Taylor council deadlocks on new towing contract after months of controversy and public testimony

The Taylor City Council on April 1 failed to select a new municipal towing contractor after a contentious public hearing and more than four hours of debate.

Council members first considered a three-year contract with J & T Crova Towing (with a possible three-year extension), the low bidder selected through a rebid ordered by a court. The motion to approve J & T Crova ended in a 3-3 tie and did not pass. Councilman Charlie Johnson then moved to approve the incumbent, Area Towing; that motion failed on a 6-0 vote, leaving the city with no approved contract.

The debate drew a large crowd and dozens of public commenters from Taylor and neighboring cities who described both negative experiences with the incumbent vendor and support for the new bidder. Louay Hussain, a company representative for J & T Crova, told the council the firm operates multiple secured yards and dispatch systems and “we are one of the largest vendors in the state of Michigan. We tow for approximately 22 to 26 police departments.” He said his company had invited council members to visit and had submitted reference letters, documentation and background checks for employees.

Supporters of J & T Crova emphasized new technology and reporting requirements in the proposed contract, including digital dispatch and photo/video evidence tied to each tow. Council members who favored the bid pointed to those features and to a selection process that included site visits and evaluations by police, fire and public works staff.

Opponents cited ongoing litigation, concerns about vendor locations and transparency in the procurement process. Several council members said they needed additional time to review documents. Councilwoman Daniels said she had requested court and procurement materials earlier and only received the full packet the day before the meeting; she described the need to “trust but verify” and asked for time to read the court opinion and related records herself.

Public testimony filled much of the meeting. Several residents recounted personal bills and disputes with the incumbent vendor, describing storage or remediation charges they called excessive. Others urged the council to approve the new vendor, saying the city needed change. Multiple speakers urged the council to require tight reporting and quick termination authority in the contract; supporters of the new vendor said the agreement includes monthly reporting to the mayor, council and police chief.

Mayor Wooley and staff said the rebid followed a court-ordered revision of the request for proposals (RFP); the revised RFP limited certain provisions the judge found improper. City staff and the mayor told council members the selection panel — which included police, fire and department of public works representatives — scored proposals and recommended J & T Crova as the lowest responsive bidder after the court-ordered rebid.

Because neither motion passed, the council left the city without a new approved towing contractor. City counsel told the council his view is that the city currently does not have a legally effective contract in place with the incumbent, a position that several council members questioned and asked to see in writing.

Council members who supported immediate change urged colleagues to approve the chosen vendor and monitor performance closely, noting the contract would be "at will" and allow the city to terminate the vendor if it failed to meet the terms. Council members opposed to an immediate vote said pending litigation, outstanding questions, and the need for further document review justified delaying or reconsidering the selection.

The council did not schedule a follow-up vote at the meeting. Several council members said they wanted to obtain additional documents and clarifications before any further action.