Here lies the NPA, a party that once laid claim to fiscal responsibility and governance entitlement in Vancouver. It is survived by Suzanne Anton, Ian Robertson, and a few faithful wayward souls.
Here is the KPMG report that Councillor Suzanne Anton was so anxious to get her hands on these past few months. Read through these summarized details, and help me figure out exactly why:
- Millennium was indeed the third placed bidder after the first evaluation matrix with 57 individual criteria was compiled. It is significant to note that no points were allocated to the offer price in the Matrix.
- Following the results where Millennium had the lowest point total, the scores developed using the Matrix were reevaluated by undertaking a sensitivity analysis that ended up allocating between 0% and 90% to the offer price.
- Miraculously, once a figure of 14.5 per cent was weighted to the offer price, Millennium jumped from third place to first.
- Councillor Kerry Jang asked during the presentation how the 14.5 per cent weighting was selected? City Manager Penny Ballem stated that there was a sliding scale and she was not sure who suggested the number, but noted that it was unanimous by the evaluation committee (comprised of eight senior City staff with voting rights, three non-voting staff and one representative from VANOC.
- Upon further questioning by Councillor Jang, the City Manager was hard pressed to note who sat on the committee due to high “staff turnover” at the time; one thing for sure is that the final report recommending Millennium to Council was written by former Deputy City Manager Jody Andrews, who one week before last year’s election stated “There is absolutely no exposure for the taxpayer. None.” Mr. Andrews resigned from his post two months later.
- Over the past few years, city staff erroneously claimed that there was no risk, because if anything went sour with the Millennium deal, the City could take over the project without an issue. Later on, it was discovered that this by no means a simple matter, as it required an emergency sitting of the provincial legislature to change the Vancouver Charter to allow the city to borrow the necessary money. This then allowed city officials to refinance the loan, step in as financier, and assume the risk in a transparent manner, which of course resulted in savings of $90 million in borrowing costs.
- When confronted with the words of the Mayor, who called the handling of the project a “train wreck,” Anton responded by saying that the assessment was not fair.
- Vision Vancouver Councillors from last term were clearly not made aware of all the information regarding the changes to the selection criteria; Vision councillors also voted against allowing for provisional loan guarantees for the developer. If the public financing option could have happened in 2007 as opposed to 2009, maybe this project could have saved Vancouver’s taxpayers even more than the $90 million negotiated by the City in January.
There a numerous questions to ask, but here are the most glaring ones that come to mind:
- Why was the criteria changed after the matrix had been compiled?
- Why was purchase price a factor to consider so seriously only after Millennium came in third place? Why wasn’t it a part of the mix from the beginning?
- What due diligence did the city engage in to ensure that Millennium had the money necessary to fulfill the commitments of their bid beyond the initial $22 million deposit?
There is absolutely nothing wrong with how Millennium handled themselves. They put in a bid, stuck to their strengths, and won a contract.
The mess that resulted falls squarely on the shoulders of city staff, the City Manager, and most importantly, the ruling party of the day, the NPA.
I challenge Daniel Fontaine, who was the Chief of Staff to Mayor Sam Sullivan at the time, to provide some answers to the abovementioned questions, and an insight into what exactly the thinking was in allowing a third place bid to suddenly become the winning bid. I would also like to know how Millennium’s financial position and payment capabilities were examined before the deal was signed.
As per usual, I doubt that CityCaucus.com will be able to rise above the political spinning and offer answers from the point of view of an individual that had a vantage point that few were privy to during the entire bidding process.
