Pendergrass City work session advances sweeping purchasing-policy rewrite, flags $25,000 approval threshold

Pendergrass City officials on Feb. 11 reviewed a draft overhaul of the city’s purchasing policy that would redefine how dollar thresholds are calculated, formalize conflict-of-interest disclosures and create new rules for local-vendor preference and change orders.

At the work session, Speaker 2 (city official) said the draft changes references from "mayor" to "mayor/city manager" so future hires could exercise purchasing authority. "I changed mayor to mayor slash city manager," Speaker 2 said, explaining the edit was meant to avoid re-amending policy if the city later hires a manager.

The draft would base a procurement dollar threshold on the total amount spent with a single vendor in a fiscal year to prevent repeated small purchases from being treated as separate, lower-value transactions. Speaker 2 described the revision as a means to prevent “split purchases” and to ensure consistent review of cumulative spending.

Conflict-of-interest disclosures were emphasized as a requirement tied to the city charter: Speaker 2 said disclosures by employees, elected officials and vendors must be submitted in writing to the mayor or city manager and attached to any formal quote or bid. "Disclosure from city employees or appointed officials should be submitted in writing to the mayor or city manager and attached to any formal quote or bid by the vendor with which the conflict exists," Speaker 2 said. The draft directs that disclosures for mayor and council members be placed on the next available council agenda as a separate item for public review, reflecting language the speaker said comes from the city charter.

Councilmembers focused discussion on approval thresholds and notification. Speaker 2 noted the council currently approves purchases of $25,000 or more; several members asked for an informational notification process for purchases that approach that level so they are not blindsided. "We would probably address you guys" if quoted costs pushed a purchase over the approval threshold, Speaker 2 said, proposing staff would BCC council with the quotes and budget source for informational purposes.

The draft also includes a local-vendor preference: businesses with a valid business license in the city or located within 20 miles could be selected if their price is within 10% for contracts under $10,000 or within 5% for contracts above $10,000, with an opportunity-to-match process for larger procurements.

Change-order limits were discussed to prevent repeated small additions that cumulatively exceed thresholds. Speaker 2 described an example structure: minor change orders up to a small amount could be approved at the department-head level, amounts above that would require the mayor’s approval, and larger change orders would require council approval. The draft cites example approval breakpoints discussed in the session (department head for small amounts, mayor approval beginning at $500, council approval above $5,000), and council asked staff to set explicit caps and limits on repeated small change orders.

Speaker 1 raised a concern about the $25,000 threshold, saying, "I think $25,000, me personally, is high," and urged more transparency to citizens on higher-dollar purchases. The group sought to balance efficient purchasing for operations with the public’s need for oversight.

Next steps: Speaker 2 said staff will edit the draft and email it to council for review; the group discussed whether to take the draft to the next work session or move it to a council vote in a regular meeting. Staff aimed to finalize the policy by the end of the year, with fallback into early January if needed.