Pasco County meeting record

Every appearance1 of 1 are in a recording

TranscriptWhat was said at each appearance is below it. Machine transcription, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 88% of 465 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.

1Sep 16, 2025
Board of County CommissionersR73Regular businessNo disposition in the minutes
Open this item →
1h 29m
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Mm-hmm. So thank you, Commissioners. We're here today to talk about the protest of the award, the timeline for this project. Yay, it's working. The timeline is that we received 11 proposals and we opened those on June 17th. On June 30th, the evaluation committee met and they shortlisted the top three high scores, which were Grant Works, Haggerty Consulting, and IEM International. On July 8th, they heard oral presentations from the three shortlisted vendors. On the 9th
of July, a notice of intent to shortlist an award to IEM International was posted on our bonfire site. On July 16th, 25, Grant Works protested the award to IEM. On the 21st of July, the purchasing director sent a letter of eligibility accepting Grant Works. protest and on July 25th we received a letter from IEM responding to the allegations made in the protest letter from Grant Works. We reconvened the evaluation committee on the 29th of July
to consider both the protest letter and the response from IEM. On the 30th of July, we received a letter from Grant Works to the County Administrator outlining additional concerns with the evaluation process. On the 30th of July, the County Administrator denied the protest to Grant Works. And then on the 8th of August, we received a protest of review by the board. The protest consisted of four major areas. The first was evaluator bias, the second was procedural
errors, the third was IEM's prior experience, and the fourth was pricing. In Grant Works protest, they alleged the evaluator bias that Grant Works asserted bias by evaluation committee members, the lack of discussion of some aspects of their proposal, and the lack of consistencies in the evaluation order, resulting in confusion amongst the committee. The second point was procedural errors. They said that shortlisted vendors were not provided a set of score criteria for the evaluation of their presentations. The
third point, IEM's prior experience. Grantworks asserts that they have superior experience to IEM in the state of Florida in regards to HUD C DBG-DR direct funding allocations. Grantworks asserts IEM had a contract terminated for default by the Pennsylvania Housing Authority in March of 2023. The fourth allegation was Grant Works asserts pricing was not compared on an apples to apples basis during the presentation evaluation phase. Grant Works Protest offered three solutions to the county to satisfy their
protest. The first was to award the full contract to Grant Works. The second was to split the award between IEM and Grant Works. And the third was to reject all proposals and resolicit the project. IEM did provide a response to the protest allegations. The county requested a response from IEM. Their written response included evaluator bias, the first point, that Florida case law states fund findings of bias must be on hard facts and not mere suspicion or innuendo. The second point procedural errors, i.e. M asserts
the questions provided to the county by the shortl to the county, by the county, excuse me, to the shortlist of proposers constituted evaluation criteria for consideration during the second phase of the evaluation. and Grant Works failed to ask the County for clarification prior to giving their presentation. IEM also said as far as the consideration of past experience that IEM has provided documentation that the contract with Pennsylvania Housing Authority was terminated for convenience, not cause or default as alleged. IEM asserts the review by the HUD Inspector General
on the was the result of a regular review and not an indication of wrongdoing on the part of IEM. IEM asserts Grantworks was not forthcoming in their own presentation by failing to mention a finding of fraud by Grantworks partner, Horn, LLP. In regards to pricing, IEM asserts that pricing was considered in a consistent manner with a two-phased RFP process by awarding to best value, not low bid. The county's response. The county reconvened the evaluation committee on 729 to review the allocations made by
both grant works and the response from IEM. The evaluation committee voted to uphold their original ranking with IEM as the sole awardee based on the following factors. Number one, the solicitation issued was issued with the intent that one contractor be selected for the implementation of the action plan. Number two, the protest letter and the response did not change the mind of any of the committee members from what it was when the original motion to award to IEM was made. And third, the intent to make the best choice for the end user of the action plan, particularly in the housing program category. Our
recommendation is you uphold the decision of the County Administrator to deny the protest by Grant Works under Section 2-124 G2 of the purchasing ordinance and award the contract to IEM. We have both Grant Works and IEM here to pursue.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
We're gonna I could I'm gonna stop you. We're gonna take a break till Commissioner Starkey gets back, so let's take a five minute recess.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
All right.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
We wanna I wanna hear it. Yeah.
Lisa Yeager
Never mind.
Ron Oakley
That's right here. We're good. That was quick.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
That was a quick five minutes.
All right. We have both Grant Works and IEM here to provide you with presentations. They both have 10 minutes to give you a presentation and then they'll both be available as well myself and the rest of the staff to answer any questions you may have. They do have a hard 10 minutes for their presentation.
Amanda Hill
Top is on the ground.
Dylan Rivers
Uh commissioners, I do have a couple of them. A couple of handouts.
Ron Oakley
Uh call for a vote.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay. take a motion got
Jack MarianoVice Chair
a motion a second already
Kathryn StarkeyChair
all in favor
Jack MarianoVice Chair
aye aye
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Sorry, I spelt water here on official papers. Give us a second here. What are we gonna do on that?
Someone swinging cows?
Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Yeah, I think. Thank you.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
No, sorry just candy.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
No, I won't.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
A battery copy here.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Okay. Hey Mike, can you run somebody up with napkins? Paper house? Right here. They're coming
Kathryn StarkeyChair
now.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Please. I got 'em. Mm-hmm.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Thank you.
Dylan Rivers
Is there still in the
She does. There's plenty.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
That's probably the first time that place has been cleaned in a while. Yeah,
Kathryn StarkeyChair
I
was
just thinking that. Is that yours or mine? That's not mine. That's not mine. Go ahead, Rodley.
Okay, we are ready.
Dylan Rivers
Ready to go?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yeah.
Dylan Rivers
Uh afternoon commissioners. My name is Dylan Rivers. I'm an attorney for Grant Works. With me are Rick Bearcloth and Holly Miller with Grant Works. We appreciate this opportunity to talk to you. Um you all know what this RFP is about, so I'll cut to the chase. It's half a billion dollars is a lot of money and there's a lot of work associated with it. So not surprisingly The two most important criteria in the RFP were qualifications and relevant experience, and that's one. And pricing too. The RFP was handled in two phases.
Um as you know, the my client was shortlisted along with IEM and another vendor. At the end of phase two, the evaluation committee voted four to three for IEM first and grant work second. Now, because it was a four to three vote, we looked very closely at everything and and we found some important issues that we want to bring to your attention that we believe affected the outcome. Um you heard earlier bias, the RFP process, relevant experience and pricing are those issues, and I'll start with bias. Um there's clear evidence of bias that that at least one evaluator
was predisposed in favor of IEM without regard to what was being presented by other vendors and the merits of their proposed. She said out loud in an official meeting it was theirs to lose, referring to IEM. And her score sheet, which is up here on the screen on the left, has nothing more than anecdotal offhand comments that have absolutely nothing to do with legitimate criteria in the RFP. They're cheeky comments and they have no place in this process. regarding the process. Vendors were supposed to be, quote,
evaluated anew, this is language from the RFP, evaluated anew in phase two, based on a new set of evaluation criteria provided to the shortlisted firms in writing with their presentation invitation. Well that didn't happen. Vendors weren't provided a new set of evaluation criteria. They were provided a list of eleven questions. And they were told to be prepared to discuss them. That's it. Those aren't evaluation criteria. And likewise, there was no scoring rubric or instructions or
guidance of any kind given to the committee telling them how to evaluate or and score vendor responses to these questions. It was just left up to the subjective interpretation of these committee members. And while that's not their fault, what that leads to is what the law considers arbitrary and capricious decisions. There's no actual objective criteria.
Yeah. And you can see that one committee member on their score sheet seemed to have no idea how to evaluate the responses to these questions. There's not a single comment at all on any of them. So along with pricing, relevant experience was one of the most important criteria in the RFP and that we believe there is a big difference between GrantWorks and IEM on this. The team proposed by Grantworks has served every direct allocation recipient currently implementing a C D BG DR program like you are about to.
with no adverse audit findings. On the other hand, in the last two years, IEM has been terminated from a contract in Pennsylvania, a significant contract, And Rebuild Florida's Hurricane Irma recovery program, run by IEM, is undergoing its second audit by the HUD Inspector General's office. And this slide shows two of the questions that were posed to vendors in phase two, one regarding audits and the other terminations. And below that are captions of information that IEM provided in its proposal
to the to the commission. or excuse me, to the committee. Now as we point out in our protest, IEM was terminated by the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency. And in its response, IEM said the termination was for was changed from a termination for for cause to a termination of convenience, pursuant to a memorandum of understanding that they reached with the PHFA. And the MOU does say that. But in looking at it closer, The MOU also says that the termination would be for convenience pending
the outcome of an audit, and in subsequent filings in Pennsylvania, The PHFA said that IEM didn't provide requested information for the audit. and by obstructing the ability to complete the audit, quote, IEM prevented PHFA from reinstating its termination of the contract for cause pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding, end quote. So however characterized, IEM was terminated, and the PHFA took over the program from IEM. And when it didn't. These
are some of the things they say they found. I won't recite them for you, but you can see these are taken directly from the PHFA's counterclaim against IEM. In terms of recent Florida experience, IEM identified the Rebuild Florida's Hurricane Irma Recovery Program under Florida Commerce. and the reference they provided to the county was an individual who to our understanding, hasn't been with Florida Commerce for a year and a half. Why not provide someone who's currently with Florida Commerce? This
slide shows recent statements from that agency about IEM, including, quote, the agency no longer does business with this vendor, end quote. Now at this point I'm going to turn it over to Rick Faircloth with Grant Works to give you some more granular detail about pricing.
Rick Faircloth
Thank you and good afternoon. Um my name is Rick Faircloth. I'm the Senior Vice President of State and Local Government Services with Grant Works. And I'd like to start out by saying that in our forty-six year history, Grant Works has never submitted a protest before. This decision was not made lightly. However, the deeply flawed and troubling circumstances surrounding this procurement compelled us to take action. The integrity of the process matters. And we felt a responsibility to stand up for fairness and transparency.
There we go.
Bear with me here with technology. So I'd like to turn your attention to the slide before you Uh your RFP specifically sought experience from vendors that had specific engagements with local governments. implementing C D B G DR projects of similar scope and scale within the last five years. As this graphic depicts on the left, the Grant Works team has exhaustive experience across the state. I am not sure. Listed zero direct Florida
Local Government C D B G DR contracts in his proposal submission. Not a single one.
It is clear that the Grant Works team offered the best value in terms of relevant experience. So now let's talk about best value in terms of pricing. Quality and value do matter, but so does price. For every million dollars spent on admin costs, three to five Pasco residents don't get their homes repaired or replaced. or those funds could be used for other appropriate county needs. The slide on the screen here shows a pricing comparison between Grant Works and IEM at
the Oral Interview. As you can see, I am's price is over a million dollars more than GrantWorks. A million dollars is highly significant, yet it wasn't discussed during the scoring evaluation, nor was the fact that IEM's proposed pro housing program delivery schedule would take a year longer than GrantWorks. Pricing in particular seemed to be misunderstood by the evaluation committee.
Now I'd like to turn your attention to a handout that we've provided you. In particular, I'd like you to look at the yellow highlighted line item here. It's called Individual Housing Programs Construction Management BCM fee.
Here, I am has added a nearly $3 million additional cost line item at the contracting phase. $3 million. That was not disclosed in IAM's Direct Housing Pricing Submission during ORALS. This appears nothing more than to be a multimillion dollar bonus IEM is working into its contract post orals.
To put a fine point on this issue, IM went IEM went from being one million dollars higher than Grant Works on the direct housing programs during orals to potentially over 3.4 million by the time they get under a contract. That's quite an escalation. So that brings us to my last slide. When determining best value We ask ourselves, how does I am provide best value to the to Pasco County. When IAM's price is millions of dollars higher, IAM
proposes to take one year longer to deliver housing relief to Pasco's citizens. And IEM's only relevant C D B G DR implementation experience is with the state of Florida, who has publicly gone on record and stated they've performed poorly and will never work with IEM again.
Grantworks offers superior experience, better pricing, and a more efficient delivery schedule. And for these reasons, We believe Grant Works and not IEM provides the best value to Pasco County. Thank you for your consideration.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Um
Uh how do we want to do questions? Let the other side speak first? Okay, we'll let the other side speak and then we'll
Christopher Lunny
I have a handout as well. It's uh it was included in the original RFP.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Second. All in favor?
Christopher Lunny
Aye.
Yeah.
Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Christopher Lunny. I'm with a Rady Law Firm in Tallahassee, Florida. With me today is Tim Liguti, the project manager here on behalf of IEM. What we want to talk about really is a question of What is what is the decision point here? And the decision point is Do we believe that the staff was wrong at phase one, that the staff was wrong at phase two? and that the county administrator was wrong during the appeal. And the answer to that is absolutely not. This
RFP and these submissions were very carefully vetted throughout this process. As we're going to explain, you know, my my counterpart at Grant Works has basically thrown four daggers, two at us and two at you. The two at you, or that you know you didn't understand the bias issue, or that somebody was biased. We don't think that's right. And the other one is that you had a process that was flawed. We don't think that's right. With respect to us, our experience is totally defensible. And the pricing is a very interesting issue because frankly, we're
going to explain to you how they missed the price concept entirely. They printed this off and ran it on 800 homes. We ran it on 1,000. So there is a delta there, but it's because they they did not do the math right. In the end. Grant Works has the burden of proof here. Brant Grant Works has to show you that this law and this process compels a different result. We don't think that happens. With respect to bias, there's absolutely no evidence of bias. One offhand comment from one evaluator.
does not connote bias in the process. In this case, this evaluator was talking about our past experience. In page 7G of the RFP, it required them to consider our past experience. And what was our past experience? Well, we helped the county with the action plan. And the action plan was one of fifty-one grants. HUD said it was one of the best they saw, so we frankly thought our experience spoke for itself on that issue. But this was a close vote. It's not a vote indicative of bias, a four-three vote. Shows that there is no outside
influence. There was no rules violated here, and there's no evidence of clear wrongdoing.
All right, the county's procedures. The county did say that the questions would be posed for oral presentation, that those would be the evaluation criteria. And that's exactly what it was. They were posed as questions, but they were pr timely and importantly considered. One of those questions was go ahead and build out a pricing model. So it was frankly a prudent process. And as far as as those questions were concerned, at the end of the invitation to come present, it said
if you have any concerns, you're not clear in any way, you can ask the purchasing director. So if they had any concern about, well, how is this weighted or how's that weighted They could have contacted the purchasing director. There's no evidence they did that. They just missed it. They didn't understand the eleven questions. We got it. We understood the eleven questions. Frankly, there was also some suggestion in the paperwork here that the administrator shouldn't have sent this back. To the evaluation committee once they had the protest. Nothing could be farther from the
truth. Why not send it back to the subject matter experts and say, this is the protest? What do you think? In this case, the county's ordinance says that the the criteria was to be considered anew, but that also the administrator here was to have a fair, transparent process. Um it's actually says a fair and equitable manner, that he was to decide it in a fair and equitable manner. That's discretion given to this administrator. And the administrator did exactly what they should, sent it back
and said, what do you think? Nobody changed their vote. And the administrator affirms the decision. Pricing.
I don't find this incredibly baffling. The pricing issue at phase one was basically hourly rates. The county had an Excel spreadsheet, The spreadsheet had some preloaded criteria for some specific positions and bidders were informed that they could augment that with other positions. It's exactly what happened. If you look at the QA that the county produced here in an amendment, there were a lot of questions about pricing. People wanted to understand that, and this was a fully developed issue. In phase two, the county did something
I thought was fantastic. They said, okay, go ahead and give us, instead of the hourly rates, go ahead and ballpark what your project is. How's it going to work? IEM ballparked it based on the action plan, and that's what you should do. IEM ballparked it at 800 homes under RRE. Um and two hundred and fifty under the manufactured housing. That's one thousand fifty. Holmes. Their pricing is based off of eight hundred. They say, well, for us it's gonna
take three years. That's not true. It's actually thirty months. But it's six more months than what they had, which is twenty-four months. Now I went to law school, so I'm not the best at math, but I gotta tell you, it's a twenty percent increase from eight hundred to a thousand. And so You know, frankly, the fact that that they're comparing us within a million dollar Delta. Is compelling. It tells you that if they actually built their paradigm right, if they read the action plan, they would have gotten it right. And their number would have
been sky high. By our projection, it'd be something like twenty-four million.
This ultimately too is a best value RFP. There's a lot of talk about apples and oranges and you know we gotta do this comparison. But this procurement instrument was overall the best value. What is the county buying when we look at this whole picture? And that makes sense. As you've heard today, this is a complex picture. It involves planning, development, there's all sorts of money set aside for hardening these communities. These folks clearly need that. And so it's a complex process where you
really gauge it on best value. So although there's a lot of talk about price being determinative, That's not the case. The track record. IM has done business in Florida for 20 years. We have 80 contracts that we've completed with task orders. Total. The IEM CEO lives in Tallahassee for as long as I've known him, and he's a former director of emergency management. If you look at the Rebuild Florida program, this was a massive program. We all know what happened
in Hurricane Irma. The hurricane went right up by 75. it caused a tremendous amount of damage. And IEM took that project over on a six year contract and completed that project. There was a one point three billion dollar program. 3,700 homes, 8,000 residents. Overall, we have this in our proposal, but you talk about all the different aspects of this company. 600 clients nationwide, a thousand contracts.
They're clearly know what they're doing. And this program was a success as well. Quite honestly. um you know, our experience I think can match with anybody. When you talk about this process, you're also talking about every home that we did over this six year period. had to go through multiple layers of approval. Had to have the county look at it. We had third party quality assurance people. It was a big deal. And so we're actually very
comfortable with the rebuild Florida program. I passed around um what really was page eighteen to our exhibit because I noticed Grant Works put us up with sort of this Hollow Florida. Yes, ma'am, that's actually page eighteen. I don't know if you all have it. In a redacted form or not, but that's really what our material showed, which was the extent to which there was work done under CBDG. Now let me speak also briefly to this Pennsylvania issue. Number one, it
wasn't a community block development program. Absolutely not. Number two. The whole issue here was a question about whether or not there was a termination of a contract. And we answered that. We answered it and they put the answer up. There was no termination for cause. There were two terminations for convenience. IEM was not replaced in Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Housing Finance Authority took that project back. If they called me tomorrow and said, Chris, how
would you describe this? I would say call it a termination for convenience. That's what it was. This never changed. It's never changed. And then if they said, okay, they took it back, and I would say, well no one replaced you. Then I would say You know, that's that's what it is. You took it in-house. That's exactly how they answered it. There's no lack of candor in responding to that question.
You are the company that you keep. And in this case, look at the seven vendors that we're bringing to the table. Many of them have Pasco specific experience. We've got Nan McKay in here, Tetretech, Terracon. These are names familiar with Pasco County because they do business in Pasco County. But beyond that, we're leveraging up. We're bringing in people like Deloitte. These are people that have tremendous resources to bear to help the county. in a time when I think the county does need
some assistance. If nothing else this morning, I feel like our client will work remarkably well with your very gifted Publix Works folks. It's it's really an honor to be able to do this work. Grant Works hasn't established any single reason that you should reverse these decisions of the staff or the administrator. And it's clear to me. as we're driving around and we're still seeing blue tarp, we're still seeing stormwater. These folks need the help. We're already, willing, and able to give it. Thank you for your time.
Lisa Yeager
Are we allowed to ask him a question or no?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
Yes, now's the
Kathryn StarkeyChair
time to ask questions.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
So um
Lisa Yeager
The other grant works has suggested that you would take a year longer for completion. Can you explain that to me?
Christopher Lunny
Yes, ma'am. Thank you so much, Commissioner Yeager, for that question. It's a great question. It goes back to the pricing issue. Remember I told you that we bid the pricing based on your action plan. And so that was 1,050 structures. That would take us in our estimate, and these are estimates. We all know this is estimates, but that was a 30 month period, not three years. It's 30 month to do 1,050. I could probably get Mr. Legudi up here to say that, you know, on 800 homes we could probably
do it in two years or less, but that's not the action plan. So Grant Works. By our calculation and we have numbers that we can share. Um they ran their numbers off a different subset. So they they base it on eight hundred homes and not one thousand fifty, which is what the action plan requires.
Lisa Yeager
Just one last question. So uh so when you see their their chart for money here um with the the difference from like a million to three point four million Are you saying they didn't do the math right?
Christopher Lunny
Hundred percent. Didn't do the math right. That's the first time I've seen that today. Um I've I've given the board the material that we provided at the outset. I kind of came to this thinking this is an appeal and that there wasn't gonna be all sorts of fresh new information, but Here we are. So so responding to your question, Commissioner, as best I can is yes, I think the math is dead wrong, and Mr. Legudi can probably explain it better than me. Um I'm assure he's not a history major.
Lisa Yeager
Okay. The the one thing I just Y you cleared it up, but the one thing I just wanna say about the year time difference is time is money. So like if you are taking a longer time, cost of goods and services go up. Which then again, you know, we take from the taxpayer. So I just wanna make sure that You know. That's a point that you would have to do. Be in a timely fashion and
Christopher Lunny
Message received, Commissioner.
Lisa Yeager
Huh?
Christopher Lunny
Message received.
Thank you.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Uh Madam Chairman M
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Commissioner Mariano
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Yes, sir.
I I've question I have questions. I have a series of them. I'm feeling I'm feeling popular. Yeah. So when I look at the the letter from the housing agency in Pennsylvania
It is reserved to maintain the right to ab a t obligation to terminate for cause if the facts warranted such a termination for a cause. Listening to Grant works, it says that the way it was written. that they we're not gonna be able to do that. Let me just go a little further. Um And based upon the facts gathered during the transition since January as a performance I am During the transition of the operation, their operation, the ACC staff take it over? It unfortunately has become evident that the agency must terminate for cause. One of the reasons was,
or the reasons stated here, uh report dated February 23rd, 2023, is IAMM IAM had only processed 6,036 application of the 10,281 assigned upon receiving the notice in January, and still has 4245 applicators still need to be processed. Given that performance um would make sense why it's now the letter that you had sent for us to read,
you've got all sorts of different uh court cases, documents, et cetera, citing your reasons why you're justifying everything. I'm I'm a little scared that if you guys perform this in this way here. We're at a big risk on how you're gonna perform here. So the way they've phrased it. is the only reason you were ch weren't terminated for cause was because of that Memorandum of understanding was written. And it prevented them from doing so. Do you dispute that?
Christopher Lunny
I think so, uh Commissioner, and I'll tell you this. I mean, this wasn't a court case, this wasn't a litigation. This is their internal administrative remedy process. So this has been called sort of a court case, but it is an internal remedy process dealing with payment issues. And my understanding of this contract was that there was sort of a percentage payment. Um and that the parties disagreed about that. Um and and there were exchanges, there's there's a history that's laid out where there
was a letter and then a retraction, and to date they've never really done that. I don't know why they couldn't try to say there was a termination for cause, but they never have. The one thing that has come out in that case so far is that I am uh prevailed on each Every change order to my knowledge. And that was also one of the issues in dispute was the change orders.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Well so only to go back to the factual stuff that's that's just as far as performance goes. You were given ten thousand assignments, six thousand got done, means like about forty percent didn't get done. And that's what they're floating on. And this contract was started on October seventh of twenty twenty-one. And by the end of March eighth, twenty twenty three, they were frustrated so much to write the letter. And in January twenty eighth they actually wrote a letter, which was only fifteen months into a contract that I don't know how long it could have gone
on for, but Clearly there's a problem with your performance there for them to wanna end the contract, whether you say by cause or not. There's clearly a problem of work not getting done that was supposed to get done.
Christopher Lunny
So, Commissioner Mariano, keep this in mind too, which is when we were responding to that, we were focusing on the question that was being asked of us, which was, was there a termination for cause? And we answered that question. What you're seeing here is one side's presentation of this. I'm not a Pennsylvania attorney, I'm not handling that case. But I I firmly believe that there will be a different set of facts there because just like every other payment dispute, someone's gonna say you're behind, someone's gonna say you're ahead.
Um keep in mind, too, this is a company with a 20-year track record. We are looking at a Pennsylvania issue. If you do disaster recovery over 20 years, there is gonna be something that comes up. This isn't a community block race uh you know, c community development block grant program. And so I would urge you to look at it contextually. I'll see if Mr. Luguti has any other information on the
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Well hang hang on to that because you're saying I'm I'm not even referring to Grant Works at this point. I'm referring to the Whereas resolution that's here. And it it it basically it says um failing to adopt the contractually required statement of work, which included tasks, timelines, milestones, deliverable payment schedule, and program metrics, failing to adopt adopt policies, procedures governing the startup PAHAF program causing inefficiency, delayed damages. failing to pay the agreed upon out of scout
work or change order and work f and failing to refusing to timely pay invoices for contract work dating back to October 1, 2022. So this is like information that's in the resolution that you both had signed. I'm not taking from Grant Works. I'm just going from what I've got here that's signed by both.
Christopher Lunny
Commissioner, I understand that. I would also tell you that the evaluation committee looked at the subcontractor here for grant works and the US Attorney's Office um you know publication in their press release that found that Horn created an applicant file for each person with a fictitious birth date security social security number of fake signatures on legal documents.
Yeah, well we haven't been accused of fraud. So I think
Jack MarianoVice Chair
And terminated. And initially was gonna be for cause. You did a great job negotiating, or someone did. So we go so it wasn't for cause and it was just for convenience.
Christopher Lunny
And and Commissioner, my understanding in speaking and communicating with the Pennsylvania Council on this is that this matter is ongoing. It hasn't reached a conclusion that the only interim conclusion that's happened so far is that the change orders that were disputed were granted in our favor. But I don't have a level of detail on the delays that you're referenced.
Unidentified speaker
You ever heard that?
Christopher Lunny
I have read it.
Unidentified speaker
All right, I'm good.
Christopher Lunny
Chairman
Kathryn StarkeyChair
I I'm gonna have a question for you, but I think mine will be for the other group first. Commissioner Weightman.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Uh my question is for staff.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Um, all things being apples to apples for number of units, one thousand fifty, the other firms at eight hundred.
Chuck Lane
What's the price per home? I I don't know the price per home, but there were eight hundred uh homes, single family homes, repair, uh reconstruct, or elevate th in that category. The other two fifty was from a uh a manufactured home replacement program.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
So there's no way to to break out Roughly the price price price per unit. I I don't have that information, but I could. I mean I guess where my frustration is with this.
Five hundred million dollars of taxpayer money was sent down here to help Our taxpayers.
And now we ought to take taxpayer money to pay thirty two million dollars or whatever for a firm.
And the only one winning in out of this out of this whole ordeal are the firms that are gonna manage this. To me th it's it's absurd. That we have to ta spend tens of millions of dollars. To tell one governing body who gives us money to tell another governing body when it's all our money anyway on how to spend it. Um Which is quite frustrating to me. And um I don't personally have an opinion on wh who's gonna do it the best. Um
Since there's so few firms that are in this in this space. Um I I'd really like some clarity from staff on who's offering the breast the best price here. This three point four million dollar discrepancy. Now the other firm's talking about it's only, you know, a million. Want some clarity on
Chuck Lane
For more folks. So when the RFP committee got done with their work and they recommended IEM as the preferred uh the preferred vendor, we had some work to do because there were some things in their scope that we wanted to change. What what they proposed was was good enough for us to really understand that that we had the right partner. But the they were putting uh They had You know, they were heavy in some areas on st on on staffing, light in other areas. So we had to do some juggling around with that. And one of the areas in particular was the the the uh the
individual housing program. When you're dealing with homeowners and fixing their homes, you get down to a level that is incredibly detailed and incredibly staff intensive. Uh and and we're gonna we wanna have a very lean internal team. So t in in order to keep that, we needed them to go heavier on that piece. And that's where that extra funding came in. Other areas they dropped the funding. And some of the other project management type type of projects, we asked them to reduce. because we know that we have good teams in place at the county that can manage
those types of projects. So that's really where the discrepancy was. It went up in some areas and went down in other areas.
I can tell you this, uh we're at as a percentage of the entire grant We're paying our vend we're the proposal is to pay our vendor about about five and a half percent of the total contract. Uh of the total grant. I'm sorry, five and a half percent of the total grant. Uh the others that we we we don't have a lot of comparative data, but we have comparative data from Pinellas County. And they're up they're up around ten and a half percent. We got information from Lee County today. They don't have a not to HD contract. Expenditures to date, they're at about 12% of
the grant. So I think we've but we're in a pretty good place comparatively speaking. uh against those other contracts.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Can I ask a question on uh following up on your your point, which is a very good question. It's when I saw that number I I took away.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Uh thirty two million Republic is out of out of our pockets and You have to have a private firm tell us how to spend our money. I I just have significant hard have a very difficult time swallowing
Kathryn StarkeyChair
But is is that all for management of the grant or is that for some Implement. Some other stuff. Is it just management
Chuck Lane
fees? It's management of the grant, it's oversight of construction, it's casework, uh h hiring case managers, it's it's all of the things that are that are needed that we need them to do in order to keep our stuff Reporting, they're gonna provide us with a documentation we need to do. Davis
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Bacon garbage?
Chuck Lane
Davis Bacon Davis Bacon is not a
Kathryn StarkeyChair
problem about it.
Chuck Lane
Davis Davis Bacon doesn't apply to the
individual housing programs. Uh so there's no cost for Davis Bacon in that program and that's the most expensive program for them to manage. About 75% of their fee is in the single is in the individual housing program. No Davis Bacon applies. When Davis Bacon does apply to some of the projects, we plan to build that cost into the project.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Um Do you mind now if I ask my question? I in doing my little bit of research and I think there's flaws in both companies. And we'll get to talk about Horn here, the the the prod The uh It's a co-application here between Grant Works and Horn. It's just not just Grant Works. Um Mike.
My little research in IEM and maybe the others too that I I I would w is it performance based? Do we pay as they perform, because I don't want to put all this money out in management and not have the performance. Running alongside
Chuck Lane
they're gonna perform the work and they're gonna submit payment uh requests for payments to us for reimbursement.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
But there's milestones and and you know we're protected. What's
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
the change orders?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
We're protected that it's not heavy on administration before any house gets fixed. Because my understanding that's that was a problem with the state.
Chuck Lane
I mean the I
Kathryn StarkeyChair
just want to make sure we've read that.
Chuck Lane
It's a time it's a time it's a time and materials contract. Most specifically mostly uh uh hourly staff rates. That's really what it comes down to. So it's about how much time they put into the project.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
That's not my question, I don't think. Not
Chuck Lane
My question is. So so my my team's job is gonna be oversight. We are going to per perform constant oversight, everything that's delivered, all the documentation that's produced, that's the lion's share of what my team work of the work my team will do.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
That's reimbursable.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay, but my I just wanna be sure we're not paying out managed fees and not getting Houses done at the same rate. I mean I I just want there to be They don't get paid till someone's house is fixed, you know what I mean? Or That that there's some kind of matrix going along with payments and work done.
Chuck Lane
They're not gonna get paid un until work's done. Whether or not a house is completed, there may be interval draws, but they're not gonna get paid unt uh unless work is done.
Lisa Yeager
Commissioner Yeager. Is there anything in the contract where if they're not holding up their end of the bargain that we can uh terminate With them. them?
Chuck Lane
I believe so, Ms. Lloyd.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes, ma'am. We have the ability to terminate any of our contracts for convenience with a set notice, but we can terminate for cause typically within thirty days if we have a cause.
Lisa Yeager
Okay. I just don't wanna see something like we had with the jail where We're you know we're at we're needing more money and we're going back for plans and we're we're kind of in a position where we're stuck.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes ma'am, we do have those out clauses.
Lisa Yeager
Okay.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Chair.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yeah.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Say say we get we get into a contract and we have to terminate for convenience. This isn't one of these contracts where there's a settlement at the end of to get one firm to walk away and bring in another one. Or there's a a fee?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
No. But all of our contracts do have the clause that says if we have to go somewhere else and there's a cost difference that we do have the ability to go back against you if you were terminated for cost. No. I don't believe so, Karen. Was it? No, there was you don't bond professional services.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Then how then what your statement of go back against you
Kathryn StarkeyChair
We we typically write a clause in that says if, for example, we are hiring you to do a hundred dollar sidewalk and you walk away, we have to terminate you and it costs us $120 to do the sidewalk, we can come back and bill you for the extra twenty dollars.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Gotcha. Okay. Madam
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Clerk. Yeah.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
I mention I want you to really consider this. Because Look what happened in Pennsylvania. They left forty percent of the work didn't get done. They fire the letter off, they're gonna be fired for cause. These guys do a masterful job litigating and get it for convenience. And get it set into that memorandum where They couldn't then go back and even change that or do anything. Against th that whole process. Look at what we went through with rad sports. We were outlawyered. They didn't perform whatsoever
and those details weren't in the contract and guess what? We had the following. I'm gonna tell you right now, if you aren't a hundred percent tight, and I don't know what expertise you think we've got to go write this contract. But if you don't write that contract, absolutely perfect. All the way through. These guys are gonna beat us in court. Any, any call. We're gonna pay, and it's gonna be it's gonna be costly. I want this. They cited ten different court things and just the r the response back to to Grant Works protest. I mean these guys are skilled. They are gonna eat our lunch if they fight.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
I I say any contract that we do with this amount of money we got to send to like the top platform
No, I mean I want a s exit strategy it's all
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
along the way. You have this kind of cash, the it's clear the sharks are circling.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yeah. Yeah, so we need it s we need more eyes on our contract.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Anybody who wants pieces is a shark.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Um. So I have a question for Grantworks because Commissioner's if you You submitted with horn, admit maybe you wish you hadn't now, but you did, and that's what Um is on your submission and Horn is being kicked out of many states for fraud. And that's their partner. So what's happening there?
Rick Faircloth
A letter from the state of West Virginia that's a permanent withdrawal of that debarment issue that's been surfacing. But more importantly, this is a deflection of of the the prime and the primes obligation. Grant Works is the sole prime, just like IEM is the sole prime. Grant Works has never been terminated for cause in its 46-year history. We were very very forthcoming. We don't pursue litigation against our clients. We're purpose-driven, we're mission-led. We believe in what we do and we do what we say. Um
you know, we're we're we've been focusing on, you know, subcontractors and Pennsylvania, but let's look at what is happening right here in this fine state of Florida. on the Rebuild Florida Irma program. It's all over the news right here in 10 Tampa Bay. I mean during the procurement there were news investigation reports going on about the Rebuild Florida IRMA program. It's in your handout. These aren't our words, these aren't our allegations. These are just real things and real people that are suffering. So Um and I'd also like to make a clarification. The
the uh attorney for IEM Um misrepresented Grant Works in our numbers. We, of course, read the action plan, and our numbers and our estimates were based on the action plan. So I feel like there's a real misrepresentation there. There was no apples to apples comparison in the pricing in either phase, and there was total confusion about what the pricing really represented. IEM's phase one pricing. which was an hourly rate schedule, excluded like 18 or 19 of their total
positions, including the program manager, the chief of staff, and all their core senior advisors. you know, w if if it doesn't include your program manager, what's the purpose of the pricing submission? So I I would urge you all to strongly consider uh reviewing a renewed BAFO between the firms and let's really line up item for it what each firm is offering and let Pasco County get the best value for its citizens.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Chair. Yeah.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Sir, so you bid one thousand fifty homes? Yes. There was a split
Rick Faircloth
between single family homes and MHUs, yes sir.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Sigle family homes in what?
Rick Faircloth
MHUs, manufactured housing units. Yes.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
So to our staff, why can't we figure out what it is per unit?
Say bid apples it's if each firm bid one thousand fifty homes, as Grant Works is claiming they bid and IEM uh Why can't we figure out what it is per unit?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Chair.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Nothing?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Well, I'm waiting for an answer. Is someone doing the math?
Unidentified speakerVoice D
What was the map?
Oh question was a little bit more.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
to s no I want this to come from Casco County staff. Yeah.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Sir, he's asked for staff. Thank you.
Chuck Lane
All right. So so price per home.
Yes.
Okay.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
He's saying he bid the same as the other. They just wrote it differently.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
And we've got we've gotten conflicting, you know, different price sheets up here. Lutham County's supposed to kind of be The intervening body into this. What where are we at? The feature one bid, what's the price difference between the two bids? A half a million dollars? So if they're each bid for one thousand fifty units based on the split of manufacturer homes in the in the single fam What's it come down to?
Chuck Lane
Well I I am uh the their price per home. Now it's gonna it's gonna fluctuate obviously per home, but they're I I don't have the exact number in front of me, but it's about twenty-two million dollars that they are charging us for the single fam for the individual home program, and it's one thousand fifty units.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Okay, what's the other firm?
Chuck Lane
Well the other firm we weren't able to have that that negotiation about uh about where we need their their services more heavily, so I don't think it's reliable. And I and I don't have it in on off the top of my head. But we had to work with IEM to work with IEM. A after after the the prefer they they were determined to be the preferred vendor, we had to work with them on ch on shifting their priorities and their manpower because we needed them to focus more on the individual housing program. That's why that cost up.
Mike Carballa
If I may interject I don't think that's
Kathryn StarkeyChair
his question.
Mike Carballa
Carrie, if you could please explain what the selection criteria were. I mean pricing, Carrie, this is an R this was an R is a request. Yeah, it's not a bid, correct. That's I wanted I wanted to get that on the record as to what the differences were and explain why the pricing sheet at least was, I guess, one of your evaluation factors, but there are there are others. Could you please
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Yes, sir. So when you look at the totals, Carrie, what's the total price difference between the two firms?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Sir, that's very hard to answer because we did do the first round of initial pricing and then we came back and had the second round of pricing. Then we went and actually negotiated final pricing with IEM. We never did a final negotiation of pricing with Grant Work, so we don't know where their pricing would have fallen if they had had all of the information IEM had during negotiations.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
I have you an apology, Chuck. that you it didn't go that far. Just say, my bad, Chuck. I thought you knew something more that than you did. No. So appreciate that thank you. So Gary. Yes, sir.
So there's no way to really answer that question.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes sir, correct. Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Carrie What?
Explain to the board the the the R F P process because that's I think that's where they're They're confusing the sh bidding process which is what they've They've had protests recently on and the RFP process.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
So the the main difference between a bid and an RFP is in a bid we know exactly what we want and we go out and we say, How much are these clickers? And they give us pricing for these clickers. When we do an RFP, we know we want something that when we push it's going to advance slides. So but we're not sure exactly how we want to approach it or we want to see what they have to offer. So we come up with a set of scored evaluation criteria and we submit we get proposals in and we tell them you're going to be judged on X, Y, and Z for this point, this point, this point. Then when we hold that
evaluation committee, the committee has already looked at the proposals and they've given preliminary scores as to how they feel the written proposals met those criteria. The committee then discusses all of the proposals they received, and if they are happy with their Scores, they hit submit. If not, they have an opportunity to manipulate their scores based on what they've heard in the room, and that's when we have a final score. From that point we shortlist and sometimes we shortlist to two, three, depends on where there's a natural break in the scoring. If we have Several, we have three
or four that are in you know the eight high eight hundreds, and the next one down is six hundred. We don't see that one down because there's no no point to it really. So we see that natural break. We bring them back in for presentations, we provide them with the list of questions that's developed by the committee at their meeting. So when they shortlist, they sit around and they say, Okay, what else based on the written proposals do we want to see from these companies. And that's where that set of questions comes from. Yes
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
How in the world is Grant Works able to come up with a line item list like this?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Because we gave them basic parameters as to what we were looking for.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
So they're comparing it. They're obviously comparing it. Who knows to their They're line items that they have, but we haven't the county hasn't seen it. Have we seen the easy thing? They're comparing IMs. So theirs and and so our staff hasn't seen Grantworks?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
No sir, we would not have seen that. No sir. We we did not get a copy of that paper until today.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Well, yeah.
Lisa Yeager
I
have
a
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
question for someone. We can't even get a professional recommendation then on the grant work side. So this is just Hyperbole. Let's wait for a good answer.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Uh Commissioner Yeager. If Wakeman's okay with that. I'm done. Thank you. Commissioner.
Lisa Yeager
So I have a question for staff. So I feel like grant works kind of deflected on um Commissioner Starkey's Question about Horn being a little bit. Um kind of kicked out of uh North Carolina, but then IEM, you see the letter here that they didn't do what they were supposed to do for Irma. So
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes, ma'am. And as from a staff perspective, we have two companies that both threw mud at each other and it's really up to you all as the board to decide what mud you think is thicker and what's gonna stick.
We're not gonna ever find a perfect vendor that doesn't have any blemishes.
Lisa Yeager
I understand. I just you know, for our citizens like i it's just them getting back on their feet and rebuilding is the most important thing and Just thinking about the money, you know, if it's it's cheaper, that makes up our that makes up our point oh three mil.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
It's all to me it's all in the contract and what You know, make sure we dot our eyes and cross our T's. Commissioner Mariano. Yeah,
Jack MarianoVice Chair
I
mean
I I'd like to have Grant Works information looked at and verified. Um When I look at the overall Sh oh the overall sheets for the scoring sum for all this all all the numbers. When you look at All the slots going across, they're all very close. Um one point where Grant Works comes ahead as far as experience goes, there are about fifteen points higher from two twenty six to two forty one. So the scores
are very close to there. Um it's edge to grant works on experience. On the on the right-of-way.
So I'm looking at the scoring sheets and it shows the the scoring from IAM to Grant Works. Grant Works is at 241 for minimum qualifications and relevant experience out of a 250. And Uh IAM is it lower at two twenty six. The one big difference between them comes out to tab E quality, cost and controls. So I'm wondering how there's fifty points difference in your opinion to How that number comes out.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
That would be based on the individual scores by the evaluation committee, sir.
Oh, and yes, sir, that was a section that was truncated because we did have a 50 page limit and Grant Works did provide more than 50 pages, so we had to take everything over 50 pages out of their proposal. So the committee did not see the entire proposal because Grant Works did not follow B rolls. And it's
Jack MarianoVice Chair
common for you to do that?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes sir.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
All right, so here's here's the problem with the commonality of for that to happen. Now you're taking the information that would give you something.
But I I hey someone made a decision on what pages to take out and it cost them fifty points, which would have been the difference from one winning to the other.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Sir we take out if I'm we take out everything after fifty.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Pardon me. Arbitrarily. They're not just a big thing. No, it wasn't arbitrary. No, no, it's not arbitrary. It's arbitrary what pages they took out of the channel.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
That's right. It's over their page limit. Yeah it's the same thing you get in court. Anyone page
Kathryn StarkeyChair
limit gets thrown out. Um here so you know look, it was three to four or four to three. It was close. Um
So I can understand Grant Works trying to get to get in. Um, but I think some of the questions you're asking cannot be discussed because this is an RFP, not a bid. First of all. And you can speak to that about it.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
And I
Kathryn StarkeyChair
uh but here's something that strikes in my mind, something that Grant Works said, and I I think we probably would have been fine with both either one of these companies. Um But frankly When I look at the right-of-way, I think we What Grant Works is doing, they're all over the state. How much capacity can a company have? I'd rather have someone that will pay a little We'll be their big dog. And they'll pay a lot of attention to the citizens in our county.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
And that shouldn't be considered either.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Well
Unidentified speakerVoice A
sorry.
So um but back to back to Commissioner Mariano's So in an RFP You negotiate with the le with whoever has been ranked number one on price. You don't Negotiate with both one and two on price. So you're locked into if unless the deal falls apart with number one. That's the only one you get. pricing full pricing information on it. That's the way this process
works.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
So with the page here that shows the cost went up from the orals, I mean from the first set of orals to now.
Three million dollars. And you said you've had to add some things in there that didn't have in their project managers, et cetera.
Um Decision making. As far as the negotiations, I mean did you just give us give raise up our price three million bucks because they didn't have some things in there that should have been in there?
Chuck Lane
The the big thing that that that impacted that that number was they the we talked about this in one of our negotiation sessions. We wanted them to have a higher uh a higher responsibility in individual housing program. So they gave us a proposal and they told us we'll write it up for you at the ne at the next meeting and it's about total management of the contractor pool. What we didn't want as a county is we we didn't want a contract with contractors that were going to people's homes and doing the repairs. We wanted to be removed from that. So the contractor will contract with IEM on that
project. And and and they're gonna manage the contractor pool entirely and do all the billing and the contra construction oversight. it's enti they're gonna they're gonna run that program because it's so staff intensive with a lean team we we're unable to do that. So knowing that from
Jack MarianoVice Chair
the orals To the Um next meeting that you had as far as for the uh debate Did that come up at that point?
Chuck Lane
That didn't come up during the during the the uh the RFP negotiation. The RFP committee negotiations.
No. uh we did know that it would be a higher number on the housing pool. As we as we got into these projects, as we got into these proposals, and particularly when we had IEM as the preferred bidder, we
So before
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Or a so after the decisions made by the committee Yeah.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes sir. Is there
Jack MarianoVice Chair
something wrong with that?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
No sir. Because what we do is we find the best match for what we're looking for, and then we get into the actual particulars. Because sometimes we're not sure exactly what we are looking for until we get to that negotiation phase. So we look at the c overall proposals, the overall experience, and the general pricing that they gave us when we make that decision.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
I'm going to disagree with you because as he said, from what they submitted is not going to work for us, to what we want to do should have been in discussions and should have been discussed from the get-go, even in the second stage with with this project. Yeah.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Russia Yeager.
Lisa Yeager
Yeah, and this is just an in general statement is when we first discussed this, I had asked if we could be on the committee to help choose this. because it was such a large amount of money. And here we are.
I trust your process, but I also trust us as a commission.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes, ma'am.
Lisa Yeager
And we we have a voice and and moving forward, if we ever get blessed with this amount of money. I hope we have a say, honestly.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
So that is I'm sorry, ma'am. That's why we come to you with a recommendation. In a in a world where you were making the decision, when you were if you had been the evaluation committee, this protest could not have been heard by this body. We would have had to go straight to court. So there would have been an injunction. It would have been months, years before we could have moved forward. That's why we do it at a staff level to give you all the protest appeal.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Um so so this was an RFP. So now we enter into negotiations with a contract with IEM. Yes ma'am. We've done we have done that. And the contract is attached to the Okay, but we We are gonna the ones that are gonna be approved that contract, right? Yes, ma'am. That's what we're asking you to do is Well, I wanna know with that contract. if we have the insurances that I at least I wanna know if you put in what I've asked for and that is Who wait, you y I I n you
know what? I need more eyes on that contract. I need I need outside eyes on that contact. I want to do that. I just No no offense to our county attorneys?
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Madam Chairman M and that's that's perfectly okay, but you're here on a protest. You need to you need to make a decision on the protest. Okay,
Kathryn StarkeyChair
but I don't have to approve the contract.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Before we can discuss the contract, I would do it as as separate mode.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
The the only thing is I don't want this to be held up because we need to start working.
non-performant outs.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Madam Chairman, I'll say it again. Yeah. Based on what I'm hearing, you need to decide on the protest and then we can talk about
Kathryn StarkeyChair
All right, I'll
Unidentified speakerVoice A
take a much done with the contract.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
If anyone's ready,
Jack MarianoVice Chair
can we uh take a break for about 10-15 minutes? Um I want to go look to the This horn situation? And I've just sent been some s sent some email information from my assistant. looking up to what's going on there and I'll share with everybody too but I think we should look at that just to see what's there.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
I'd rather information regarding the protest be from your staff or from the uh or from the the two people The two uh the the protester and the proposer. I I I mean I
Ron Oakley
A B L side.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
I I just think you're building problems into the into the hearing if you start getting information mid-hearing outside.
Rick Faircloth
May I submit what I
Unidentified speakerVoice A
that outlawyer
Rick Faircloth
thing I discussed earlier, I wasn't.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Move to receive and file.
Lisa Yeager
Second.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
All in favor? Aye. You have copies for everybody? Yes, sir.
Lisa Yeager
So real quick a question for County Staff, just going back. So like when we hired a lobbyist and we got to hear there and that's all I said. Earlier, we're not allowed to hear these companies presentations because if it went to court Is that what you're saying?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes, ma'am, that's the process is if you all are the committee and for that lobbyist had you all decided that you wanted one company and one company protested, we would not have been able to bring it to you as the board. We would have had to stop work and we would have had to go to court. We would have had to have judges involved, et cetera.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Madam Chairman
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Mariano.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
If One of the companies doesn't like the decision, can they still go to court?
Unidentified speakerVoice A
If they can if they can find a reason to challenge your decision, but it but the protests are you have a lot of discretion in both the award and your decision in the protest.
Amanda Hill
Thank you.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
That wouldn't be a very wise move.
Lisa Yeager
Yeah.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Then they have to work with us and they're just taking more from the taxpayer. That would be a very unwise move from either firm, in my opinion.
Christopher Lunny
We have material that explains how we've got to their calculations if that helps. If it doesn't, that's fine.
Ron Oakley
Statements have to be on the record or they're not gonna be captured.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
You have paperwork to submit?
Christopher Lunny
If we're if we're supplementing the record, move to receive and file.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Let's see it and what is what are we receiving in file?
Christopher Lunny
So this is uh the analysis that we did that yielded that they were quoting on eight hundred homes versus one thousand fifty. It just explains it in more detail. Motions on the table.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Second. All in favor? Aye. I'm not sure that it could be relevant because that was a proposal and they've gone to a But it was information
Unidentified speakerVoice A
that the protester submitted and he's He's trying to do that.
Refute. Okay,
Kathryn StarkeyChair
all right. Go ahead.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Let's get it.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
You're you're Judge Kathryn right now.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Hey, I've sat on these committees when I was on the school board and it's not a good thing. They're open.
Madam
Clerk of
Unidentified speaker
Grantworks, you have a question?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Uh there's two pages, so let's let us look at it for a second, Jack. Um
Unidentified speakerVoice E
Mm-hmm.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yeah, and I and I'll have a a question too. Okay. Uh Commissioner Mariano.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Um first of all I'm sure they didn't want to see a copy of this. Um on the department letter. Um
Is it is it's what's what's the status of Horn where they find, were they Disciplined or
Rick Faircloth
or what?
They settled uh with the state of West Virginia. They paid a fine, they admitted no fault, and the state of West Virginia, as as evidenced by this letter. Dated September fourth, twenty twenty five, is a permanent withdrawal. Of notice of debarment.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
They they paid like 1.2 million.
Rick Faircloth
I believe that's correct, yes. What
Kathryn StarkeyChair
about North Carolina?
Rick Faircloth
They're They are currently delivering the state's C D B G D R program and then are in very good standing with the state of North Carolina. Um and really I apologize for the mud slinging that you commented. It's really an unfortunate byproduct of this this industry and it's it's not very nice. That being said, I am is also coming to you today with a Teaming partner, a subcontractor who's running the infrastructure program, TetraTech, that was terminated from Sarasota County's C D B G DR program recently here in
Florida, in the state of Florida. So I we didn't go down that road until today, but if we're gonna, you know, cast stones, you know, that uh it's out there. So that's why we wanted to focus on the prime contract holders, which is Grantworks and IM.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Maybe we just need it in house.
Dylan Rivers
Madam Chairman Mariano. It's not about this person or that person. Uh I wanted to address a point that was brought up by your counsel and I i I I believe it's correct that if the commission were to be involved in the selection process, you'd be recused from but that same logic applies as to why this it first of all it's not in your procurement uh ordinances or procurement manual. Why we file a protest Pointing out what we believe
were problems. And then it's submitted to the same people to say, do you think you did anything wrong? That's the same logic and the same problem. I mean we're pointing out that we think you didn't understand some things. There may have been some bias, there may have been some problems And it's given back to them and say, did you do anything wrong? wrong? The same logic applies. There were no independent eyes laid on these allegations until right
Kathryn StarkeyChair
now in this moment.
Right? It goes to you first.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes, ma'am. So the process was that it went back to the committee. The committee made their recommendation, but all the information was provided to Mr. Karbala and Mr. Karbala made the final protest denial decision, not the can not the committee.
Dylan Rivers
It's hard to tell. And the only other point I wanted to make is uh with regard to Commissioner Weightman's question, there is a way to resolve that. We'd be given the opportunity to submit a price.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Um Commissioner Oriano, do you still want a 10 minute? I mean do we do we want a 10 minute or what do we want, guys? I can't get outside. I hate these
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
question for Canturn. So because of the RFP process
And this is obviously a very unique coming.
This is a unique circumstance. And this is an RFP process. But there is no way. with with these procurement parameters that we can't go into a best and final?
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Not unless you if you had rejected I E. M., you could have gone to Grant works. and negotiated with them. But you have to you have to reject your Primary. the the number one ranked person before you get to talk to the number two ranked person.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
But then
Unidentified speakerVoice A
So you can't be number two of them up to bid against each other.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
And if you kick out number one and you go to number two and you can't resolve things with them, you can't go back to number one.
So
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
there's no best and final on on this between the two. These are qualification
Mike Carballa
based
Jack MarianoVice Chair
selections.
Madam Chairman I'd like Seth to take some time and go look at these two things we've got here.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
The operation. Okay, can you recap? Yeah, because we've gone down paths.
Mike Carballa
I'm not going to go through those.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes. Remember what oh the four because I've straight, others here have straight. Recap for us the parameters of our decision making.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Oh no I'm going. I'm sorry, Gina. Thank you.
I know, right? Nope. Go back.
That one. So evaluator bias. The statute says that it has to be actual hard facts finding of evaluator bias, not innuendo or conjecture. In this case, it was a statement made by a committee member prior to the voting. Each committee member was instructed that they are to give their own opinions. committees do have varying opinions, which is why we have a com committee based.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Would you repeat what that bias statement was?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
The bias statement was something to the effect of this is IEMs to lose. And how
Lisa Yeager
many were on the committee?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Seven.
For the procedural errors, the concern about not getting a second round of evaluation criteria. That is what the questions in the letter are for. Grantworks had plenty of opportunity to prov to provide us with questions and say, hey, is this the criteria? Is there a scoring? They did not do so, which would lead me to believe professionally that they understood the process before they did the process. That is how we do all RFPs. This was not something that we veered from our policy or procedure in
this case. That is a standard procedure for the county. As far as IAM's prior experience, that is why we went back to the committee with the concerns so that they could see the concerns and hear the con hear the the response back from IAM. And as far as pricing, again, this is a best value overall. We're not sure what the final negotiated contract with Grant Works would have looked like. It may have been higher, it may have been lower, but at this point, we do have to stick with that number one. And then we can go to number two, but we
can't go back to number one. And having the ability to look at the finalized contract from IEM. Grant Works did have the ability to look at that a as part of the agenda, so their numbers may have Reflected that they had seen IAM's final numbers as well. So we we don't have any way of knowing what Grant Works final would have been at this point.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Madam Chair?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yeah.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
So based upon what they had submitted, if I get the final, how would they stand up?
Kathryn StarkeyChair
I'm sorry?
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Based upon what Grantworks had submitted, how do they stand up?
Mike Carballa
We would have to negotiate a contract with them using the same criteria and discussions that we would have had with the other firm. And so again, you know, firms were given information on how to prov how how to respond to the pricing segment of that RFP. So they were all given that same information. They come in, they present that. As we go through, they may make assumptions. There's things that are made during the during the negotiation process where we may refine things or other details come out. Again, it's it's a portion, and so you you look at it, it it
was one of several criteria that were considered, but it was not the criteria.
You're effectively bidding them against each other if if you go down that path.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
As for pricing, to the extent it was relevant in the selection Of of The rank the the final rankings it was weighed out by the selection committee and you shouldn't be reweighing that evidence.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Not that I want to reweigh the evidence, but again, as it's been said by staff, they had to go back and look at different management fees, et cetera, et cetera, that weren't included into the bid by IEM and now that affects what's going to be done and who's going to be able to do that.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
We just did not go down that road because they were not the selected vendor. So we would have had those same conversations with Grant Works.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
I understand, but the key is you didn't go down and have that information ahead of time. Which to me is a very key part of this whole thing and what it's gonna cost us.
Mike Carballa
That's the right-of-way. It's just a point of order. We don't do that with any selection. Whether we're hiring engineers to do a wastewater treatment plant, we don't go down that path. make those selections based on qualifications and then we discuss pricing. That's that's how that's what qualifications based selection is about.
Lisa Yeager
So one thing I just want to point out, I I feel like you know if we don't go with IEM, then Grant Works already knows their prices and they can be higher than them. And then we're sabotaging ourselves. So there's that. That can happen. That can happen. So because now all the cards are out on the table. And I would hate for that to
Unidentified speakerVoice A
which is generally why we don't recommend you reject all bids. In a in a situation like this, because everybody's cards have already been around.
Lisa Yeager
Knowing that, me personally, I would uphold I am. Because I feel like we're gonna be saving our our we have no idea what Grant Works is gonna be do and then we'd be knocking out IM, we couldn't go back with them, and then they kinda s have have us over a barrel on price because they will hold all the cards.
Seth WeightmanSecond Vice Chair
Is that a motion?
Lisa Yeager
So I make a motion to uphold uh the county administrator's um decision on the uh protest.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Deny the pr protest from Grant Works
Lisa Yeager
from Grant Works.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
A second one.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Discussion. So I'm I'm just thinking about
go look up and see what these horn allegations were, et cetera. And I'm told that I can't well we can't go look at that what's outside information at this point. However We've got other outside information coming in before us that we've been able to use, just like we just got the letter from the Um I am not sure. showing how they did their bid. If I don't know. I I I just think that if you've got issues that are here, if they're real, they're real, if they're not, they're not. But This whole thing's based
upon horn as far as what's hurting these people and I don't I'm not comfortable with what we're doing here at this point.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
So I wasn't information. Horn was Grant Works subcontractor.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Right. And that the whole thing is and it's been whole all said about how bad they've been, et cetera, et cetera. But at the same time, you got other outs outside information that's come in. I think I've got some that just came online from my assistant and I'd like to take a look at it. I think we should all take a look at it.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Let me try this again. So you're you've got a protest. by grant works of IEMs. Proposal.
The four things that are on your screen is what you're supposed to be reviewing in this. the mud that has bl been slung back and forth really is not relevant. to your decision.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Let me ask this. Did the mud of Horn come out? On the Second meeting.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Yes, sir.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
So I'm gonna say that if it didn't get considered there maybe was some bias.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? No. Okay. Now I want to talk about the contract. Yes ma'am.
Amanda Hill
Just.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Um
I just
Want to be sure that we are not getting you know, I just want to be sure that we are We're not gonna be paying out without the homes being done. I need them to go side by side, the payments and the work. Right? Or as close to it as possible. Because that's what I'm hearing was the issue with the state.
Chuck Lane
We will require the work to be done. We'll we'll review the documentation. Uh we will do site inspections on on on a on a case-by-case basis too if we need to, but we will not but we will we will make payment when we see that the work has been completed. uh or or at least the work that they're billing for has been completed.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay, and then uh the question that k there there was a comment made That um the project managers weren't included in the bid. You know, did so Is the management cost gonna be different than what they told us it was gonna be?
Chuck Lane
No, we know exactly what that structure is gonna be and we'll we'll check those costs every time we pay a bill. that were being built correctly.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Any guys have any other?
Lisa Yeager
Yeah to IEM, please don't waste our money with big shiny papers colored both sides. We'll do black and white.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
That's grand work.
Lisa Yeager
I know that, but I'm telling you, we are we wanna we wanna stretch our dollars in Pasco County and I'm we are trusting you as a board. And we take that job seriously. Yeah. Make sure the money's going in the and people aren't patting their pockets and we're not paying people to do nothing. Please use our money. For our people. I want something. And please take that job seriously and not waste money like this. Yeah.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
I want to make sure when we draw this contract up that we have tremendous flexibility in terminating this contract whenever we choose.
Well don't want to I don't want to go through a court situation or being delayed or
Kathryn StarkeyChair
whatever you choose because they've gotta hire people and step up and then you can't it's gotta be for cause, but Right?
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Could be convenience. Oh just that's that was that was just was negotiated.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Yes.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
And I I just want to make sure we look at this and we have a uh we're not gonna be trapped in a situation like happened in Pennsylvania.
Unidentified speakerVoice C
Yeah, yeah. Okay, go ahead. This is Karen Lloyd, Senior County Attorney. Um senior assistant county attorney. Agreement can be terminated for cause as well as for convenience. So if the county finds that it's not in our best interest to continue with the contract, we can give them notice and get out of the contract. If they're not doing what they're required to do under the contract, we give them notice and gets terminated. So
we feel that we know from all of this discussion that it's very, very important to be on top of everything that is built to us and on top of timelines. We took that into account in drafting the contract.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
Madam Clerk. So the reason my my my emphasis on that is for ten thousand Issues that were out there with the inspections to be done or work to be done. Forty percent didn't get done and they still didn't get You know, they started out being for cause and then ended up being convenience and couldn't change it. So I just I just wanna make sure we're protected because I don't wanna fight that battle.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Um so so the contract was part of your agenda package. It has been signed by IEM. We can send it out to outside council if you wish, but My office was comfortable with it. You've heard from the senior assistant that that was involved in the team. Um I mean we could have it here if if it is the board's desire, we could send it out to to Carlton Fields and have them look it over. But um W because
this was expedited, because we were trying to get it closed off as of what you d if if you decided to Uh uphold the administrator's determination. We wanted to be sure that we could move this forward on an expeditious basis. And so we took the risk of finalizing the contract and putting it in your package.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
And Cartonfield is under our contract?
Unidentified speakerVoice A
They're outside council.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
And I th I think I think it should get that done within a
I don't want to be in a situation where we're going to be losing money money and spending money we didn't want to do.
Lisa Yeager
Okay. I just have a comment. Um I trust the county attorney's office. Um, I'd like to see the contract signed today. So there's no chance of us having court issues or things thrown at us, which is gonna waste more money, more time. I say we sign the paper, let the team g you know, go off and running and start helping our taxpayers because there's a chance that this could be go to court and then what? Wear out more money. Not
Jack MarianoVice Chair
in the
Lisa Yeager
I trust our our County Attorney's Office.
Jack MarianoVice Chair
So let's let's ask the applicant. Are you okay if we bring this out to our in council tournament bring it back for within a week.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
So what I asked IEM is would they be willing to entertain any amendments that we might have? Should we sign the contract today? And should we find that we're not comfortable with anything there, they'd be willing to entertain amendments. They would work that out between the attorneys. Like a whole other guy.
Lisa Yeager
That's good. So I make a motion to have instruct the county attorney to have the um IEM sign the contract and also to make um a note of if we have any issues with the amendments that you would be okay with that. So that is my motion.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Okay, so it let me restate your motion.
Lisa Yeager
Restate it properly.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Award the contract to the highest ranked proposer, I. Uh in a not to exceed amount of thirty-two Million three hundred and thirty-seven dollar or three hundred and thirty seven thousand one hundred and I went to law school too. What $119.29. Authorize the chairman to execute the provided agreement with IEM. and Board Records to distribute as set forth below. instructing
the county attorney to have the contract reviewed by outside counsel. And if they believe any amendments to the contract are necessary, present them to IEM for signature and negotiation.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
That's the motion. Take a second.
Lisa Yeager
Second. I d I did motion I you could somebody else has got to second it. Sorry.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
I second it. Um all in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. All right.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Um there's one more in this package you want to keep Delegate the authority to the county administrator to execute task orders under the solicitation RFP LK 251100 as stated in the agreement in the amount of as we've just with the highest ranked proposer. Um provided that such task orders are within the scope of the issued solicitation and all other requirements of the Pasco County Purchasing Ord Ordinance
have been met.
Unidentified speakerVoice B
I'll make that motion. Second. All in favor. Aye.
Unidentified speakerVoice A
Do you need the in addition? In addition, section one sixty three.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Who are you asking?
Unidentified speakerVoice A
It's in the recommended board action section.
We'll bring that back if it needs to be a little bit more.
Christopher Lunny
Bring it back.
Kathryn StarkeyChair
Okay. Thank you. That was a long one. But like I said, I think we would have been fine with either company.
With our good contract.
Okay, um we are back to the budget. Discussion or are we gonna save that for five fifteen? Oh no, we'll do commissioner items.
Ron Oakley
We've already taken care of that.

PU-25-0042

Official title

Every appearance1 of 1 are in a recording