Oct 17, 2006 3 min read

It’s hard to believe that in Fayette County, not one local vendor was interested in submitting a bid to supply 150 refrigerators to the Fayette County Housing Authority. The contract went to General Electric, a manufacturer, which bid $375 per refrigerator. That’s a $56,250 contract that no one else thought worth pursuing. “It’s a shame no one other than one (firm) responded,” said FCHA Chairwoman Angela M. Zimmerlink. Board vice chairman James V. Bitonti was no less remorseful, noting that he’s always disappointed when the authority gets only one bid.

What this opens up is a debate on whether the authority should even bother to seek competitive bids for certain goods and services. As a public agency, the FCHA is entitled to use the state and federal piggyback programs, which lets them purchase such items from a list of approved vendors after the state and federal governments have done all the necessary groundwork.

According to Executive Director Thomas L. Harkless, it costs the FCHA about $3,000 in hard costs (such as advertising) and in staff time to prepare a competitive bid. That figure swells higher in cases such as this month’s refrigerator contract, because any time the authority receives only one bid, it has to perform a cost comparison to make sure the bid is in line. Staff has to call around and solicit additional price quotes to fulfill that requirement.

Using the state piggyback program would permit the authority to simply go to the approved list of vendors, decide if the price is right and make the purchase. That’s what occurred recently when it awarded a $70,000 contract for pest control services to Erlich.

We are philosophically in tune with Zimmerlink regarding her desire that the board vote to approve use of the piggyback program before such transactions are carried out. After all, the board is charged with providing oversight on the operation and we’ve seen the adverse ramifications of lax oversight by this and other boards in the past.

We also concur with board member Beverly Beal that it’s “sad” when the authority can’t contract with local firms. In the case of the refrigerators, however, those companies weren’t interested in competing.

And there’s no denying that use of the state program, as in the pest control example, streamlines the procurement process while providing the authority with significant cost savings. The FCHA has a responsibility to provide the most bang for the taxpayer buck, and we won’t fault it for taking any measure that accomplishes that goal.

Toward that end, the authority should explore using the piggyback program for goods and services for which it last received only one bid. It should also routinely check that program’s approved vendor list after opening other bids, to see if a better price still could be obtained.