MIAMI, Fla. — Miami-Dade County commissioners rejected the result of a competitive procurement for janitorial services at Miami International Airport before approving two negotiated contracts worth nearly $268 million, county records reviewed by The Florida Pundit show.
The county administration originally recommended awarding a five-year, $261.38 million competitive contract to C&W Facility Services Inc. for cleaning Miami International Airport’s main terminals.
Commissioners instead rejected all proposals for that portion of the solicitation and directed the administration to negotiate with ABM Aviation Inc. and Flagship Aviation Services LLC, the two companies that had received the highest technical scores before Miami-Dade’s Local Preference rules were applied.
The county ultimately approved a $136.46 million contract with ABM Aviation and a $131.29 million contract with Flagship Aviation Services.
Combined, the agreements total approximately $267.75 million — about $6.37 million more than the competitive C&W contract originally recommended by the administration.
The final ABM and Flagship awards required commissioners to waive competitive bidding procedures.
County initially recommended C&W
Miami-Dade issued a request for proposals in January 2024 for janitorial services covering three areas of the county’s aviation system.
Area A encompassed approximately 9.7 million square feet at MIA’s main terminal, including Concourses D, E, F, G, H and J, federal inspection areas, TSA facilities, administrative offices and other airport spaces.
County records show 23 proposals were submitted across the three areas, including 14 for Area A.
Following evaluation and negotiations, Mayor Daniella Levine Cava’s administration recommended awarding Area A to C&W Facility Services for $261,381,966 over five years.
The recommendation described the award as a competitive contract.
C&W had not initially received the highest technical score.
County records show ABM scored 337.94, Flagship scored 337.84 and C&W scored 337.73 — a difference of just 0.21 points between first and third place.
Miami-Dade’s Local Preference program was then applied.
Because C&W maintained a local address and its score fell within the required range of the higher-ranked non-local proposers, the preference elevated C&W to the recommended position.
Cabrera pushed to reject the proposals
The procurement changed course during a Feb. 12, 2025, Airport Committee meeting.
Commissioner Kevin Marino Cabrera, whose district includes Miami International Airport, criticized conditions at the airport after conducting what county minutes describe as an unannounced four-hour walkthrough.
Cabrera said cleanliness was the airport’s second most common passenger complaint and described restroom and terminal conditions as unacceptable.
He also criticized C&W’s performance during its roughly 20-year history at the airport and argued that the contract should be awarded based on airport-cleaning experience.
According to county minutes, Cabrera pointed to ABM’s work at nearly 50 airports and Flagship’s work at nearly 30, compared with C&W’s work at five airports.
He also questioned how Local Preference had affected the procurement.
County Chief Operating Officer Jimmy Morales confirmed that ABM and Flagship had ranked first and second in the technical evaluation before Local Preference points were added, while C&W had ranked third.
At Cabrera’s request, the committee amended the administration’s recommendation.
Instead of awarding the $261.38 million competitive contract to C&W, the amended resolution rejected all Area A proposals and directed the administration to negotiate with ABM and Flagship.
The administration was instructed to return to commissioners with noncompetitive recommendations within 30 days.
Commissioners approved rejection 10-1
The full Miami-Dade County Commission approved the amended resolution on Feb. 19, 2025.
The measure passed 10-1.
Commissioner Eileen Higgins cast the sole dissenting vote, according to official commission records.
The resolution formally rejected every Area A proposal and authorized negotiations with ABM for terminal and landside areas and Flagship for airside areas.
The county record reviewed by The Florida Pundit does not establish why Higgins opposed the resolution.
C&W defended its airport performance
C&W representatives pushed back against criticism during the committee meeting.
Company President Matt Noe told commissioners that passenger traffic had increased substantially under the existing contract while contractual restrictions limited the company’s ability to adjust staffing and absorb Living Wage increases.
Noe said those pressures left C&W operating approximately $3.5 million underwater annually.
He also said the company had sought approval for technological improvements before the new procurement but had been told to wait for the RFP process.
Commissioners nevertheless raised concerns about airport conditions.
During questioning, Noe acknowledged that conditions did not meet the standards he wanted to see.
Cabrera argued that basic cleanliness should not depend on specific contract provisions and said Miami-Dade needed vendors capable of delivering higher service levels.
Competitive recommendation becomes two negotiated awards
Following the commission’s February directive, county administrators negotiated separately with ABM and Flagship.
The resulting agreements divided Area A into two sections.
ABM received Area A1, covering Concourses D and E and associated terminal and landside areas.
Its five-year contract totaled $136,459,471.
Flagship received Area A2, covering Concourses F, G, H and J and associated areas.
Its five-year contract totaled $131,292,181.
Together, the agreements totaled $267,751,652.
The county’s final resolutions characterized the contracts as noncompetitive and required a waiver of competitive bidding procedures.
New contracts cost $6.37 million more than original recommendation
The combined ABM and Flagship agreements are approximately $6.37 million higher than the $261.38 million C&W contract originally recommended through the competitive procurement.
That difference amounts to approximately 2.4% of the original proposed award.
The comparison does not necessarily mean Miami-Dade purchased identical services for a higher price.
The negotiated contracts divided the airport work between two vendors, and county officials said negotiations addressed staffing, pricing, scope, service levels and technology.
The county also incorporated contingency funding intended to address future Living Wage and Consumer Price Index increases, additional staffing and equipment needs.
Still, the procurement sequence is clear in county records: Miami-Dade’s administration recommended a competitive $261.38 million award; commissioners rejected all proposals; negotiations were conducted with the two companies that had ranked highest before Local Preference; and the county subsequently approved approximately $267.75 million in negotiated contracts.
Airport cleanliness drove commissioners’ decision
County officials repeatedly cited cleanliness and passenger experience in explaining the decision.
Miami International Airport is undergoing a multibillion-dollar modernization program as the county prepares for continued passenger growth.
The janitorial contracts include cleaning and disinfecting terminals and restrooms, smart-restroom technology, supply monitoring, passenger-feedback systems and light restroom maintenance.
During the February committee discussion, commissioners questioned whether the existing contractor could meet the airport’s future needs.
Vice Chairwoman Danielle Cohen Higgins also questioned why the original selection process had not included oral presentations or site visits for a contract worth more than $261 million.
She cited her own visits to airport facilities while discussing differences in service quality.
The airport contracts come amid broader scrutiny of Miami-Dade County spending. In June, Florida Chief Financial Officer Blaise Ingoglia identified what he described as $470 million in “wasteful spending” in Miami-Dade’s budget, part of an ongoing state-level debate over local government spending and taxpayer accountability.
Records leave accountability questions
Nothing in the county records reviewed by The Florida Pundit establishes that commissioners violated procurement rules or that ABM or Flagship received improper treatment.
The agreements also appear in Miami-Dade County’s FY 2025-26 adopted budget and active contracts records.
The records do establish an unusual procurement sequence involving one of Miami-Dade’s largest public facilities.
A competitive process produced a recommendation for C&W.
Commissioners rejected it.
They then ordered negotiations with the two vendors that had ranked above C&W before Local Preference was applied and ultimately approved nearly $268 million in contracts after waiving competitive bidding.
The process leaves several questions for further scrutiny, including whether abandoning the original procurement produced better service for taxpayers, how the negotiated pricing compares with the services offered under the competitive proposal and why one commissioner opposed the decision.
The Florida Pundit is continuing to review county procurement and lobbying records associated with the agreements.
Related Coverage
Blaise Ingoglia Identifies $470 Million in ‘Wasteful Spending’ in Miami-Dade Budget
Miami-Dade Spending Under Fire as Florida Lawmakers Demand Greater Accountability
Tax Records Reveal A3 Foundation Billed Miami-Dade Rodeo Far More Than It Spent
Get The Florida Pundit Newsletter
Breaking Florida politics, investigations, elections, and government news delivered directly to your inbox.
The post Miami-Dade Rejected Competitive Airport Janitorial Bid, Then Awarded Nearly $268 Million in Contracts appeared first on The Florida Pundit.
