citymeetings.nyc

Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.

Q&A

Measures to prevent double dipping and improve vetting of subcontractors

1:32:44

·

115 sec

Video Player is loading.

Current TimeÂ 0:00

DurationÂ 0:00

Loaded: 0%

Stream TypeÂ LIVE

Remaining TimeÂ 0:00

Â

Council Member Julie Won inquires about measures to prevent double dipping and improve vetting of subcontractors, using the example of Century Security receiving $11.6 million over four years from Sevco.

Won suggests using AI or automated systems to scrape the web for information on potential conflicts of interest
Commissioner Park outlines the current process for reviewing subcontracts:
- Requiring evidence of three bids for subcontracts
- Ensuring bids are independent and the lowest responsible bidder is selected
- Withholding payment on subcontracts without proper documentation
- Requesting conflict of interest disclosures and conducting LexisNexis searches
Park emphasizes that these measures have become much more stringent in recent times

Julie Won

1:32:44

The security company in question, Century Security, received more than $11,600,000 for security services over a 4 year period.

1:32:51

The owners of the company were listed publicly on the website of both the nonprofit and the subcontractor for the security company.

1:32:58

I know that chair Brewer was referring to AI.

1:33:01

There are systems that are automated to scrub the web or scrape it for you so that you don't run into problems like this.

1:33:08

Can you help me understand what we're doing now to ensure that potential instances of double dipping like this is not happening any longer?

Molly Wasow Park

1:33:16

Yeah.

1:33:17

Absolutely.

1:33:17

Thank you, council members.

1:33:19

So, the process would be that when we are either entering into a new contract or approving the annual budget for an existing contractor that we look at their, subcontracts.

1:33:31

Right?

1:33:31

So typical subcontracts, for example, are security, sometimes maintenance.

1:33:37

We start with how were how was the their procurement process done.

1:33:42

Right?

1:33:42

So do can they provide evidence of 3 bids?

1:33:47

If they can't provide evidence of 3 bids, that's a that's a hard line.

1:33:50

We'll go back.

1:33:51

We'll say, you know, we need to see the bids.

1:33:53

Once they do have the bids, we're gonna look at them to make sure that they are that those are in fact independent bids and that they are going with the, lowest responsible bidder.

1:34:03

If they cannot provide documentation of that, that they have appropriately followed the procurement process, we won't make we can't make payment on the portion of the invoice that is related to that subcontract.

1:34:16

In addition to that, we are asking for conflict of interest disclosures, again, at the point of contracting and doing, searches, you know, LexisNexis, but, you know, to your point, certainly online more generally, to identify any any related party actions.

1:34:35

This is something that we have gotten much more stringent on in recent times.

← Previous Chapter

MOCS explanation of vendor responsibility determinations and related party transaction policies

Next Chapter →

City-wide efforts to improve vendor vetting and responsibility determinations