WHO OPENED THE LAWYER BIDS?
Fire District Bids For Solicitor Must Be Done Over
At the April 1, 2026 Fire District meeting, it was revealed that long awaited proposals from attorneys to serve as Solicitor had to be rejected due to a “fatal flaw”. Namely, someone opened one of the bids before they were sent to the “Qualified Purchasing Agent” [QPA] at the Mount Holly MUA. Readers will recall that the Fire District has had difficulty retaining lawyers with four Solicitors having come and gone in a year.
The reason the bidding process is so strictly controlled is that in New Jersey, the “chain of custody” for public bids is regulated under the Local Public Contracts Law to ensure competitive fairness, transparency, and the integrity of the procurement process. The core requirement is that bids remain sealed and untampered from the moment of submission until the designated public opening.
And so, the Fire District will have to repeat its “Request For Proposal” [RFP] process. The re-advertised RFP was issued on April 10th and it is expected that new bids will be opened by the QPA on April 23, 2026.
While Commissioner Thiessen suspects the breach of custody was accidental, he said that submission of new bids will go to the MUA office as a direct response to the bid security failure.
FORMAL INVESTIGATION: Commissioner Logue introduced an amendment to the bid rejection resolution to require an official investigation into how the bid was opened. Commissioner Sheppard and Commissioner Logue both noted that neither of them has access to the office where the bids were stored and that key fobs which do have access are monitored by a security system. The investigation passed by a 3-2 vote with Commissioners Saucier and Gaskill voting against the investigation.
Shared Services Utilization: The board reaffirmed its reliance on the Mt. Holly MUA’s QPA through a shared services agreement, noting that the district had not previously conducted RFPs for professional legal services.
Take-Aways
Administrative Failure: There is significant concern regarding the “fatal flaw” in the bid opening. While the error was described as probably accidental, the board emphasized the need for an “above board” response to avoid any appearance of impropriety and to avoid future failures.
Chain of Custody: The shift in submission location to the MUA office is a direct response to the failure of the district’s internal handling of the initial bids.
Public Transparency: The board explicitly invited public attendance for the upcoming bid opening to restore confidence in the procurement process.