Stubborn Obstacle to Public Safety
As one who has written a great deal on the contributions modern technology might make to highway safety, I find it disturbing that a combination of legal gamesmanship, questionable business practices and bureaucratic wishy-washiness now threaten to undermine the vital protections that became law almost three years ago.
A bill sponsored by Sen. William Craven created the legislative machinery to install “emergency motorist aid” systems on California’s major thoroughfares. Specifically, the bill’s authors contemplated a network of emergency call boxes on state freeways, funded by a registration surcharge of $1 per vehicle.
In San Diego, however, the bill’s translation into reality has been stymied by a local firm’s self-seeking quest to become the prime contractor in the installation of the call boxes. The chronology of events speaks for itself.
It has been more than two years since the San Diego Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE) was organized. In 1986, SAFE foresaw the award of a contract to install call boxes by October of that year. Nonetheless, in typical bureaucratic style, a request for a proposal inviting bids on the system was not issued until November.
Following a second delay, the first bids were received in late February, 1987. Among the five bidders were San Diego’s Cubic Corporation and Comarco of Anaheim, which eventually was chosen to install Orange County’s call boxes. Evaluation of the various proposals consumed the ensuing three months.
On June 8, SAFE met, fully prepared to award the contract to Comarco. True, the Orange County firm was not low bidder on the project; its $9.6-million proposal was about $1 million higher than Cubic’s. But Comarco had nonetheless received the unanimous endorsement of an advisory committee composed of representatives of Caltrans and the CHP, as well as several technical experts. The firm already had call box systems operating in several locations nationwide. Its design was thus viewed as a proven, “installation-ready” commodity.
On the other hand, Cubic’s proposal had met with considerable skepticism. Performance of the Cubic prototype unit in compliance tests had been spotty. Potential problems were noted in weatherproofing and vandal-resistance; the hardware lacked several features and capabilities which Cubic representatives could only promise to “redesign” into the final version. Indeed, minutes of the meeting reveal that the company’s system did not even exist as a testable entity. What’s more, it was noted that Cubic had “no previous experience in freeway call box systems.”
Unfazed by such criticism, Cubic lodged a formal objection to the selection of Comarco, accusing the advisory committee of bias. The SAFE board delayed a vote on a final award until Cubic’s charges had been investigated.
A month passed. After concluding that Cubic’s pique was unfounded, the SAFE board convened again on June 29 to reaffirm its decision to award Comarco the contract, whereupon Cubic promptly sued to prevent the installation of call boxes. Plans for the delivery of Comarco’s 963-unit network screeched to a halt. Then, in August, Judge Richard Huffman decreed that the proposal should be re-bid, with preference given to the lowest bidder.
SAFE appealed, noting that state lawmakers had explicitly exempted the authority from the usual competitive bidding process. As Supervisor Leon Williams later wrote, “It was never the SAFE board’s intent to purchase the cheapest system for San Diego. Rather, we wanted the best, most reliable system for area motorists.”
But finally, fearful of having the procedure drag on, SAFE caved in to Cubic’s pressure in January and reopened the bidding with a deadline of March 10. Given the inevitable lag between approval and installation, it’s likely that most of 1988 will pass before ground is broken on a call box system for San Diego freeways. This would put us two years behind schedule.
Cubic then tried to buy even more time. It petitioned for an additional delay of 45 days, a request it later withdrew.
On Friday, however, SAFE got a legal boost. The state Court of Appeal ruled that competitive bidding is not required for the call box contract. SAFE attorneys are studying the ruling and the board will discuss its alternatives on Monday.
It’s worth noting that while all this was going on, Comarco had begun call box installations in Orange County. (Cubic contested that bidding process as well, but was swiftly overruled by an Orange County judge). Since November of last year, some 200 boxes have been deployed. Installations continue at the rate of 10 units per week. Already, our neighbor county has logged more than 150 calls, dealing with such varied and potentially serious freeway emergencies as drunk driving, gun brandishing, stranded motorists and car fires.
To sum up: We have a situation in San Diego where substantial progress on freeway safety is being thwarted by the dilatory tactics of an outclassed losing bidder. It seems clear, under the circumstances, that Cubic is simply trying to buy time until its technological prowess catches up with its desire to land the contract.
The appellate court decision would seem to pave the way for a reinstatement of SAFE’s original award to Comarco.
We can only hope that SAFE takes that decisive action and has the stomach to continue the fight against an adversary who likes to whip up parochial sentiment by portraying itself as the hometown favorite whose rightful claim has been infringed by the “poacher” from the north.
