There is little chance the UNM Board of Regents will consider putting the project labor agreement back on the table any time soon.
The regents voted 4-2 in favor March 8 for the UNM Hospital agreement.
Some regents said the agreement would ensure timeliness, quality and efficiency for the project - something that has been a problem with construction projects at UNM in the past.
The agreement, instead of taking the lowest offer for projects, requires contractors to be qualified before submitting a bid.
More than 60 area contractors responded to the vote by signing a letter contending the agreement and sent it to the regents asking them to reconsider the labor plan at their next meeting on May 14.
UNM President Louis Caldera and Regents President Jamie Koch set the meeting agenda and they can take up to 24 hours before the meeting to determine the agenda.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
Susan McKinsey, director of public affairs, said the agenda is usually available five days before the meeting, but because May is hectic due to graduation, it may not be that soon.
She said it is much too early in the process to consider agenda items and even when the regents meet in May, they could easily avoid a meeting of substance addressing the labor agreement until June.
Regents Mar°a Griego-Raby and Sandra Begay-Campbell voted against the agreement.
Begay-Campbell said she would love for there to be immediate plans on the agenda, but that there would have to be a consensus.
"I disagree because there is a process that needs to be addressed and questions answered," she said. "I would be glad to re-discuss it because our vote is in line with what the contractors want."
Contractors said the agreement would change their business formulas to suit UNM's needs and would not promote competition.
Because taxpayers' dollars are being used to fund the $183 million expansion, they said it is not an appropriate screening process.
"When I wear my taxpayer hat, I like to see a cost-effective project achieved by competition and a PLA does not offer competition," said Donald Kawal, president of Klinger Constructors, who signed the letter.
Steve Crespin, executive director of the Mechanical Contractors Association that represents union contractors, said if low-bidding contracting is not working, there is nothing wrong with a different approach.
"The regents and the governor should be commended," he said. "What is wrong with requiring a contractor to put his rÇsumÇ on the table?"
He said the opposition is forcing the project to come out just perfect and that does not happen with most construction projects, union or non-union.
According to the letter, New Mexico is 92 percent non-union and exempts the New Mexican workforce.
"For them to say we are exempting 92 percent of the workers is not true," Crespin said, adding that only a handful of those who signed the letter are qualified to do the job.
The letter also states that PLA supporters insist on hiring union workers that are looked at as the only sources for skill.
"For the University to sign a PLA in a state that is predominantly non-union, it is not an appropriate way to spend tax dollars," said Matthew Martin, president of Gerald Martin Contractors. "It is going to limit competition. It will certainly bring in a lot of out-of-state competition that I do not think is good for economic development."
