Baldwinsville — A few residents believe that Lysander Supervisor Barry Bullis should be replaced because we need change. The key question is: Exactly what kind of change do they want?
Supervisor Bullis and the town board lowered the town tax rate, reduced the town’s debt load, while maintaining an appropriate cash reserve. Would it have been better if they’d raised taxes, increased borrowing and established a reserve fund that is either dangerously low or excessively high? Is that the kind of change that the residents of Lysander want? I don’t think so.
I’ve also read that we need change because the town allegedly has been granting contracts without soliciting competitive bids. That’s patently false. The town has guidelines for bidding contracts, as required by state law. Professional service contracts, however, do not require competitive bids because it is impossible to define the scope of work specifically enough to generate a meaningful cost estimate; or the nature of the work is likely to change over time. Such contracts take into account staff qualifications, the depth of in-house services the firm offers, project experience and familiarity with the needs of the town of Lysander. Those who clamor for change on this issue clearly lack a working knowledge of municipal government. Again, this is not the kind of change we want.
As the old saying goes, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” The town of Lysander isn’t broken. Supervisor Bullis has worked hard for many years to help make Lysander one of the most livable, affordable towns in Onondaga County. Changing that is the last thing we need.
Edward T. Reed is a resident of Baldwinsville.
Comments
jmsml 1 year, 9 months ago
Nothing is wrong with the old crooks, why risk bringing in new people.
And plese do not mention a political campaign that make Richard Nixon look like a choir boy.
Barry has seeded his Town Board with his buddies, now they are repaying the debt.
turgid 1 year, 9 months ago
The sheer creativity of our Lysander Town Supervisor never ceases to amaze me. He reshapes common concepts and redefines standard terms, all seemingly at will. In the end, what he delivers bears no semblance whatsoever to what he promised. Black is white and old is new. And somehow, he manages to outdo himself every time.
Take for example, the concept of an “RFP,” which is an acronym for “Request For Proposal.” It is a common method for soliciting bids for a specified product or service. In the private sector, also known as “Corporate America,” an RFP is standard operating procedure. In the public sector (government), an RFP process is often required by law.
Either way, an RFP ensures that potential sellers of a specified product or service are treated fairly by the buyer. In short, it provides a competitive, but level playing field. More important, the RFP process ensures that the buyer obtains the best possible product or service at the lowest possible price. In other words, it maximizes value.
Just as shareowners want value from the investments they make, taxpayers want value from the taxes they pay. Again, the RFP process is just another way to maximize value. In the words of Warren Buffet, “Price is what you pay, but value is what you get.” It’s a very basic concept, which most folks seem to understand. Notice that I said most folks.
If maximizing the value of our taxpayer dollars were important to Supervisor Bullis, then he would adopt and follow a simple and straightforward RFP process. But, he doesn’t. A case in point is the recently renewed agreement between the Jack’s Reef Kennel Dog Protective Agency, Inc. (JRKDPA) and the town for dog control and kennel services.
Our town’s procurement policy states that, “Except when directed by the Town Board, no solicitation of written proposals or quotations shall be required (for) acquisition of professional services.” The town can award no-bid contracts for professional services. To be clear, New York State law does not require towns to solicit competitive bids for professional services, such as legal, engineering, and dog control and kennel services.
turgid 1 year, 9 months ago
But, New York State law expressly forbids favoritism of any kind on the part of town government. Specifically, Section 104-B (Procurement policies and procedures) of Article 2-A (Public Contracts) of General Municipal Law of New York State, states that:
“Goods and services which are not required by law to be procured by…competitive bidding must be procured in a manner so as to assure the prudent and economical use of public moneys in the best interests of the taxpayers…, to facilitate the acquisition of goods and services of maximum quality at the lowest possible cost…, and to guard against favoritism, improvidence, extravagance, fraud and corruption. To further these objectives, the governing (town) board…shall adopt internal policies and procedures governing all procurements of goods and services which are not required to be made pursuant to the competitive bidding requirements of…local law.”
Whether to maximize taxpayer value or minimize the risk of favoritism, the town chose last fall for the first time to solicit competitive bids for dog control and kennel services. On November 21, 2010, the town of Lysander published a legal notice in the Syracuse Post-Standard. It was a “Request For Proposal” for dog control and kennel services.
Like most folks in Lysander, I read that paper last November with a mixture of surprise and relief. For once, the town of Lysander would follow standard operating procedure. But thanks to Supervisor Bullis, my pride in our town was short-lived. Once again, he reshaped a common concept and redefined a standard term, all apparently at will. And in the end, what he delivered bore no semblance whatsoever to what he promised.
It is an unwritten rule in the world of commerce that certain circumstances require the reissue of a new RFP, including changes in the term, requirements or scope of services. There seems to be an unwritten rule of a different type in our town government, in that the best contracts and positions may be reserved for the supervisor’s political friends.
turgid 1 year, 9 months ago
If not, then why did the town of Lysander fail to reissue the first and only RFP dog control and kennel services in its history, despite the following significant changes:
· The RFP states that “copies of completed proposals must be delivered by 4:30 p.m., December 3, 2010.” The proposal submitted by the JRKDPA, the recipient of a no-bid contract since 2004, is clearly stamped “RECEIVED Dec 06 2010.” The proposal was received after the deadline stipulated by the town in the RFP.
· The RFP lists the term as “January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011.” The contract between the town and JRKDPA states that the term is “until December 31, 2012.” The RFP term was only for one year, but the signed contract term is for 2 years.
· The RFP describes the primary service as “24-hour on-call response and investigation of complaints.” The signed contract states that, “After hours calls (5:01 p.m. to 7:59 a.m.) will be responded to on an emergency basis only, emergency being…determined by Jack’s Reef (JRKDPA).”
· The RFP states that another service is to “patrol town roads.” The signed contract makes no mention of any requirement to patrol town roads at all.
· The RFP states that whomever the town awards the contract “also serves as Town Constable for enforcement of both civil and criminal penalties under state and local dog control laws).” Once again, the signed contract makes no mention of a requirement to serve as town constable or in the role of any public servant.
· The RFP states that any proposal must “specify hours of operation, accessibility, performance standards and guarantees.” The signed contract fails to mention whether weekday hours of service differ from hours of service on weekends.
· The RFP states that proposals must “include at least one client reference.” The proposal submitted by the JRKDPA and accepted by the town includes none.
· The RFP states that any proposal must “specify and define all charges to the town, including kenneling, care, disposal, mileage, etc.” The signed contract states that, “Office space will be provided by the town….The cost of the space will be shared equally by the town and Jack’s Reef, whose share will be deducted from the contract’s overall value.” The amount charged to the JRKDPA is only $684.75 per year, which is significantly below fair market value for office space of similar location, size, and amenities in the town of Lysander.
·
turgid 1 year, 9 months ago
The RFP states that any proposal must “specify and define all charges to the town, including kenneling, care, disposal, mileage, etc.” But, neither the proposal submitted by the JRKDPA and accepted by the town nor the signed contract mentions any reimbursement for mileage. And a subsequent communication from the town clerk states that, “Research is being done to see if the contract should state that the DCO gets reimbursed for mileage when he serves an appearance ticket. Right now it is a negotiated agreement (verbal so to speak) that the DCO (Dog Control Officer) will be reimbursed.” Verbal, “so to speak?”
· As of 5:00 p.m. on January 24, 2011, the agenda for that night’s town board meeting posted on the town's website still failed to address or list the issue of the outstanding contract for dog control and kennel services. But the town waited until the meeting started that night to distribute a revised meeting agenda, which included the issue of the contract for dog control and kennel services. The town supervisor gave for his reason the excuse that the town attorney had not yet finished negotiating with the JRKDPA until just before the meeting opened at 7:00 p.m. The decision regarding this contract was now three weeks past the date specified in the RFP.
As for this last point of contrast between what the town promised in its RFP and what it delivered in its contract, see the town board meeting minutes from January 24, 2011:
APPROVAL OF 2011 CONTRACT JACK’S REEF KENNEL DOG PROTECTIVE AGENCY, INC. RES. #22/2011 Motion by Levy, Second by Reed
“RESOLVED that the Supervisor be authorized to sign the 2011-2012 Dog Control Officer Services Agreement with the Jack’s Reef Kennel Dog Protective Agency, Inc. in the amount of $44,748.
VOTE: Supervisor Bullis Yes Councilor May Yes Councilor Krisanda Yes Councilor Levy Yes Councilor Reed Yes
All Ayes, Motion carried and adopted.
Supervisor Bullis reported that the Board factored in use of office space and that service will be extended to the Village of Baldwinsville. The Town does not have to extend service into the Village by law, however it was the desire of the Board to do so. The Village of Baldwinsville residents will no longer have to pay for Dog Control Services in the Lysander portion of the Village. This will be a two year contract at the same annual fee for each contract year. Supervisor Bullis said he researched what other Towns are paying for Dog Control Services and believe that the amount of $44,748 is a fair price. Attorney Twichell reported that the service being extended into the Village of Baldwinsville also includes the enforcement of the Village’s leash and noise law.”
turgid 1 year, 9 months ago
It seems that Supervisor Bullis rewarded a fellow member of (and contributor to) the Lysander Republican Committee, Don Power, who is president of the JRKDPA, and who has received no-bid town contracts for dog control and kennel services since 2004. If you don't believe me, then please click below to see the town's original RFP, Mr. Power's proposal, and his final contract with the town, all of which are posted here.
How you would feel if you had considered submitting a bid for this role, but then chose not to, based on the RFP? How would you react to learning that the winning bidder:
· Submitted his proposal after the deadline? · Received a contract for two years, not just one? · Had his required work hours reduced from 24 hours per day to just 8 hours? · Was allowed the discretion to determine which calls constitute emergencies? · Was relieved from having to patrol the roads of the town? · Doesn’t have to serve as town constable, or be fingerprinted, tested, or trained? · Doesn’t have to work weekends? · Didn’t have to submit a client reference? · Will enjoy office space in town hall at a rate far below fair market value? · Will be reimbursed for mileage in the performance of his role? · Could verbally negotiate these and other terms of the contract with the town?
Are these the same term, requirements, and scope of service from the original RFP? Or is it now a completely different role? Shouldn’t the town have issued a new RFP?
If others had the same knowledge of these contract changes as Mr. Power did, then perhaps they would have submitted proposals, too. But they didn’t, so they didn't. And as a result, Mr. Power’s proposal was the only one received by the town in response to its RFP. How convenient for him and for Mr. Bullis, too.
An RFP ensures that potential sellers of a specified product or service are treated fairly by the buyer, so that it provides for a competitive, but level playing field. The RFP process ensures that the buyer obtains the best possible product or service at the lowest possible price, so that it maximizes value. Did Supervisor Bullis accomplish this?
Did he maximize value for the town’s taxpayers? Did he provide a level playing field for potential bidders? Or did he just hide a policy of favoritism behind an illegitimate RFP?
Unfortunately, things aren't always what they seem in the town of Lysander, wheter the term “RFP” doesn’t seem to stand for “Request For Proposal.” Instead, it seems to signify an entirely type of contract. Perhaps, it means “Reserved For Pals.”
turgid 1 year, 9 months ago
Nice try, Mr. Reed. Their are town favorites which is specifically prohibited by State Law. The DCO, B&L and legal all fall under this law. They have been employed by LIEsander for decades without any competition. I thought Republicans thougt competition was good unless it interfers with feeding off the taxpayers. I guess Art's research was enough. He knows friends in the legal and engineering worlds and we get the best price.
jmsml 1 year, 9 months ago
Turgid, you may not be aware that the RFP was written by the same Town Atty that did the incorporation paperwork for JRKDPA in the first place. The RFP was customized to exclude ANY other possible competition, the fact that he did is so poorly is par for his performance.
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID