Item 3: Ratification of Unanimous IGR Actions and Action on Non-Unanimous IGR Actions

Home Browse Search

Additionally, the provision within this bill that requires three interested bidders or proposers to state their interest prior to allowing the CMGC or Design-Build process poses an ethical conflict from a purchasing standpoint. Historically speaking we do not solicit input from a select few companies prior to issuing an RFP or ITB because we could potentially provide an unfair advantage to those firms. To enable this process and make it ethically sound we would have to advertise the possibility of the process, have basic specifications drafted so that vendors could make an informed decision, have vendors reply to this advertisement and THEN present these findings for approval. The added process would create additional costs for the vendor community, especially small and disadvantaged vendors, for a process that ultimately might not be approved. Overall this bill has negative impacts on both the City and the citizens and I recommend that we oppose. Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation Mike Penwell CS-FAC 2/23/2011 Pri 2 Oppose Comments: The $5 million threshold for using alternative contracting methods is onerous and unnecessary. Alternative contracting methods such as Construction Manager/General Contractor and Design-Build have been used successfully by public agencies in Oregon for over a decade without limiting competition or increasing costs for the contracting agency. In fact, these alternative methods usually result in better value for the agency, particularly on public buildings and facilities. Current requirements for using alternative contracting methods in Oregon are quite rigorous in order to maintain a level playing field among prospective offerors. This proposed bill would likely cause project delays and would make alternative contracting more expensive and less desirable. This bill also violates the principle of Home Rule. Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation Mark Whitmill PDD-BPS 2/22/2011 -- -- Comments: This bill would have no impact on Building Permit Services; defer to others for recommendation. Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation Jenifer Willer PWE 2/23/2011 Pri 2 Oppose Comments: While not as controlling as SB 581 (a state contract review panel must approval all alternative contracting); this bill does take control away from the local agencies in deciding how best to contract work for their local conditions as well add process to existing contracting. I see this bill as having two parts - there are specific findings that the agency must make in order to determine if alternative contracting methods may be used (including holding a public hearing on the determination) and further, an agency may not award a contract in which a single contractor acts as construction manager and general contractor unless the contract is $5 million or more. 6 | Page March 9, 2011 IGR Committee Meeting