Alameda County Procurement and Contracting Committee Meeting - November 17, 2025
Alameda County Procurement and Contracting Committee Meeting
Date: November 17, 2025 (Monday) – Evening meeting. Committee: Board of Supervisors Procurement and Contracting Committee. Present: Supervisor Marquez, Supervisor Nate Miley. Quorum achieved.
The committee met four to five times annually, with this being the last meeting of the calendar year. The agenda covered General Services Agency (GSA) items, an Auditor-Controller procurement report, and an update on the disparity study. Key decisions included advancing a wage-theft mitigation policy to the full board and directing further research on collective bargaining requirements for certain contract categories.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Alex Garcia (Political Organizer, SEIU USW): Urged the county to adopt a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) requirement for security contractors, emphasizing that state law only protects the county from wage theft liability when workers are under a CBA. Cited examples from Sacramento, Palo Alto, Mountain View, and San Mateo County.
- Zaid Elamin (Security officer with 19 years experience in Oakland): Supported a CBA requirement, describing union protections for workers and oversight for the county.
Discussion Items
Item 1A – Labor Code 238.5/AB 520: Policy to Mitigate Wage Theft Liability
- Presentation by Kimberly Gassaway (Director, GSA): Explained that AB 520 (effective Jan 1, 2024) makes public agencies jointly and severally liable for wage theft by contractors providing property services (janitorial, security, landscaping, gardening) or long-term care staffing unless the contractor has a CBA expressly waiving that liability. No such CBAs were found.
- Proposed policy includes pre-award screening for wage theft judgments, contractor certifications, contract clauses requiring indemnification and notice of claims, and enforcement (suspension, termination, debarment).
- Discussion: Supervisors Marquez and Miley asked about scope. The policy originally listed long-term care; staff clarified it covers all property services (security, landscaping, gardening) and long-term care. Supervisor Miley pushed for expanding collective bargaining requirements, especially for security contracts. County Counsel (Kathy Leam, Andrea Weddle) noted legal concerns about requiring union CBAs and the need for careful analysis. Supervisor Miley suggested a two-phase approach: adopt the proposed policy now, then research CBA requirements and report back in spring 2026. Supervisor Marquez concurred.
- Outcome: Motion by Supervisor Miley, seconded by Supervisor Marquez, to forward the wage-theft policy to the full board and direct staff to research CBA requirements for property services and long-term care contracts, with a report back at the spring 2026 committee meeting. Passed.
Item 1B – GSA Quarterly Procurement Report (July–September 2025)
- Kimberly Gassaway presented: GSA administered 33 formal procurements totaling $18M (64% to SLBE firms). 319 new SLEB waivers ($116.5M) were approved. 98 sole source exceptions ($10.4M), 70 exemptions ($10.5M), and 33 piggybacks ($14M). Construction: 15 informal contracts ($1.3M, 83% local); formal construction awards ($160M) included a progressive design-build at Santa Rita jail ($129M, non-local). Project Stabilization Agreement data: cumulative countywide 471,131 hours; 49% local (goal 40%); 17% apprentice (state goal 20%); 40% disadvantaged worker (on target). GSA held outreach events and contractor assistance.
- Discussion: No public speakers. Supervisor Miley noted improvement in local contracting and asked about the East Bay Interagency Alliance (EBIA) – staff will provide an update at a future meeting.
Item 1C – Informal Construction Procurement (GSA Building Maintenance)
- Doug Bond (Deputy Director) reviewed: After a 2022 qualified contractors list and alignment with state code (informal bidding limit $220,000), local contractor participation increased from 52% (2022) to 65% (2025). In 2025 (10 months), 100% of contracts between $75k–$220k went to local contractors. Outreach efforts include trade journals, chambers of commerce, and the Bob Breakfast with Public Works.
- Discussion: No public speakers. Supervisor Marquez asked for future reports to include examples of contract types. Supervisor Miley praised the improvement.
Item 1D – Contractor Technical Assistance Program (CTAP) by Merriweather & Williams
- Jennifer Elmore (Merriweather & Williams) presented: CTAP (under contract since 2008) provides free coaching, bonding assistance, and loans to small, local, and emerging contractors. Program results (Nov 2024–Nov 2025): 32,600 hours of technical assistance, 5 bond transactions, 80 contractor opportunities, 20 seminars, 11 program management meetings. Success story: Phantom Builders (Beshoy Metri) – first county contract. National recognition as a model program. Bond default rate: <1% (industry avg 25%); loan default rate: 0%.
- Discussion: Supervisor Marquez asked for a flyer to promote the program; Merriweather & Williams agreed. Supervisor Miley praised the program and asked for annual updates to the committee.
Item 2 – Auditor-Controller County Procurement Report (July 1, 2009 – June 30, 2025)
- Melissa Wilk (Auditor-Controller) reported: Total payments up to $500k: $2.36B, 60% local, 48% MWBE/SLEB. Including payments over $500k: $5.3B total, 53% local, 35% MWBE/SLEB. Provided breakdown by category (construction, A&E, professional services, goods and services). Also gave an update on the East Bay Interagency Alliance (EBIA) – revived after COVID, two outreach events held, another planned at Hayward Library.
- Discussion: No public speakers. Supervisor Marquez requested a simplified five-year trend chart; Auditor agreed to prepare one for the next committee meeting (late Jan/early Feb 2026). Supervisor Miley asked about historical trends and local contractor performance.
Item 3 – Disparity Study Update
- Andrea Weddle (Chief Assistant County Counsel) reported: The disparity study (Mason Tillman & Associates) began in September 2020, covering 2017–2020 data. County Counsel has reviewed chapters 1–8; four chapters remain. Key disagreements with Mason Tillman over legal analysis, including application of recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings. The contract has expired; a time-only extension is expected. The full board will be briefed in closed session “very soon” (possibly before end of 2025).
- Discussion: No public speakers. Supervisor Miley expressed frustration with delays (study period now 5+ years old). Supervisor Marquez noted that the committee last received an update in December 2024. Both supervisors emphasized urgency.
Key Outcomes
- Item 1A Motion (Miley/Marquez): Advance the wage-theft mitigation policy (covering property services and long-term care contracts) to the full Board of Supervisors for adoption. Direct staff to research collective bargaining agreement requirements for those contract categories and return to the committee in spring 2026. Unanimously approved.
- Item 1D: GSA and Merriweather & Williams to create a promotional flyer for the Contractor Technical Assistance Program for use by supervisors.
- Item 2: Auditor-Controller to develop a five-year trend chart for procurement data by the next committee meeting (late January/early February 2026).
- Item 3: County Counsel to arrange a closed-session briefing for the full Board of Supervisors on the disparity study legal disputes, soon (before end of 2025 anticipated). The committee will receive a report back in 2026 on progress.
Next Meeting: Scheduled for late January or early February 2026 (date to be set by the clerk).
Meeting Transcript
Everyone. It's Monday, November 17th, 2025. Um, procurement and contracting committee, policy committee for the board supervisors. If the clerk could take the roll. Supervisor Marquez present. Supervisor Nate Miley. We have a quorum. Thank you. Alright. So this committee meets about four or five times annually. And we I know I committed to having one meeting in the evening. And we usually have that as our last meeting of the calendar year. So this is our evening meeting. We have a pretty pretty full agenda this evening. And so we'll start off with our General Services Agency with their various items A, B, C, and D. Good afternoon, Supervisors. Kimberly Gassaway, Director of the General Services Agency. So today at the request of the board, there's been a few presentations as it relates to the Labor Code 238.5 that was amended in 2023 via an assembly bill 520. Next slide. So we're going to go over the background of the labor code and the amendment and some share some definitions, the impacts of this amendment, what other jurisdictions have been doing, and proposed property services and long-term care services contracting policy. Next slide. So labor code 238.5 was amended and signed into law on October 10, 2023. That was the amendment, and it was effective January 1st, 2024. What AB 520 did was extended the labor code to public agencies, making them jointly and severely liable for wage theft by contractors providing property services or long-term care staffing. This law mirrors existing requirements for private entities and includes an exemption where contracts with contractors covered by a collective bargaining agreement that expressly waives this liability. So in essence, unless the collective bargaining agreement has that waiver, then the county will not receive that exemption. Currently, there are no collective bargaining agreements that we could find that expressively waive this liability. Next slide. So a public entity is defined as a city county, city and county, district, public authority, public agency, or any other political subdivision or public corporation in the state. Property services or janitorials, security guard, valet parking, landscaping, and gardening services. Long-term care is defined as operation of a skilled nursing facility, intermediate care facility, congregate living health facility, hospice facility, and the list goes on as you can see there. Next slide. So the impacts, this legislation does not require the public entity to act. The legislation imposes joint and several liability on public entities for unpaid wages if a supplier contracting with a public entity for a specific specified service has been determined liable for unpaid wages by the labor commissioner. So GSA, after quite a bit of research and some consulting with county council, we came to propose the county board adopt a procurement policy to mitigate the risk. Santa Clara County does, however, they have an office of countywide contracting management that launched a program in 2020 before this law. It screens contracts for unsatisfied wage theft judgments and can disqualify bidders suspend or terminate contracts or withhold payment until the contractor remedies the violation. In Alameda County here, here our landscaping contractors are required to submit certified payroll records in adation for submission to the Department of Industrial Relations. This may have some risk mitigation for landscaping work, but it is a self-reported wages and doesn't cover all contract services in the law. Next slide. So then we took a look at all the contracts inventory. I will before I jump into that. We um also note that the labor commission picked these specific services because they're the highest risk for wage theft. That doesn't mean uh any other contract could have wage theft, but the law specifically relating to long-term care facilities, behavioral health manages 40 of those contracts, and they run those procurements independent of GSA. The GSA building maintenance division and the public works agency manage seven landscaping contracts, and there is a countywide master contract that includes two security guard service contracts. I will point out that there before Chief moves, there are no janitorial service contracts because by code, all janitorial services in county-owned buildings are provided by county staff. So what we're proposing is a long uh property service and long-term care contracting policy, and this ensures workers contracted count for county work are fully compensated, ensuring in Santa Clara. This is sim uh similar to what they claim is the model for this and it aligns with what they have proposed. So it ensures that white workers are uh for county work are fully compensated, preventing the county from inadvertently financially supporting employers with outstanding wage theft judgments and preventing the county from creating a race to the bottom among bidders for contracts. So if they're bidding low, you know, these are low-cost bids, and um so often they'll put a low cost, and some of the way they can mitigate that is possibly by not paying their wages.
openpublica.com