Legislative Matter

Miami-Dade Legislative Item
File Number: 170534

Printable PDF Format

Clerk's Official Copy

File Number: 170534

File Type: Resolution

Status: Adopted

Version: 0

Reference: R-391-17

Control: County Commission

File Name: EXTEND A CONTRACT OR TO AUTHORIZE ADDITIONAL SCOPE

Introduced: 2/28/2017

Requester: NONE

Cost:

Final Action: 4/4/2017

Agenda Date: 4/4/2017

Agenda Item Number: 11A12

Notes:

Title:

RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COUNTY MAYOR OR COUNTY MAYOR’S DESIGNEE TO CONDUCT COMPETITIVE SELECTIONS WHENEVER FEASIBLE INSTEAD OF EXPANDING THE TERM OR SERVICES UNDER EXISTING CONTRACTS, TO INCLUDE IN ANY RECOMMENDATION TO THIS BOARD FOR THE EXPANSION OF TERM OR SERVICES UNDER EXISTING CONTRACTS A WRITTEN JUSTIFICATION OF WHY A COMPETITIVE PROCESS IS NOT FEASIBLE, TO INCLUDE TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE IN ANY SUCH PROPOSED EXPANSION OF TERM OR SERVICES ANY REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THIS BOARD SUBSEQUENT TO THE INITIAL CONTRACT, AND TO REPORT TO THIS BOARD IN THE RECOMMENDATION WHICH REQUIREMENTS WERE ADOPTED AND REJECTED

Indexes:

CONTRACT

Sponsors:	Barbara J. Jordan, Prime Sponsor
	Daniella Levine Cava, Co-Sponsor

Sunset Provision: No

Effective Date:

Expiration Date:

Registered Lobbyist:

None Listed

Legislative History
Acting Body	Date	Agenda Item	Action	Sent To	Due Date	Returned	Pass/Fail

Board of County Commissioners	4/4/2017	11A12	Adopted				P

Government Operations Committee	3/14/2017	2B	Forwarded to BCC with a favorable recommendation				P
REPORT:	Assistant County Attorney Eddie Gonzalez read into the record the title of the foregoing proposed resolution. Commissioner Sosa expressed her concerns regarding the foregoing proposed resolution and inquired how the item would impact the County’s existing procurement process. Ms. Tara Smith, Director of the Internal Services Department (ISD) explained that while she was still in the process of reviewing the foregoing proposed resolution, she believed the item sought to add an additional layer of review for contracts before they came before the Board of County Commission (BCC) for approval. She noted her commitment to streamlining the procurement process to make it more efficient and requested additional time to meet with the sponsor, Commissioner Jordan, to gain a better understanding of the pools the item would apply to. Ms. Smith proceeded to review Sections 3 and 4 of the foregoing proposed resolution in an attempt to explain the intent of the item. Commissioner Sosa commented on the complexity of legal language and spoke about the Board of County Commission’s (Board) desire to eliminate all legacy contracts to ensure a more competitive and fair procurement process. She requested the foregoing proposed resolution be deferred to allow the sponsor additional time to meet with staff to clarify the intent/language of the foregoing proposed resolution. Commissioner Martinez asked for clarification from the County Attorney’s Office about the difference between the foregoing proposed resolution and legislation already in place which required staff and the administration to negotiate all contracts. He noted on May 3, 2005, July 6, 2006 and January 24, 2012 Deputy Mayor Edward Marquez addressed legislation which required staff and the administration to negotiate all contracts with an option to renew; and noted that then ISD Director, Mr. Lester Sola, confirmed that the legislation was applicable to all contracts. Assistant County Attorney David Murray explained that the foregoing proposed resolution contained additional reporting requirements and the opportunity for staff to inform the Board of situations where specific contracts such as Wage and Small Business contracts could not be negotiated due to governing ordinances. Commissioner Martinez argued that the existing legislation already included a written justification component and spoke about the Board’s commitment to protecting and promoting local vendor participation in the County’s procurement processes as evident in the numerous ordinances in place. He pointed out that despite the presence of legislation; problems persist due to the lack of adherence and enforcement by the Board. Commissioner Martinez stated that he would support the deferral of the item with the hopes that it would effectuate change. Commissioner Monestime recognized the intent and limitations of the foregoing proposed resolution and voiced his support for the item based on the fact that it sought to reinforce existing legislation. Commissioner Sosa informed her colleagues that she was currently working with the County Attorney’s Office to draft legislation to improve the County’s existing procurement process by reviewing and redefining existing definitions such as those for local vendors. She spoke about her experience and role on the Procurement Reform Taskforce which resulted in such positive improvements to the County’s procurement policies that the County was recognized for its reform initiatives. Commissioner Suarez suggested his colleagues consider including a resident requirement component for local vendors when revising the local vendor definition. Commissioner Martinez inquired from his colleague, Commissioner Sosa, if she would consider voting to forward the foregoing proposed resolution to the BCC to allow the sponsor the opportunity to refine the item. Commissioner Sosa stated she would prefer to defer the item. It was moved by Commissioner Sosa that the foregoing proposed resolution be deferred. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Martinez and upon being put to a vote, the motion failed by a vote of 2-3 (Chairman Moss, Commissioners Monestime and Suarez voted “no”.) There being no further comments or objections, the members of this Committee proceeded to take a vote on the foregoing proposed resolution as presented. Commissioner Suarez clarified that the foregoing resolution was forwarded to the BCC with a favorable recommendation, in response to Commissioner Sosa’s question. Chairman Moss spoke about creating a comprehensive procurement package which could be used to promote discussion and reform. Deputy Mayor Edward Marquez reassured the Committee members that both staff and the administration were committed to improving the procurement process and requested Commission sponsors collaborate with the County Attorney’s Office to facilitate departmental and administrative input when drafting legislation/reform. Chairman Moss reviewed the role of the County Attorney’s Office in drafting legislation and reiterated his belief that the most efficient mechanism available for discussing and overcoming the challenges affecting the County’s procurement process was to develop a workshop format to identify issues followed by a comprehensive approach for reform.

County Attorney	2/28/2017		Assigned	David M. Murray	3/1/2017

County Attorney	2/28/2017		Referred	Government Operations Committee	3/14/2017

Legislative Text

TITLE
RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COUNTY MAYOR OR COUNTY MAYOR�S DESIGNEE TO CONDUCT COMPETITIVE SELECTIONS WHENEVER FEASIBLE INSTEAD OF EXPANDING THE TERM OR SERVICES UNDER EXISTING CONTRACTS, TO INCLUDE IN ANY RECOMMENDATION TO THIS BOARD FOR THE EXPANSION OF TERM OR SERVICES UNDER EXISTING CONTRACTS A WRITTEN JUSTIFICATION OF WHY A COMPETITIVE PROCESS IS NOT FEASIBLE, TO INCLUDE TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE IN ANY SUCH PROPOSED EXPANSION OF TERM OR SERVICES ANY REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THIS BOARD SUBSEQUENT TO THE INITIAL CONTRACT, AND TO REPORT TO THIS BOARD IN THE RECOMMENDATION WHICH REQUIREMENTS WERE ADOPTED AND REJECTED

BODY
WHEREAS, it is the policy of Miami-Dade County that goods and services are to be procured through competitive processes except where competition is not in the best interests of Miami-Dade County; and
WHEREAS, competition ensures that the County receives the best quality goods and services at the best price; and
WHEREAS, competition allows more firms more opportunities to participate in Miami-Dade County contracts; and
WHEREAS, contracts typically provide for a limited duration and for a limited scope of services; and
WHEREAS, often, Miami-Dade County staff seeks to have contracts extended beyond the original duration, which frustrates the purposes of competition; and
WHEREAS, often, Miami-Dade County defines the scope of projects expansively and following award of the contract, seeks to expand the scope of services to be provided under the agreement (the �Additional Scope�) in lieu of competitive bidding for the Additional Scope by, for example, authorizing services at new locations, authorizing new goods or services, or allowing concessionaires to operate locations for which they had no competed, and
WHEREAS, existing contracts may not include legislative requirements passed by this Board of County Commissioners after such contracts were entered into, such as requirements related to labor peace, employee wages, local hiring, or other requirements; and
WHEREAS, authorizing Additional Services in such agreements without requiring the contractor to abide by the legislative requirements now in effect frustrates the purposes of this Board,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
Section 1. The whereas clauses above are incorporated herein as legislative findings and describe the purpose of this Resolution.
Section 2. The County Mayor or County Mayor�s Designee is hereby directed to conduct competitive procurements for contracts whenever feasible. For the purposes of this Resolution, the term Contract shall be include any contract, agreement, lease, or concession agreement whereby the County purchases goods, services, construction contractors, architects/engineers, lessees, or concessionaires.
Section 3. The County Mayor or County Mayor�s Designee shall, in any item presented to this Board seeking to extend a contract or to authorize Additional Scope shall provide specific findings of fact as to why the provision of goods and services through competition instead of via an extended contract or via adding Additional Scope is not feasible. These findings of fact shall be set forth in a separate portion of the Mayor�s Memorandum to this Board accompanying such item.
Section 4. The County Mayor or County Mayor�s designee shall seek to include in any Contract modification, amendment, or change order extending or adding Additional Scope to a Contract, and which requires approval by this Board, to include, as a condition of extension or addition that the Contract be amended to include all then current requirements of this Board as pertains to the type of County contract or agreement being extended or amended, including but not limited to, Living Wage, Responsible Wage, Labor Peace, Community Workforce, and Community Small Business Enterprise/Community Business Enterprise/Small Business Enterprise goals.� In the event that the County Mayor or County Mayor�s designee does not or is unable to include such requirements in return for such proposed extension or amended, the County Mayor or County Mayor�s designee shall specifically inform the Board of the reasons such requirements were not included, including the efforts made by the County Mayor or County Mayor�s designee to include such requirements.
Section 5. Contracts which are extended or expanded by this Board which are not in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution shall be nonetheless effective. This Resolution is not intended to create any cause of action for any third party. This Resolution is applicable solely with respect to extensions or additions to Contracts which require the approval of this Board.