Below is an email chain between Delran’s Recreation Chairperson and the representative at Starlite.
On September 24th Starlite adjusted the quote from $150,000 down to $61,500 and sent the new quote to Colin at 5:35:13 PM on September 24th.
At 6:25 pm Colin wrote back:”Hey,Thank you for the quote.
Just it make this even more interesting, we are having an issue with the bidding
threshold. We need to have a call immediately on this.”
At this point the quote was for $61,500 and the bidding threshold for Delran is $44,000.
On September 28th at 12:36:06 PM Starlite wrote to Colin:
“Hi Colin,Are there any updates on this? Without any commitment from your team, we’re unable to
hold any equipment or reserve labor. With each day that passes, we run the risk of not having
availability. Please let us know asap if you would like to move forward. Thank you.”
On September 28th at 8:09 PM Colin wrote to Starlite:
“Ok. And the township solicitor has directed me that it must be two separate contracts. Willthat be a problem?”
On September 28th at 8:21 PM Starlite wrote to Colin:
“I don’t think operations will allow that. As I mentioned, the contract is not for billingpurposes, but just for our records only.
There will be 2 separate quotes and 2 separate invoices.”
On September 28th at 9:13 pm Colin wrote to Starlite:
“We can get the township solicitor on the phone to help remedy this issue.”
On September 29th, after a full month of all services being offered in one, Colin wrote to Starlite:
“Hey,We need those quotes asap to meet the required days.”
As you can see, it is now more than one quote that Colin is requesting from Starlite.
September 29th at 1:53 pm Starlite wrote to Colin:
“Colin,Here is the proposal from the video supplier.
September 29th at 4:38 pm Colin wrote to Starlite:
“We need a contract to sign from the video company and an invoice from you.Per the state, an invoice and contract is required. Then we will be good to go to meet the requirements.”
September 30th at 11:59 am Starlite wrote to Colin”
“Please see the attached video contract. I will send the Starlite invoice today.”
As you can see, Starlite separated the contract into two and offered the same exact services, only by two separate companies, for the same exact price as the original contract. One being Video WallTronics for $22,500 and one being Starlite for $39,000. Fixing the “issue with the bidding threshold” by dividing a contract that was in whole into parts.
NJ Contract Law States:
40A:11-7 Contracts not to be divided.7.Contracts not to be divided. a. No contract in the aggregate which is single in character or which necessarily or by reason of the quantities required to effectuate the purpose of the contract includes the provision or performance of additional goods or services, shall be divided, so as to bring it or any of the parts thereof under the bid threshold, for the purpose of dispensing with the requirement of public advertising and bidding therefor.
b.In contracting for the provision or performance of any goods or services included in or incidental to the provision or performance of any work which is single in character or inclusive of the provision or performance of additional goods or services, all of the goods or services requisite for the completion of such contract shall be included in one contract.
The law is clear, all services needed for the completion of the contract should be included in one, just as they were in the first two proposals from Starlite. Once those services were divided the bidding threshold was no longer an issue, but the law is.
One response to “Email Chain Shows How Bids Were Split.”
[…] and a half hour party in a small town. That proposal would later be decreased to $61,500, but in a chain of emails between Starlite and Colin Rafferty, that amount still created an “issue with the bidding […]