Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Procurement director outlines causes and fixes for retroactive contracts on master list
Summary
Procurement staff told the committee about a high number of retroactive contract approvals on the master contract list and proposed mitigations including a short fiscal‑year grace period and greater procurement engagement to reduce delays that disproportionately affect smaller providers.
Matthew Hotta, Director of Procurement, briefed the Finance and Government Operations Committee on Dec. 16 about retroactive contract approvals appearing on the county's fiscal year 2024–25 master contract list and described proposed operational changes to reduce their frequency.
Hotta said about one in three contracts on the list come for retroactive approval and that many of these occur in the narrow window immediately after the fiscal year begins. He described a proposal to add language in the upcoming MCL pledge file resolution to allow a short execution grace period (for example, permitting amendments executed in July to have an effective retroactive date of July 1) and said procurement will work with departments to streamline administrative processes.
Supervisors noted that while many retroactive approvals appear to be the result of signatory processing at fiscal‑year start, a smaller set of cases occurring months late may indicate substantive problems. Committee members cautioned that retroactive timing can harm smaller community providers that rely on timely contracts and urged efforts to mitigate disproportionate impacts.
The committee received the procurement report after discussion.
