The amendment to Resolution R-385-95, Section 2, will make the requirement for vendors to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and other laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability requirements a condition of award rather than requiring a separate affidavit. This amendment also includes a debarment provision for failure to comply, thereby providing the County with the ability to take action against non-compliant bidders.

Similar amendments to other legislation are proposed as separate items on today's agenda.