The firm that previously managed Atlanta’s city-owned tennis facilities for the past decade is formally protesting a move to award the contract to another company.
The contract was on the Atlanta City Council’s Monday meeting agenda. But a vote on the matter was delayed by nine hours of public comment, the vast majority was about which firm sould run the city’s five facilities for the next decade.
The council will reconvene its virtual meeting at 10 a.m. Tuesday, and is expected to vote on the contract in the afternoon after public comment concludes.
Two firms, Universal Tennis Management and Agape Tennis Academy, have been competing over the past year for the $25 million contract, and the city has re-bid it three times. Both companies where initially disqualified during the first round for not meeting local hiring requirements.
Agape won the second bid, but a groundswell of public support to keep Universal prompted the city to rebid the contract last year.
Agape again won that bid.
But an attorney for Universal argued in a letter dated Nov. 30 that Agape’s bid misrepresented the amount of capital improvements that it would provide to the city by $150,000, and grossly inflated the amount of revenue it would share with the city.
“The City could not have reasonably determined (Agape) was a responsive and responsible offeror when its proposal contained false and misleading material facts,” wrote lawyer Cary Ichter, of Ichter Davis LLC.
Agape Owner and CEO Amy Pazahanick said the discrepancies in the figures resulted from normal negotiations with the city that take place once a vendor has been selected, and that Universal was not privy to those talks.
“Everything has been done 100% properly,” Pazahanick told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Pazahanick said Agape had also agreed to take on additional expenses that the city normally incurs.
Atlanta has one of the country’s most vibrant tennis scenes and the Atlanta City Council has listened to dozens of hours of public comment in support of both companies over the past year.
In September, the council voted to shelve the contract, making the city vulnerable to a court challenge.
About the Author
