Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neshaminy board directs staff to draft responsible-contractor policy, sends proposal to committee
Summary
Board voted unanimously to ask the district solicitor and administration to draft a responsible-contractor policy for public works projects and return a proposal to committee for review.
Neshaminy School District board members voted unanimously to direct district staff and the solicitor to draft a responsible-contractor policy for public works projects and bring a proposed policy back to committee for consideration.
Board member Michael (Mike) Allen moved the resolution at the Oct. 14 meeting, saying the district needs objective qualifications for bidders that go beyond selecting the lowest price. The motion, seconded by board member Mrs. Marshall, passed 9-0.
Allen said the proposed policy would establish criteria to prequalify bidders on experience, training and compliance records. “Ensuring construction and protecting taxpayer investments requires qualifications beyond simply selecting the lowest bidder,” Allen said when introducing the motion. He added that the policy should not be used to exclude small contractors and must be carefully developed in committee.
Board members who spoke during the discussion cited two main goals: ensuring consistent quality on public works projects and strengthening ties between large contractors and local workforce training. Board member Rodriguez said the policy should include consideration of contractors’ investments in employee training and apprenticeships and stressed inclusion of all stakeholders. “All stakeholders need to be included,” Rodriguez said.
Several members also recommended that the policy be reviewed by both the policy committee and the business operations committee to avoid unintended exclusions of small firms and to incorporate knowledge from staff who have worked with local contractors.
The motion directs the district solicitor and administration to research, consult stakeholders and present a draft policy for review at a future policy-committee or board meeting. The board clerk recorded the outcome as “motion passes 9-0.”
The board noted that the vote itself does not adopt a policy; it only authorizes preparation of a draft for committee review and further public consideration.
Going forward, the district will set committee meeting dates for review; no timeline for final adoption was specified at the meeting.
