An official with Stantec, one of the program management firms overseeing the more than $1 billion MoveBR road improvements program, is defending his firm’s request for an additional $780,000 for program management software.
Stantec principal Mike Bruce says the software package needed to manage the projects in the program will ultimately enable the city-parish to complete the MoveBR projects with greater speed and efficiency.
“Putting this in place saves time and money,” Bruce tells Daily Report. “Everybody sees who they’re waiting for and what approval they need so whether it is frontline designers or DPW or whatever, they’re all in the system.”
Stantec, which leads a team of six subcontractors that will be paid some $5.6 million during the first 18 months of the program to oversee enhancement projects like sidewalks and bike paths, requested the supplemental funding from the Metro Council late last month.
But several Metro Council members questioned why the firm, which will pocket nearly $2.8 million of the $5.6 million that goes to its team, didn’t factor the $780,000 into its original price and why the city didn’t include it in its contract with the team.
The council deferred voting on the request last month but will take up the matter again Wednesday.
Bruce says his firm does large-scale program management all around the country and that doing things this way is not unusual. He says his team discussed with city-parish officials including software costs into the contract during negotiations but city-parish officials didn’t know at the time what kind of package they wanted or needed.
“We gave them several options and they said until we know what we need let’s leave it out,” he says.
As for why the existing program management software used to track projects in the last major roads program, the Greenlight Program, can’t be used, Bruce says it was old and outdated.
“Here’s the reality: You’d probably get less work done with a less efficient system because every step would take longer,” he says.
The $780,000 software spending request includes $187,600 to purchase three programs— eBuilder ($121,480), SharePoint ($60,000), and Oracle P6 ($6,120)—plus $592,280, which Stantec will get to install the software and train users.
The city-parish will own the license for the package, which has to be renewed annually, Bruce says.
But Metro Council member Dwight Hudson, who was among those who raised concerns at the last meeting, still has questions.
“I don’t see how spending an additional $800,000 will save us money in the long run,” he says. “I doubt they’re going to bill us $800,000 less because they have good software, so that doesn’t make sense to me.”
Specifically, Hudson points to a clause in Stantec’s contract with the city-parish that says Stantec shall, “for the agreed fees, obtain data and furnish professional and technical services required to support and assist the parish … in the execution of the project.”
Why, Hudson says, does the firm need more money to do what it already agreed to do under the contract?
“That’s pretty glaring to me,” he says.
Another clause in the contract, outlining Stantec’s scope of services, requires the firm “to develop the Program Management Information System (PMIS) … and make recommendations for implementation. An allowance for proposed implementation staffing costs is included but will require an internal review prior to implementation.”
“What is the allowance?” Hudson says. “It isn’t specified in the contract. And, who is responsible for the internal review? How does that work?”
Hudson says he needs answers from the city-parish before he can support the supplemental spending request. He is planning to meet this afternoon with Fred Raiford, city-parish director of transportation and drainage, and try to get some answers.
Bruce says there’s nothing underhanded or opaque about what’s going on.
“We could have negotiated this upfront but the city wasn’t sure of what it wanted,” he says. “I guess in hindsight it makes us look kind of stupid.”
(Clarification: Mike Bruce says the last quote in the story misrepresents what he said. Bruce says the quote should read: “I can see how someone who doesn’t understand this might think it looks stupid.”)
