Atlanta Water Resource Commission clarifies profitable bid process for new contract

During the Fulton County Board of Commissioners meeting on August 6, 2025, a significant discussion centered around a contract related to the Atlanta Water Resource Commission. The meeting highlighted an unusual bidding process where one of the bidders, Veolia, was instructed not to include profit in their initial proposal, a departure from standard practice. This decision raised questions among commissioners about the implications for future contracts.

David Clark, the director of public works, clarified that the omission of profit was intentional and part of a negotiation strategy. He explained that while Veolia's bid was lower even after including profit, the other bidder, Jacobs, had included profit in their overall cost. This led to a discussion about whether future contracts would require bidders to include profit in their proposals, with Felicia Strom Whitaker, the purchasing director, indicating that this contract was a joint effort involving multiple agencies, including the city of Atlanta.

The commissioners expressed concerns about the transparency of the bidding process and the need for better communication regarding contract specifications. They noted that the contract had been approved by both Fulton County and the city of Atlanta before the issue of profit was raised, suggesting that the oversight was procedural rather than substantive.

As the meeting progressed, the commissioners moved to approve the contract, indicating that despite the oversight, the financial implications were not significant enough to warrant further delay. The discussion underscored the complexities of inter-agency contracts and the importance of clear communication in public procurement processes.

In conclusion, the meeting highlighted the need for improved oversight and clarity in future bidding processes, particularly regarding profit inclusion. As Fulton County continues to navigate its partnerships with the Atlanta Water Resource Commission, these discussions will likely inform future procurement strategies and enhance accountability in public contracts.