Candidates: Limit commission's authority on awarding contracts
BY ANDRES VIGLUCCI, Miami Herald, October 16, 2004

aviglucci@herald.com

LINK


When two communications giants bid on a contract to operate pay phones in Miami-Dade County facilities a few years ago, the right call for taxpayers and the County Commission seemed crystal clear: AT&T offered $50 million over five years, $31 million more than BellSouth.

But BellSouth deployed a small army of politically connected lawyers and lobbyists, and for the next three years commissioners delayed, debated and nearly derailed AT&T's bid.

In the end it took an independent examiner to affirm the decision -- giving AT&T the contract -- that county staffers had backed from the start. The delay cost taxpayers millions in lost revenue.

Four years later, amid a county mayor's race focused on cleaning up County Hall, the pay-phone imbroglio could serve as Exhibit A in one of the main proposals backed by both candidates -- taking away or limiting the commission's authority to award public contracts.

Dubbed ''procurement reform,'' the proposal is viewed by both candidates -- Carlos Alvarez, former Miami-Dade police director, and veteran Miami-Dade County Commissioner Jimmy Morales -- as critical in curbing the influence of lobbyists in the commission chambers.

The idea would likely face considerable opposition in the commission, which has repeatedly voted down efforts to take away or water down its contracting power. Even some critics of the system like former county manager Merrett Stierheim, who led the battle to secure the AT&T pay-phone bid, say commissioners should retain ultimate authority over contracts because they are accountable to voters.

But Stierheim and others suggest compromises that would require a supermajority to override recommendations of the county manager, or raise the limit under which county administrators can award contracts without commission approval, currently at $1 million.

The mayoral candidates say awarding contracts should be left to the county's professional staffers, who have the time and expertise necessary for the complex task, thereby freeing the commission to concentrate on legislative and policy-setting matters.

TWO VIEWS

Doing so would also eliminate the troubling link between campaign contributions and contracts, Alvarez and Morales say. Lobbyists often raise campaign funds for candidates, who are expected to provide access or, some critics say, votes for their clients seeking public contracts.

''That is often where issues of public corruption come up,'' said Morales, who as commissioner twice unsuccessfully introduced legislation taking the commission out of the contract business. ``The perception is that people get business in return for campaign contributions.''

Alvarez is more blunt.

''Most of the things wrong with county government is procurement. It's dysfunctional,'' he said. ``You have 13 people that don't have the knowledge making these decisions.''

Alvarez and Morales say they would attempt to reach an agreement with the commission first. If that doesn't work, they say, they would launch a signature-gathering campaign to put the matter to a referendum.

COMMISSIONER'S TAKE

The idea angers some sitting commissioners, who say it unfairly impugns all board members. They say approving contracts in public votes ensures transparency and accountability, and helps catch errors.

''The public wants to have elected officials doing that out in the open,'' said Commissioner Rebeca Sosa, chairwoman of the procurement subcommittee. ``My opposition is not because of power. I want a process that is clear and open.''

Sosa says she has spearheaded reforms in recent years, including raising the cutoff for contracts the manager can approve to $1 million last year from $500,000, and instituting ethics training for administrators involved in procurement. She is proposing a pilot program in which procurement experts from local universities would join bid-evaluation committees.

But Sosa disputes the notion that commissioners routinely interfere in contracting issues. She cites figures from the county department of procurement management showing that of the 256 contracts for goods and services awarded between September 2003 and July of this year -- representing just part of all contracts issued by the county -- only 21 were modified by the commission.

Still, the commission's handling of some big contracts, including the AT&T bid, has cast it in a harsh light.

Just last year, for instance, a dozen lobbyists working for the third-ranked bidder on a Miami International Airport phone-card contract persuaded the commission to reject airport director Angela Gittens' plan to choose the highest bidder.

Before that, a bid on a baggage-wrap contract at the airport was bogged down for three years in a political battle larded with 36 lobbyists for various companies.

CERTAIN `ADVANTAGES'

The perils of such political interference outweigh the value of what minimal legitimate oversight of contracting the commission does provide, some reform backers say.

''Ninety percent of the time, it blows right through,'' said Santiago Leon, former chairman of the League of Women Voters' committee on ethics and accountability. ``There are advantages in going to the county commission. Injustices can be righted. It is possible for there to be mistakes, procedural errors at an earlier stage.

``The question is, is the chance of discovering and correcting one of those worth the disruption that you have in bringing the process into the political arena? I would say the value added by the county commissioners is pretty minimal.''

Without question, county work is lucrative for businesses and lobbyists -- 175 of whom have registered with the county so far this year, representing dozens of companies and causes.

Miami-Dade spends tens of millions each year purchasing goods and services and making substantial capital improvements. Just one category this year, 32 contracts for capital improvement projects that must by law be awarded to the lowest bidder, total nearly $60 million.

And contracting issues could only get more contentious as the county gets set to issue billions of dollars worth of contracts for mass transit expansion.

STIERHEIM'S ADVICE

Still, even partial reforms could go a long way, proponents say.

Stierheim, who was twice county manager, worries that a weak manager could be just as subject to political pressure as elected officials.

He suggests two reforms that would better balance contracting authority: First, raise the $1 million limit to take more contracts out of the commission's purview. ''You will get a lot of cats and dogs out of the way,'' he said.

Then, Stierheim said, set up a new system under which both the county manager and a professional advisory committee, appointed by the commission, review bids and make recommendations. Overriding them would require a supermajority of the commission.

''That way, the commissioners have the ultimate power, but you're making it tougher to have undue lobbying interests,'' Stierheim said. ``It has to be a compelling case made publicly. Everyone's looking.''