On May 21, Northampton County Council approved an $11,525,000 contract with the Mohawk Group to serve as the General Contractor for the replacement of the parking deck at the courthouse complex. Work should have been underway by now, but nothing was happening. Why not?
At last night's meeting of NorCo Council, Executive Tara Zrinski explained that Mohawk failed to provide the necessary documentation to prove that it was complying with the county's responsible contractor ordinance. As a result, the county was forced to reject the bid and go with the second highest bidder, Wilmer R Schultz, Inc. .
County Council was forced to amend its agenda to approve a contract with Wilmer R Schultz. Unfortunately, the amount of this contract was unstated. Council Solicitor Matt Deschler advised that amended agenda must be posted online within one business day, so the amount should be available sometime today.
Zrinski assured County Council that Schultz has the necessary responsible contractor certifications.
14 comments:
Yeah right, TZ is such a great leader and manager that everyone automatically accepts her assurances.
Second highest or second lowest bidder?
How did anyone know Schultz was the second [highest/lowest] if no contract amount was available?
Council should have tabled this.
Actually, it was supposed to have been on the agenda last night. I know that Schultz was #2 bc there were only two bidders although a large number of contractors did access the bid. Work for the county must hire local people and must follow a responsible contractor ordinance, which usually means union labor although there are nonunion companies with apprentice programs. I just don't know how much was bid by Schultz. That garage is falling apart so I can see why there was a need to move quickly.
We had the full contract in front of us last night. Additionally, both contracts and the pricing differences were reviewed extensively at the Finance Committee meeting before the original contract was approved.
The base bid from Schultz was lower than the base bid from Mohawk. The solar panels, which were in the bids as an alternate, pushed the Schultz bid slightly higher by about 100k (11.625m vs 11.525m).
We had all the info we needed to vote last night. I dislike amending agendas to add items (even though the PA Supreme Court ruled that it's legal, I feel it's a violation of the Sunshine Act). But in this case, given the urgent need to get this project moving and the risk of costs increasing, and the fact that both bids were already vetted publicly, I felt it was acceptable.
Sorry, slight correction to the above. It wasn't the solar panels, it was the canopy that the panels would be installed on.
So really there was only one bid? That's not competitive then. The "Restrictive Contractor Ordinance" strikes again.
RCOs add an extra layer to the bidding process that does not benefit taxpayers.
Politicians say they promote “workforce development.”
That’s not the county’s responsibility.
exactly
Last night, the Council Solicitor advised you to post the amended agenda withing 24 hours and that has been done. But what your Clerk has failed to do is include the resolution in the supporting documents for a contract over $11 million. This really should take place for the sake of transparency, if nothing else. That is a lot of $.
There were two bids. It's not just the RCO that deters contractors. Doing business with the government on any level is always a pain in the ass, as I am sure any vendor can attest.
No, but it is the county's responsibility to look out for worker safety and quality work on its own projects.
Bernie,
Wrong! It seems as though doing business with the federal government (see: all work in DC currently) is simple and have no bidding process or red strings to deal with!
I like how Boullette engages. Explains his position. I may not agree with it but it’s all business. Kelly Keegan should take note. Everything she says or does drips with emotion and hysteria. If you disagree you’re a target for her vitriol. Not the qualities we need in an elected official.
BO 3:53 pm said: “There were two bids. It's not just the RCO that deters contractors.”
I think that was 12:54’s point. If you’re already in a sector (government) that’s already “a pain in the ass” as far as working with vendors (thus limiting competition), it’s probably not too bright to add more regulations that limit who you can do business with.
I’ll add that somehow the private sector is able to build many more buildings and hire many more vendors who do quality work (usually at a pace faster than government work) while also providing safe workplaces. They do so without responsible contractor ordinances; and because of the increased competition (among other factors) they also manage to save a little price-wise for their projects.
Don’t taxpayers deserve the same?
Post a Comment