Using the Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion outline, I'm having trouble creating the IRAC for this situation....Happy City opened bidding for an airport construction project, by the usual process of advertising a request for bids. Crafty Construction submitted the lowest responsive bid. When the Happy City Council met to review the bid the Council members discovered the bid exceeded the budget for the project and discussed the possibility of negotiating a bid reduction. The city manager told the Council that Chris Crafty, owner of Crafty Construction, objected to further negotiations until Happy City formally awarded the contract to Crafty Construction, taking the position Happy City should award the contract in the amount of the original bid and afterward negotiate reductions in the scope of the work and/or contract price by submitting work change orders authorized by the contract. The City Council decided to award the contract to Crafty Construction on the condition that the parties negotiate the work and price to bring it within the Citys budget; adding that if Crafty would not participate in the negotiations, the City would rebid the project. Thereafter the Citys public works director suggested changes to Chris Crafty that would cut $100,000 from the project price to bring it within budget. Chris Crafty stated she felt she could do the reduction but was not prepared to discuss specifics. The next day Chris informed the public works director that she was confident that the price reduction of $100,000 could be accomplished based upon something like the suggested changes once a contract was signed. No further discussions occurred, and nothing was signed. Happy City eventually announced it would reject all bids, including Crafty Constructions, as over-budget and rebid the project. Subsequently, Crafty Construction claimed it had a contract for the project, which Happy City breached by rebidding it. Happy City claims no contract ever existed. Who wins and why?