Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board seeks clearer RFP vetting after legal-services procurement questions; outside consultant offers best practices
Summary
Trustees pressed the district’s procurement staff on the legal-services RFP process and asked staff to return with a formal vetting process and evaluation criteria after a third‑party procurement educator outlined safeguards and best practices.
Trustees asked district procurement staff to develop a clearer, documented process for vetting and selecting evaluation committee members for requests for proposals (RFPs) after questions about the recent legal-services solicitation.
The board invited Tammy Briscoe West, a public procurement educator and consultant, to answer questions. West, who teaches public procurement certification classes in New Mexico, told trustees that procurement officers should set evaluation criteria aligned with the board’s priorities and that input from the end user (in this case, the board as the attorney’s client) is appropriate. She described best practices for evaluation committees: include end users, disclose conflicts, avoid committee quorums that create a board‑meeting quorum, and mitigate biased scoring by averaging evaluator scores or, in some cases, discarding outlier evaluations after documented review.
Board members said they wanted a transparent vetting process for committee members that reduces perceived bias while not unduly delaying procurements. Board Member James Edwards asked whether a board representative could sit on the evaluation committee; West said it is legally permissible but recommended that any board member on a committee consider abstaining from the final contract vote to avoid perceived conflicts. Chief Procurement Officer Miss Merchant confirmed the district had obtained an example RFP and would work with West and staff on a draft process.
Why it matters: the board has authority to approve contracts and wants assurance that solicitations and selection processes are fair and defensible. Trustees requested procedures that balance transparency, speed and public confidence.
Board direction: trustees asked staff to return with a written vetting process, a proposed evaluation rubric aligned to board priorities, and a recommended timeline for procurement events; staff said they would work with Tammy West and present the draft to the board for review.
