|
|
|
City Council |
|
Oscar Leeser |
Peter Svarzbein, District 1 |
|
|
Mayor |
Larry Romero, District 2 |
|
|
|
Emma Acosta, District 3 |
|
|
|
Carl L. Robinson, District 4 |
|
|
Tommy Gonzalez |
Michiel R. Noe, District 5 |
|
|
City Manager |
Claudia Ordaz, District 6 |
|
|
|
Lily Limón, District 7 |
|
|
|
Cortney Carlisle Niland, District 8 |
|
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES COUNCIL CHAMBERS January 11, 2016 |
|
|
|
The City Council met at the above place and date. Meeting was called to order at 11:30 a.m. Mayor Oscar Leeser present and presiding and the following Council Members answered roll call: Peter Svarzbein, Emma Acosta, Carl Robinson, Michiel Noe, Claudia Ordaz, Lilia Limon and Cortney Niland. Larry Romero requested to be excused |
|
|
|
|
AGENDA |
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Discussion and action on Low Income Housing Tax Credit evaluation process for 9% tax credit developments.
Ms. Veronica Soto, Director of Community and Human Development, presented a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file in City Clerk’s Office).
Mayor Leeser gave an introductory explanation of the item and the timelines as briefed by Veronica Soto, Director of Community and Human Development.
Mayor Leeser explained his reasoning for supporting the issuance by City Council of letters of support for all applicants.
Representative Niland agreed with the Mayor on allowing HCAP to participate in the noncompetitive category and on issuing letters of support to each and every applicant in the private sector competitive category.
Representative Niland questioned, “Is the Northgate project on hold due to flood plain issue?”
Mr. Tommy Gonzalez, City Manager, replied, “Northgate is not participating this year due to the flood plain issues.”
Representative Niland commented, “The Northgate project will be a priority project once it is eligible.”
Representative Niland questioned Ms. Soto on how the money is awarded by the State.
Representative Acosta questioned why HCAP should not be included in the competitive category?
Mr. Gerald Cichon, Chief Executive Officer for Housing Authority went over his understanding of the State awards.
Mayor Leeser questioned Mr. Cichon on prior year project applications and discussed the impact of application deadlines this year.
Representative Niland discussed projects with Mr. Cichon.
Mayor Leeser discussed a strategy for the El Paso community to win four projects.
Representative Niland stated, “City Council cannot make commitments for the future. The rationale is to make the most projects available for the City.”
Mr. Cichon stated, “The City needs to have a public housing policy.”
Representative Acosta stated, “We do need to work with the school districts for a redevelopment plan for the area, encompassing the infrastructure of closed schools. The closed schools can create blight with our aging population; we need more affordable homes for the elderly.” She would like to create a committee to set up a strategic plan. She also stated, “We also need housing around the transit oriented centers.”
Mayor Leeser replied, “Mr. Cichon does have a plan and I have seen it.” He agreed we need a Blue Ribbon Committee to develop a strategic plan for the City.
Representative Acosta stated, “We need to include the private sector. We need housing for the disabled.”
Representative Niland wanted to be sure Mr. Cichon is pulling his applications for the regional competitive category.
Mr. Cichon agreed he would pull them.
Representative Robinson stated, “9% for next year is, and will be, dedicated to the Northgate project.” He wanted to be clear on that.
Representative Robinson questioned, “Can the private sector compete in the 4% category?”
Ms. Soto replied, “Yes, but it is fiercely competitive on the 9%. The 4% is generally used for rehabs.”
Representative Robinson wanted all the money for both 9% and 4% to stay in El Paso.
Ms. Soto explained how the scoring system works and the importance of a letter of support for any applicant to get 17 points. Then the TDHCA criteria fulfills the rest of the scoring points.
Mayor Leeser commented on the importance of expanding the affordable housing units.
Representative Robinson asked, “Is there a difference between the residents in public housing and in tax credit affordable housing?”
Mr. Cichon answered, “The HCAP families tend to be in the under 30% income category or the elderly and disabled.”
Representative Robinson asked, “Can a Section 8 resident live in tax credit affordable housing?”
Mr. Cichon replied, “5,400 families in Section 8 most live in private developments.”
Representative Ordaz agreed with the Mayor’s proposal to keep the most dollars in El Paso. She confirmed with Mr. Cichon that HCAP would not compete in the regional category.
Mr. Cichon replied, “Correct. This year HCAP will not compete.”
Representative Ordaz questioned Ms. Soto on using the scoring criteria to evaluate projects.
Ms. Soto stated, “From a staff and developer point, it is easier not to use the criteria.”
Ms. Soto stated, “The criteria was changed this year in response to criticism from developers about the general nature of the criteria. This year’s criteria was more specialized.”
Representative Ordaz brought up the TDHCA meeting from last year about Tays and Krupp developments that are over budget. She asked Mr. Cichon to explain.
Mr. Cichon replied, “TDHCA was worried about a Dallas lawsuit. December 31, 2016 is the deadline for the project and HCAP plans to meet it.”
Mr. Cichon wants City Council to focus on the number of families served as a criteria. El Paso is number two for urban poverty in the U.S.
Representative Ordaz recommended, “Bring affordable housing into the infill development policy.”
Representative Svarzbein agreed with Representative Ordaz about incentives to encourage families to reside toward the center of town. He urged that we create spaces and places to provide most of our citizens to get ahead in this economy.
Representative Limón wants to be clear that Northgate next year will receive a letter to be in both the rehab and the new development categories. She asked, “If Northgate does not come forward, then what?”
Mayor Leeser answered, “No, it can’t be in rehab. It can be only in 9% category.”
Ms. Soto stated, “Northgate is a private development.”
Representative Limón mentioned Ray Tullius of the Opportunity Center’s concerns about El Paso’s homeless problems.
Motion made by Representative Niland, seconded by Mayor Pro Tempore Noe, and unanimously carried that the City’s Policy for this year will be to GIVE Resolutions of support to HCAP for the State Wide At Risk category and to give letters of support to all private sector applicants in the regional competitive category, excluding HCAP.
ABSENT: Representative Romero |
|
|
|
|
2. |
Discussion and action on procurement processes and procedures.
Mr. Bruce Collins, Director of Purchasing and Strategic Sourcing, presented a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file in City Clerk’s Office).
Representative Niland asked for an explanation of the difference between low bids and competitive sealed proposals.
Mr. Collins answered, “Low bid is awarded only on price. Competitive Sealed Proposal (CSP) is similar to (RFP) a Request for Proposal with evaluation factors, but it is used only for construction.”
Mr. Tommy Gonzalez, City Manager, asked Mr. Collins to explain the cost of going to e-commerce.
Mr. Collins answered, “$500,000 to $700,000.”
Mr. Gonzalez stated, “The cost is heavy on training.”
Representative Acosta asked, “Where are we on the uploading electronically of bid documents?”
Mr. Collins answered, “It will be part of the e-commerce project.”
Representative Acosta asked, “On the RFP process, page 21, where is the evaluation process that lists consensus?”
Mr. Collins answered, “The flowchart does not show 100% of what is considered because this is a training manual.”
Representative Acosta asked Mr. Collins to please provide a copy of the procurement training manual that addresses consensus.
Mr. Collins answered, “It has always been a part of the manual, but it has not typically been used.”
Representative Acosta asked, “Who sets the Policy?”
Mr. Collins answered, “Some processes are set by State law. Others, such as RFPs allow Purchasing professionals to set certain guidelines.”
Representative Ordaz asked, “Are evaluation committee meetings recorded? And, can we make it a policy?”
Representative Ordaz asked for legal advice from Laura Gordon, Deputy City Attorney.
Representative Ordaz shared her concerns about how the financial advisor procurement process was handled.
Ms. Gordon explained that objections about one procurement, do not indict the entire process.
Mayor Leeser stated, “Representative Ordaz and I agree with her.” He is concerned about how we used the consensus process for the first time ever.
Representative Ordaz does not want Council to find itself in this unsettling situation again.
Mr. Collins stated, “Council can decide to exclude the consensus process as an option for procurement evaluation. We can bring someone in to rewrite the procurement process and consensus can be eliminated from the manual.”
Representative Niland stated, “Procurement should be completely removed from politics.”
Representative Niland questioned, “Page 5, CID/Engineering doing its own bidding. Who else does that, what department? Why were they doing their own bidding?”
Mr. Gonzalez stated, “I decided that it would be centralized in Purchasing to promote consistency and because I had not seen it done that way, allowing Engineering to handle bidding.”
Mr. Collins stated, “Only Engineering was doing its own bidding.”
Mr. Terry Freiburg, Purchasing Agent, stated, “The Engineering Department developed a contracting office.” He explained how it worked.
Mr. Gonzalez explained that another reason to bring bidding back to Purchasing from Engineering is that some projects were late.
Mr. Collins stated, “We had two different standards of compliance. We needed to centralize that process.”
Representative Niland praised the centralization.
Representative Niland questioned, “Under $50,000, how are those procurements handled? What was the prior threshold?”
Mr. Collins answered, “$25,000.”
Representative Niland asked, “When was it changed? What oversight is there under $50,000?”
Mr. Collins asked, “Informal bid or request for a quote?”
Mr. Collins stated, “Purchasing allowed some departments to have a relaxed process if they have in house technical experts.”
Representative Niland asked, “Does the City Manager know what departments have a relaxed process?”
Mr. Collins answered, “No, he does not.”
Representative Niland asked, “Don’t you think he should know that?”
Mr. Collins explained the HUB process, State database.
Mr. Collins stated, “Anything over $3,000 and up to $50,000 the quotes have to come to the Purchasing Department where they are examined.”
Representative Niland wanted to know what best practices are for procurement.
Mr. Gonzalez recommended taking consensus out of the manual.
Representative Acosta asked, “If we change the under $50,000 procedure and make Purchasing do it, does Purchasing have enough staff?”
Representative Acosta recalled an incident with software that happened several years ago where a department submitted something as sole source that was not sole source.
Ms. Deniese Baisley, Senior Purchasing Agent, stated, “Originally Mr. Collins wanted to bring into Purchasing the three quote process.”
Representative Niland asked, “Is the evaluation criteria set in the Purchasing manual?”
Mr. Collins answered, “No. It cannot be standardized because it needs to be individual to the needs of the services being procured.”
Mr. Gonzalez explained he does not get into this level of detail with Purchasing or departments. He cited several evaluation categories that are common in an RFP such as price and experience.
Ms. Sol Cortez, Assistant City Attorney explained State Code and how it stipulates evaluation criteria.
Dr. Mark Sutter, Chief Financial Officer explained reasons why you need flexibility in developing evaluation criteria.
Representative Niland asked Mr. Gonzalez how we can move forward with procurement processes and have confidence that what happened with the financial advisor (consensus) will not happen again, and to what degree could or should evaluation criteria be standardized?
Mr. Gonzalez answered, “Consensus can be removed as an option.” He again stated he did not know that it had been used.
Mr. Collins stated, “In the new manual there will be no reference to consensus.”
Representative Niland wants the media to publicize:
Representative Acosta asked that the consensus method be removed and the words, “Consensus may not be used” in bold letters, added.
Representative Ordaz pointed out that what happened to initiate the financial advisor process is what is unsettling. Council was unaware as a body. One recommendation by one City representative is what initiated the procurement process.
Mayor Leeser stated, “Ross Fischer has been hired to find out how that happened.”
Mr. Collins went over the standard process for initiation of procurement and for terminating a contract. Today, he will send an email to Mayor and Council to ask them to identify someone in their offices to receive a list of every procurement.
Representative Acosta asked questions about the application of the cone of silence on procurements.
Mr. Collins stated, “The list of bidders is public.”
Mayor Leeser stated, “Nothing legally wrong happened with the financial advisor because when the termination of the contract was sent by Purchasing to Legal, the process was stopped.”
Representative Niland stated, “The suspicion came from one Council member making the recommendation and that resulted in the initiation of the termination and new procurement.”
Representative Robinson spoke of the executive session process and that someone breaks it on a regular basis to release information that should be confined to executive session.
Representative Robinson wants to know what led up to the RFQ in the first place. Misinformation contributed to that, misinformation that the financial advisor caused us to spend an extra $22 million on the ballpark. The genesis is that the bonds were not issued timely and their delay resulted in $22 million extra.
Mayor Leeser explained that the $22 million bond issue was discussed in executive session on August 1, 2013. He listened to the executive session tape.
Representative Limón agreed that what Representative Robinson identified is critical. She did not see it in Mr. Fischer’s outline, the delay in bond issuance that resulted in $22 million extra for the taxpayer.
Representative Limón asked about the wage theft impact on procurement. She also asked for training for Council staff members on the Marketplace feature.
Ms. Juliet Lozano, Communications and Public Affairs Manager answered that training meetings are quarterly between her and City Council staff.”
Representative Acosta again spoke of the Scope of work for Ross Fischer and if the $22 million bond issuance delay was to be part of the scope of work.
Representative Limón would like an established lunch break for the Monday LRCs and the Tuesday Council meetings.
NO ACTION taken on this item. |
|
.................................................................................................................................... |
|
|
ADJOURN
Motion made by Representative Limón, seconded by Representative Ordaz, and unanimously carried to ADJOURN this meeting at 2:54 p.m.
ABSENT: Representative Romero |
|
|
.................................................................................................................................... |
|
|
|
|
|
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: |
|
|
|
|
|
____________________________ |
|
|
Richarda Duffy Momsen, City Clerk |
|
