Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local contractor alleges procurement irregularities after low bid on Liberty water tank
Summary
A Sullivan County contractor said he was the low bidder on a county Liberty Complex water tank job but received a later county attorney letter declaring him an "irresponsible bidder" based on prior contracts he disputes; he asked the legislature to review the record and consider local vendors.
A Sullivan County contractor told legislators during public comment that he was the low bidder by about $40,000 on a December water‑storage tank solicitation for the Liberty Complex but later received a certified letter from the county attorney stating prior contracts justified declaring him an "irresponsible bidder." He asked the county to review references and called for transparency.
Norm Sutherland, owner of NGS Construction, said his firm bid as prime contractor on the Dec. 13 solicitation to install a new water storage tank. Sutherland said he became aware by certified letter in early February that the county attorney had raised concerns, and he disputed the factual basis of the letter.
Sutherland said the county attorney's letter cited problems on prior projects, including a claim that his crews worked in a hamlet called "Eulen." He said the referenced project was in Eldred and that the quality issues flagged by the county were either unrelated or subsequently remedied. He said he had performed multiple water‑main and tank projects for towns and villages in the county and that AquaStor (a tank vendor) supports his work. Sutherland said the owner of AquaStor had contacted him in surprise after learning of the county attorney's letter.
Sutherland asked officials to review the references he submitted with the bid and suggested the county call previous municipal clients named in his materials. He also asked staff to confirm the award status; the transcript does not record an award decision during the meeting.
County officials on the record in the transcript did not provide the full contents of the county attorney's letter or a determination on the procurement outcome during public comment. A committee member asked Sutherland to submit documentation of references and project details to county staff.
Ending: Committee members told Sutherland to provide the requested references and contact information to the clerk; staff said they would follow up. The transcript does not include a formal finding or a vote on the procurement matter.
