End county office supplies scandal by paying lowest prices

Miami-Dade failed last week to stem its office supplies scandal that saw $1.7 million in buys disappear from unlocked storage and purchasing agents clearly ignoring instructions to buy only from small local vendors. 

Instead of trying to stop the bleeding, a divided commission committee heard from small local vendors, then simply punted and agreed to deal with the mess later on.

Everyone saw major flaws – how could they not, after a scathing internal audit that the commission ordered found records altered during the audit, ineligible bidders the big winners, and prices soaring after a buy was made. Miami Today detailed all that May 30.

But they viewed the issues through conflicting lenses in Chairman’s Policy Council debate that ultimately left things right where they started. 

As Commissioner Raquel Regalado – who cited vast process gaps that have already sparked a criminal investigation – debated with Chairman Oliver Gilbert III, who opposed big purchasing changes, Commissioner Keon Hardemon tried to explain their division.

“You have to understand that what she’s advocating for is fiscal responsibility,” Mr. Hardemon told the chairman, “so the policy of having small businesses be the victor … may not always be one in the same.”

Mr. Gilbert buttressed the point in his call not to shut a bidding pool that was set up to allow only small local businesses to provide office supplies for $12 million.

“I want small local businesses to be able to do this work for the county,” he said. That was the policy made [by the commission in 2022], he added, and “we knew it might [cost] marginally more in some instances.” How marginally, nobody asked.

Commissioners agreed that allowing outside firms to bid against smaller local firms would lower county costs but outsiders might win – and part of the debate was how to be sure outsiders didn’t keep participating, because the audit found that 31% of office supply purchases now go, against commission rules, to cheaper Broward County vendors. That’s the loophole they wanted to close: we were paying less but not all locally.

Such preferences are the root of this disaster. Sure, $1.7 million in supplies vanished from an unlocked county store, but the bigger issue is neither theft nor failure to heed commission buying policy. 

The biggest waste, in truth, is that preference orders cost the county untold millions every year, an issue commissioners sidestepped.

The audit says the county spends $4.2 billion via 238 vendor pools. Most or all build in preferences for vendors. And, as the office supplies case reveals, preferences raise costs to taxpayers by yielding higher prices. 

For years it has been commission policy not to favor the most efficient, low-cost companies with purchases and contracts.

Firms headquartered in the county get a 15% bid margin – if they’re within 15% of lower-priced non-local firms, bidding is a do-over, allowing the local firm to win. A local branch of a national firm gets 10% margin. If it’s a locally certified military veteran’s firm, 5% is subtracted from the bid price in the battle but the bidder doesn’t have to cut its true price 5%.

The other preferences are many and complex, skewed to aid minority owners, minority teams that bidders must add, companies owned by the handicapped, small businesses, women owners, businesses with union contracts, business paying county-mandated wages, firms that help meet county environmental aims and who knows what else. 

Then come preferences that Mayor Daniella Levine Cava last year ordered department heads to follow in a process that lists more than 40 possible preferences when spending county money but fails to mention either price or quality.

Commissioners digging into the office supplies fiasco never mentioned quality but did note price in arguing to exclude any cost-effective vendors who can’t meet both Ms. Levine Cava’s screening and be local small businesses.

Commission Vice Chairman Anthony Rodriguez came nearest a good solution as he puzzled over the debate of how to make departments jump through all the preference hoops. 

“My disconnect is that I don’t understand how this government works,” he said. Why, he asked, doesn’t it follow the rules in purchasing? But while he agreed that it would be nice for small local businesses to sell office supplies to the county, “It’s a free market and they’ve got to be competitive.”

So why, he asked, can’t the county figure out how to find the lowest-priced bid, no matter who makes it? “The technology exists to compare pricing out there” (maybe he’s used Amazon to do that). “We don’t need to pay more,” he said. “Is it that we aren’t set up for that?”

“Exactly,” Ms. Regalado replied.

And that is the true purchasing scandal, not that someone stole from a supplies hub but that the county isn’t set up technologically to find the lowest bids and that policy is not to take the lowest bid anyway, but just the bids of those who can check the most boxes on special-preference lists. 

How could anyone not root for local small business? But as Commissioner Marleine Bastien noted, “It’s about us being good stewards of the people’s money.” 

That, commissioner, means lowest price and best quality in spending our taxes, not agreeing to pay more to favor special groups. 

We’d love local small businesses to get every bid, but as Mr. Rodriguez said, “They’ve got to be competitive.” That begins with price, not preference.