![]() |
BOARD MEETING DATE: November 2, 2007
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PROPOSAL:
SYNOPSIS:
COMMITTEE:
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
Barry R. Wallerstein, D.Env. Background In October of 2004, the Board approved contracts for up to three years with four firms having expertise in handling general liability matters and authorized the Executive Officer to make expenditures over a three-year period of up to $250,000. To date, no contracts have been entered into because there were few general liability matters requiring litigation and those that did were handled by the District Counsel’s Office. At the June 1, 2007 Board meeting, the Board authorized issuing an RFP to hire liability counsel when the current panel list expires. As with the earlier approval, the Board authorized expenditures of $250,000 over a three-year period. For future litigation, a rapid response is needed in such situations, and it is not possible to go through the RFP process as new cases arise. Establishing a prequalified list ensures that AQMD can respond to current claims and quickly select counsel for future representation as needed. The size of the prequalified list, consisting of four firms, was determined based on the current and projected litigation case load. Outreach In accordance with AQMD’s Procurement Policy and Procedure, a public notice advertising the RFP/RFQ and inviting bids was published in the Los Angeles Times, the Orange County Register, the San Bernardino Sun, and Riverside County Press Enterprise newspapers to leverage the most cost-effective method of outreach to the entire South Coast Basin. Additionally, potential bidders may have been notified utilizing AQMD’s own electronic listing of certified minority vendors. Notice of the RFP/RFQ has been mailed to the Black and Latino Legislative Caucuses and various minority chambers of commerce and business associations, the State of California Contracts Register website, and placed on the Internet at AQMD’s Web site (http://www.aqmd.gov). Information is also available on AQMD’s bidder’s 24-hour telephone message line (909) 396-2724. Bid Evaluation Copies of the RFP were mailed to 155 law firms in California. Twenty proposals were received by 5:00 p.m. on July 10, 2007, the deadline for submittal. The bid evaluation panel rated proposals according to criteria described in the RFP. Attachment A lists the firms determined to be best qualified in order of their final scores. Staff recommends the four firms with the highest overall scores be approved as prequalified to perform legal services. Selection of a law firm for particular legal matters will be based on the individual firm’s specific experience and expertise, as identified in its proposal, and on prior relevant experience, the needs of the particular project, and the firm’s availability. The three-member evaluation panel consisted of three AQMD employees (two attorneys and one risk manager; two Hispanic and one Caucasian; three male). Proposal Establish a list, valid through December 31, 2010, of prequalified outside counsel having expertise in personal injury and general tort-liability litigation, with an emphasis in public entity defense, consisting of the following firms: Dunbar & Associates, Houle & Houle, Kohrs & Fiske, and Ivie, McNeill & Wyatt. The recommended firms include three small businesses and one minority-owned business. Per the RFP, points were allotted to firms that qualify as a small business. Also, authorize the Executive Officer or Board Chairman, as appropriate, to execute contracts with one or more of these firms, in a combined amount of no more than $250,000 over three years. Resource Impacts The recommended total budget amount for liability counsel is $250,000 over a three-year period, all of which may be allocated to one or more selected contractors as the need arises based on current or future litigation, the availability of counsel, and the needs of the AQMD. With this action, sufficient funds for the first year are available in the FY 2007-08 Budget. Remaining funding for subsequent years will be dependent on future budgets. Attachment A. Evaluation of Proposals
ATTACHMENT A
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||