Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council moves to re-evaluate RFP after disclosed conflict and defers parking-fund ordinance to budget review
Summary
After the city attorney advised a conflict of interest in an evaluator panel, the council agreed to appoint a new evaluation panel; separately, councilmembers debated and voted to bring changes to the Special Parking Revenue Fund back with the mayor’s budget rather than adopt an ordinance immediately.
The council heard two procedural but consequential items on April 14: a procurement conflict in an evaluation panel for a city program and a contentious debate over the Special Parking Revenue Fund.
Assistant City Attorney Anthony Alburn said one outside evaluator discovered a contractual relationship raising a state conflict under Government Code section 1090 and recommended appointing a new evaluation panel to review the original proposals. Jessica Hines of the city attorney’s office explained staff could fund portions of proposals, but the legal remedy Alburn proposed was a fresh panel to ensure a clean process. Council adopted a motion (7a as amended) to proceed with a new evaluation panel and to include additional oversight from CLA or CAO.
On parking funds, Councilmember Walters and others argued for limiting eligible uses of the Special Parking Revenue Fund and urged sending a letter to the mayor while bringing any ordinance back with the budget. Opponents said acting before the mayor’s budget is released could create a funding shortfall; votes on procedural points passed (a prior-question motion and removal from committee passed by 8–3) and the council later approved bringing the ordinance back concurrent with the budget (recorded as 8 ayes, 2 noes). The council did not adopt the underlying ordinance at this meeting but directed further action during the budget process.
