Council declines staff'recommended Hazen & Sawyer contract for valve assessment after procurement and ethics concerns

Staff presented a recommended award of a CDBG-funded valve assessment study (grant award $399,852; total contract up to $497,750) and proposed using Hazen & Sawyer because the firm already maintains the town's water-system GIS and model from the larger water project. "They will be able to build off of that current mapping and we would have one integrated GIS system," a staff member explained, describing the vendor's institutional knowledge.

Several council members objected to awarding the contract without a formal price bid. Council Member Hall and others pointed to the town ordinance favoring formal bidding at particular thresholds; other members and staff replied the solicitation was issued as an RFQ for professional services and that engineering contracts commonly use qualifications-based selection. Council Member Kane raised an ethics concern, noting a recent six-count ethics ruling that referenced Hazen & Sawyer and saying the town should avoid the "appearance of impropriety." "I think this is inappropriate to sole source this contract to Hazen & Sawyer when it's an open question of whether these water contracts are voidable based on the ethics ruling," Kane said.

After debate about whether to rebid or proceed under professional-services procurement rules, the motion to approve the staff recommendation failed on a roll-call vote. Council members who opposed the motion said they would prefer rebidding or further review to avoid an appearance of favoritism; staff said the town could return with price proposals from other qualified respondents if council directs it.

Separately, council voted to place a future agenda item requesting legal advice on whether water contracts are voidable given the ethics ruling. That separate motion passed and directs the town attorney to provide guidance to council for a subsequent meeting.