CORRESPONDENCE- 25A - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

TRA - November 18, 2014 Maria Huizar Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana ("City") 20 Civic Center Plaza, 8`h Floor Santa Ana, CA 92702 Re: City Council Agenda Item No. 25F Agreement with All Vision, LLC for Outdoor Advertising Management Services Dear Ms. Huizar, The purpose of this letter is to express our concerns with the staff recommendation and the proposed agreement for the above referenced item. As noted in the staff report, the City received two proposals in response to the Request for Proposal (RFP) for Outdoor Advertising Management Services issued on May 30, 2014. 1 am the Managing Director for TR Advisors, LLC, who submitted the other proposal in response to the RFP. We have a number of issues with the proposed agreement: The proposed agreement provides that All Vision may develop, construct and maintain signs on City property. This right to be granted to All Vision directly contradicts the RFP. The RFP states in the Introduction that the successful proposer "may not be directly affiliated with any company whose primary business is the construction or operation of outdoor advertising products." The proposed agreement, with an expanded scope now allowing this dual role of independent consultant and interested developer, cannot be the product of this solicitation. The RFP, as issued, seeks an independent consultant to advise the City and work solely on its behalf in the policies, plans and management for its outdoor advertising program. TRA proposed to fill only that advisory role and was deemed qualified. We stand ready and able to negotiate a contract based on our response to this RFP. If the City, despite the potential conflicts, now wants both an advisor and developer, a new RFP must be issued to open the development piece to the competitive process. To now allow the proposer to develop sites not only flies in the face of the independent advisory role but also introduces an opportunity specifically excluded from the RFP and never opened to full competition. The dual role presents a potential conflict of interest which the RFP, as issued, sought to avoid. The City is allowing All Vision to provide consulting services which gives it a significant role in setting policy for an Outdoor Advertising Strategic Plan, while at the same time granting All Vision the right to develop sites per its own recommendations. o This would violate Section 10365.5 of the California Public Contract Code which states: "No contractor who has been awarded a consulting services agreement may submit a bid for, nor be awarded a contract for the provision of services, procurement of goods or supplies or any other related action which is required, suggested or otherwise deemed appropriate in the end product of the original consulting services contract." Although this code is applicable to State agencies, the wisdom of this good government policy should be followed. www.tradvisors.com