Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIPC Board Committee January Meeting MinutesMeeting Agenda Templates | © 2019 by Vertex42.com | https://www.vertex42.com/WordTemplates/meeting-agenda.html Inclusive Procurement and Contracting Board Committee Meeting Minutes Date: January 19th, 2022 Time: 4:00 pm Location: Microsoft Teams (Virtual) Link: https://tinyurl.com/m3y37pma I. Call to Order- The IPC Board Committee is now called to order on January 19th, 2022 @ 4:00 p.m. (Attendance provided based upon verbal statement for the record) • COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Wilbur Boggs, Murray Miller, Michael Morris, Jeff Rea & Keana Baylis • DIVERSITY & INCLUSION: Larry King & Antonius Northern • LEGAL: Clara McDaniels & Jenna Throw • PUBLIC WORKS: Eric Horvath & Kara Boyles • CONTRACTORS PRESENT: Nick Larson and Jeff Jensen (Larson- Danielson Construction), Matt Cain & Jered Baker (HRP Construction Inc.) & Ruben Alvarado (Reith- Riley Construction Co.) II. Discussion of Good Faith Efforts (GFE) • Goal: What needs to be changed to provide clarity surrounding GFE? o Eric Horvath: - Hopes to make process better for contractors, and meeting objective to increase utilization - Improvements can be made to make a better program for Primes and MWBE subcontractors - Still maintain competitive marketplace to prevent increase prices for City work o Nick Larson: - Requirements for the GFE being clearly defined in bid documents aids in assuring company is compliant with GFE - Would like to know whether GFE expectations go beyond invitation and advertising (newspapers, online, etc.) to MWBE subcontractors, ▪ If so, have those expectations “spelled out” in bid documents o Wilbur Boggs: Meeting Agenda Templates | © 2019 by Vertex42.com | https://www.vertex42.com/WordTemplates/meeting-agenda.html - If contractors are seeking clarity regarding GFE, can they request a meeting to gain understanding? o Nick Larson, Larson- Danielson Construction: - Has been directed to field questions to architects, not sure after that point - Possibly consider streamlining communication concerning MWBE outside of architect or construction manager Discussion Point: GFE, is it a Goal or a Requirement? o Matt Cain: - Questions and concerns surrounding MWBE goals and their availability has been previously brought to engineers/ architects have not resulted in any changes or reevaluating Goals - It’s unclear what it requires to achieve GFE, is this a Goal or is this a requirement? - Contractor ought to have a voice in the review process, what would the reversal procedure be if a contract is made with somebody else? o Jenna Throw: - Distinction between “Goal” and “Requirement” - Goals are based on availability of MWBE businesses in the marketplace ▪ GFE are a component of the Goal setting program. If a contract is unable to meet a goal, they are still able to be awarded the contract & found to be a responsive bidder if they meet GFE ▪ This a goal program, not a requirement Discussion Point: Notification Process of Rejected Bids o Murray Miller: - In discussion of rejected HRP bid, there’s a requirement to notify contractors and the Board, prior to deciding the contractor won’t be receiving the bid. This hasn’t been done. o Antonius Northern: - There’s a requirement in regard to issuing a waiver, not a requirement concerning the rejection of a bid in advance - Hope of the Goal Setting program is that relationships are made between Prime and MWBE subcontractor community Discussion Point: Challenge of Outside Contractors & Close Margins o Jeff Rea: - There’s a challenge of working with MWBE subcontractors that aren’t local and aren’t contributing to the South Bend economy ▪ Should our service areas continue to be outside of our region? ▪ Ex: January Report findings of majority contracting spend going outside of St. Joseph County - Concern lies in the ambiguity of close margins ▪ Ex: 10% price difference in bids was “good enough” o Antonius Northern: Meeting Agenda Templates | © 2019 by Vertex42.com | https://www.vertex42.com/WordTemplates/meeting-agenda.html - ODI Team is working towards building up businesses in the area, but still connecting with subcontractors around the state during the growth period of local development - Close or narrow margins, ODI Dept. makes sure to reach out to the contractor for additional information concerning GFE, space for communication is provided o Eric Horvath: - Geographic market issue cannot be changed unless a new disparity study is conducted - Marketplace will continue to be the state of IN and Berrien County, MI - Appeal Process: Timing could be improved, not opposed to providing further clarity on what is meant by exceedingly significant additional cost to the total contract cost - Considerations of GFE include the following: Totality of Circumstances, Quality, Quantity, Intensiveness/ Aggressiveness of effort o Larry King: - Contract search begins locally, but lack of availability pushes search outside of St. Joseph County - Appeal Process: Can be found in the MWBE Program Plan Discussion Point: Further Inquiry Concerning Appeal Process o Michael Morris: - If a contractor has been rejected due to GFE, why appeal if the contract has been awarded? Will the contract be taken away from the initial awardee? o Kara Boyles: - During the Appeal process, Board would likely proceed with contract signing, and begin the work ▪ Would need to coordinate the meetings between BPW and IPC, and there would be some stoppage with the initial contract award o Clara McDaniels: - Indiana Law states after the opening of the bids and awards, there is a 60-day timeframe where the city must provide a Notice to Proceed to the awarded contractor - The coordination and communication between BPW and IPC are imperative if there is an Appeal ▪ Additional conversations are needed on this o Murray Miller: - When are we going to notify the contractor that his bid has been rejected because of GFE? o Eric Horvath: - There’s no answer currently for the timing issue, it’s something we want to work out. Discussion Point: Clarity of GFE & GFE Checklist o Nick Larson: - Similar to Matt Cain from HRP, generally looking for clarity in bid documents as far as what the requirements are. What is needed to comply, so bid does not get rejected? o Jeff Rea: - How often does it occur that a contractor does not meet the goals, and BPW moves to the next contractor because of this? Meeting Agenda Templates | © 2019 by Vertex42.com | https://www.vertex42.com/WordTemplates/meeting-agenda.html o Larry King: - Likely a small number (possibly three), most projects have been awarded. We have met or exceeded the goal setting measures - GFE 2.0 Document contains checklist that Prime Contractors must agree to, ODI uses this list to evaluate compliance ▪ Mentorship-Protégé program will increase utilization and Prime/Sub relationships o Jeff Rea: - This GFE checklist has not been seen by the Board, which could provide more clarity as well. o Eric Horvath: - Feedback and improvements are welcomed by both Prime and Sub contractors regarding GFE Checklist o Jeff Rea: - The IPC Board should have input also in GFE Checklist feedback. o Kara Boyles: - At least 7 projects have been rejected as of the beginning of December for not meeting GFE. Discussion Point: Proposed Best Practices o Antonius Northern: - When bid received from M or W, but higher than what you can utilize, include that information in the bid documents - When using mass email programs, be sure the email is going to that individual - Utilize another effort outside of a mass email/newspaper ad to show relationship building - Provide as much information as possible on the front end Discussion Point: Needed Information Moving Forward o Jeff Rea: - Has been a lack of provided information to the Board, ODI providing more information could bring more clarity ▪ Is the next step for the city to return with recommendations to present to the IPC Board in February? o Antonius Northern: - Yes, continuous discussion is likely to happen given the establishment of committee, joining of contractors, and information to be shared o Jeff Rea: - New ideas from the ODI could be shared in the full Board March meeting III. Meeting Adjourned: 5:31pm Meeting Agenda Templates | © 2019 by Vertex42.com | https://www.vertex42.com/WordTemplates/meeting-agenda.html Notes and Action Items o ODI will share GFE Checklist Document with IPC Board ▪ ODI will share any new reports/ information for March IPC Board Meeting