Please read the updates posted at the end of this article.
The state Department of Transportation is considering scaling back plans for its new headquarters complex, leaving more publicly owned land for the use of a private developer who is a large donor to Gov. Bill Richardson, the Albuquerque Journal is reporting.
A project that is already controversial is further tainted by the revelation. This is the same project that, in recent months, the Journal has reported was initially tied to two men now indicted in the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Courthouse scandal.
But the newest revelation about the project is the worst. In seeking proposals for the DOT project, the state said the headquarters “shall consist” of one or more buildings “totaling a minimum of 300,000 square feet,” the Journal reported. In exchange for building the new complex for the state, the successful bidder would get to lease the rest of the property for other development. Gerald Peters, who has given well over $100,000 to
Now the state and Peters are discussing instead building a headquarters of between 170,000 and 180,000 square feet, the Journal reported today.
In exchange for building the complex, originally estimated to cost up to $90 million, Peters plans to build commercial development and condominiums on the rest of the land. Scaling back the DOT headquarters, which is supposed to include a Rail Runner commuter station, would significantly lower its cost and make available more land for Peters to develop.
If Peters and the state agree on a smaller DOT headquarters than was announced in the request for proposals, the other, unsuccessful bidder could challenge the contract in court, and lawmakers might pressure
It’s sketchy for state officials to even entertain the idea of scaling back the project in this manner once the contractor has already been selected based on specific criteria. That the developer is one of
Update, 7 p.m.
Denise Greenlaw Ramonas, Peters’ chief of staff, called this evening to say the Albuquerque Journal article upon which this article is based “is wrong.” She said the Department of Transportation conducted a “use analysis” that was completed before the contract was awarded to Peters, and found then that it only needed about 170,000 square feet.
She said at that point the department asked both bidders whether they wanted to adjust their bids, and both had the opportunity.
“Because Jerry is a good developer, a great builder, he got the contract,” she said.
Obviously, if that’s true it would significantly change and possibly negate the basis for this article. The problem is, the state won’t verify what Ramonas said. Spokesmen for the Department of Transportation and governor’s office said they could not comment on a project that is in negotiations, as this one currently is.
I told the Department of Transportation spokesman that I wasn’t asking about something that relates to the negotiations. I told him I was asking whether the terms of the project changed during the public bidding process, information that should be public. He refused to answer.
Because of that and because this came to my attention well after 5 p.m., I can’t tell you right now what happened. We’ll see if the Albuquerque Journal changes its story or further reports on the issue on Thursday.
Update, Aug. 23, 8:50 a.m.
Peters told the Journal for an article published today much of what Ramonas told me on Wednesday evening. He said there was nothing improper because the department changed the scope of the project during the bidding process, not after he was awarded the contract.
Though Peters’ group has been selected, no contract has been signed, so the other bidder refused to comment on whether Peters’ account is accurate. State officials didn’t tell the Journal any more than they told me.
What’s clear is that, sometime during the bidding process or after the contract was awarded to Peters, discussion moved to talk about a smaller facility than what was originally announced in the request for proposals. That’s the key – the RFP is what’s legally binding. If it was officially changed, giving others time to bid on the scaled-back project, all was done appropriately.
If it wasn’t officially changed, there are questions about whether things were done appropriately. Even if both who submitted bids on the 300,000 square-foot project had the opportunity to change their bids based on a scaled-back project, other potential bidders may not have had that chance.
And, under the worst-case scenario, only Peters got that chance. Since state officials and the other bidder aren’t talking, that’s about all I can tell you, at least for now.
Update, Aug. 23, 11:25 a.m.
The Santa Fe New Mexican weighed in today with an editorial you can read by clicking here.
One final thought: The state’s procurement code exists to ensure that all potential bidders have an equal shot at bidding on the contract. That’s to ensure the state gets the best work at the best price.
If the scope of this project has changed – a scaling back of the public facilities to be built on the land from 300,000 to 170,000 square feet – it should have been done publicly. It required a change in the scope of the work laid out in the request for proposals. The state won’t comment on whether that was done, saying it doesn’t comment on negotiations, but this isn’t about negotiations. Either the change was made publicly or it wasn’t.
If it was done publicly, there should be a public record the state can release to show this was done properly. If it wasn’t done publicly, there’s probably something wrong here.
If the RFP wasn’t officially changed and other potential bidders weren’t given time to submit bids based on the new criteria, this probably wasn’t handled properly by the state, even if both companies that did submit bids were given an opportunity to adjust their proposals.