YourCT.com header image 2

Norwalk: Municipal Contracting Philosophies At Odds


by turfgrrl


August 7th, 2007 · 3 Comments

The prevailing economic philosophy when it comes to awarding municipal contracts is that the lowest price serves Norwalk residents best. On the surface, paying the least amount for services in a competitive bidding process seems like a good idea. Competition theoretically does the job of negotiating a fair price. In practice though, the system of lowest bid wins the contract has led to contractors gaming the system with low ball bids completed to standards that will result in more money being paid to fix the things the contractor skimped on in performing the work.

It doesn’t take long to see the years of lowest bid contracting lasting effects in Norwalk. From the leaking school roofs that leaked after millions in renovations, to school construction project costs escalating with delays and retrofits, and the crumbling potholes, which form within days of being repaired. The truth is that the years of skimping on cost, the lack of oversight of the contractors work in the first place, and the mismanagement of Stuart Opdahl in particular have all led to an increased cost of contracting that remains unaccounted for.

One of the ways that a contractor cuts corners is by hiring laborers at lower wages. Inexperienced workers, workers who don’t understand what they are doing, or what they are told to do, can create havoc. The I-84 fiasco is a great example, a contractor hired workers that managed to install catch basins that weren’t connected to anything. Either the workers were criminally negligent, or they had no clue as to what they were supposed to be doing. We don’t have to look very far to find similar blatantly shoddy workmanship. Over on Osborne street, contractors have been digging and re-digging a trench, presumably hired by SNEW, and have patched it with the worst patching job I have ever seen. Truly it is a site to behold. Lumpy, bumpy and crumbly. ANd right by Fort Point there is a hole, that resembles the computer simulations that physicists use to model the effects of a black hole. For all I know it is black hole, and everyone should be afraid to drive over it. What are they still doing on Osborne? This has been going on since May and there’s no sign anyone has gone over to say to these contractors that they are doing a sucky job.

Tomorrow night the Ordinance committee of the Common Council is taking up some legislation to counter the prevailing cheaper is better philosophy. The language of it, responsible contracting, lends itself to the idea at least. Whether the legislation accomplishes that is up for debate. While the proposed language is not up on the Norwalk City web site, here is a scanned copy of it, and I apologize for not having a way to increase the type size on it, but documents arrive here in mysterious ways. I also have posted the white paper against the idea of project labor agreements.

The Hour’s Robert Koch previews the likely philosophies:

The public hearing before the Common Council’s Ordinance Committee is scheduled for 8 p.m. Wednesday in the third-floor council chambers of City Hall, 125 East Ave.

Among those planning to attend the public hearing before the Common Council’s Ordinance Committee is Brian Petronella, president of United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 371.

“I support it 110 percent. It’s something that I’ve been trying to help the building trades get in Norwalk for the last five years,” Petronella said. “We have a lot of construction that’s going to be happening in Norwalk. I believe those folks should be entitled to wages and benefits that others enjoy in the building trades. (Instead) very often what happens is employers go out and circumvent worker compensation laws by not paying the prevailing rate in an area, and also not providing medical and pension benefits.”
Under the proposed ordinance, put forward by council President Michael W. Coffey, Norwalk would be required to give preference to people in the Norwalk labor market area when hiring mechanics, laborers and workmen for certain municipal construction projects.

Contractors and subcontractors have to pay their employees in accordance with the state’s prevailing wage — as is now the case. The law applies to new construction work totaling or exceeding $400,000, and remodeling, rehabilitation and similar work totaling or exceeding $100,000.

In addition, contractors would be required to provide their employees hospitalization and medical benefits under the contract, and classify their workers as “employees” rather than “independent contractors.’

The proposed ordinance includes opportunities for apprenticeship programs, and reporting requirements for employers, including the forwarding of payroll records.

Coffey, also chairman of the Ordinance Committee, unveiled the draft ordinance during a press conference at City Hall July 24. More than a dozen representatives of area labor organizations, including Petronella, as well as Mayor Richard A. Moccia, attended the conference.

Moccia said he has spoken with Danbury Mayor Mark D. Boughton regarding responsible contractor ordinances. Moccia said he supports the concept. He predicts any difficulty will lie in the details.

“It’s worked in Danbury. Mayor Boughton spoke very glowingly of it. But again, we’ll have our corporation counsel talk with (Danbury officials),” Moccia said Monday. “There’s probably going to be some opposition … but we’ll let the council people do the debating on that. I’ve already stated that, in principle, I support something like this to get quality work. The devil is in the details.”

Boughton said Danbury adopted its ordinance five or six years ago. The ordinance, he said, is in effect for the city’s contract with Konover Construction, which is building a $38-million police headquarters.

Bougton said the ordinance has helped employ local people, train them through apprenticeship programs, and improve the quality of work.

“Our projects are high quality with very few callbacks, because we’re using local vendors that care about the community, and there’s a sensitivity toward timeliness,” Boughton said. Without such an ordinance “you may get a cheap price, but in terms of change orders and callbacks, you’ll end up paying later.”

My guess is that in Danbury Boughton has taken a step to curb the proliferation of illegal immigrants working on municipal contracts by adopting this type of ordinance. It will be interesting to see how that issue plays in Norwalk.

contractor ordinance draft

PLA in CT

source: The Hour, City mulls ‘responsible contractor’ ordinance, By ROBERT KOCH, August 7, 2007

Tags: In the News · Norwalk

3 Responses so far “Norwalk: Municipal Contracting Philosophies At Odds”



  • 1 Art Santella // Aug 7, 2007 at 10:03 am

    It would seem to me that the idea of bidding which is open only to local contractors, may cost a few bucks more, but is putting local people to work. These people are spending money, and hopfully paying taxes locally and helping Norwalk’s economy. It is also a lot easier to keep tabs and take legal action if necessary on firms that are local, if their work is not up to quality and deadline specifications.

    But what do I know?

  • 2 Anonymous // Aug 8, 2007 at 2:21 pm

    Is this post about making good choices in bidding out projects and services or is it about curbing abuse of illegal immigrants and championing Norwalk based business? If it’s about the former, references should play a part in making decisions. How many people, in reroofing their homes, don’t chose the lowest bidder because of the measure of comfort engendered by good references?

  • 3 Grinder // Aug 8, 2007 at 5:31 pm

    Lowest bidders are not always chosen for construction projects….We are told that the lowest bidder has been accepted but requsitions are made for middle bid or high bids and then someone pockets the difference.Anyone who knows about construction realizes that most contractors on muicipal jobs are from “out of town” anyway..Some local contractors will not even win any bids beacuse they might have had a beef with the city or a particular person within city management.Drive by the development on Main street and you would have seen that all the contractor signs boast that they are from out of town also….I’ts amazing that someone would spend $100+ a week in gas to travel to a job…Instead of worrying about contractors being local the city should be concerned with direct employees of DPW,Parks and Rec,BOE,Police,Fire being norwalk residents.Especially people working at city hall in upper management.Most are out of towners that have no direct financial interest in this town.Who wants to have someone not living in their house having any say about the finances of the house?……Peolpe involved with the future financial growth of this city sould live here and have a “vested interest”.

Leave a Reply