[Amended 1-4-2011]
All goods and services will be secured by use of written requests for proposals, written quotations, verbal quotations or any other method that assures that goods will be purchased at the lowest price and that favoritism will be avoided, except in the following circumstances: purchase contracts under $20,000 and public works contracts under $35,000; goods purchased from agencies for the blind or severely handicapped pursuant to § 175-b of the State Finance Law; goods purchased from correctional institutions pursuant to § 186 of the Correction Law; purchases under state contracts pursuant to § 104 of the General Municipal Law; purchases under county contracts pursuant to § 103, Subdivision 3, of the General Municipal Law; or purchases pursuant to §
30-6 of this chapter.
Documentation is required of each action taken
in connection with each procurement.
Documentation and an explanation is required
whenever a contract is awarded to other than the lowest responsible
offeror. This documentation will include an explanation of how the
award will achieve savings or how the offeror was not responsible.
A determination that the offeror is not responsible shall be made
by the purchaser and may not be challenged under any circumstances.
Pursuant to General Municipal Law § 104-b,
Subdivision 2f, the procurement policy may contain circumstances when,
or types of procurements for which, in the sole discretion of the
governing body, the solicitation of alternative proposals or quotations
will not be in the best interest of the municipality. In the following
circumstances it may not be in the best interests of the Town of Cato
to solicit quotations or document the basis for not accepting the
lowest bid:
A. Professional services or services requiring special
or technical skill, training or expertise.
(1) The individual or company must be chosen based on
accountability, reliability, responsibility, skill, education and
training, judgment, integrity and moral worth. These qualifications
are not necessarily found in the individual or company that offers
the lowest price and the nature of these services are such that they
do not readily lend themselves to competitive procurement procedures.
(2) In determining whether a service fits into this category,
the Town Board of the Town of Cato shall take into consideration the
following guidelines:
(a) Whether the services are subject to state licensing
or testing requirements.
(b) Whether substantial formal education or training is
a necessary prerequisite to the performance of the services.
(c) Whether the services require a personal relationship
between the individual and municipal officials.
(3) Professional or technical services shall include but
not be limited to the following: services of an attorney; services
of a physician; technical services of an engineer engaged to prepare
plans, maps and estimates; securing insurance coverage and/or services
of an insurance broker; services of a certified public accountant;
investment management services; printing services involving extensive
writing, editing or art work; management of municipally owned property;
and computer software or programming services for customized programs
or services involved in substantial modification and customizing of
prepackaged software.
B. Emergency purchases pursuant to § 103, Subdivision
4, of the General Municipal Law. Due to the nature of this exception,
these goods or services must be purchased immediately and a delay
in order to seek alternate proposals may threaten the life, health,
safety or welfare of the residents. This section does not preclude
alternate proposals if time permits.
C. Purchases of surplus and secondhand goods from any
source. If alternate proposals are required, the Town of Cato is precluded
from purchasing surplus and secondhand goods at auctions or through
specific advertised sources where the best prices are usually obtained.
It is also difficult to try to compare prices of used goods and a
lower price may indicate an older product.
D. Goods or services under $250. The time and documentation
required to purchase through this policy may be more costly than the
item itself and would therefore not be in the best interests of the
taxpayer. In addition, it is not likely that such de minimis contracts
would be awarded based on favoritism.