Riverside's rules for approving and bidding city contracts will remain largely unchanged for now after the City Council declined Tuesday to give the city manager greater purchasing authority, voting instead to send the proposal to the Finance Committee for further review.
The proposal would have increased the city manager's authority to approve qualifying contracts from $100,000 to $220,000 without a public council vote. It would also have allowed city departments to use an informal competitive process for purchases up to $220,000, or $350,000 when federally funded, subject to Purchasing Division review.
Council members debated whether the changes would help the city complete projects faster or make it harder for residents to follow how public money is spent.
Under staff's recommendation, the threshold for formal procurement would have increased from $50,000 to $220,000 for nonfederally funded purchases and $350,000 for federally funded purchases. Purchases of $15,000 or less would have required only one quote.
The council did unanimously approve a narrower set of updates addressing purchases involving fleet vehicles, certain employee benefits and police canines, along with administrative clarifications.
"I'm all about reducing unnecessary bureaucracy, but I'm not willing to do so at the expense of competition, transparency or council oversight," Councilmember Sean Mill said. "I think that's what this is asking us to do here today."
Mill said residents expect to see how the city spends their money and warned that removing more contracts from council agendas could create the perception that decisions are being made behind closed doors.
"The average citizen in Riverside, they want to see how their tax dollars are being spent," Mill said. "I think while I understand you're trying to make the process quicker and more efficient, I also think it gives the perception that we're trying to do things in the back room under the shroud of secrecy."
Ward 1 resident Jason Hunter also urged the council to postpone the proposal until it could be reviewed by the city's inspector general, arguing that it would reduce public and council scrutiny of city spending.
Other council members said Riverside's purchasing process can delay projects that residents are waiting to use.
Councilmember Steve Robillard pointed to a Ward 3 senior center where the city is trying to replace flooring. New furniture has already been purchased, he said, but the company storing it cannot continue doing so past the end of the year while the city works through the procurement process.
"At some point, cost versus effect, it's not really getting there," Robillard said. "If you're talking about 94% of the dollar spend being still under council authority, you're eliminating so much of the smaller purchases that are needed to be effective, to move quickly, to get things done."
Councilmember Clarissa Cervantes also leaned toward the $220,000 option, citing rising costs and delays associated with the purchasing process. She asked whether council members could receive a list of contracts moving toward administrative approval, giving them an opportunity to raise questions or request public discussion.
Councilmember Philip Falcone said he saw merit in both positions.
"We have to get stuff through this very clunky and weighed-down bureaucracy of a city government," Falcone said. "But I also know that we're the ones that I think need to be making as many decisions as possible because that's what the voters expect from us."
Councilmember Luis Hernandez said he was uncomfortable with the proposed $220,000 threshold and suggested a lower figure, such as $120,000 or $130,000, could help speed up purchases while keeping more decisions before the council.
Councilmember Steve Hemenway ultimately proposed sending the procurement thresholds and city manager approval authority to the Finance Committee for additional review.
Purchasing Manager Jennifer McCoy stressed that informal procurement is still competitive, with departments typically gathering three quotes from different vendors before Purchasing verifies them at the time a purchase order is issued. However, the difference is public visibility. Formal opportunities are posted on the city's website, while informal procurements are handled by departments contacting vendors privately.
Staff estimated that its recommended changes would remove about 73 contract actions from council agendas each year while reducing the number of formal procurements from 1,397 to 669 over the three-year period analyzed. About $1.04 billion in purchases would have remained in the formal procurement process, and approximately 94% of the affected spending would still require council review. Construction purchases governed by Section 1109 of the City Charter would not have been affected.
McCoy said the reduced workload could redirect about 996 staff hours annually toward contract administration, compliance monitoring, vendor outreach, procurement planning and more complex purchases. The change would not produce direct budget savings or reduce staffing.
While the broader overhaul undergoes committee review, the council approved several more limited changes.
Those include greater flexibility when buying, leasing, repairing and outfitting city vehicles. Staff said vehicle purchases are often affected by limited inventory, model-year changes and pricing vendors can't hold through a long procurement process. McCoy told the council that departments were waiting for vehicles and described the change as time-sensitive.
Any increase in procurement thresholds or city manager approval authority will go through the Finance Committee before returning to the full council for a public vote.
Staff was also directed to return to the council within 12 months with an evaluation covering procurement timelines, vendor participation, contract amendments, purchasing exceptions and compliance with reporting requirements.
