Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners approve two federally funded inspection contracts after questions about local vendor access
Summary
The board approved professional‑services agreements for inspection services on two road projects under federal Brooks Act procurement rules; commissioners and the public pressed for clarity on vendor addresses, local‑vendor treatment and state approval steps.
The Board of Commissioners on Feb. 18 approved two professional‑services agreements for construction inspection on California Avenue and Ohio Avenue — awards that drew public questions about vendor locations and whether local firms had been considered.
County engineering staff explained the contracts are federally funded and were procured under the Brooks Act process for professional services, which ranks proposals on qualifications before negotiating price. “You basically have to go with the number‑one ranked firm,” County Engineer staff said. For the California Avenue inspection, the board approved a contract with Traffic Planning & Design for up to $159,013.74; for the Ohio Avenue inspection the board approved Environmental Resources Inc. for up to $90,896.42.
Why it matters: several commissioners and members of the public asked why firms with addresses outside Atlantic County won the work and whether the county could give preference to local companies. Purchasing staff said federal and state rules govern Brooks‑Act procurements and the county cannot limit responses to Atlantic County vendors; RFPs were posted through the county’s BidExpress system and a four‑member internal review committee independently scored proposals. Purchasing staff said locality can be a factor only to a limited degree and cannot be a required threshold under the federal program.
What the county said about selection: the county presented the list of firms that responded to the RFPs for California Avenue (Traffic Planning & Design; EME Associates; Greenland Peterson; Keller Engineers; KS Engineers; TNM Associates) and said reviewers prepared independent rankings and then negotiated fees with the top‑ranked firm. Staff said they prepared internal cost estimates, compared them to the price proposals, and negotiated to reach a fair price.
Public and commissioner concerns: State Senator Paulsina (present at the meeting) and other speakers said the address shown on the vendor’s resolution packet for Traffic Planning & Design did not show an active storefront and urged the county to confirm where the company operates. Commissioner [Parker] and others asked whether the review process gives any advantage to local firms; the purchasing agent said statutes require an open and fair process and that in an RFP local presence may be one of many evaluation criteria but cannot be a determinative requirement.
Votes and next steps: the board approved both contracts by roll call (California Avenue inspection, Traffic Planning & Design, $159,013.74; Ohio Avenue inspection, Environmental Resources Inc., $90,896.42). Commissioners asked staff to bring the evaluation criteria, reviewer names and the county’s engineer estimate to the upcoming Roads & Bridges committee meeting for further review. Staff said they will provide the committee the scoring sheet, negotiation details and construction‑contract amounts so the board can compare negotiated inspection fees to the construction contract values.
Ending: county staff and commissioners agreed to follow up in committee so commissioners can review the procurement record and to return with more detailed procurement and cost information for public scrutiny.
