Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Contracts Procurement Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors approve seventh amendment to AMEC Geometrics contract amid criticism over lack of competitive bidding
Summary
The board voted to extend and increase a contract with AMEC Geometrics, Inc., for environmental consulting services through June 30, 2010, increasing the contract by $180,000, despite questions from supervisors about why the contract had been amended seven times since 2003 without a competitive bid.
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted to approve an amendment extending the term of a contract with AMEC Geometrics Inc. through June 30, 2010 and increasing the contract by $180,000 for environmental consulting services.
Supervisor David Campos asked why the contract, which originated in February 2003, had been amended repeatedly and whether the city had sought competitive bids. Jack Sylvan of the Office of Economic and Workforce Development explained the contract had governed oversight of the Navy's environmental cleanup on Treasure Island and that the city had amended the contract annually while expecting that property transfer and cleanup responsibilities would shift to the private developer: "This role is overseeing the Navy's environmental cleanup... We have been working under the assumption that over the past 3 years that when the property is transferred from the Navy, that we would actually transfer the responsibility for the cleanup to our private developer."
Sylvan said the engineering firm had developed specialized site knowledge and relationships with regulators that would make replacing the vendor more costly and time-consuming than continuing the amendment. "When we went back and looked at did it make sense to open the contract to bid... we actually think that it will cost we would have to double the amount to bring somebody new on who would have to learn the site from scratch."
Supervisor Campos and others argued multiple amendments without reprocurement risked losing arm's-length contracting and preferred competitive bidding to verify value. Campos said he appreciated the work but would vote against the extension because of procurement concerns; after discussion the board approved the amendment. The clerk announced the resolution was adopted with 9 ayes and 2 noes.
The board asked that the contract and procurement approach be revisited when the property transfer occurs and that the Office of Economic and Workforce Development document the firm's site-specific expertise and the estimated costs of rebidding.
