You asked for the legislative history of CGS § 7-148v, dealing with municipal competitive bidding requirements. OLR report 2005-R-0817 addresses the issue of whether municipalities can change the thresholds for competitive bidding by passing an ordinance rather than revising their charter

BIDDING REQUIREMENTS

CGS § 7-148v provides that, notwithstanding contrary provisions of any municipal charter or special act, any municipality may establish requirements by ordinance for competitive bidding for the award of any contract or the purchase of any real or personal property. The ordinance may provide that, except as otherwise required by the statutes, sealed bidding is not be required for contracts or purchases having a value up to an amount established in the ordinance, which may not be more than $7,500. The law and any ordinance adopted under it may not be construed to limit the ability of a municipality to enter into a contract under CGS § 4a-53a, which allows the administrative services commissioner to serve as the contracting agent for a group of three or more municipalities.

Most of these provisions were adopted in 1989 with the passage of PA 89-136 (HB 6963). The provision on contracts entered into under CGS § 4a-53a was added by PA 08-2, November Special Session.

PUBLIC HEARING

Two individuals spoke on HB 6963 when the Planning and Development Committee heard the bill. Nancy Mulroy, Public Information Officer for the City of Hartford, noted that the city had a charter provision requiring competitive bidding for all purchases above $2,500. She stated that the bill would reduce municipal advertising and administrative costs for the city's purchasing division and save procurement time by purchasing departments as well as vendors and contractors.

Charles Duffy, representing the Council of Small Towns, noted that a similar bill had been favorably reported by three committees (Government Administration and Elections, Planning and Development, and Finance, Revenue and Bonding) the previous year. He stated that the bill died on the House floor because it became a “Christmas tree” i.e., took on many unrelated provisions. Duffy argued that the bidding threshold needed to be periodically increased to reflect inflation and the growth in municipal budgets. He also recommended that the threshold set by the bill be increased to as much as $20,000.

COMMITTEE AND FLOOR ACTION

The Planning and Development Committee favorably reported the bill and the House then referred it to the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee, which also favorably reported the bill.

There was an extended discussion of the bill in the House. Representative Langlois brought out the bill, noting that it would allow municipalities to waive sealed bidding requirements for purchases up to $7,500. Representative Adamo then introduced House Amendment “A”, concerning municipal pension benefits, which was ruled not germane. Representative Emmons then asked whether under the bill sealed bidding meant the same thing as competitive bidding, and Representative Langlois responded that it did.

Representative Arthur questioned the need for the bill, since municipalities could set bidding thresholds by revising their charters. Representative Langlois stated that the bill would eliminate the need for municipalities to go through the charter revision process in order to update their bidding requirements, and instead allow them do this by adopting an ordinance. Representative Radcliffe discussed the relationship between charters and such ordinances and stated that the bill could allow bidding requirements that are less restrictive than those contained in charters. Representative Farr raised a similar issue, stating that the bill would allow ordinances to override the charter. Representative Langlois agreed that this was the case and stated that the bill was introduced on behalf of Hartford, which had found that several efforts to update its bidding requirements had been “lost in the shuffle of a major charter revision.” The House passed the bill on a 100-46 vote. The bill passed the Senate on consent after a brief discussion.

KM:ts