VISIONING STINK: Memo spikes council candidate contract controversy

COLUMBIA, 2/2/10  (Beat Byte) --  A City Hall memorandum forwarded to the Columbia Heart Beat has ratcheted up controversy over 4th Ward Columbia City Council candidate Sarah Read's 2008 contracts to write a so-called "Visioning Report" for city government.  

 

The memo reveals that Columbia city manager Bill Watkins allowed Read and her firm, The Communications Center, Inc., to bypass conventional bidding and proposal requirements. 

 

Earlier criticizing Read's report in a January 5 letter to the City Council, Columbia Vision Commission (CVC) members protested "inequitable access to City administration," calling it "inappropriate, in our view," to treat the Read report "as an expression of the citizen's groups who drafted the 13 Vision Statements." 

 

Read received a first no-bid $150/hour contract in April 2008, a few months after leaving the Visioning Committee, a predecessor to today's Vision Commission.   To comply with laws governing competitive bidding and requests for proposal (RFP), Read's first contract was capped at $15,000.

 

But The Communications Center quickly met the contract cap, prompting Watkins to pursue additional contracts. Using so-called "non-fungible" contracting authority, he authorized a second $10,000 contract in August 2008 and a third $25,000 contract in October 2008. 

 

The three contracts totaled $50,000 without competitive bidding or formal proposals. 

 

"The city manager may enter into contracts for professional and other services without following a competitive bidding process or a request for proposals process when factors such as prior experience, skills, education, local knowledge or unique knowledge are considerations in selecting the contractor," reads Columbia Code of Ordinances section 2-460(d). 

 

Citing this authority, Watkins sent a June 19, 2008 memo to city communications director Toni Messina, whose department oversaw Read's contract.

 

"Sarah Read, president of The Communications Center, Inc., has provided communications and process consulting services for other clients in the past and continues this practice....As a former member of the community visioning committee...she has unique local relationships and specific, immediate knowledge of the intent of the vision plan not possessed by other firms." 

 

But CVC members claim they never knew about the arrangement.   Responding to an emailed request for comment about the Watkins-Messina-Read memo -- attached to the email -- CVC chairperson Dan Goldstein, Ph.D. told the Heart Beat, "your e-mail was the first time I saw this memo."

 

"I was not aware of the process and procedure either," CVC secretary Jan Weaver, Ph.D. told the Heart Beat.  "I do not know why we were not made aware," added Weaver, who directs the MU Environmental Studies program.

 

Also unaware of the arrangement, 3rd Ward Councilman Karl Skala, who said the City Council "gives the city manager broad latititude to decide such things.  Given Visioning's stated goals and purposes -- transparency, public involvement -- would it have been nice to have known?   Yes.  Nice, but under the law, not necessary." 

 

The newly-revealed memo fulfills an earlier CVC request that until now, has lingered without response.   

"We are working hard on gathering information for our Columbia Vision Commission (CVC) report," the group wrote assistant city manager and city staff liaison Paula Hertwig-Hopkins on December 19, 2009.  "One item we need to document is the Request for Proposal (RFP) process used in hiring the Visioning Consultant, Sarah Read.  Could you please provide the CVC with any and all documentation on this process?   We will need:

1. The RFP to hire the visioning Consultant.
2. Any application material or communications, from or to, any applicants for the visioning contract.
3. Communications of all forms between City Staff and the Visioning consultant (Sarah Read) which in any way were related to the Visioning consultant's contracts with the City of Columbia.

We do request that it be provided before the end of December, if at all possible, so we can complete our report to Council." 

 

But the Vision Commission never received a response, and submitted its report on January 19 without the requested information, Goldstein said.  "I have asked Paula for an explanation of why the Visioning Commission did not seem to have received the Watkins memo, either," he added. 

 

RELATED:

 

Letter from Vision Commission to Columbia City Council

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26211082/Visioning-Letter

 

Three City of Columbia contracts with Sarah Read's firm

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26211081/Sarah-Read-Agreement

 

Watkins/Messina/Read memo regarding bid procedure waiver

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26211073/Bill-Watkins-Sarah-Read-Memo

 

Vision Commission Report of 1/19/2010

http://www.gocolumbiamo.com/Council/Commissions/Vision_Commission/documents/2010_jan19_cvc_report.pdf

 

Columbia Vision Commission

http://www.gocolumbiamo.com/Council/Commissions/Vision_Commission/index.php

 

 

1 comment:

1.  
   Justin ThomasFebruary 8, 2010 at 11:30 PM

   The problems caused by too much emphasis on pushing a project "forward" without the involvement of the community. Gathering input and support from the community to Imagine Columbia's Future was supposed to be the impetus for this visioning process. It appears that the Commission has its work cut out for it. Hopefully being forced to keep up with administrative agendas will not detract from engaging the broader community, an intention still lingering after four years.

   Reply