Action 18.
Regular Board of Supervisors Meeting
Procurement
- Meeting Date:
- 12/20/2011
- Title:
- Local Vendor Preference Policy
- Submitted By:
- Dave Seward, Procurement
- Department:
- Procurement
Presentation:
No A/V Presentation
Recommendation:
Approve
Document Signatures:
BOS Signature NOT Required
# of ORIGINALS
Submitted for Signature:
Submitted for Signature:
0
NAME
of PRESENTER:
of PRESENTER:
Dave Seward
TITLE
of PRESENTER:
of PRESENTER:
Procurement Director
Docket Number (If applicable):
Mandated Function?:
Federal or State Mandate
Source of Mandate
or Basis for Support?:
or Basis for Support?:
Agenda Item Text:
Adopt Resolution 11-58 implementing the County’s trial local vendor preference policy into a permanent county procurement policy.
Background:
On December 14, 2010, the Board of Supervisors adopted a trial local vendor preference policy, Resolution No. 10-88, allowing for a 3% credit applicable to purchases on which transaction privilege taxes (TPT) are paid and not to exceed $2,500 on any single solicitation. At the time the trial policy was adopted, the Board of Supervisors requested that the Procurement Director provide an analysis of the results of the policy at its conclusion.
During the term of the trial policy there was only one instance whereas the trial local vendor preference policy was a factor in determining the award of a contract. As a result of Request for Price Quote (RFPQ) No. 12-02-FMD-04 Lawley Motors of Sierra Vista, AZ was awarded a contract for two (2) Fleet Vehicle Trucks. A bid tabulation is attached which demonstrates how the local vendor preference was given on this particular solicitation. The fiscal impact of awarding this solicitation to a local vendor was $689.28.
As previously indicated to the Board of Supervisors during the trial policy work session, local vendor preference is most commonly a factor in the award of bids for fleet vehicles. The bid results during the trial policy period were analyzed by the Procurement Director. The analysis demonstrated that a difference in the local vendor preference credit amount from 3 to 5 percent would not have been a factor in any bid award. The analysis did show that there were several contracts awarded to local businesses throughout the trial period whereas the local business was the low bidder or when there was enough competition to only solicit bids from local businesses. Examples include:
• Contract with Buck Lewis for Engineering - $4,300
• Contract with DeAnda Construction for Concrete Wall Repair - $25,831
• Contract with Cochise Motor Sports for Sheriff ATV Vehicles – $28,707
• Contract with K E & G Construction for Culverts - $254,629
• Romero’s Roofing for County Roofing Repairs - $32,500
The trial local vendor preference policy will expire on December 31, 2012. At this point and time, the Board of Supervisors may choose to implement one of the following options:
• Extend the trial local vendor preference policy term beyond December 31, 2012,
• Adopt a resolution making the local vendor preference policy a permanent policy, or
• Allow the trial local vendor preference policy to expire with no further action.
It is the County Administrator’s recommendation that the Board approve a resolution making the local vendor preference policy a permanent policy.
During the term of the trial policy there was only one instance whereas the trial local vendor preference policy was a factor in determining the award of a contract. As a result of Request for Price Quote (RFPQ) No. 12-02-FMD-04 Lawley Motors of Sierra Vista, AZ was awarded a contract for two (2) Fleet Vehicle Trucks. A bid tabulation is attached which demonstrates how the local vendor preference was given on this particular solicitation. The fiscal impact of awarding this solicitation to a local vendor was $689.28.
As previously indicated to the Board of Supervisors during the trial policy work session, local vendor preference is most commonly a factor in the award of bids for fleet vehicles. The bid results during the trial policy period were analyzed by the Procurement Director. The analysis demonstrated that a difference in the local vendor preference credit amount from 3 to 5 percent would not have been a factor in any bid award. The analysis did show that there were several contracts awarded to local businesses throughout the trial period whereas the local business was the low bidder or when there was enough competition to only solicit bids from local businesses. Examples include:
• Contract with Buck Lewis for Engineering - $4,300
• Contract with DeAnda Construction for Concrete Wall Repair - $25,831
• Contract with Cochise Motor Sports for Sheriff ATV Vehicles – $28,707
• Contract with K E & G Construction for Culverts - $254,629
• Romero’s Roofing for County Roofing Repairs - $32,500
The trial local vendor preference policy will expire on December 31, 2012. At this point and time, the Board of Supervisors may choose to implement one of the following options:
• Extend the trial local vendor preference policy term beyond December 31, 2012,
• Adopt a resolution making the local vendor preference policy a permanent policy, or
• Allow the trial local vendor preference policy to expire with no further action.
It is the County Administrator’s recommendation that the Board approve a resolution making the local vendor preference policy a permanent policy.
Department's Next Steps (if approved):
Follow through with the direction/decision provided by the Board of Supervisors.
Impact of NOT Approving/Alternatives:
If the local vendor preference policy is not extended or made permanent, local vendors will not be afforded a preference on County purchases.
To BOS Staff: Document Disposition/Follow-Up:
Resolution will be hand carried to Katie Howard when signed and received by CAO.