Carr's second round on RFP process for carter acquisitions

Thank you, Chair.

Commissioner, thank you for explaining the approach to the substitution with respect to the third awardee in the Staten Island zone.

I think one of my concerns is not that the department did anything inconsistent with the law.

My problem is...

The way the law is structured, right?

And I think that the, what you described, right, I think kind of still leaves me with concerns because I think a new RFP

would have been the most appropriate thing because once you've done an RFP and now it actually incentivizes those who may think they're in the queue

to be substituted in for a Carter if they're able to do a buyout, the structure of the law is now creating conversations that wouldn't have happened otherwise.

And I think that when you have an acquisition that comes in the middle of an award period, I think that's a very different thing to assess than

what we were looking at where this conversation

Station was happening in advance of the award coming into effect.

And so I still think that there should be a protocol that requires the department in advance of the implementation of the zone or moving forward in advance of a new award whenever that day comes

for there to be a new RFP if there's going to be a potential sale or an awardee isn't going to be activating their award and serving.

I think, and that gives an opportunity for the department to refresh the list of people who are potentially available or companies that are potentially available to execute that award if they get selected.

I appreciate the point you're making, but I think we followed the letter of Local Law 199 in this process and just, I think, fundamentally disagree with that kind of approach.

I think acquisition happens in these kinds of industries.

I think it's not something for us to necessarily shy away from.

So you said the local law gives the agency broad discretion.

Do you believe it gives you the discretion to choose to do a new RFP in these circumstances if you wanted?

Or if you deemed it appropriate?

Where we've had open awards, we've done new RFPs in other areas.

Yes.

So in the case of a potential acquisition, you could do another RFP without any amendment to the local law?

Particularly if we denied the contract assignment or if the selected awardee were to pull out of the zone for some reason.

The situation here was one Carter was...

Was prepared to start offering the service with the other Carter as a designated Carter, which is also allowed for under the law.

And the acquisition simply inverted those two parties and the Carter that was going to be the subcontractor became the prime.

So it's,

From our perspective, it was not a tremendous change.

But if BIC approves the purchase, do you still retain discretion?

No, I know they did, but do you still retain discretion as a department?

Department not to allow the award to transfer.

Or is it your view that once BIC approves the acquisition?

We retain discretion for sure, but the discretion is subject to some parameters around having a rational basis for whatever direction we go.

Yeah, I think the way the law is structured, it's not leaving you with sufficient options because I think that this is just creating some bad incentives

on the industry side for folks who made a bid, they didn't get in, and they see an opportunity to get in because they know that they can game it out, that they're likely, much like in the situation you described,

one of the carters wasn't eligible because they'd already gotten enough zones under the law, and they see an opportunity to move up, and I think we have to seek to address that moving forward.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.