Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFQ PW16-115 and award contracts to AKM Consulting Engineers, Inc., of Irvine, CA; AndersonPenna Partners, Inc., of Newport Beach, CA; Caltrop Corporation, of Los Angeles, CA; Cumming Construction Management, Inc., of Los Angeles, CA; Harris & Associates, Inc., of Irvine, CA; Hill International, Inc., of Irvine, CA; KOA Corporation, of Monterey Park, CA; Psomas, of Santa Ana, CA; S2 Engineering, Inc., of Rancho Cucamonga, CA; Simplus Management Corporation, of Huntington Beach, CA; Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., of Irvine, CA; Vanir Construction Management, Inc., of Costa Mesa, CA; and Willdan Engineering, of Industry, CA, for providing as-needed Public Works construction management and inspection services, in an aggregate amount not to exceed $39,000,000, for a period of three years, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager; and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any necessary amendments relative to extending the term, adjusting the individual contract amounts withi
Motion carries. I am 19. Report from Public Works and Financial Management Recommendation to award 13 contracts for as needed public works, construction management and inspection services in an aggregate amount not to exceed 39 million for a period of three years citywide. There's a motion and a second public comment. Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a comment. Sure. Okay. Is there a staff report on this item here? Certainly. Mr. Craig, that director of Public Works. Good evening, Mayor. Members of the city council. Tonight you have an item before you that is our on call as needed construction management services. The city put out an RFP for these services. We had over 40 responses. Of those 40, we evaluated and narrowed down to roughly 20 firms that were interviewed. We're bringing forward firms that we believe will help us be successful in implementing our CHP projects, especially under measure. That concludes the staff report and I'm available for questions. Thank you, Craig. And how many of those you said there were 40. My only thing here is that there are no Long Beach resident or Long Beach business owners here. So how out of the 40 like what is the process after that? What do they have to do to be able to make this list of 13? So a council member of the 40 firms, approximately five were Long Beach firms. We went through and interviewed. Of those five, we interviewed three, I believe, that were Long Beach. None of them met the criteria of the firms that were ultimately recommended before you this evening. We do understand and support local jobs in Long Beach. We believe that there are other ways to achieve that. And any construction project that come forward that these firms would oversee does include local hiring provisions, both under play projects and non play projects. So I think we share a common goal, which is to provide jobs in Long Beach. But what you have before you are those 13 firms that staff believe are best suited to address the needs of construction management policy program. So why did they not qualify or what were the reasons for them not meeting the criteria to make it to the list? Well, typically it's because they didn't have the level of staffing. It may be a one or two person shop, and these are relatively large and complex projects. So as people went through the evaluation and went through and made presentations, staff evaluated both their experience, the projects that they work on, and the resources that they brought to bear for projects moving forward. Okay. Are there. Because I understand as well from from I believe that they're also given, you know, out of the 13, there's some sort of interview process or they come to you and they have to be vetted, if you will, to see what if they fit the criteria. Um, how many of those people were interviewed? Again, I believe that the five three went through the interview process. Okay. So three Long Beach businesses went through the interview process, correct? Okay. Um, it would I would suggest I mean, if it's possible, I think that, um, to be able to include all of those. Businesses that were interviewed because to some degree, they were they they fit some sort of criteria. And I think that out of 4013 that are not Long Beach, this is a it's a stark number. So if it's I mean, if possible for us to be able to include those Long Beach businesses, or at least the ones that came close to. Or had an interview. It would be my suggestion that this council would look at that. Councilman Mongo. Maybe I have a question that might be helpful. So if if we look at the staffing of the different organizations and let's say the 13 that did qualify, what if their staffing changes and their manager of whatever is no longer with the organization? How does that change and do people get reevaluated? How long is the term of the contract? And are there options in the future as these long each firms develop to reenter into the process? Is that a council decision to reopen in the future? Does it have a clause? Is it already settled? I guess I need to know more about that generally. Well, I think part of your question is a legal question. What I can say is that the term is typically two years. We engaged these firms for two years. We reevaluate after that. These again are as needed services and nothing is guaranteed as far as the amount of work that one particular firm would get depends on the level of IP projects that come forward and the availability and how those those firms resources match the type of work that's coming forward. So if the if the firm changes over any criteria by which they were judged, do they need to provide that information to us as a city? So I think your question is, if they if a firm goes through staffing changes, if they lose lose, for example, some key personnel. Correct. That allowed them to rate higher because of those key personnel. Would we reevaluate that contract? I think there's a twofold answer. Again, under that two year term, this is an as needed contract. If we had firm a that had an expertize in in a in a person on staff and that person moved on. We and we believed that that person's expertize was key for a project. We simply wouldn't ask that firm or bring that firm on. I completely understand that. But is there a requirement of the firm to notify us that that person has retired, left or whatever? That was a part of the initial bid? Yes. So there is a requirement under the contract terms that if key personnel are lost, that the firm must engage the city. And in telling us that that is occurred. And of all the teams being approved, are there at least multiple in every single area that we would have a contract? Or did not. So, for instance, I see there's construction. There's I'm not sure what some of these companies do, obviously, because their names are more ambiguous than others. But let's say construction, because there's a bunch that say construction management or engineering or things like that. So. In any category that we would use this as needed. Do we have multiple firms that have qualified? So if someone. Else maybe I could clarify a little bit. The item you have before you this evening is just for construction management services. Right. But those construction management services will vary greatly. So, for example, if we were building a new sports field and adding irrigation, the firm that we would use for that would be much different than the firm we would need. And the expertize of that firm to evaluate the construction of a new bridge. It's different. It's different expertize, it's different engineering knowledge depending on the complexity and type of the CHP project will typically drive the decision on what firm to bring forward. And so if we had a project, say, irrigation and there was only what would there be multiple firms on the lists that we would be able to use or if if a firm that we liked. And again, I don't know any of these firms really, but if a firm that you chose to do that project alerted you that their senior manager that let them qualify had retired. And then we were not comfortable with their new manager. Would we go out to bid again or would we just put the project on hold for two years until the next batch of these go through? Or would we just choose another firm that's less experienced? How do we work through that process? I guess we just have a lot more questions because we've got a new eye on contracting. Yeah. So I think what you have before you this evening is a number of qualified firms. Some of them have different expertize. To specifically address your question, using my example of a bridge. If there was one firm on this list that we believe was the firm that had the type of expertize necessary to evaluate that particular project , and that firm no longer had the individuals working for them that met that expertize, then the answer would be no. We would not bring on an alternate firm to provide construction management, and we would either a identify a firm, come forward to council and ask for a contract with that firm. Or B we would come back and add names to this particular list for as needed consulting services. That makes me feel great. I really appreciate you taking the time to explain that. We've had a couple of questions come in through email this week, and I think that it's really important for people to know that while they are judged on the expertize of the staff and we are at a time in our life cycle of baby boomer employees that people are leaving the workforce, that we have those protections in place. So I appreciate your diligence on this and we appreciate your work. Mr. Parkin, you wanted to chime in. Thank you, Mayor. Members of the council to the council member. Gonzalez, to your question and a correction, I think to the what the director said tonight, you would approve a contract for three years and with an additional two one year options to maintain this list for up to a maximum of five years. But as the director indicated, that if there were changes or companies fell off of this list, obviously the director and the city manager could come back and add names or of additional companies that could come to that. I do have a concern about just adding additional firms based upon the location of that firm. I don't have any of the information in front of me, but there would be a criteria that the selection committee went through to determine which firms qualified and met the requirements of the request for proposals. And if the firm that would be added does not meet that request for proposals, then we're not following a process that we would be required of every other RFP. They have to meet the certain criteria. And so without knowing more specifics about which firms those were, I would be hesitant just to blanket ad firms based upon their address. Cancer prostate. Oh, man. Thanks, Charlie. I think you might have answered a couple of questions that I might may have had, but I wanted to be clear on how we how we came to 13 were those that 13 that that met the qualifications or might there have been 20 that met the qualifications? But you felt like the 13 were the best. How do we arrive at that number? Yeah, so that's a good question. Again, this was a very competitive process. We had 40 firms that responded to the RFP and I won't say that's unprecedented, but that is a lot more than we would typically see. Of those 40, we felt that the most qualified of the 40 should come forward and go through a panel interview process. So there was a group of professionals that represented different interests within the city organization that evaluated these presentations. There were 20 firms that came forward and made presentations, and of those 20 firms, this recommendation, the 13 that recommended for you this evening, came out of that process. So the panel is recommending these 13 firms. Okay. So to to the city attorney's point what it is. Does the council have the ability, based on the information here, to say, for example. We want 15 farms and. And. To include two more firms and strongly consider local local firms. Um, for. For for consideration. Would that be out of line? Certainly from a legal standpoint, you could request staff to go back and to reevaluate, to see if any of the other firms that they interviewed meet the qualifications necessary to be included on the firm. If you didn't believe 13 was a sufficient number, I would leave that up to the city manager and the director to say how many firms they believe are necessary to get this work done. But as they indicated in the past, if they didn't have the expertize in one of these firms, the answer would be to come back to council and add a firm or to add a specific contract for that particular project. So to other questions of the firms that are here. Would they be prime? And would these guys would these firms. Be up to to some kind of subcontract to other other firms. Typically for construction management services. The vendors on this list or the firms listed here have in-house expertize and resources that they would do the work directly. It's not typically a situation where they would subcontracted, subcontract out this type of work. There may be there may be conditions where they would need additional support for a project and they would consider that. But typically, the firms that you have before you this evening are those that have the expertize, resources and experience to meet the demands of our IP projects. And I would add something, I think, to this conversation. Again, I think Council appreciates my perspective on local hiring and and the need to provide opportunities here for residents in Long Beach. And I just want to make sure that when we're talking about Long Beach firms, that it's really it's employees, right? We want to make sure that it's it's the residents of the city and not just a firm's address. So, for example, one of the firms that is not on your list tonight is a large construction management firm. They have a Long Beach office, but their main headquarters is in Phenix. So I don't know if you would consider that a Long Beach firm or not. But I would point to local firms should should be looked at as those that are employing Long Beach residents. That would at least be my perspective. Well, is that a question in the interview process of any of the. I don't have that data before me, but we can certainly put that together. Yeah. I would love to know that. And and of the 13 firms that I knew. Then they're not all guaranteed to actually get a job or get work. Right. Now, again, I want to stress this is as needed services. There's no guaranteed work. Thank you. And just as a as a reminder, as I know we have a couple of more comments, I think, which are obviously which is always the case. We always want the idea of bringing our local folks in is always important to everyone. But just as a reminder in Mr. Parking, correct if I'm wrong, but these these RFP proposal, the process that these go through, we're also following very clear and strict guidelines that are legal as far as what can be considered and what is actually a preference or not a preference before this process even starts. And so in this case, I know that address of of business is not something that is looked at. Is that correct? That is correct. The Long Beach does, and the council has adopted a local preference for nonprofessional services, materials, equipment and supplies. But this is a professional service contract. So there is not a local preference ordinance that would apply to this type of a contract. Okay. Thank you, Councilman. Super now. Discount on your ring. I've been skipping them, like, every time. Thank you very did take in the motion. One of the concerns that I have always raised consistently is the inclusion of diversity, of having very tired that have a commitment towards equity diversity. Small business enterprises, women, women owned businesses, as well as minority owned businesses. I see a lot of the while. None of the 13 is a minority owned business, there's a few women owned businesses. But being being that said, I recognize a few of these companies during my time at the Lonely City College and the huge construction contracts that we had over there, I recognized all these companies and I do know that they have do have some minorities working with them in terms of administrative as well as workers. So I mean, I'm okay with that. The the one thing that I do look at and and I feel encouraged. Is that one sentence right below the list that says that these firms are committed to using small, local and disadvantaged areas as subcontractors. I think that's an excellent sense to put there. The only thing that I would want to know is, is there a a mechanism by which this is going to be monitored, such as a a consultant that would be monitoring the the contracts themselves in terms of their compliance with diversity hiring and the the construction and in the construction project as they move forward. So I can in other words, using not like a compliance officer or compliance agency to monitor those contracts. Councilmember Turanga to provide some some insight as to the construction process. So the city has has engaged a compliance officer for all of the construction activity that we engage in, and that includes both the play work to make sure we're in compliance with the play. And if you recall, part of the play language includes a DB component and there is a goal of 10% participation in all of our construction projects. For the for the most part, construction management services that you have before you tonight are for larger projects. And and those projects are typically going to go over the $500,000 threshold, which is where we have our plate placed. So there is a compliance element associated with all of our construction activity. To my knowledge, I don't know. And I would have to reach out and have a conversation with our purchasing manager. I don't know how individual professional services contracts are are reviewed for participation with with subcontractor components. Well, again, I want to re-emphasize the need for diversity in our contracts that we pay close attention. I'm not I'm not so much concerned about the address as I am about the diversity of the contracts that we offer. I think that's very important because I know that with that sentence there that we're going to be looking at local hires and local businesses to do contract with. But, you know, let's just give the jobs to where they deserve to be. I appreciate that very much. Thank you. Council member Supernormal. Thank you. I think I'll get in the weeds now because I don't think we're there quite yet. But just just I just want to clarification on the subbing issue from from what I'm hearing is that there's no law or there's no rule against one of the contractors subbing part of the job. But de facto, practically, it rarely happens. Is that what you're stating? Again, it really depends on the type of construction activity that's occurring and what that firm would need in the way of support. Okay. My my suggestion was folks who didn't make the cut could apply to be on a subs list. Ultimately. And they mentioned that this doesn't guarantee you a contract if you make the list. Not only that, if you get a contract that doesn't necessarily guarantee you work if it's a large project also. So that's is just it's a great milestone to make this list, but it does not guarantee a job. Also, I think I've heard that it's been about four weeks since these decisions were made. And I don't know if that's been enough time for contractors to regroup or whatever to figure out how they want to approach this again . I don't know if there's been enough time for them to think about this, but would it be appropriate to revisit this in six months or something like that to see if if we need to upgrade the list? Does that comport with with what we're doing here legally? From a legal standpoint, yes, you could either lower the term of this agreement or you could ask them to management to give you a off council agenda memo item on how it's doing or what they see on it. You have you have options here this evening that would be legal to change the scope of this contract. I'm wonder if that would satisfy satisfy the need of Councilmember Gonzalez. What you're saying it to give folks another shot of it at six months or some type of interim period like that. If that would be acceptable to the council here on this item. Yes. I think that would be fair if we're able to do that. I don't know if that's enough time. Would that be enough time to assess? It may not be enough time to assess. I leave that to the discretion, Director. You could you could change this agreement to one year agreements at the option of the city manager and he could, you know, renew it each year individually. Okay. And council member. Super or not, are you done? I just wanted to make. Sure you go ahead. I would just thought of that option that you might want to explore, so. Yeah, I'm done. Thanks. So just to kind of address the particular question I think is staff, if we were asked to come back and expand the list to include some Long Beach businesses, then I think that that's what we should be asked to do. I think doing. Coming back and renewing our contracts in six months or a year is we can do, but it just creates more challenges. You have to remember the complexity of many of these projects are multiyear projects and I wouldn't like it would be challenging to assign a construction firm to a project that then crossed their contract term. So we are asking for a period of time to ensure that we have the resources necessary to address multiyear projects. So if really the council's goal here tonight is to try to find a way to add more Long Beach firms to the list, then then I would ask to provide that direction. And we will come back and we will amend this list and we will include some on beach firms or a or a mechanism that would allow Long Beach firms to either subcontract with the firms listed. So I would prefer that just I mean, I it's not just because they're Long Beach, but it's because they're qualified and they're from Long Beach. And I think we need to make an extra effort in light of so many reports that have come out. There's been added scrutiny, and we're the ones ultimately that have to make the decision. And of course, with your recommendation and your suggestions, we certainly respect them and we want to make sure we're doing the right thing here. So I just I see this list. It's it's striking. There's 1340 people applied, you know, zero Long Beach I keep saying residents, Long Beach business businesses. And so if there is a way we can reassess that. Mr. City Attorney, what was your recommendation on doing that? I think that would be. Well, I think I concur with the director here. If the substitute motion is to direct staff to review the list and see if there's any additional firms that qualify under the RFP, they could bring back a revised proposal to you maybe relatively quickly. Okay, that would be great. I would, I would, uh, would love to do that. So if there is a opportunity for me to make a substitute motion for that, I would like to get myself the support of the Council. Can I ask Mr. City Attorney, because I want to just clarification as the substitute comes in as well, because I think I'm hearing two different things and I just want to make sure we're clear, because I think also I know I know that a reason why this is a lot of this is forward is because the timeliness of the measure, a work which if this isn't if we don't move this forward or putting back also the work that needs to happen to begin the immense amount of construction that needs to begin after October one. So what I'm hearing, though, and I agree, is there's incredible interest to ensure that that local businesses are included in this. And so I think what I've heard from Mr. Beck and the your interpretation, we're a little bit different. I heard one is to approve the folks that are here tonight so that the critical work that needs to begin can begin, but also then open up and review and see if there's other folks that are local folks going to be added to this list or just reject the list completely and start over. But open it up to local folks. Is that what I'm hearing, Councilwoman, or because I. May remember I was talking with the city manager and the director and the way you described it would certainly work to you could adopt tonight and direct staff to bring back additional firms that qualify for this list to add those to those listed at an in a later date or do the the previous way I described it . So that is an option that you have before you also. We can do that. And how long would you would you need a director to be able to bring back? Additional companies, if need be. We have all the data. We've gone through the review process. We know the firms. I wouldn't want to open it up to a new RFP. I think we have some large firms on there and we would simply bring back those firms and ask you to amend the list that you adopt tonight and include those particular firms. I could say next week, but I'm not sure we could get on next week's agenda. So maybe two weeks. Two weeks. Okay, that would be great. I would be amenable to that. So we go ahead and I'll approve the motion to go ahead and approve these firms. And then, yes, if we can come back and you'd be coming back to the council. Correct? Because I would just recommend that you do that. Thank you. Yeah. I mean, it has to come back here because you have to the council has to approve it. So. Right. And so just so I'm clear, the motion on the floor, which is a substitute for Councilwoman Gonzalez, is to approve the presented lists, the list tonight. And then in a couple of weeks, you're coming back to the council with additional firms to add to this list, taking into consideration the interest of the council to include local Long Beach firms. Councilwoman, is that correct? Okay. And then who was the second council member? Sabrina. Okay. Okay. So you just amended that that that motion. Okay. Councilwoman Mango. I'm just glad that we're I'm strongly encouraging my council colleagues to move forward on approving the list that's here tonight. There's a lot of work scheduled, and I know that we've been making commitments to our community on street repairs and tree removals and sidewalks and bridges and all sorts of things. And I think that it's important to take this dual track, and I think that that was a very wise amendment by Councilmember Gonzalez. And I'll be supporting that two weeks. Thank you. So there's a motion who's a second on it to chime in on there. I know, but it's not in the. There we go. Or I guess, Austin. So there's a motion or second public comment on this item. Please come forward. Very good. You click. Okay, so the address number of comments, the first thing caught my attention is the dollar amount here we're talking about is 10,000, $10 million short of half the cost of building the. This new civic center. Number two, I think it would be wise again to suggest that get an analysis from give it the dollar amount and the import of the projects and analysis from our city auditor. As to the comments of the need to own the imperatives of hiring local. Let me share this experience with you. As I watched the project a number of years not too long ago unfold and watched every single day. And I noticed. People standing around doing essentially nothing. Looks like a group of Larry, Curly and Moe. And the this was these were people that the contractor was forced to hire. And that did not had the skill level to do what is. The jobs, the reformed. I think that argues well to have a report from the city auditor. That's particularly in view of the last report she gave relative to the findings of some earlier contracts. Again the what we want. If you again, you take your kid to a hospital. Do you want the best person or do you want to look necessarily a local person? When you take your car in, you want it done by the best person. Or a local person. And the two are not always the same. Hence. Turn to the city auditor. Ask for her analysis of it. Thank you. Thank you. Any of the public comment? See none. There's a motion in the second. Please cast your vote.