1. The city claimed that it benefited the public by allowing the bid change because it resulted in monetary savings for the city. Does this explanation justify the city’s disregard of established precedent? Can the court of appeals disregard established state precedent?
2. Shaw-Lundquist was able to prove that its original bid was wrong due to a legitimate clerical error. Should this have mattered?
3. Why is it good policy to not permit amendments of bids in competitive bidding situations?