ARTICLE
The New York State Supreme Court’s Broome County Bench issued a decision yesterday regarding public works contracting and a practice known as “Piggybacking.” Piggybacking is when an existing contract is used to acquire the same commodities or services at the same or lower price from another public entity contract. Lately, however, it is believed that some public owners have attempted to work around the competitive bidding requirements of General Municipal Law (GML) Section 103 by using piggybacking when it comes to construction projects. In its decision, the Court pointed out, in part, that GML clearly applies to “the purchase of specific classes of things, namely apparatus, materials, equipment and supplies, as well as service contracts related to those specific things. It does not identify or include the "purchase” of public works, public works contracts or public works projects which the court interprets as construction or repair projects undertaken by municipalities on their infrastructure and are clearly distinct in nature and scope from apparatus, materials, equipment, and supplies.” In short, the court determined that piggybacking for the use of building construction projects is a violation of GML 103, and is not permitted on public works contracts in New York State. Click here to read the full decision of the Court. This case may not be closed yet, as there is still a chance it could advance to the appellate courts.
The New York State Supreme Court’s Broome County Bench issued a decision yesterday regarding public works contracting and a practice known as “Piggybacking.”
Piggybacking is when an existing contract is used to acquire the same commodities or services at the same or lower price from another public entity contract. Lately, however, it is believed that some public owners have attempted to work around the competitive bidding requirements of General Municipal Law (GML) Section 103 by using piggybacking when it comes to construction projects.
In its decision, the Court pointed out, in part, that GML clearly applies to “the purchase of specific classes of things, namely apparatus, materials, equipment and supplies, as well as service contracts related to those specific things. It does not identify or include the "purchase” of public works, public works contracts or public works projects which the court interprets as construction or repair projects undertaken by municipalities on their infrastructure and are clearly distinct in nature and scope from apparatus, materials, equipment, and supplies.”
In short, the court determined that piggybacking for the use of building construction projects is a violation of GML 103, and is not permitted on public works contracts in New York State.
Click here to read the full decision of the Court.
This case may not be closed yet, as there is still a chance it could advance to the appellate courts.