Rul­ing fa­vors col­lege district in bid process

Board treated firm’s pitch to man­age L.A. County bond pro­gram fairly, judge says.

Los Angeles Times - - CITY & STATE - By Teresa Watan­abe

The Los An­ge­les Com­mu­nity Col­lege District acted prop­erly in se­lect­ing a man­ager for its multi­bil­lion­dol­lar con­struc­tion bond pro­gram, a judge has ruled, dis­miss­ing al­le­ga­tions of un­fair treat­ment by the los­ing bid­der.

Los An­ge­les County Su­pe­rior Court Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff ruled ear­lier this month that AECOM Tech­ni­cal Ser­vices Inc. failed to prove its claims that the col­lege district abused its dis­cre­tion and vi­o­lated its own pro­cure­ment pro­ce­dures in award­ing a five-year, $86-mil­lion con­tract to Ja­cobs Project Man­age­ment Co. in 2017.

Since 2001, vot­ers have au­tho­rized the district to raise $9 bil­lion in four bond mea­sures; about $4.5 bil­lion re­mains, most of it from Mea­sure CC that was ap­proved in 2016. The district is us­ing the funds to ren­o­vate ag­ing build­ings, con­struct new ones and mod­ern­ize tech­nol­ogy and in­fra­struc­ture on all nine cam­puses.

AECOM ar­gued that the district had failed to prop­erly eval­u­ate the bids and ul­ti­mately de­prived tax­pay­ers of the best value for their dol­lars.

The com­pany said its ini­tial bid was $15 mil­lion lower than Ja­cobs’ bid but that only Ja­cobs had a chance to re­vise its of­fer.

Beckloff ruled, how­ever, that the district’s re­quest for pro­pos­als did not re­quire it to ne­go­ti­ate with all par­ties and that AECOM had not ob­jected to that lan­guage. He also said Ja­cobs earned the high­est over­all score and ruled that the state con­tract law cited by AECOM did not ap­ply to the re­quest for pro­posal at is­sue.

“The District did not act in an ar­bi­trary or capri­cious fash­ion ...[it] com­plied with the terms of the RFP,” Beckloff wrote.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.