Protest Creative Sonoma's Selection of Non-Local Agency for Local Creatives Website

County of Sonoma

Purchasing Agent

2300 County Center Drive, Suite A-208

Santa Rosa, CA 95403

Dear Kristen Madsen, Creative Sonoma, and the County of Sonoma Economic Development Board,

This letter is in protest of the notice of intent for the County of Sonoma Economic Development Board and Creative Sonoma to award the project of Development and Implementation of CreativeSonoma.org to Silicon Valley Creates, Artsopolis, an organization for which the interim director of Creative Sonoma, Nancy Glaze, was once executive director. This is an egregious conflict of interest as Nancy Glaze has also acted as consultant for the last four months with Creative Sonoma during the RFP process. We also feel that Creative Sonoma withheld critical information in the RFP—a budget with a clear scope of project.

PROTEST

Creative Sonoma, an entity that plans to “represent the creative sector of the community, effectively advocating for its growth and development,” misrepresents itself by bringing an outside vendor in to develop CreativeSonoma.org, the “hub” for its growth. It is absolutely necessary that a Sonoma County creative team or teams develop the website for Creative Sonoma as this truly represents Sonoma County’s creativity. This decision to use an outside vendor takes money out of Sonoma County and takes jobs away from the local creative sector Creative Sonoma claims to represent.

Furthermore, due to Nancy Glaze’s involvement with both Creative Sonoma and Silicon Valley Creates, the team at Artsopolis was allowed to present their capabilities on November 12, 2014, nine months before this RFP was released. Because of Nancy Glaze’s relationship as executive director of Silicon Valley Creates, and her role as interim director of Creative Sonoma, she was undoubtedly aware of what it would cost to put a website of this nature together. Additionally, according to Glaze’s LinkedIn profile, she has been a consultant to Creative Sonoma since July 2015, during the RFP creation and process, yet nowhere in the RFP was a budget or a clear scope of work suggested.

GROUNDS FOR PROTEST

According to the RFP, Section J, “The evaluation committee may select those firms deemed most qualified for this project for further evaluation.” Even with the many qualified firms in Sonoma County, we know that further evaluation did not occur. It seems the deciding factors for choosing Artsopolis were: 1) price, one that undercuts all local firms’ bids because Artsopolis is funded by The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, Cisco, and Adobe, and this organization’s major partner is Silicon Valley Creates, the largest private, nonprofit arts council in the state; and 2) the fact that Creative Sonoma already has a relationship with Artsopolis and has spoken to the team directly about their capabilities. Not a single local firm was given the opportunity to present its capabilities before, during or after the RFP process.

During a discussion regarding RFP selection process with Kristen Madsen on Friday, October 16, 2015, Madsen clearly admitted that the price was a deciding factor and that the second lowest bid was from ZDCA, a local, highly-qualified, creative firm with a huge network of local suppliers and artists. Terry Garrett from Sonoma County GoLocal Cooperative explained to Kristen the long-term economic impact and benefits of hiring within the County. In fact, ZDCA’s fee, in the long run, would stimulate more local growth in the arts sector—which Creative Sonoma claims to be part of its mission—and provide more financial benefit to Sonoma County than the lesser fee of Artsopolis, which would go to stimulate the already thriving Silicon Valley. Below is the analysis that Terry Garrett of Sonoma County GoLocal Cooperative has put together:

According to Section K of the RFP, “The County further reserves the right to award the agreement to the proposer or proposers that, in the County’s judgement, best serves the needs of Sonoma County.” We believe this decision absolutely does not serve Sonoma County and its constituents.

REMEDY

The purpose of this bid protest is to offer a remedy to what we see as an egregious conflict of interest on the part of individuals involved in the decision making of Creative Sonoma as well as an insufficient RFP. The two lowest local bidders most closely aligned with Creative Sonoma’s needs, although not within the 5% stated in your Local Preference Policy for Goods, should have an opportunity to learn further about the needs and budget of Creative Sonoma and present their capabilities based on that information.

CLOSING

This protest is not just for local creative agencies, but all local agencies and businesses who intend to work with Sonoma County. We are asked to provide our fees, services, and backgrounds openly and honestly, and we expect the same transparency and accountability from our County leaders. As Creative Sonoma begins to build its foundation with integrity for local artists, we feel it would be prudent for this entity to honor its mission and promise to serve the local creative community and Sonoma County at large from day one.

We look forward to the resolution of these issues and are dedicated to upholding and exemplifying the strong creative culture of Sonoma County.

Signatures:

WIMP LLC | Web & Interactive Media Professionals

Flight LLC

Ranch7 Creative LLC

ZDCA Design & Development

Planeteria Web Design

Michele Lott Design

Sonoma County GoLocal Cooperative

Josh Simmons, MadeInSonoma.org