Wednesday, February 18, 2015

WEEKLY RECYCLING APPROVED, BUT FOR $65,000 MORE THAN IT SHOULD COST

Maplewood residents will finally have weekly recycling after the Township Committee on Tuesday approved a resolution awarding the contract.

But it will cost $65,000 more than it could have because the Township did not properly issue the previous bid, sparking a legal challenge that ended with a previous lower bid being thrown out.

The $263,000 one-year contract was awarded to Gaeta Recycling of Paterson last night in a 5-0 vote. But the contract could have cost just $198,000.

"It has not been a situation that has been beneficial to the Township in terms of cost," said Township Attorney Roger Desiderio. "There really was not much choice."

The situation began when a request for proposal went out in late 2014 seeking a weekly recycler for 2015 and required potential bidders to submit their bids on Nov. 25.

That request for proposal was the second for this program after the first request in October resulted in just one bidder, F. Basso Jr. Rubbish Removal, with a bid of $499,000 that was deemed too high.
 
On the second request for proposal in November, four firms bid, with Bella Cleaning and Carting of Ridgewood offering the lowest bid at $198,240.

But the second lowest bidder, Gaeta, claimed the lowest bid was improperly submitted and blamed the Township for failing to provide information on an addendum to the request. Gaeta's bid was $243,400.

In January, a Superior Court judge agreed and threw out the bids, requiring the Township to seek bids for a third time, which it did on Feb. 10. But just one company, Gaeta, submitted a bid at that time, for $263,000, which the TC approved Tuesday night.

Desiderio and Township Administrator Joseph Manning said last night that they did not know why there was only one bidder, adding that they will seek to find out and hope for more bidders in the future when the contract is put out for 2016.

"We did everything we were supposed to do," Mayor Vic De Luca said. "We don't know why there was only one bid."

No comments: