City of Bellingham Public Works and Natural Resources Committee

**Freeman Anthony, on the bid irregularity:** "We had some language in the bid spec that wasn't as flexible as we would have liked." **Freeman Anthony, on the solution:** "So we intend to rebid these with revised specifications that we're working with legal on to give us some more flexibility and then allow us also to be a bit more precise in the process so we don't come back." **Hannah Hamill, on the motion:** "Yeah, I just vote to reject." #

## Meeting Overview The Bellingham City Council's Public Works and Natural Resources Committee convened for a brief session on Monday morning, March 23, 2026, to address a single agenda item requiring immediate attention. With Committee Chair Michael Lilliquist excused from the meeting, Council Member Lisa Anderson stepped in to chair the proceedings. The committee, which normally consists of three members, needed Council Member Hamill to join Anderson and the remaining regular member to achieve the required quorum. The sole item before the committee was a staff recommendation to reject all bids received for a significant water quality improvement project in the Birchwood neighborhood. What should have been a routine bid acceptance had become complicated due to administrative irregularities in how the city handled the bidding process, forcing staff to recommend starting over entirely. ## Little Squalicum Water Quality Retrofits: A Bidding Process Gone Awry The committee's only substantive business centered on agenda item 24872, a recommendation to reject all bids for the Little Squalicum Water Quality Retrofits Phase 2 project. The project, designated EV-177 with bid number 6B-2026, represents a significant environmental initiative aimed at improving water quality in Little Squalicum Creek through the installation of biopods and other enhanced stormwater treatment infrastructure specifically in the Birchwood neighborhood. Council Member Anderson, settling into her role as acting chair, provided the basic framework: "The city publicly opened six bids on March 4th, 2026. Due to irregularity in the city's administration of the bid process, it is not possible to determine the low bidder. Therefore, staff recommend that city council reject all bids so that staff may rebid the project." The city had received what appeared to be a healthy response from contractors, with six separate bids submitted for the water quality improvement work. However, what should have been a straightforward evaluation process had become mired in administrative complexity. Mike Wilson, Assistant Director of Public Works and City Engineer, introduced Freeman Anthony, Engineering Manager of Public Works, to explain the technical details of what had gone wrong. Anthony provided crucial context about the root of the problem: the city's use of bid alternates had created an evaluation nightmare. "Utilizing bid alternates is a thing that we do to kind of give us some flexibility in bidding, but depending on what kind of, what the general service provisions that you use and how you write it, can be a bit complicated to figure out the low," Anthony explained to the committee. Bid alternates are a common municipal practice that allows cities to include optional work items or different approaches within a single bidding process. This gives both the city and contractors flexibility—the city can add or subtract work based on budget considerations, and contractors can propose different solutions or pricing structures. However, when not carefully structured, bid alternates can make it mathematically complex or even impossible to determine which bid offers the best value to taxpayers. "And in this case, we had that exact scenario," Anthony continued. "And we had some language in the bid spec that wasn't as flexible as we would have liked." The engineering manager's explanation revealed that the problem wasn't with the contractors or their submitted bids, but with how the city had structured the bidding documents themselves. The language in the specifications had created ambiguity about how to evaluate and compare the different alternate options, making it impossible to definitively identify the lowest responsible bidder—a fundamental requirement in municipal contracting. Anthony outlined the path forward: "So we intend to rebid these with revised specifications that we're working with legal on to give us some more flexibility and then allow us also to be a bit more precise in the process so we don't come back." This solution involves collaboration with the city's legal department to craft bidding specifications that maintain the flexibility the city wants while providing clear, unambiguous criteria for evaluation. The goal is to avoid finding themselves in the same position when the project goes out for bid again. ## Swift Committee Action The committee's response was notably efficient. Acting Chair Anderson asked for questions from the committee members, and Council Member Hamill immediately moved to action. "Yeah, I just vote to reject," Hamill stated, cutting directly to the heart of the matter. With no additional questions or discussion needed, Anderson moved the committee toward a vote. "So looking like there's no additional questions, we have a vote to reject. All in favor say [aye]." The committee unanimously approved the staff recommendation to reject all bids, clearing the way for the project to be rebid with corrected specifications. ## Routine Business and Procedural Efficiency The meeting demonstrated the committee system's efficiency in handling technical municipal matters. Rather than requiring extensive debate about what was essentially an administrative correction, the committee trusted staff's assessment and recommendation. The presence of engineering and public works leadership—Wilson and Anthony—provided the technical expertise needed to explain the situation and outline the solution. Anderson concluded the agenda item by thanking the public works staff: "Thank you, gentlemen. Much appreciated." ## Closing and Next Steps With the single agenda item resolved, Anderson turned the meeting back to Council President Stone, who announced a brief break before the next committee meeting would convene. The entire Public Works and Natural Resources Committee session lasted only about three and a half minutes, demonstrating that municipal governance, while often complex in substance, can be remarkably efficient in execution when dealing with straightforward administrative matters. The rejected bids will now allow staff to return to the drawing board, working with legal counsel to craft revised specifications that will enable a clear evaluation process when the Little Squalicum Water Quality Retrofits Phase 2 project returns to the bidding process. The environmental improvements planned for the Birchwood neighborhood—including the installation of biopods and enhanced stormwater treatment—remain on track, albeit with a brief delay while the administrative issues are resolved. For the six contractors who submitted bids in the original process, they will have the opportunity to rebid on the revised project specifications, potentially offering the city better clarity and value while advancing this important environmental infrastructure initiative.