Council Proceedings

IOFF[CIAL COUNCIL CHAMBER. I Ann Akbor, Sept. ?th,1894. )' Special sessiou. Called to order by President Keech. Koll called. Quorum present. Absent- Aid. Wagnèr, Allmendinger, Prettyman.- 3. C0MMUN1CAÏI0XS. KROM THE MAYOR. Mayor's Office, i Awn Arbor, Sept. 6th, Is94. f To the Aldermen of the City of Ann Arbor and the President of the Common Oouncil: By the power vested in me, I hereby cali a special meeting of the Common Council of the City of Ann Arbor, to be held in the Council Chamber on Friday evening, Sept. 7, "94, at 7:30 p. m., to consider the lateral sewer specifieations, reported by the Board of Public Works, the quèstion of repairing the bridge over the M. C. R. K., also the grade of sidewalk in front of the property of E. E. Calkins, Mr. Toop and otliers in this Iocality.that may be affected by any change of grades. C. G. Daklinh. Mayor. FKOM THE HOAKD OF PUBLIC WORKS. To the Common Cowicil: The Board of Public Works respectfully report that they have had uuder careful consideration the recomniendations of your honorable body in regard to allerations and amendments in the speciücatious for sewer construction and concurin the alterations suggested in the title and the following sections: Sections 3S, 39 and 40; and the Board of Public Works further report that it does not eoncur in the alterations of Section No. Three nor of Section No. 114; but the Boaid of Public Works return Section Three unchanged and recommend the following alteration of Section 114 and incorpórate the same in the speciflcations herewith submrtted. Respectf ully submitted by order of the Board of Public Works. W. J. Miller, Clerk. The Council theu proceeded to consider various alterations and recotninendations in the speciflcations from the Board of Public Works. The City Attorney was called on, as to the legality of Section 114 of the specifications. City Attoruey Bennett had a brief orepared quoting several cases . in the premises. Aid Manly moved that the City At;orney file said opinión as to the legality of Section 114, With the City Clerk, and the same be printed and made part of this meeting. Adopted. To the Hon. Cooimoa Council of Ann Arbor. Michigan: In response to your request for my opinión regard i n i; the lerul effect of einbodying the irorisious of Section Number 114, as aniended by resolutiou of your honorable body, in the specificatioiis for the construction of lateral 9ewers in this city, I beg leave to submit the following: In my opinión the ineorporatlon of thissection in the speciücations, and of restrictions and limitatious upon the right of any person bidding upon this work to mploy laboratthe lowest price that it can be obtalned in the contract that the city will make with the lowest bidder, would opérate to establish a monopoly in thi8 item of the expense of constructing such sewerivstem, and weuld render the asseesment made to meet said expenses illeitti and in valid. The sole effect of such a provisión must be to comoel the employment of laborera residing in this city, at a price of not less than Í1.26 a day. so long as a sufflcient aumber of such persons present themselves. Accnruingly, all bidders would be compelled to fisure upon rhe item of labor at a nxed price, and thus this item is withdrawn trom competition. It must be remembered that this assessmect is for a local improvement, and the expense falls not upon the entire property of the city, but upon such pieces of land as lie within the particular assessment district to be benefited, as fixed and determined by your body. The Council in this matter is acting as the agent of a limited number of the citizens, each one of whom has the riiht to demand that every provisión of our charter and ordinance be strictly followed out. In the case of Twiss vs. City of Port Huron, reponed in 63 Mich. 528, it was held: That when a city charter requires all contracts for pubhc improvements tu be let to the lowet bidder, if tlie lowest bidder was permitted to withdraw his bid on the sround of an alleged mistake, the contract eóuld notbelegally let to the next lowest bidder, but must be readvertistd. Mr. Justice Campbell says, in hia opinión, "The council had no power to deprive the city, and tlie parties who would assessrd, of the beneüt of a letting to the owe.st bidder." The provisioüs of our charter and ordinanee iré similar. The Board of Public Works is equired by ordinanee to advertise for tenders lor the construction of lateral sewers, and ■8hall contract therefor with the lowest repoii8ible bidder," and the contractor is reuired ',to do all the work and furnish all the material." 1 ii the case of MeBrian vs. Grand Rapid-;. 58 flieh. 65, is the following language: ['What he Board is required to do ia för the benfit oí he public, the object being to invite cotnpeition and prevent favorltism aod fraud in warding contracts for public works. If uner the statutes contracts cao only be let to he lowest bidder it f_llows as a neceasary onsequence that no other manner of conractitig can be legal and any bid or contract which lea ves the payment for substantialand material subjects as part of the lmprorement contemplated, either in work or materal tobe agreed upon by private arrangement or asjreenient, is unauthorized, contrary to the expresa provisión of law and void." Mr. Justioe Cooley used this lansuau;e in the case of Atty. General va. Detroit, 6 Mich. 263: "If a pateuted article weie desired which was owned by a single persou who ref used to sell the right to territory or to fix a royalty, or If stone or any other material were required and a single person owned ail within a practicable distance of the place where lt was used, HOthingcouldbeuioreobviousthan propoals wbioli conflned bids to the particular article or material would invite no valuable competition." In the article on Public Improvements in the American aud Èni;lish Encyclopedie .f Law, it is said: "How contract sliall Oe letdepends on the statutes and ordinances. If the statute liniits the city to one method surli u letting by contract to the lowest bidder, no other method can be employed, and in such case the work cannot be dlvlded so as to oontraci íor a part by oue method and a part by anutber. nor ean tlie city evade the law by requirlng all bidders to agree upon u stated pnce for one part of tlie work leavlng the other parts to competition. An instance of tliie was seen in the rase of the Matler of Maliau, 20 Hun. i.N. Y. Ren 302, This was an assessment tor the eonstructlna' "f a sewer in New Yorn. Uy the terms of the advertwement for bids. the price to be paid tor rock excavatloo was Hxed and the corupetition therefore only extended to the price to be paid for the remainder of the work to be performed. The nssessment was flnally vbcated, anti the decixion reads as followsDie 0111Í8SÍ011 to sulimit the item of rock exi':iv;itlon for competion was a deparcure from the statute relatinjr to the subject. The faoi tliat the Drice allowed was not in exeess of whiit -oulil liave beun demanded by any coqtraotor is not sufflc-ieift to overrkie the plain termsof üw -tatiite Itappearsto me from an examinstion of these nu-liorit'cs that theCouncil niustcomply strlctty with the provisions of uur ordinanoe anil that a stiict compliance corupels tno nubimtting of every item of frpense of the propoied improrement to open competitioQ, labor as well as material. Respeetfully aubmitted. J. W. BENNETT, City Attorney. Aid. Kitson moved that the sewei specifications, as submitted by the Board of Public Works, be approved and conürmed. Adopted as follows: Yeas- Aid. Bodmer, Martin, Wood, Snyder, Ferguson, Brown, Manly, Taylor, Kitsou, Prea. Wines- 10. Nays - None. By Aid. Kitson: Resolved, That the City Clerk have the sewer specifications printed in such manner as is usual ia aucti cases. Adopted as follows: Yeas- Aid. Bodmer, Martin, Wood, bnyder, Ferguson, Brown, Manly, Taylor, Kitsou, Pres. Wines- 10. ' Nays- None. On motion a vote of thanks was extended Aid. Manly for a basket of his delicious peaches, which he . presenred the Council with. On motion the Council adjourned. City Clock.