sta september 2014 newsletter

1September 2014

Affordable Housing Construction in New York City: Getting in the Game

SUBCONTRACTORS NEWSBringing New York’s Union Subcontractors Together to Build a Stronger Construction Industry

September 2014

2 President’s Message

3 Affordable Housing Construction In New York City: Will Union Subcontractors Be Able To Get In The Game?

7 STA General Membership Meeting, Construction Insurance Practices

9 Private Company Reporting Update

12 The Time is Right for Retainage Reform in New York

16 Procurement Disputes – Bid Mistakes And Bid Protests – Part 1

22 STA Member Profile: Woodworks Construction Company

24 Take Advantage of Upcoming STA Training Opportunities

IN THIS ISSUE

If you would like to receive a hard copy of Subcontractors News in the mail

each month, please email your full mailing address to [email protected]

with the subject line “Subcontractors News Hard Copy Request”

Email Feedback to the STA Office

P R E S I D E N T ’ S M E S S AG E

STA Subcontractors News2

As we move into fall, I would like to acknowledge the members of the STA for their

continued participation and thank them for the constructive year we’ve had so far.

This newsletter features a glance at Mayor de Blasio’s initiative to include union

trades to build and save affordable housing units. With this comes lots of progress

for the union trades and construction industry. There is an agreement that calls for

a reduction in wages for less-experienced workers in building the affordable housing

between the BTEA and housing advocates. While this is in its beginning stages, we

are headed in the right direction.

You will also see that for those small- to medium-sized businesses out there, there are now options for

accounting standards. The FRF-SME framework, benefits, and principles are outlined and discussed in

this issue.

The STA is pleased to share that there is a call to reform for New York’s outdated payment/retainage

law set forth in 1978. Of all of the states, New York has one of the more repressive retainage policies.

This reform is attempting to authorize the early release of subcontractors who have completed their

work, among other things.

The next STA General Membership Meeting will be taking place on October 1, focusing on construction

insurance practices and current policies. The evening’s speakers are prominent members of the field,

including Mitchell B. Reiter, Esq. (Goldberg & Connolly), Kelly Bluhm (AIG Property and Casualty),

Colleen Parmelee (Harleysville Insurance), Stephen Paier (Travelers Construction), along with David

Marino (Aon Construction Services), who will be moderating.

I would like to remind all STA members that coming up on October 24, the AGC NYS and STA are

hosting a breakfast meeting to discuss the CID operational enhancements. Please register and reserve

your spot today. The flyer can be found in this issue of the newsletter.

I look forward to seeing these advancements become a reality and thank you all for your ongoing

support.

Sincerely,

Robert J. Ansbro

President


3

One of the cornerstone policy and program initiatives of Mayor Bill de Blasio’s first year in office is concerned with the development of affordable housing across New York City’s five boroughs.

Earlier this spring, Mayor de Blasio outlined his long-awaited plan to build and preserve 200,000 units of affordable housing over the next decade at a projected cost of $41.1 billion. Under this plan, New York City would invest at least $8.2 billion over the next ten years and would seek federal and state aid as well as investments from the private sector to cover the total cost.

The de Blasio administration’s affordable housing plan has been detailed in a recently released report entitled “Housing New York: A Five-Borough, Ten-Year Plan.” The report deals with the housing affordability gap for both working and middle class New Yorkers citywide. The plan addresses saving existing affordable housing stock as well as building new developments. Sixty percent of the plan calls for preservation while forty percent of affordable housing is expected to come from new construction. With most of the households to be served through this plan to be low income or below, Mayor de Blasio committed to address moderate and middle income residents by creating and saving at least 20,000 units.

While a huge amount of public financial resources will be going into this affordable housing program, will union contractors be in a position to participate, given existing wage rates and benefits packages for their union trades people? In the not-too-distant

past, the trades unions did not show a great deal of interest in working in the area of affordable housing. Developers found little reason to pay higher union wages to build residential units at or below market prices. After all, both the unions and contractors were more inclined to work on higher paying luxury residential projects and commercial high rises.

While Mayor de Blasio has signaled that he would like the involvement of the union trades in fulfilling his plan for affordable housing, he recognizes that it will take some work on the part of the unions to be able to get involved. “We always look for every opportunity to work with union labor,” the Mayor said in announcing his affordable housing plan earlier in the year. “We are also trying to create affordable housing with real tight financial dynamics, and our job is to create it on an unprecedented level. So it really will take a lot of cooperation and creativity in that relationship, but I think we’ve signaled to the building trades that we want to maximize their involvement.”

Last month, the Building Trades reached an agreement with housing advocates to support a plan that would have some of their members paid significantly less for working on affordable housing projects. According to the Wall Street Journal, the arrangement would see the building trades unions accept a forty percent reduction in wages for less experienced workers who would build affordable housing in New York City. However, details of this affordable housing compromise by the trades have yet to be communicated to the contractors.


BY HANK KITA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, STA

continued on page 5

Affordable Housing Construction In New York City: Will Union Subcontractors Be Able To Get In The Game?

4 STA Subcontractors News

333 Westchester Avenue | White Plains, NY 10604 | 333 Earle Ovington Blvd. | Uniondale, NY 11553

www.usi.biz | 800.447.3586

CONSTRUCTION INSURANCE

LEADERSSURETY BONDING

EXPERTS

ADVERTISEMENT


Whether this agreement can become a reality or not will come down to a matter of simple economics. Speaking on behalf of the union contractors, Lou Coletti, President of the Building Trades Employers’ Association (BTEA) said, “What we have happening in New York City is that those trades that have made changes to be competitive, if their contractors are awarded that work and it’s a nonunion job, they’re going to work, and that’s a huge change in the New York City construction market. Unless we find a way to continue making changes in those markets, the BTEA (union) contractors will find ways to compete in those markets, because we have a responsibility to those employees, those stockholders, to keep our businesses viable. We want to do that by building union for all trades.”

With such an enormous construction program in its nascent stages, it will behoove union contractors to closely monitor developments regarding the agreement in the works between the building trades, housing developers and advocates, and the City. That agreement has the potential to be a “game changer” regarding the makeup of union construction from both the perspective of the trades and contractors, for decades to come.

Stay tuned!

continued from page 3



ADVERTISEMENT

STA GENERAL MEMBERSHIP MEETINGCONSTRUCTION INSURANCE PANEL & SEMINAR

OCTOBER 1, 2014

When: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 5:15 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.

Where: The Automotive Center for Education and Training 15-30 Petracca Place Whitestone, NY 11357

$65 for Members ($70 at the door) $75 for Non-Members

Call or Print & Fax the Form Below

REGISTRATION FORM – GENERAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING – OCTOBER 1, 2014

Subcontractors Trade Association 1430 Broadway, Suite 1600 • New York, NY 10018 Tel: (212) 398-6220 • Fax: (212) 398-6224 • [email protected]

Name(s) Company Tel: Fax: Email:

$65 for Members ($70 at the door) $75 for Non-Members Check Enclosed: $ for reservations

SAVE THE DATE

Please join the STA for our upcoming General Membership Meeting featuring a construction insurance panel and seminar.

The panel will be moderated by David Marino, Regional Executive Vice President of Aon Construction Services.

SPEAKERS

Mitchell B. Reiter, EsqPartnerGoldberg & Connolly

Stephen PairManaging DirectorTravelers Construction

Colleen ParmeleeCommercial Lines Territory Manager Eastern NY Territory at Harleysville Insurance

Kelly BluhmHead of Excess Casualty Energy and Construction USA, Canada and Bermuda for AIG Property and Casualty

7

STA General Membership Meeting, October 1: Construction Insurance Practices

September 2014 7

The STA’s next General Membership Meeting will be

held on Wednesday, October 1, 2014. The seminar and

panel discussion will focus on construction insurance

and current policies.

Moderating the panel will be David Marino, the

Regional Executive Vice President of Aon Construction

Services. He has over 20 years of unsurpassed insurance

expertise and real-world construction industry

experience providing strategic insurance, wrap-up and

surety solutions. Mr. Marino is also a part of the STA’s

Executive Advisory Committee.

The evening’s speakers are all seasoned professionals in

the field and will include Mitchell B. Reiter, Esq., Kelly

Bluhm, Colleen Parmelee and Stephen Paier.

Mitchell B. Reiter, Esq. is a partner with Goldberg &

Connolly and is a member of the firm’s Construction Law

and Insurance Coverage Groups. Mr. Reiter regularly

counsels clients regarding complex construction

claims and has successfully resolved numerous claims

accounting for tens of millions of dollars before the

NYC Comptroller’s Office and with the New York

State Department of Transportation, the New York

City Mayoral Agencies, the NYC School Construction

Authority and the New York Metropolitan Transit

Authority.

Kelly Bluhm is the Head of Excess Casualty Energy and

Construction for the USA, Canada and Bermuda for AIG

Property and Casualty. In this role, she develops and

executes strategies to return the group to profitability.

She has held positions in director’s and officer’s liability,

sales and marketing as well as positions of increasing

responsibility in excess casualty. She has achieved her

Chartered Property Casualty Underwriter, Associate

in Risk Management and Construction Risk Insurance

Specialist designations.

Colleen Parmelee has been with Harleysville Insurance,

a Nationwide Insurance Company, for the past fifteen

years serving as a Commercial Lines Territory Manager

for the Eastern NY territory. Her duties include

large account underwriting and agency and sales

management for Harleysville’s top performing agents

in NY, most of who specialize in the construction

industry. She has worked with many NYC property

managers and general contractors.

Stephen Paier is a construction insurance professional

with more than twenty-five years of experience. For

the past eleven years, he has served as the Managing

Director for Travelers Construction, a business unit

with a broad appetite for small, medium and large

contractors. Stephen serves the “Downstate NY”

territory. In this current role, he is responsible for

all Guaranteed Cost lines of business and programs

written in the Downstate NY territory.

The dinner meeting will be held at the Center for

Automotive Education and Training, located at 15-30

Petracca Place in Whitestone, New York. There will be

a networking hour with dinner from 5:15p.m. to 6:15

p.m. and the presentation will begin at 6:30 p.m.

If you would like to attend the General Membership

Meeting on October 1, please contact Samantha

Sweeney at [email protected] or 212-398-6220. It

is $65 for members who reserve a spot early or $70 at

the door, and $75 for non STA members.

BY SAMANTHA SWEENEY, SUBCONTRACTORS TRADE ASSOCIATION



ADVERTISEMENT

Constructing Your Wealth Providing builders and contractors with

a wealth of exceptional services

ROSEN SEYMOUR SHAPSS MARTIN & COMPANY LLP

Construction Services Group

757 Third Avenue • New York, New York 10017Telephone (212) 303-1800Facsimile (212) 755-5600

Frank A. Petitto, CPA Dov Klein, CPA Michael Hochman, CPA, CCIFP William Hughes, CPA

E-mail [email protected] • www.rssmcpa.com

Additional Offices in Garden City and White Plains, NY

• Cash Flow Management• Estate Planning• Contract Cost Accounting

• Litigation Support• Financing & Bonding• Taxation Services

• Accounting & Auditing• Succession Planning• Budgeting & Forecasting

10 Esquire Road, Suite 4 • New City, New York 10956Telephone (845) 634-5300Facsimile (845) 634-5409

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

Construction half page-Color.pdf 1 10/16/12 8:54 AM

9

Private Company Reporting Update

September 2014 9

Small business owners, accountants and the credit

community have long debated the need for simplified

accounting standards that could be used by the

smaller, privately held company in lieu of the technical

and sometimes overly complex standards issued by

the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”).

While opponents argued that keeping only one

set of accounting standards would avoid confusion

and credibility issues, there is no denying the need

for flexibility—especially when you consider the

uniqueness of individual businesses in the small-

medium sized marketplace. There is no marketplace

where this is more prevalent than the construction

market.

To that extent, there are now two options that the

construction contractor has in selecting a reporting

method: the AICPA Financial Reporting Framework

for Small to Medium Sized Entities (“FRF - SME”) and

FASB – Private Company Council (“PCC”).

AICPA Financial Reporting Framework for Small to

Medium Sized Entities (“FRF - SME”)

The FRF-SME framework was developed based on

the needs of the industry and is available for use.

However, it is important to note that this method

is non-authoritative. In other words, the financial

statements are not prepared in accordance with

generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). This

option instead is based on a concise set of accrual-

based principles, which are still preferable to cash,

tax and other comprehensive basis of accounting

(OCBOA) methods, which are too vague and easily

available for manipulation.

The FRF-SME framework principles are simplified so

that the focus of reporting is on the most relevant

needs of businesses and their financial statement

users. There are many benefits of implementing this

method, such as:

• Disclosures are concise and targeted

• Concepts such as variable interest entities, which

allow the company consolidation or equity

method treatment of subsidiaries, are eliminated

• Management has the option to report on parent

only financial statements

• The technical aspects of employee benefit-

defined benefit plans can be avoided, as the

FRF-SME would allow the company to record

these transactions based on the contribution

attributable to the current period and only

disclose relative information

• The option for recognition based on actuary

calculation still exists, but it is not required

• Messy qualitative and quantitative analysis’,

which could be influenced by management bias,

such as goodwill impairment, go away

• Goodwill would be amortized over the same

period as for tax

• Income tax liabilities shown by the company

would reflect only current taxes payable

• While a deferred income tax liability could be

shown as the company would do under GAAP, it

is not required

• There is no requirement to disclose uncertain tax

positions

• For the construction contractor, revenue

recognition as it relates to long-term contracts is

similar to GAAP, as reporting would be under the

BY CARL OLIVERI AND STEVE MANNHAUPT, GRASSI & CO. CPA’S


continued on page 11


ADVERTISEMENT

2120 Atlantic Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11233 | Tel (718) 403-0100 | Fax (718) 596-5085 | www.parkavebuilding.com

Your Vision – Overhead

YOUR FULL SERVICE USG CEILING SYSTEMS DISTRIBUTOR

YOUR CERTIFIED MBE SUPPLIER

Specialty Solutions Integrated Ceiling Systems

Acoustical Suspension Systems

Acoustical Panels

Drywall Suspension Systems

11 September 2014 11


percentage-of-completion method or completed

contract, if certain criteria exist

• Most transactions are shown at historical cost,

with fair value adjustments only used in a few

areas; the notion of comprehensive income does

not exist under this framework

• All leases are either classified as either operating

or capital. There is no straight-line adjustment

over the extended lease lives, as the lease is

expensed as incurred

FASB – Private Company Council (“PCC”)

FASB also acknowledged the need for a different set

of accounting principles for the privately held entity

and released the PCC, which would offer GAAP

exceptions for private companies. However, any

financial statements prepared under this model are

still GAAP basis and the company can still obtain an

unmodified opinion.

The PCC currently has exceptions that can be elected

for three areas, which impact the construction

contractor: goodwill, accounting for certain interest

rate swaps and consolidation as it relates to variable

interest entities. While these are similar issues to

FRF-SMEs, these elections under PCC are GAAP basis.

Under PCC, goodwill is amortized on a straight-

line basis over 10 years. Impairment testing should

occur but this can either be at the entity level or

the reporting unit level. The testing for impairment

is only necessary when there is a triggering event,

an advantage over having to test it every year. The

election stems from the feeling that the value of

goodwill within a company is depleted over the

years due to changes in the company and the market.

This also has an innate savings to the company, as

the election will reduce the costs associated with

valuation.

When a company has entered into an interest rate

swaps agreement, the PCC allows private companies

to apply a simplified hedge accounting method.

Prior accounting standards for achieving hedge

accounting were complicated and overly technical and

burdensome to the internal accounting personnel.

Here there is no assumed hedge ineffectiveness in

the hedging relationship, which leads the swap to

be recorded at the settlement value, not fair value.

Perhaps the most important item to note is that

this type of hedge accounting is better for avoiding

income statement volatility. There is no impact to

operations for any changes in the fair value of the

swap agreement, allowing more predictability and

comparability for trend analysis.

Similar to FRF-SME, PCC will also allow the company

to eliminate the consolidation of variable interest

entities if in relationships with related parties under

common control. This will reflect a more traditional

operating and rental company relationship, even

with common ownership.

While both frameworks have their distinct

advantages and disadvantages, before making

any type of election, the contractor should have

an extensive dialogue with its users. The credit

community and other impacted parties should be

involved in the decision making process, through

education of the concepts and demonstration of

how adoption would improve financial reporting in

terms of end cost to the contractor and turn around

in reporting of timely information.



12

When New York’s payment/retainage law for public projects was enacted in 1978, it represented a breakthrough for the State’s construction industry. Not only did this new law prescribe payment mechanisms for public work contracts, it also stipulated the percentage of retainage that may be withheld from contractors and subcontractors performing work for state agencies, municipalities, and school districts throughout New York State. These new retainage provisions limited retainage to a maximum of 5% when performance and payment bonds are required, and 10% when bonds are not required. The law also required public entities to release retainage upon substantial completion of the project, less of an amount to cover the punch list as well as any outstanding claims, liens and judgments. No longer could public agencies and municipalities legally hold retainage for many months or even up to a year or more after the project had been completed. At the time, New York’s payment/retainage law was considered cutting edge and a significant change for the better. This is no longer the case.

Since 1978, in recognition of the hardships imposed, particularly upon subcontractors, by virtue of withheld retainage, the federal government and many states have taken steps to reduce or even eliminate retainage. It can now be said that New York has among the more repressive retainage policies in the country.

The federal government’s reforms on retainage began in 1983 when the government announced a new policy that provided for the practical elimination of retainage on all federal construction projects. Office

of Federal Procurement Policy Letter 83-1 stated in part: “Retainage should not be used as a substitute for good contract management, and contracting officers should not withhold funds without cause.” In 1986, this policy was fully implemented through an amendment to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). FAR Section 52.232-5(e) states in part: “If the Contracting Officer finds that satisfactory progress was achieved during any period for which a progress payment is to be made, the Contracting Officer shall authorize payment to be made in full.”

As for the states, the mandatory or permissive nature of retainage varies. However, in recent years more and more states have recognized the problems caused by retainage, and have taken steps to reduce retainage permitted on public projects. For example, in New Jersey the amount of retainage specified on most public projects is just 2%. In Indiana, the state may either withhold a maximum of 6% until the project is 50% complete (with no additional retainage withheld thereafter) or it may withhold a maximum of 3% for the entire project. In total at least twenty states reduce or eliminate retainage at 50% of project completion.

In some states, including Kansas, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon, Tennessee and Texas, withheld funds are placed in interest-bearing accounts for the benefit of contractors and subcontractors. Nevada has a particularly interesting statute which includes interest on retained funds, and a maximum 5% retainage until the project is 50% complete, with no additional retainage withheld thereafter. Further, all previously withheld retainage may also be released


The Time is Right for Retainage Reform in New York

BY MICHAEL J. MISENHIMER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, EMPIRE STATE SUBCONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, INC. (ESSA) AND NORTHEAST SUBCONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION (NESCA)


13September 2014

ADVERTISEMENT

Construction, Real Estate & Labor Law • Public/Private Bids and Contracts • Claims • Surety Law • Mechanic’s Liens

• Environmental Law • Commercial Litigation • Real Estate Development • Offering Plans • Labor Law • OSHA Violations • Arbitration • Mediation

Tri State Lien, Inc.

11 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New York 10606

Phone: (877) 543-6488 • Fax: (914) 686-4493 • www.tristatelien.com

NEW YORK • NEW JERSEY • CONNECTICUT

Providing lien filing andbond claim notices for construction projects

throughout the tri-state region

Goudy Old Style

LIEN, INC.

TRISTATE

C O L L E C T I O N S E R V I C E S

www.tristatelien.com

11 Martine Avenue, 15th Floor, White Plains, New York 10606 • Phone: (914) 428-2100 • Fax: (914) 428-2172 • www.wbgllp.com

Goudy Old Style

A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W

A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W

GREENBLATT, LLP

WELBY,BRADY &

W BG&


14 STA Subcontractors News14

when a project has reached 50% completion.

Several states, including Colorado, North Carolina and Kansas, authorize the early release of retainage to subcontractors who have satisfactorily completed their work. This concept is closest to what NESCA and the Empire State Subcontractors Association (ESSA) are attempting to secure here in New York. In North Carolina, for example, the law declares that when the project is 50% complete, early finishing trades may seek a 100% retainage payment contingent upon the approval of the project architect or engineer.

In New Mexico, retainage is actually prohibited on the majority of public projects. The New Mexico statute

provides that “when making payments, an owner, contractor or subcontractor shall not retain, withhold, hold back or in any other manner not pay the amount owned for work performed.”

Retainage laws have been the subject of much debate and reform throughout the country in recent years. New York’s 1978 payment/retainage law, while viewed as ground-breaking 36 years ago, is now outdated and lags behind most of the other states. During the 2014 legislative session, ESSA’s release of subcontractor retainage bill fell just short of passage, but over the next several months NESCA and ESSA will be laying the ground work to make retainage reform in New York a reality in 2015.


ADVERTISEMENT

15September 2014

ADVERTISEMENT

Comprehensive Legal Services for the Construction and Real Estate Industries

• ConstructionContracts&Claims• Litigation,Mediation&Arbitration• Private&GovernmentProjects• Partnering,JointVentures&Closely

HeldCorporationandLimitedLiabilityCompanies

• CommercialRealEstate

• Labor&EmploymentDisputes• SecuredCreditorTransactions• Wills,Trusts&Estates• BusinessSuccessionPlanning• IntellectualProperty,Copyright&Trademark

MattersandDisputes• Bankruptcy&Debtor/CreditorRights

ONE PENNSYLVANIA PLAZANew York, New York 10119-0196

(212) 695-8100, ext. 312Donald J. Carbone

OneNorthBroadway,Suite800WhitePlains,NewYork10601

55HarristownRoadGlenRock,NewJersey07452

7600JerichoTurnpikeWoodbury,NewYork11797

www.goetzfitz.com

Goetz Fitzpatrick llp

Law Offices

C. Jaye Berger

110 East 59th Street, 22nd FloorNew York, New York 10022

TEL: (212) 753-2080

• Real Estate and Corporate Law

• Renovation and Construction Law

• Mechanic’s Liens

• Contract Drafting and Review

• Litigation in State and Federal Courts


16

This is the first in a two part series regarding bidding controversies. Discussed this month will be the issue of “bid mistakes”; next month the broader topic of bid protests will be addressed.

Every potential new job is, of course, important, but proceeding with a financially doomed project resulting from a bid mistake is wholly untenable. Similarly, losing a bid to an alleged “low bidder” you reasonably believe should not receive a particular award is equally unacceptable. These two articles are designed to help you promptly avoid (defensively), or properly address (offensively), these and other regrettable bidding problems.

One of the fundamental messages conveyed in this first article concerning bid mistakes, and one that is applicable to bid protests as well, is the highly time-sensitive nature of your response. Bid mistakes must be treated as the emergency they are. Bid mistakes can be satisfactorily dealt with, but you must do so within a very short time frame.

“Excusable” Bid MistakesIf because of a unilateral error a contractor’s bid is significantly lower than all other bids, the contractor must promptly act to rescind its bid or it will be “bound” to the job. Such a mistake could single-handedly create significant financial consequences, including the loss of one’s bid security or bond.

If a contractor’s mistake is deemed “excusable” under New York law, the contractor may be relieved of its bid. New York courts will determine whether a mistake is “excusable” on a fact-by-fact basis. New

York statute provides a “safe harbor” of excusable conditions. Where a unilateral error or mistake is discovered in a bid, such a bid may be withdrawn upon a timely showing of the following:

1. The mistake is known or made known to the awarding officer, board or agency prior to the awarding of the contract or within three days after the opening of the bid, whichever period is shorter; and

2. The price bid was based on an error of such magnitude that enforcement would be unconscionable; and

3. The bid was submitted in good faith and the bidder submits credible evidence that the mistake was a clerical error as opposed to a judgment error; and

4. The error in the bid is actually due to an unintentional and substantial arithmetic error or an unintentional omission of a substantial quantity of work, labor, material, goods or services made directly in the compilation of the bid, which unintentional arithmetic error or unintentional omission can be clearly shown by objective evidence drawn from inspection of the original work paper, documents, or materials used in the preparation of the bid sought to be withdrawn; and

5. It is possible to place the public agency, board, officer, or subdivision in status quo ante.

Assuming these conditions are met, the only remedy at law for a mistaken bid in New York is for the contractor to be relieved of its bid. Moreover, a contractor who is legally relieved of its bid is also relieved of its


Procurement Disputes – Bid Mistakes And Bid Protests – Part 1

BY HENRY L. GOLDBERG, MANAGING PARTNER, GOLDBERG & CONNOLLY AND STA LEGAL COUNSEL


17September 2014

ADVERTISEMENT

CONSTRUCTION LAWSOLUTIONS

CONTACT: HENRY L. GOLDBERG MANAGING [email protected]

www.goldbergconnolly.com | 516.764.2800

LEGAL COUNSEL TO THE STA

Contract Claims & Disputes | Bid Protests Labor Law/Prevailing Wage | M/W/DBE

Mechanics Lien/Payment Bond Claims Insurance Coverage


obligations under its bid bond. However, revising a bid (“reformation”) is not an available remedy. A bid may be withdrawn, it cannot be “corrected,” even where the original intent was obvious and could be demonstrated by documentary evidence.

After a bid is withdrawn, the owner, for its part, has only two options: go with the next lowest responsive and responsible bidder, or re-bid the project.

Examples of an “Excusable” Mistake The most common excusable mistakes are clerical errors. Two typical clerical errors are calculation errors and transference errors.

A calculation error is simply a mathematical error, which typically occurs when a larger number than intended is subtracted from a bid during the calculation. For example, a contractor inadvertently reduced a number/value in the bid by $200,000 instead of $20,000.

Transference errors, on the other hand, occur when a person who calculates a bid, transfers a number incorrectly from the bid calculation sheet to the bid submission. For example, a contractor assessed $5,100,000 on its bid calculation, but when this number was transferred to the bid form, it accidentally switched the first two digits and wrote down $1,500,000. This obviously results in a substantially lower bid than intended.

In contrast to a purely “clerical error,” it is unlikely that a mistake that is the result of a bidder’s negligence in analyzing the project’s plans and specifications, an error in judgment, will be held to be “excusable” by the courts. A mistake in judgment is a risk inherent to the bidding process and courts will typically not relieve a contractor from its low bid for making such a mistake. While this may appear harsh, it is important to keep in mind that the bidding process is clearly part science and part art. For example, a bidder might have chosen to “go low” as a matter of strategy, but, after seeing the other bids upon formal public opening of the bids, may have had a change of heart and wanted out. This will, most likely, not be countenanced.

“Non-Excusable” MistakesAn example of a non-excusable or judgmental mistake concerned a bid specification that required a contractor to supply temporary heat. The bidder later discovered that it did not include the price of temporary heat in its bid calculation. The court found the mistake to be non-excusable.

Where a court denies rescission of a bid, such as in the example above, the bidder must make the often difficult choice of whether to perform the contract, or forfeit its bid security. In some cases, where the mistake is too great to withstand, it’s an “easy”, but unpleasant, decision to forfeit the bid security, typically five percent of the total contract price.

Despite “Non-Excusable” Mistake, Courts May Apply “Fairness” PrinciplesAll hope is not lost, however, even in the event of a non-excusable mistake. Courts may still find that it would be inequitable to force a contractor to perform its grossly underbid contract. In consideration of such equitable considerations, courts may consider the following factors to still grant the remedy of rescission to the bidder:

• The mistake was of such consequence as to make

enforcement unconscionable;

• The mistake was material;

• The bidder exercised ordinary care in compiling

the bid; and

• The other party (the owner) may be put back to

the status quo. Keep in mind that while available, these arguments are reserved for extraordinary circumstances. Do not expect to rely on them.




19September 2014

ADVERTISEMENT

Great things get built when we put our heads together.

STRENGTH IN PARTNERSHIPGarden City | 516.873.2000

New York City | 212.239.2000

www.moritthock.com

Our fi rm knows the business needs of subcontractors. Our Construction Law Practice applies a unique, cost-effective and innovative approach to problem solving. Our experience in representing not only subcontractors, but also owners, contractors, construction managers and sureties, enables us to better serve you. Because we lack traditional separation by departments, you tap into the combined mind power of our entire fi rm: 50 experienced attorneys with diverse skills and insight, all coming together to deliver big picture solutions for your business.

Discover our combined strength in partnership with your business.

Lee J. Mendelson

William P. Laino

Gary Y. Wirth


G & C CommentaryIf you take no other message from this article, be certain to always treat bid mistakes as the urgent emergency they represent. Do not sit on your statutory, or any other rights.

Courts do permit bidders to promptly rescind their bids due to the “right” type of mistake or error.

If a mistake is discovered at bid opening, the bidder must take immediate action. A bidder has only three days from bid opening to make a claim for rescission or withdrawal.

If after analyzing your estimating documents, you realize that your mistake was not due to a mere clerical error, but instead, a judgmental error such as a failure to account for a detail in a specification or drawing, as discussed above, it still may be possible for a court to allow for a bid withdrawal if the appropriate arguments are made. Act quickly and consult your lawyer who can guide you through this minefield. With the proper advice, you may still be able to avoid the harsh consequences of a bid mistake, obtain the return of your bid bond, and survive the error to compete and win another day.

Mr. Goldberg can be contacted by email [email protected] or by telephone at 516-764-2800.

Stephanie M. Herschaft, an associate with Goldberg & Connolly, assisted in the preparation of this article.

©Goldberg & Connolly 2014

This article has been prepared for informational purposes only. It is not a substitute for legal advice addressed to particular circumstances. You should not take or refrain from taking any legal action based upon the information contained herein without first seeking professional, individualized counsel based upon your own circumstances. The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you written information about our qualifications and experience.

www.goldbergconnolly.com



21September 2014

ADVERTISEMENT

YOUR BUSINESSNEEDS A GAMECHANGERINSIGHT IN CONSTRUCTION CAN CREATE IT.Turn to CohnReznick for proactive financial insight to improve profitability, fortify working capital and strengthen banking and surety programs. Find out what CohnReznick thinks at CohnReznick.com/construction. Forward Thinking Creates Results.

CohnReznick is an independent member of Nexia International

cohnreznick.com/construction

Joe Torre2014 National Baseball Hall of Fame Inductee


22

Subcontractors Trade Association (STA) member, Woodworks Construction Company, was started in the spring of 1980 with founder Hal Heustein at the reigns. In its beginning days, the business worked with a handful of employees; now Woodworks is one of the leading drywall, carpentry, wood-flooring and safety subcontractors in New York City.

Today the company is headed by President W. Scott Rives and partner Dan Kennelly, both of who began with Woodworks shortly after its inception in the early eighties. The two took over from Heustein in 1998 and grew the business to what it is today.

Woodworks has worked on numerous high-profile jobs in Manhattan such as the 9/11 Memorial Museum, Time Warner Towers, One57 57th Street, Beacon Tower at 731 Lexington and the renovation of Carnegie Hall, among many others.

Rives sits on the STA Board of Directors and served as President of the Board from 2010 to 2012. He continues to have an active presence within the STA and the advisory committee.

For him, the STA has been a driving force in giving a unified voice to subcontractors in the state, representing the rights of businesses to government agencies, general contractors and construction managers.

He has found the STA a chance to meet and learn from other subcontractors who don’t necessarily specialize in the same type of construction.

“A valuable benefit for me has been the opportunity to participate in meetings and seminars with peers who are in the same industry but not the same trade, and learn from the different experiences others go through that I may not,” he said.

Rives stresses the importance of the subcontractor members of the STA. Without them, he says, the organization would cease to exist.

“Whether you are a member who pays dues or you are not a member, subcontractors in New York reap the benefits of what the association does,” Rives said. “However, without the help and participation of members, the STA would not and will not be able to provide these services.”

Contact Scott Rives at [email protected].


BY SAMANTHA SWEENEY, SUBCONTRACTORS TRADE ASSOCIATION

Woodworks Construction Co., Inc.322 8 t h Avenue , S te 701 , New York , NY 10001

Phone: (212) 888-7311 Fax : (212) 832-8864

STA Member Profile: Woodworks Construction Company

23September 2014

ADVERTISEMENT

Putting The Pieces Of

Building And Business

Together

Beyond Protection. Partnership.

When it comes to creating new contacts andconnections, we create the perfect fit. Fromenhancing market relationships and creatingalternative risk financing to forming jointventures and acquisition opportunities, ourteam of experts can put it all together for you.

David W. MarinoRegional Executive Vice President

[email protected] | www.aon.com

24

Take Advantage of Upcoming STA Education & Training Opportunities

September 2014 24

Among the services provided by the Subcontractors

Trade Association are the seminars and workshops

addressing issues of interest to our members. The

STA will have a variety of these seminars in the

coming months.

On September 23, the STA collaborated with the

Building Trades Employers’ Association to present

a seminar on the newly revised Chapter 33/Safety

Code for the City of New York. Presenters from the

New York City Department of Buildings reviewed the

changes to the Safety Code which are scheduled to

go into effect on October 1. Look for a summary and

highlights of this seminar in the October issue of the

STA Subcontractors News.

The next General Membership Meeting of the STA

on October 1 will include a panel discussion of

tremendous interest to our member subcontractors.

This panel discussion will focus on the subject of

subcontractor insurance. Led by the STA’s Insurance

Committee Chairperson, David Marino, this panel

comprised of four experts in this field, will review

trends and changes in the insurance market that

impact construction contractors. Insights provided

by this panel should provide STA members with

information necessary to making sound decisions in

procuring insurance in what is currently a difficult

market.

On October 24, the STA will be joining with

the Association of General Contractors (AGC)

in sponsoring a seminar dealing with the Code

Enforcement Unit of the New York City School

Construction Authority (SCA). This session promises

to offer attendees with informed insights from SCA

staff on their enforcement of building code rules and

regulations. SCA staff will also participate in what

promises to be a spirited “question and answer”

session.

In addition, the STA will hold its final General

Membership meeting on Wednesday, November 12

with a seminar panel from a prominent Construction

Management firm in the New York City construction

industry. Look for more information in the coming

weeks regarding this meeting.

Finally, I would like to urge members and friends of

the STA to “save the date” of May 9, 2015 for the

STA’s Annual Awards Dinner. We have changed

the venue of the dinner in 2015 to the Glen Island

Harbour Club in New Rochelle. A STA Committee is

working on the honorees for this annual event and

we hope to better our participation of 450 attendees

from the 2014 Dinner.

Be on the alert for these other upcoming STA events

as we continue to expand our seminar program.

BY HANK KITA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SUBCONTRACTORS TRADE ASSOCIATION


25September 2014

ADVERTISEMENT

135 Crossways Park Drive, Suite 201, Woodbury, New York 11797 | Tel: 516.681.1100 | Fax: 516.681.1101 | www.kdvlaw.com

Jason LangeAssociate

Muhammad IkhlasAssociate

Matthew MineroPartner

Andrew RichardsPartner

Chair of KDV’s Construction Practice

Kaufman Dolowich & Voluck Is A Full-Service Litigation Firm That Understands Your Business Needs

In today’s business climate, companies face risks on a variety of fronts when a dispute arises. Our attorneys are proactive, pragmatic and result-oriented. We always act in the best interests of our clients and strive to achieve favorable results whether

by litigation or through settlement whenever alternate resolution is possible.

Construction Law

▪ Contract Drafting and Negotiation ▪ Construction Defect Litigation ▪ Claims, Litigation, Arbitration and Mediation

- Breach of Contract - Extra Work - Wrongful Termination - Performance and Payment Bond - Non-Payment - Defective Work - Mechanic’s Lien - Delay Claims

Commercial Litigation

▪ Real Estate Claims and Disputes ▪ Fidelity and Surety

Labor & Employment Law on Behalf of Management

▪ Wage and Hour Litigation and Compliance ▪ Collective Bargaining and Negotiations ▪ Human Resources Counseling and Training ▪ Employment Agreements ▪ Risk Management ▪ Union Arbitrations and Grievances ▪ Whistleblower and Retaliation Claims

Jeffery A. MeyerPartner


ADVERTISEMENT

313 West Old Country Road • Hicksville, NY 11801 | T: 516.937.9500 | www.castellanokorenberg.com

Castellano, Korenberg & Co.

Certified Public Accountants

G U I D A N C E Y O U C A N C O U N T O N

BUILD WITH

CONFIDENCE

27September 2014

ADVERTISEMENT

New York City SCA Construction Inspection (CID) and Permitting Processes

and Procedures Update DATE: Friday, October 24, 2014 TIME: 7:30 a.m. breakfast ● 8:00 a.m.-10:00 a.m. program PLACE: Downtown Association, 60 Pine Street, New York, New York COST: $85 per person for AGC NYS and STA Members $115 per non-member (Price includes continental breakfast) SPEAKERS: Lorraine Grillo, President, SCA Jason Ocharsky, NEW Director of CID

As reported recently, the AGC NYS/STA (Subcontractors Trade Association) joint task force met recently to discuss the New York City School Construction Authority’s CID (construction inspection) and Permitting processes and procedures. That meeting was very beneficial and realized a number of improvements/operational enhancements.

On October 24th, AGC NYS and STA will host a breakfast meeting at the Downtown Association (60 Pine Street) where SCA President Lorraine Grillo and other key staff including Jason Ocharsky (new Director of CID) will discuss the CID Operational Enhancements.

Please join us for this important breakfast seminar.

For more information or to register, contact Samantha Sweeney at [email protected] or 212-398-6220


Subcontractors Trade Association 1430 Broadway Suite 1600 New York, NY 10018T: 212.398.6220 F: 212.398.6224e-mail: [email protected] website: www.stanyc.com OfficersRobert J. Ansbro, President The New York Roofing Company Robert Weiss 1st Vice President A.J. McNulty & Co. Inc. Peter Cafiero 2nd Vice President Island Painting John A. Finamore Treasurer Jordan Panel Systems Joseph Leo Secretary Atlantic Contracting & Specialties, LLC

Active Past PresidentsGreg S. Fricke, Jr.Leonard Powers, Inc. Jerry LissA. Liss & Co. Inc. Alan Nathanson (Honorary)Forsythe Plumbing & Heating Corp. Lawrence RomanWDF, Inc. Arthur RubinsteinSkyline Steel Corp.

Robert SamelaA.C. Associates Gary Segal (Honorary)Five Star Electric Corp. Lawrence WeissA.J. McNulty & Co., Inc. Scott RivesWoodworks Construction Co, Inc. Board of DirectorsJoseph Azara Jr. C.D.E. Air Conditioning

Christine Boccia JD Traditional Industries Dan J. DeVita Penava Mechanical Corp. John Dierks Dierks Heating Company, Inc Andrew Drazic ATJ Electrical Brent Fleisher Environet Systems James Flynn Independent Temperature Control Patrick Gallagher BP Mechanical Corp. Stephen Gianotti Arcadia Electrical Co., Inc. Sandra Milad Gibson Milad Contracting Corporation Craig Gilston Gilston Electrical Contracting Gloria Kemper Recon Construction Corp.

Randy Rifelli United Iron, Inc. Guy VandeVaarst Five Star Electric Corp. (no longer at Empire System Solutions) John Villafane Eldor Electric Upcoming Events

General Membership Meeting Wednesday, October 1 5:30PM SCA Construction Inspection (CID) and Permitting Processes and Procedure Update Friday, October 24 7:30AM Board of Directors Meeting Tuesday, October 7 5:30PM

trengthen New York’s construction industry

each member firms to increase business opportunities

dvocate to preserve subcontractors’ rights

O U R M I S S I O N S TAT E M E N T

ADVERTISEMENT

Manhattan Long Island212-661-6166 516-256-3500www.grassicpas.com

find the balance to gain a competitive edge

For more than 30 years, Grassi & Co.’s Construction Practice has been assisting contractors, engineers, suppliers and distributors minimize their tax liability, uncover potential savings, and build a successful future.

sta september 2014 newsletter

Documents

sta members

sta office3one

sta general membership

new york citys

sta member profile

affordable housing units

housing advocates

sta officep r e s i