The Committee of the Whole voted on Nov. 25 to move forward with an ordinance authorizing execution of contract PW260831 with Green Track LLC for abatement and demolition work not to exceed $977,857.28. The award drew extended debate from aldermen and a public speaker who said city staff relied on incorrect information when recommending the higher-priced bidder.

Aldermen opened debate after the clerk read the ordinance and several members raised a similar concern: the recommended vendor was significantly more expensive than the apparent low bidder. Alderman Gregory and others repeatedly asked public-works staff to explain why the low bidder had been passed over, to show documentation of the low bidder’s responsiveness, and to demonstrate how the selected contractor would meet the city’s minority and female participation goals.

Public-works staff pointed to Green Track’s prior local projects and reported subcontractor participation levels, citing examples that included roughly 10% minority subcontractor participation and large percentages of female subcontracting on certain prior jobs. Staff said the city monitors labor reports as jobs progress and that female ownership of the prime contractor and subcontractor was considered in the evaluation.

Sam Schafer of Schafer Excavating, who addressed the committee during public comment, said his company was the low bidder and disputed staff statements that his firm lacked minority participation or union status. Schafer said he has documentation showing union standing and an asbestos subcontractor that is female-owned and minority-owned, and argued the higher-priced recommendation would cost taxpayers roughly $303,000 more than his bid. "This is a big job. We were low bidder again," Schafer said, adding that the city’s apparent errors had real consequences for demolition capacity and taxpayers. He requested that public works follow up with a report and documentation.

Several aldermen said the price difference and the lack of publicly shared detail about the low-bid disqualification merited follow-up. Alderman Notriano asked whether bidders were asked to project minority/female participation up-front or whether the city gives weight to past performance; staff responded that labor reporting is collected during the job and that timing and craft availability affect on-the-ground hiring. Alderman Williams and others asked corporation counsel to review the procurement record; corporation counsel agreed to meet with staff and return with clarifying information.

Despite the debate and requests for additional documentation, the committee took a voice vote and the motion carried. The chair noted that a formal award is not final until the city council votes; aldermen requested that public works provide follow-up documentation on why the lower bid was not selected and on actual minority/local participation metrics for this contract.

What it means: The exchange highlights a recurring tension in municipal procurement: balancing lowest-price procurement against prior performance, local hiring and supplier diversity goals. Aldermen seeking clearer procurement transparency asked for post-award reporting and for corporation counsel to review the record.