Can West Windsor adopt an ordinance that would ensure that construction companies bidding on large township projects are solid companies that provide pension plans, health benefits, and apprenticeship-training programs for their employees?.##M:[more]##
Council President Will Anklowitz says yes. Councilwoman Linda Geevers says no, and that the measure would reduce competition and could lead to increased costs. A decision on the matter could come during the council’s next meeting on Monday, May 19, when discussion is set to continue.
Debate became heated during the council’s April 21 meeting when Geevers said she was concerned that possible pay-to-play issues were driving the resolution on part of Anklowitz and councilman Charles Morgan, who also supports the measure. She suggested that special interest groups, including unions, gave money to the councilmen during their campaigns “in exchange for promoting resolutions that exclude competent competition, which in turn costs the taxpayers more money.”
When she stated these concerns during the meeting, Anklowitz said he was offended. After the meeting, Anklowitz said: “I was kind of offended,” he said. “It has nothing to do with campaign contributions.”
The proposed resolution is not self-enacting, says Anklowitz. It calls for the mayor to issue an executive order to ensure the bidders on significant construction projects, which means those who bid on projects costing more than $21,”500, are qualified to do the job.
“It’s meant to make sure that if you’ve got a big construction project that you’ve got a big, solid construction company” to do it, he explains. “We don’t know if they treat their workers well.” It also is meant to ensure that on big projects, the company’s employees are “capable of what they’re doing. It saves you money in the long run. It saves you from the surprises of having a contract that costs you more than what it would have initially been.”
Geevers, on the other hand, says the township already ensures that companies bidding on the projects are of good quality because it is required to accept the lowest responsible bidder, “the emphasis on the responsible bidder.” “It’s not the absolute lowest bidder,” she points out.
“At a time when the economy is in a recession and people are losing their jobs, why would we want to do anything that could possibly increase the cost of construction, which in turn, adds to the burden of our taxpayers?” she said. “What is the need to do this? Any construction company can bid. Why would you limit who can bid by putting in such a provision?”
She also questioned whether there is any proof that the quality of construction is better with businesses that have quality apprenticeship programs. Geevers questions whether a parking garage would fall under the resolution. “It’s possible that a private company could build this parking garage.”
While Geevers had concerns about labor union contributions to the campaigns of Anklowitz, Morgan, and Borek, in relation to the resolution, Anklowitz, in turn, said one could possibly accuse Geevers of the same thing. He was referring to contributions from Pat Boyle — who was recently appointed to a vacant advisory position in the West Windsor Parking Authority — to Geevers’ campaign. The council unanimously supported his appointment, after Anklowitz and Morgan first tabled his appointment to seek further information.
“I know that she’s taken contributions from somebody who then came into council and got appointed to a board,” Anklowitz said. “I thought the guy was a good guy,” he said in reference to why he voted yes to his appointment. “It has nothing to do with campaign contributions.”
The News checked prior articles and the records of the state Election Law Enforcement Commission (ELEC) and found that in 2006, Anklowitz received a $500 contribution from Insulator’s Local 89; $300 from the Ironworkers Local 68 Political Action Committee; and $1,”000 from the Plumbers & Pipefitters Local Union 9, of Englishtown. He also received $500 from the Communication Workers of America. In September, 2006, he received $1,”500 from the Plumbers & Pipefitters Local Union 9. In April, 2007, he received $1,”000 from IBEW in Washington, D.C., and in May, 2007, he received $500 from CWA Local 1034.
In 2007 Borek received $750 from CWA Local 1033, where Rae Roeder is president; $2,”000 from the Plumbers and Pipefitters Local Union 9; and $2,”000 from the IBEW Educational Committee in Washington, D.C. That year, he also received $1,”500 from the International Association of Firefighters.
In 2007 Morgan received $1,”500 from the Ironworkers Local 68 Political Action Committee Fund, and $2,”000 from the Plumbers & Pipefitters Local Union 9.
ELEC records show that Pat Boyle did contribute $1,”000 to the West Windsor Community Vision Team, which included Geevers, Councilwoman Heidi Kleinman, and Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh, in 2005.
This is not the first time a resolution like this has been on the table. According to former councilman Franc Gambatese, who was defeated in last year’s council election, the same resolutions were put forward in January, 2007. Gambatese said he was approached by the same unions that gave money to the campaigns of Anklowitz, Morgan, and Borek, and that those unions asked whether or not he was going to support the resolution. “The same unions that gave Will and Charlie and George contributions offered them to me first, and my team decided we couldn’t accept the contributions because we couldn’t support those resolutions because we didn’t know whether we supported a transit village,” he said.
While he says he doesn’t have a problem with the resolution itself — and he points out that many towns have adopted these types of measures — “these guys took the money, which means they had to agree they would put the resolutions forward.” And then, they went “door-to-door telling people that they’re not going to build a transit village. To me, it’s unethical.”
