San Diego County subcommittee reviews contracting portfolio, flags market checks and consolidation as savings opportunities

San Diego County supervisors and staff met in an ad hoc subcommittee to examine how the county's contracting policies are applied in practice and where procurement changes could save money or expand access for small and local businesses. Chair Pro Tem Aguirre opened the meeting by saying the panel would “take a closer look at where these systems are working as intended, where there may be gaps, and where there may be opportunities to strengthen consistency, transparency, oversight, and public accountability.”

Alan Huntsberger, the county's director of Purchasing and Contracting, told the subcommittee the team reviewed contracts that began before 2021 to see how older agreements line up with policy direction adopted since then. Huntsberger said that review identified several opportunities, including that “some single source contracts may be ready for a market check” and that “IT and infrastructure agreements present opportunities to reassess design, strengthen competition, and identify where consolidation may make sense.” He also said taking a closer look at spending under large as‑needed contracts could yield savings.

Huntsberger walked supervisors through recent board policy changes—including the Working Families Ordinance and Board Policies B‑74, B‑75, B‑53, and B‑67—and how those policies affect new solicitations rather than automatically rewriting existing contracts. He noted implementation metrics for construction procurements: since 2022, 51 requests for bids have included a skilled-and-trained‑workforce provision, and prequalification rounds (conducted quarterly since May 2022) have produced 18 rounds and roughly 140 prequalified contractors.

Staff told the committee that retrofitting new policy provisions into existing agreements can be time‑consuming and disruptive: amendments may require extensive negotiation and, in some cases, re‑procurements; by contrast, fresh solicitations allow the county to embed new policy requirements from the outset. Huntsberger said the county typically uses contracts that last about five years (often 1 year plus four optional renewals), meaning roughly 20–25% of the portfolio turns over annually and gives periodic opportunities to apply updated policies without retroactivity.

The committee did not take a formal vote. Supervisors asked staff to return with follow‑up materials and recommended procurement pathways that balance value, operational alignment, and small/local business participation. The subcommittee scheduled a next meeting and invited public input through the county’s fiscal‑transparency web portal.