Note: The online Request to Speak window has expired.
Agenda Item
5.8 24-0056 Subject: Award Construction Contracts For Mandela Parkway And Cary Avenue Trash Capture Projects
From: Public Works Department
Recommendation: Adopt The Following Pieces Of Legislation:
1) A Resolution: (1) Authorizing The City Administrator To Award A Construction Contract That Follows All City Advertising And Competitive Bidding Requirements To The Lowest Responsive And Responsible Bidder In Accord With Project Plans And Specifications And With The Contractor's Bid For Project No. 1006066 Mandela Parkway Trash Capture Project For An Amount Not To Exceed Three Million Seven Hundred Nineteen Thousand Three Hundred Thirty-Three Dollars ($3,719,333.00), Contingent Upon Caltrans Approval Of Additional Funding, Without Return To City Council; (2) If No Valid Bids Are Received, Authorizing The City Administrator To Award A Construction Contract In The Open Market; (3) Rejecting All Bids That Were Due October 19, 2023; And (4) Adopting Appropriate California Environmental Quality Act Findings For Project No. 1006066 Mandela Parkway Trash Capture Project; And
Residents are questioning whether a possible Charter and Ethics violation based on how this matter is on the calendar may have been committed.
NO COUNCIL MEMBER should get involved, guide, direct, advertise or be involved in ANY bids, ESPECIALLYsole-source bids, whether local, regional, state or federal contract requirements that may benefit her vis-a-vis relationships and associations.
The Oakland City Administrator’s responsibility isn’t being questioned but residents are curious about
1) Why this was being advanced as a no-bid contract, as written in the proposal and
2) Scope of Work Transparency: Questions regarding why this is alleged to be needed on an expedited basis and a sole-source contract, there are concerns that how this is coming forward raises concerns about how this is written and sounds strangely like an ‘earmark'. Vendor selection associated with this item should be explored more closely.
Items from Rules and Legislative calendar from early January that are ‘expedicted’ yet on the calendar for 4 weeks but declared ‘expedited’ on the basis that come through the Rules and Legislative committees need CLOSE examination.
Residents are questioning whether a possible Charter and Ethics violation based on how this matter is on the calendar may have been committed.
NO COUNCIL MEMBER should get involved, guide, direct, advertise or be involved in ANY bids, ESPECIALLYsole-source bids, whether local, regional, state or federal contract requirements that may benefit her vis-a-vis relationships and associations.
The Oakland City Administrator’s responsibility isn’t being questioned but residents are curious about
1) Why this was being advanced as a no-bid contract, as written in the proposal and
2) Scope of Work Transparency: Questions regarding why this is alleged to be needed on an expedited basis and a sole-source contract, there are concerns that how this is coming forward raises concerns about how this is written and sounds strangely like an ‘earmark'. Vendor selection associated with this item should be explored more closely.
Items from Rules and Legislative calendar from early January that are ‘expedicted’ yet on the calendar for 4 weeks but declared ‘expedited’ on the basis that come through the Rules and Legislative committees need CLOSE examination.