Skip to main content
File #: 25-1288   
On agenda: 4/7/2026 Final action:
Enactment date: Enactment #: Agreement No. 26-139
Recommended Action(s)
Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Master Agreement for various printing services, effective upon execution, not to exceed five consecutive years, which includes a three-year base contract and two optional one-year extensions, total not to exceed $3,500,000 (4/5 vote).
Attachments: 1. Agenda Item, 2. Agreement A-26-139 Master Agreement
Date Action ByActionResultAction DetailsAgenda MaterialsVideo
No records to display.

DATE:                     April 7, 2026

 

TO:                     Board of Supervisors

 

SUBMITTED BY:                     Mike Kerr, Director of Information Technology/Chief Information Officer

                     Steven E. White, Director of Public Works and Planning

 

SUBJECT:                     Master Agreement for Printing Services

 

RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):

TITLE

Approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Master Agreement for various printing services, effective upon execution, not to exceed five consecutive years, which includes a three-year base contract and two optional one-year extensions, total not to exceed $3,500,000 (4/5 vote).

REPORT

There is no additional Net County Cost associated with the recommended action, which will allow the Information Technology Services Department (ITSD) - Graphic Communication Services subdivision (Graphics) and the Department of Public Works and Planning (PWP) to contract with vendors for various printing services. This item is countywide.

 

ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S):

 

Should your Board not approve the recommended action, Graphics will not have the resources necessary to maintain current operations and adequately support user departments.

 

FISCAL IMPACT:

 

There is no increase in Net County Cost associated with the recommended action. Costs associated with the recommended Agreement will not exceed $3,500,000 for the total potential five-year term and are covered through chargebacks to user departments. Costs for PWP reprographic services will be covered from appropriate sources for various public works projects as the services are provided. Sufficient appropriations and estimated revenues are included in the ITSD Org 8905 and various PWP Orgs FY 2025-26 Adopted Budgets and will be included in future ITSD and PWP Recommended Budget requests for the duration of the Agreement term.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Historically, the County has utilized a combination of in-house and external printing services to meet the printing needs of user departments through master procurement agreements. On July 1, 2021, the General Services Department - Purchasing Division (Purchasing), on behalf of ITSD, executed printing services Agreement No. P-21-249, effective July 21, 2021 through June 30, 2024, with two optional one-year extensions, total not to exceed $2,000,000.

 

When requesting approval to extend the Agreement into its fifth and final year, Purchasing re-assessed the scope of the Agreement and determined the County is procuring services rather than goods only, and the amount of the Agreement exceeds the Purchasing Manger’s authority. Purchasing advised ITSD that a new printing services agreement would need to go before your Board. To allow time for the competitive bid process, short-term purchasing agreements were issued effective August 1, 2025 through March 31, 2026.

 

On October 17, 2025 the County issued Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 26-027. Addendum No. 1 to the RFP was issued on November 4, 2025, followed by Addendum No. 2 on November 13, 2025, to address questions from potential bidders. The RFP closed on December 1, 2025. Six bids were received: Advantage Specialties; Jade Capital Partners dba California Financial Printing; Dumont Printing, Inc.; Fresno Reprographics, Inc.; Professional Print and Mail, Inc.; and Smart Source LLC. Cost proposals were based on example projects, with actual costs varying depending on project specifications. Staff will be soliciting bids on a per-project basis.

 

An evaluation panel, consisting of a Supervising Multimedia Technician and Graphic Arts Specialist from ITSD, and a Program Manager from PWP, conducted a thorough review of each proposal based on the criteria outlined in the RFP. Each evaluator individually reviewed each proposal on its own merit, based on bidder-provided data, capability, and qualifications. The evaluators concluded that each vendor has the expertise, experience, significant locally based support team, and competitive pricing that would best benefit the County meeting the RFP requirements. The recommendation to award all six vendors was based on the vendors’ offered services and their respective base-model capabilities, competitive pricing, turnaround time, and a locally based support services team.

 

Approval of the recommended Agreement will provide a vendor pool to ensure flexibility, timely service, quality, and competitive pricing. In addition to improving service delivery, the recommended Agreement will require user departments to go through Graphics to fulfill requests for service. In addition, PWP will utilize the recommended Agreement specifically for large format prints for public works projects and will serve as the County representative for those services only, while Graphics will serve as the County representative for all other printing services. By requiring departments to route printing requests through Graphics or PWP, the County can ensure consistency in quality, better manage vendor performance, and maintain cost control across departments. Centralizing requests in this way also supports more efficient use of resources and aligns with countywide standards for printed materials.

 

Per County Charter Section 13, approval of the recommended Agreement requires four affirmative votes of the Board of Supervisors as some of the contracted services can be, and are currently being, performed by County employees. While there is some overlap in services, internal County procedures are in place to ensure that services of County staff are prioritized. The recommended Agreement is only utilized when the County is unable to appropriately respond to user department requests.

 

ATTACHMENTS INCLUDED AND/OR ON FILE:

 

On file with Clerk - Master Agreement

 

CAO ANALYST:

 

Amy Ryals