In this news:
New Jersey taxpayers will face an “unfortunate” financial impact of nearly $10 million due to a technical error on a bid for a major bridge repair project, the state Supreme Court ruled Monday.
The state’s high court upheld the New Jersey Turnpike Authority’s decision to reject a $70.9 million bid from El Sol Contracting & Construction Corp. for a bridge repair project due to a technical defect in a bidding document.
Instead, the contract will be awarded to the next-lowest bidder, Joseph M. Sanzari, Inc. for a total $80.7 million, resulting in an additional cost of nearly $10 million to taxpayers.
The contract is for repairing 11 bridges in the Newark Bay area.
“We recognize that the result compelled by precedent comes with the unfortunate collateral consequence of a nearly ten-million-dollar increase to the price of the project from what El Sol had proposed,” Associate Justice John Hoffman wrote for the court.
The issue centered around a document from El Sol’s insurer, Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., which would guarantee financial backing if the contractor won the contract.
El Sol argued that the defect in their paperwork was minor and noted that the New Jersey Turnpike Authority had previously accepted similar submissions. Liberty Mutual echoed this position, stating the defect could have been corrected.
Hoffman said that the agency could not ignore El Sol’s bid defect simply because it had accepted similar paperwork before.
He noted that once the issue was discovered, the agency had to follow the rules and correct the specifications.
There was no proof they knew about the problem in earlier bids, the court ruled.
While a previous lower court ruling agreed with El Sol, the New Jersey Supreme Court ultimately upheld the bid rejection, stressing the need for strict compliance with bid specifications.
The court was divided, resulting in a 5-2 decision on the matter.
“We think the dissent had it right, but I do understand the majority’s decision,” El Sol’s lawyer, Michael F. McKenna of Cohen Seglias in Newark said.
McKenna said that even though the court did not agree with his arguments, he knows they did what they thought was in the best interests of the state.
“Who am I to question that?” McKenna asked.
The New Jersey Turnpike Authority was represented by Thomas A. Abbate of Decotiis, Fitzpatrick, Cole & Giblin. He did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The high court also issued an order dismissing the New Jersey Turnpike Authority’s requests to reconsider the decision.
.png)
