Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Alpharetta council upholds finance director, denies protest of pavement-assessment award
Summary
The Alpharetta City Council unanimously denied an appeal from Applied Research Associates that sought review of the finance director’s decision to reject a late protest of the award for RFP 25-103 (pavement condition assessment). The council ruled the protest was untimely under the city’s procurement timelines.
The Alpharetta City Council on March 3, 2025 unanimously denied an appeal by Applied Research Associates Inc. of the finance director’s decision to reject the firm’s protest as untimely in connection with RFP 25-103, a pavement condition assessment and mapping contract. The council’s vote upheld an earlier award to Spencer Consulting.
City Administrator Chris Lagerbloom and Tom Harris, the director of finance, told the council that the notice of award for RFP 25-103 was posted to the city’s Bonfire procurement portal on Nov. 20, 2024. Under the city’s procurement code a seven-day protest period applies; city staff said that advice from legal added three days under state law related to public records timing, which the city counted conservatively to produce a Dec. 2, 2024 protest deadline. Harris entered a letter into the record dated Dec. 30, 2024 denying Applied Research Associates’ protest as untimely; staff recorded the firm’s written protest as delivered Dec. 20, 2024, 17 days after the protest deadline.
Danny Silos, attorney for Applied Research Associates, argued the protest should be considered on the merits because his client only learned of the award after reaching out to procurement on Dec. 6 and receiving confirmation on Dec. 9, and therefore could not reasonably have filed earlier. Silos said the RFP and procurement manual do not state that posting on the Bonfire portal alone constitutes notice to losing proposers and argued that proposers supply contact information that the city could use to send email notice when an award posts.
Harris and other staff urged the council to focus on the timeliness question; Harris said staff evaluated only the timing of the protest and did not adjudicate the technical merits of the procurement. Council discussion acknowledged the due-process concern raised by the appellant but emphasized the city’s established process and the duration between the posting and the appellant’s first inquiry; one council member said a 16‑day gap between posting and the appellant’s initial inquiry weighed in favor of staff’s interpretation. Council then voted to deny the appeal.
A motion to deny the protest was made by Mayor Pro Tem Merkel and seconded by Councilman DeRito; the motion passed unanimously. The denial leaves the original award to Spencer Consulting in place; the council did not rule on any technical challenges to the award because the protest was rejected on timeliness grounds.
Key chronology entered into the record: notice of award posted to Bonfire, Nov. 20, 2024; procurement code seven-day protest window plus three days under state law yields a Dec. 2, 2024 deadline; protest delivered Dec. 20, 2024 and denied by finance director letter dated Dec. 30, 2024. The council’s action on March 3, 2025 concludes the city-level administrative appeal.
