§ 7-148w — Disqualification of contractors from bidding on municipal contracts.

(a) As used in this section, the term “contractor” means any person, firm or corporation which has contracted or seeks to contract with a municipality, or to participate in such a contract, in connection with any public works of the municipality, including professional consultants. (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of any municipal charter, special act or home rule ordinance a municipality may, by ordinance of its legislative body, establish a process for disqualification of any contractor, for up to two years, from bidding on, applying for, or participating as a subcontractor under, contracts with the municipality for one or more causes set forth under subsection (c) of this section. Such ordinance shall establish procedures for disqualification which shall include notice and an opportunity for a hearing to the contractor who is the subject of the proceeding. The hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures for hearings on contested cases established in chapter 54. The hearing officer shall issue a written decision within ninety days of the last date of such hearing and state in the decision the reasons for the action taken and, if the contractor is being disqualified, the period of such disqualification. The existence of a cause for disqualification shall not be the sole factor to be considered in determining whether the contractor shall be disqualified. In determining whether to disqualify a contractor, the hearing officer shall consider the seriousness of the contractor's acts or omissions and any mitigating factors. The hearing officer shall send the decision to the contractor by certified mail, return receipt requested. (c) The ordinance shall provide that causes for disqualification from bidding on, applying for or participating in, contracts shall include the following: (1) Conviction or entry of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere for or admission to commission of a criminal offense as an incident to obtaining or attempting to obtain a public or private contract or subcontract, or in the performance of such contract or subcontract; (2) Conviction or entry of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere or admission to the violation of any state or federal law for embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, receiving stolen property or any other offense indicating a lack of business integrity or business honesty which affects responsibility as a municipal contractor; (3) Conviction or entry of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere or admission to a violation of any state or federal antitrust, collusion or conspiracy law arising out of the submission of bids or proposals on a public or private contract or subcontract; (4) A wilful failure to perform in accordance with the terms of one or more public contracts, agreements or transactions; (5) A history of failure to perform or of unsatisfactory performance of one or more public contracts, agreements or transactions; or (6) A wilful violation of a statutory or regulatory provision or requirement applicable to a public contract, agreement or transaction. (d) For purposes of a disqualification proceeding under an ordinance adopted under this section, conduct may be imputed as follows: (1) The fraudulent, criminal or other seriously improper conduct of any officer, director, shareholder, partner, employee or other individual associated with a contractor may be imputed to the contractor when the conduct occurred in connection with the individual's performance of duties for or on behalf of the contractor and the contractor knew of or had reason to know of such conduct. The term “other seriously improper conduct” does not include advice from an attorney, accountant or other paid consultant if it was reasonable for the contractor to rely on such advice. (2) The fraudulent, criminal or other seriously improper conduct of a contractor may be imputed to any officer, director, shareholder, partner, employee or other individual associated with the contractor who participated in, knew of or had reason to know of the contractor's conduct. (3) The fraudulent, criminal or other seriously improper conduct of one contractor participating in a joint venture or similar arrangement may be imputed to other participating contractors if the conduct occurred for or on behalf of the joint venture or similar arrangement and these contractors knew of or had reason to know of such conduct. (e) The municipality may reduce the period or extent of disqualification, upon the contractor's request, supported by documentation, for the following reasons: (1) Newly discovered material evidence; (2) Reversal of the conviction upon which the disqualification was based; (3) Bona fide change in ownership or management; (4) Elimination of other causes for which the disqualification was imposed; or (5) Other reasons the municipality deems appropriate. (f) The municipality may grant an exception permitting a disqualified contractor to participate in a particular contract or subcontract upon a written determination by the head of the contract awarding agency that there is good cause, in the interest of the public, for such action.

Legislative History

(P.A. 95-353, S. 5, 7.) History: P.A. 95-353, S. 5, effective July 1, 1995.