Opinion: IVGID’s no-bid policy a disservice to taxpayers
I read with interest the GM’s column in last week’s Bonanza by Steve Pinkerton, “To bid or not to bid?”
I have been a frequent and constant critic of IVGID’s no bid contracts. From my perspective as a former business owner, it is pure laziness that drives IVGID’s no-bid policy, as well as poor management.
Bidding assures the public and taxpayers that a public entity is GETTING THE BEST DEAL IN ALL CASES. It further assures the public that cronyism is not playing a part in the process. Finally, it assures the public that our public officials are above reproach and are NOT GETTING KICKBACKS.
Our GM’s defense of the no-bid policy is just putting lipstick on the pig. The GM’s assertions on rental skis are hogwash. All rental bindings are super easy to size to the customer. There is a universal pressure indexing system, and the sizing adjustments are fast and simple for all manufacturers.
In every case where IVGID has gone to bid, the public has saved. In almost every case where they have not gone to bid, the district has squandered money. Examples:
A few years back, EXL Media was charging the district an ad placement commission of 20%, when the prevailing industry rate was 15%.
IVGID had a 5-year contract with Coca Cola for beverage syrup claiming that as a perishable product that the product was exempt from bidding. The shelf life of the syrup is 2-3 years. Pepsi came in with a bid, saving the district $110,000 over 5 years.
IVGID buys Chevrolet vehicles on the GSA contract. What about just asking for a bid from Toyota or Dodge (for vehicles that might have a better service record)?
Finally, why not just put an RFP out for our trash collection and threaten Waste Management that we will take the transfer station under eminent domain.