I find myself in an unsettling position on a project and I am left searching for how to proceed. I work for a public entity that sought qualification-based proposals from engineering firms to study a drainage problem and design a solution for the neighborhood. The work actually hinged on recommendations from a previous study.
Let’s say Firm A was the selected firm and Firm B was the runner up firm that was not selected based on scores given by a proposal scoring committee.
As it turns out, an Engineer from Firm B actually lives in the neighborhood that was part of the study.
Firm A worked diligently and even worked with us to re-work their original proposal within the given budget when there were issues outside of their control related to major changes to the project location due to availability of property and willingness from property owners to sell.
One of the neighbors heard about the change in location and went on a NIMBY petition crusade to end the project even though the changes meant their neighborhood stood to see the biggest benefits.
The neighborhood then sought the input from the engineer from Firm B who lives in the neighborhood. Without formal public records request, he was able to obtain a copy of the report and proceeded to review and critique the work.
He sent me a list of concerns that I re-wrote in bullet point format and sent to Firm A to read and internally address. I kept the identity of the individual from Firm B and their firm anonymous and only told Firm A that the neighborhood had enlisted the help of an engineer who lived in the neighborhood who does in fact work for a competing firm and that he had some concerns.
Firm A addressed these concerns to our satisfaction and explained that there were some tables in the report that could have provided more complete data (it could have been presented better), but that the data was accurate and correct.
I explained to the engineer from Firm B that Firm A had addressed the concerns to our satisfaction and went into some detail of their explanation via a phone call when he had called me to follow up.
Many months go by and work on the project plans continues, and I find a public records request from the engineer at Firm B to obtain the model data. After he obtains it, he sends an email explaining that his employees have found terrible discrepancies in the report and model and all of the results must be invalidated and demands a meeting with Firm A.
Firm A agrees to meet with him to hear him out. At the meeting he is very light on details but acts extremely aggressive and condescending. He insinuates that if his concerns aren’t addressed to his satisfaction that he will recommend the neighborhood file an injunction to stop the project.
From the start, I believe this individual from Firm B should have recused himself from the neighborhood’s request to review this work since they were a competing firm that responded to the solicitation of qualifications. That is just my opinion but obviously they felt not to go that way. Then from a public health and safety perspective I find myself having the duty to review and take into consideration all concerns, especially one from a practicing engineer.
However, I am finding this behavior as unacceptable and likely unethical. I am trying to consider what my future options are to keep the project alive without being held hostage to vindictive behavior.
Any input or insight would be greatly appreciated.
Let’s say Firm A was the selected firm and Firm B was the runner up firm that was not selected based on scores given by a proposal scoring committee.
As it turns out, an Engineer from Firm B actually lives in the neighborhood that was part of the study.
Firm A worked diligently and even worked with us to re-work their original proposal within the given budget when there were issues outside of their control related to major changes to the project location due to availability of property and willingness from property owners to sell.
One of the neighbors heard about the change in location and went on a NIMBY petition crusade to end the project even though the changes meant their neighborhood stood to see the biggest benefits.
The neighborhood then sought the input from the engineer from Firm B who lives in the neighborhood. Without formal public records request, he was able to obtain a copy of the report and proceeded to review and critique the work.
He sent me a list of concerns that I re-wrote in bullet point format and sent to Firm A to read and internally address. I kept the identity of the individual from Firm B and their firm anonymous and only told Firm A that the neighborhood had enlisted the help of an engineer who lived in the neighborhood who does in fact work for a competing firm and that he had some concerns.
Firm A addressed these concerns to our satisfaction and explained that there were some tables in the report that could have provided more complete data (it could have been presented better), but that the data was accurate and correct.
I explained to the engineer from Firm B that Firm A had addressed the concerns to our satisfaction and went into some detail of their explanation via a phone call when he had called me to follow up.
Many months go by and work on the project plans continues, and I find a public records request from the engineer at Firm B to obtain the model data. After he obtains it, he sends an email explaining that his employees have found terrible discrepancies in the report and model and all of the results must be invalidated and demands a meeting with Firm A.
Firm A agrees to meet with him to hear him out. At the meeting he is very light on details but acts extremely aggressive and condescending. He insinuates that if his concerns aren’t addressed to his satisfaction that he will recommend the neighborhood file an injunction to stop the project.
From the start, I believe this individual from Firm B should have recused himself from the neighborhood’s request to review this work since they were a competing firm that responded to the solicitation of qualifications. That is just my opinion but obviously they felt not to go that way. Then from a public health and safety perspective I find myself having the duty to review and take into consideration all concerns, especially one from a practicing engineer.
However, I am finding this behavior as unacceptable and likely unethical. I am trying to consider what my future options are to keep the project alive without being held hostage to vindictive behavior.
Any input or insight would be greatly appreciated.
![[pipe]](/data/assets/smilies/pipe.gif "[pipe] [pipe]")
