Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council questions low bids and good-faith efforts as city renews contracts and extensions
Summary
Council members pressed staff about low-bid awards, contract amendments and minority participation goals on multiple consent items; staff explained tracking of change orders and use of good-faith-effort (GFE) waivers where prime contractors did not meet participation targets.
Charlotte City Council debated multiple consent-agenda items Jan. 13 that drew sustained questioning from Councilwoman La Juana Mayfield about bid accuracy, contract amendments and minority-business participation.
Mayfield asked staff to explain circumstances in which a low responsive bid later required contract amendments and whether the city tracks how amendment costs compare with the next-lowest bid. Marie (staff), General Services and procurement staff told council that between 2018 and 2024 the city completed 78 projects with a 3.3% change-order rate reported for that sample and that change orders typically reflect unforeseen site conditions such as rock or other necessary extra work rather than price gaming.
Mayfield highlighted several specific items. On item 17 (Sunset Pedestrian Improvements Phase 1) she asked about a bid that was roughly $400,000 below the next-lowest bidder; staff said the procurement followed the usual lowest-responsive-bid process and that change-order incidence is tracked. On items 18 and 19, Mayfield had the council consider two related maintenance contracts previously awarded in 2021 for $370,461 with subsequent amendments: amendment 2 for $123,487 (bringing the not-to-exceed amount to $493,948) and a proposed amendment 3 that would raise the total contract value to $617,435 and extend performance through March 2026; council approved the extension.
Mayfield also noted item 20, the I-277 Rail Trail pedestrian bridge procurement, where she said the lowest responsive bid was about $3 million lower than others on the list; staff again pointed to the same tracking and change-order auditing process and the item passed.
Council and staff also discussed the city's minority-business participation process. For one water-infrastructure contract CBI (city business inclusion staff) established an 8% participation goal: the contract achieved only 1.76% participation without meeting the goal through prime participation and therefore staff relied on documented good-faith efforts (GFE) to validate the award. Council members asked CBI and Charlotte Water to strengthen outreach and use bonding and capacity-building efforts to increase participation; manager and council members said the council will discuss procurement competitiveness and equity at an upcoming retreat and during budget deliberations.
Other consent items that drew brief comments included a request to standardize public-record reporting on requests for qualifications (item 28) and a clarification that the airport concourse E renovation project is funded in part by a $32.2 million federal Airport Terminals Program award and $14,772,003 in North Carolina DOT Airport Improvement Program grants (item 35). Council approved all pulled consent items after discussion.
Ending: Council directed staff to return with recommended retreat topics and additional procurement metrics and accepted staff assurances that change-order tracking, GFE documentation and outreach would be emphasized going forward.
