“In This World, You Get What You Pay For!”, Kurt Vonnegut
By Dan Murphy
The legal question in a lawsuit against the Town of Yorktown, for awarding a garbage and recycling removal contract to Competitive Carting is, was Competitive the lowest, responsible bidder?
Clearly, Competitive Carting submitted the lowest bid to the Town last year, after the Town Board and Supervisor Matt Slater rejected the first three bids. So, the legal question before the court is -can Competitive Carting handle the job of removing garbage and recycling for the about 12,000 residents?
Many Yorktown residents, who have joined a Facebook group called Yorktown, family TRASH TALK, say no, and continue to complain about Competitive Carting’s service, three months after their contract began.
Recent comments include:
-Doesn’t look like they will get it right. The transition period is over. What a complete s&^*% show
-They came to my home at 430 am, if it happens again, I will be calling YPD-It’s ridiculous!
-I was woken up at 5:28 am by the sounds of the garbage truck. Are they back to mixing all the recyclables in one truck? Is Competitive ever gonna get it 100 right,
-It’s March, so much for the “ready to go” attitude publicly proclaimed at the October 2022 Board meeting.
As the comments continue, the question now being asked is-Was it worth it for Slater and the Town Board to “save a couple of bucks” as one comment stated, “to have this kind of crappy garbage service?”
The lawsuit filed by AAA, against the Town and Competitive Carting, includes “On August 29, 2022, Angelo Cartelemi, AAA Carting’s Operations Manager, went to Town Hall to meet with the Town of Yorktown’s Town Supervisor, Matthew Slater and the Town of Yorktown’s General Foreman, Philip Marino. “During that meeting, both Slater and Marino admitted that the Town’s decision to discard AAA Carting’s first bid without even looking at it was a “mistake” and Mr. Slater admitted that he “messed up” and that the Town “didn’t handle [the bidding process] properly.”
“During the same conversation, the Town informed Mr. Cartelemi that the bid would be workable if the price came down to approximately $3,000,000 per year. After the meeting concluded, Mr. Marino opined to Mr. Cartelemi that Brian Amico was a “fl’***ing wannabe” and that Amico did not even own his company (referring to Competitive Carting)…Amico has told employees of AAA Carting on multiple occasions that the Town “begged” him to submit a bid for the public contract on behalf of Competitive Carting Corp,” states the suit.
The suit argues that the Town violated its obligations under GML § 103 and Town Law § 122 by not examining the finances of Competitive, and by changing the bond requirements to benefit Competitive.
“The Town’s abject failure to conduct due diligence raises serious questions about Competitive Carting’s foundational capabilities, in determine, inter alia, whether Competitive Carting has the necessary “capital and infrastructure” to fully perform under the Public Contract.”
AAA Carting has contracts with the City of White Plains, the Town of Kent, the Village of Briarcliff, New York State O.O.T., New York State Office of General Service, the County of Westchester, the County of Putnam, the Town of Putnam Valley, the Town of Carmel, and they had the prior contract with Yorktown, with no complaints from residents.
Most interesting was this paragraph from the lawsuit, “Given AAA Carting’s long and current history of servicing towns and municipalities, the awarding of the Public Contract to Competitive Carting, whose reliability is more suspect, to put it charitably, strains credulity and gives rise to a strong inference of an improper purpose,” asks AAA and Caputo in the suit.
The argument in favor of giving the contract to Competitive has always been the low bid. But now that argument is being met with-You Get What You Pay For.
Perhaps the strongest part of the suit filed by AAA against the town takes issue with the changing of the Bond requirement. AAA’s attorney Nicholas Caputo, from the firm CARMEL, MILAZZO & FEIL, LLP, argues in the suit that Competitive Carting had troubles securing a one-year bond from a bond insurance company, and that the town amended the contract after it was awarded, to allow Competitive to submit one-month bonds, which are cheaper and easier to obtain.
And that change given to Competitive violates the terms of the original bid which stated, “For the life of the contract, the successful bidder shall provide a performance bond issued by a Surety in an amount equal to no more than 100% of the annual value of the contract.”
The suit continues, “Instead, in contravention of the Town’s Instructions, Competitive Carting has been permitted by the Town to submit a monthly performance bond. The Town’s concession to Competitive Carting to completely ignore the Instruction’s annual performance bond requirement, a material term of the bid (and a statutory requirement), was wholly improper. Competitive Carting did not, and could not, obtain a performance bond as required by the specifications, and therefore did not fully comply with all of the specifications.”
“This special treatment also compels inquiry into what motivated the Town to give Competitive Carting a material financial edge over other bidders,” and points to “the Town’s apparent favoritism of Competitive Carting.”
AAA is asking the court to annul the contract and award the contract to AAA or order a new BID. Residents are encouraged to join in the suit against the Town’s decision to award the contract to Competitive. They can do so by filing an Amicus brief, which will help the case by having an aggrieved party from Yorktown.
You can email us at dmurphy@risingmediagroup.com if you are interested.
