TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR
MINUTES
TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION
COUNCIL CHAMBERS APRIL 17, 2006
SOUTH WINDSOR TOWN HALL TIME: 7:00 P.M.
1. Call Meeting to Order
Mayor Streeter called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Mayor Matthew Streeter
Deputy Mayor Thomas Delnicki
Councillor Deborah Fine
Councillor Edward Havens
Councillor Kevin McCann
Councillor John Pelkey
Councillor Cary Prague
Councillor Keith Yagaloff
Members Absent: Councillor Moriarty
Also Present: Town Manager Matthew Galligan
Atty. Duncan Forsyth, Halloran & Sage (Town Attorney)
3. Public Participation: None
4. Communications: None
5. Town Manager’s Report: None
6. Items for Discussion
A. Potential Resolution Regarding Bid Preference for South Windsor Companies
Addressing this subject was Atty. Duncan Forsyth, a Partner in the law firm of Halloran & Sage LLP, the firm chosen to represent the Town of South Windsor as its “Town Attorney.”
MINUTES
Work Session – Town Council
Page 2
April 17, 2006
6. A. (Continued)
Atty. Forsyth reported that, at the town Manager’s request, his firm had researched the subject issue regarding “bid preference.” He said that they had begun by looking back at what had happened in 1997 when a “draft” Ordinance was presented to the Town Council; was considered; tabled at that time; and no further action taken.
Continuing, Atty. Forsyth stated that, because of a recent Capital Region Council of Governments’ (CRCOG’s) bid package associated with catch basins, his firm has been asked by the Town to examine to determine whether or not it was advisable to enact the Ordinance commonly known as a “Local Bid Preference Ordinance.” Under this Ordinance, if a local vendor agreed to match the lowest responsible bid, the Town had the prerogative to shift the award to that vendor as long as it was within a certain percentage as set forth in the Ordinance.
Atty. Forsyth said that it was the opinion of the firm that it would not be advisable for the Town to enact this local Town Ordinance under the current bid package as sent out by CRCOG. They felt that this would be “changing the rules of the game” after they had been put out by CRCOG; and people bid based upon certain assumptions.
The Town Attorney felt that the bid package “certainly makes it clear” that any municipality that participated in that invitation to bid could reject any and all bids that were put forth. Therefore, it was his opinion that if the Town felt that a local bid Ordinance was advisable and good for local vendors, the option the Town could engage in is to “reject the bids currently out there; promulgate an Ordinance; and then go out to bid, separately, with the new rules, clearly indicating that if there were a local vendor who was clearly within the “spread” allowed by the Ordinance, then the Town would have the option of granting the award to the responsible “local” vendor who was willing to match the low bid.
This method, he stressed, would at least make know to all the interested bidders what the new rules of the game were, and so allow them to bid accordingly.
MINUTES
Work Session – Town Council
Page 3
April 17, 2006
6. A. (Continued)
Atty. Forsyth pointed out that the last part of his letter (a copy of which is attached) indicates that the one “caveat” that the firm has found one Superior Court case where it was commented on by Judge O’Neill that “it was possible that a local bid Ordinance could be violative of the State’s “Anti-Competitive Statute.” However, according to Atty. Forsyth, what he was referring to contained “nothing more than a comment;” and was followed up by “no legal analysis.”
Atty. Forsyth then responded to comments and questions from the Members of the Town Council regarding this subject.
A part of this discussion included the Attorney’s personal opinion that the “smaller the spread” (between the lowest responsible bid from an outside vendor, and the lowest responsible bid from a local vendor, the better the chances are that outside vendors are going to want to participate. Conversely, with a bigger spread, potential bidders may not feel it will be worth bidding because of the large spread being allowed for local vendors. He again said he felt, that from a practical standpoint, it makes sense to keep the spread “as small as possible.”
Deputy Mayor Delnicki said he wished to make one comment—that being that he does intend to pursue a Bid Preference Ordinance for the benefit of all the businesses in South Windsor who are taxpayers here. He added that he had invited Councillor Yagaloff to assist him in this endeavor. The Deputy Mayor asked Councillor Yagaloff if he would comment.
Councillor Yagaloff stated that he was open to discussing the “local preference;” and, would be happy to co-sponsor an appropriate Ordinance. He emphasized again, however, that before this could be done, he would first seek “some kind of consensus from his fellow Democrats” as to their opinions on such an Ordinance.
Deputy Mayor Delnicki then said he wished to give credit to the individual who first proposed this Ordinance back in 1997—that person being then Council Member Marianne Lassman Fisher. The Deputy Mayor then thanked Atty. Forsyth for his presence this evening, and for his input.
MINUTES
Work Session – Town Council
Page 4
April 17, 2006
6. A. (Continued)
Councillor Yagaloff, addressing Atty. Forsyth, asked if there were “some cases” in other Towns in Connecticut who are administering this ordinance in their bid process. Atty. Forsyth named Wethersfield, Hartford, and said he was aware of other Towns in Fairfield County who have this Ordinance.
Atty. Forsyth said he had suggested to the Town Manager, and they’ve agreed, to use the resources at CCM to get information regarding this and a list of other municipalities within the State using this type of Ordinance.
Councillor Yagaloff said he presumed there is “something in the CRCOG language” that prohibits municipalities from doing this. Atty. Forsyth responded that the CRCOG Invitation to Bid was totally silent with regard to the issue of local bid preference Ordinances. He said his concern was that, because it was silent to that, that it would not make sense for the Council to enact an Ordinance now; and then utilize that Ordinance to shift the award away from the responsible lowest bidder under the package.
Councillor Yagaloff asked if it was feasible for the Town to “pull back” from the CRCOG bidding; withdraw the bid; and then raise our own bid (either through CRCOG or through the Town) after the Ordinance is passed. Atty. Forsyth felt this was entirely possible—keeping in mind, in this case, that “timing” could be an issue.
Councillor Pelkey felt that the concept of a bidding package; however, he quoted that the “devil is in the detail.” He was interested in receiving some data that points to a drop-off of outside bidders when Towns “draft” such an Ordinance.
Councillor Havens stated that, as a Councillor and as a Mayor, the complaint he has heard most often is “not having awarded any local businesses any work in this community. He felt that a new Ordinance of some type might be extremely helpful. However, he said, it must apply to “written bids,” “oral bids,” bids sent by E-mail, etc.
MINUTES
Work Session – Town Council
Page 5
April 17, 2006
6. A. (Continued)
Quoting from the Public Hearing held in 1997 when the ordinance was first proposed, the Deputy Mayor quoted that “then” President of the Chamber of Commerce, Cile Decker, had stated that the “Chamber feels that this is an essential item.” The Deputy Mayor then reminded the Town Manager that he had indicated that he would get back to the Council on the timeline on that existing catch basin cleaning situation.
7. Executive Session
The Town Manager said he needed an Executive Session regarding a personnel issue this evening. At 7:30 p.m., Deputy Mayor Delnicki moved to go into Executive Session to discuss a personnel issue. It was seconded by Councillor McCann; and approved, unanimously.
8. Adjournment
Upon its return from Executive Session at 7:50 p.m., the Work Session was adjourned, with unanimous approval.
(There was a 10 Minute Recess Before Convening the Regular Meeting)
Respectfully submitted,
Patricia R. Brown
Clerk of the Council
Attmt. (Written Legal Opinion from
Halloran & Sage LLP)
| 
