Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement It Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board orders review of IT contract after staff says managed-services agreement lacked board approval
Summary
Supervisors discussed a managed IT contract signed in September 2023 with Alliance that staff said was not approved by the board and may lack required procurement steps; the board directed the county attorney to contact Alliance and recommended exploring contract termination or an RFP.
The Mathews County Board of Supervisors held an extended discussion May 1 about an IT services contract with a vendor known as Alliance after staff said the executed contract provided managed IT services that had not been approved by the board and may have bypassed a required request-for-proposal process.
Miss Wilson told the board the contract had been executed Sept. 5, 2023 by signature under delegated authority and said "the contract, by technicality, is no good because it states plainly in there that it was supposed to be approved by the board, and it never was." She described a letter of intent and subsequent contract execution while she was on vacation and said the board had not seen an RFP for managed services.
Board members expressed concern about payments and documentation. Miss Wilson said the county had paid Alliance about $184,000 from July 1 through April for services and "as of April 1 we've spent a total of $318,000 with this company," and estimated spending could approach $350,000 by July 1. Board members asked for a breakdown of invoice line items, on-site visits and whether licensing costs were included.
Mister Brown and others asked the county attorney to advise the board on steps to correct the procurement irregularity. Mister Brown asked that the county attorney be authorized to "reach out to Alliance and talk with them, discuss the situation, and see if there isn't a way to conclude the contract," and suggested that, if the board later decided to issue an RFP, Alliance should be permitted to bid.
Legal and process steps: Mister Barr (legal counsel) advised the board and recommended a measured approach; the board instructed the county attorney to discuss options with Alliance and report back. Board members also requested information on how many on-site visits Alliance performed and a mapping of work to invoices.
The board signaled support for moving the procurement question into a closed session for further legal and personnel discussion. A motion to enter closed meeting under Virginia Code a7 2.2-3711(a)(3) (potential disposition of public property) and a7 2.2-3711(a)(1) (performance of a specific appointee) carried on roll call; the board also directed staff and legal counsel to pursue next steps with Alliance outside the public meeting.
Ending: The board did not vote to terminate the contract at the meeting. Members requested a formal legal recommendation and a procurement review, asked staff to assemble invoices and service logs, and asked the county attorney to attempt to negotiate a resolution with Alliance and, if needed, advise on RFP or termination procedures.
