Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1915-05-11
LEGISLATIVE NEWS
PUBLIC SERVICE
REJECTS CONTRACT
Action Taken in Williamsport Case
That Has Aroused Much Atten-
ton in the State

The Public Service Commission has
refused to approve contract made by
the city of Williamsport with the Citi-
zens' Electric Company for the light
ing of the streets, parks and pubic
places of that city
The case involves unusual features
and in its treatment of 1t the commits
sion cites number of authorities. In
cluding an opinion of Justice Brown,
of the Supreme Court, in support of its
position. The city solicitor of Will
Transport also shares the views of the
commission, but Notwithstanding his
advice he was overruled by the coun-
ellis of Williamsport and the contract
with the electric light company was
sent to the commission for approval.
1t appears that the city advertised
for bids upon forms and specifications
which contained no specifications Or
condition as to the length of time to
be allowed for the erection of poles.
wires, etc. The bid of the Citizens
company. which was accepted by ordi-
nance approved November II, 1914,
set forth that it be given a reasonable
period of time after the approval of the
contract to erect its poles. wires. lamps
and other apparatus, and on December
1S council by ordinance fixed period
of six months as the time within
which these appliances should be in
stalled.
which was actually made by the COM
pany with the city contained ma
terial term and condition which made
1t different contract from that upon
which under the specifications, pro-
posal and advertisement the bids were
invited. For this reason" says the
commission, I'VE are of opinion in ac-
cordance with the contention of the
counsel for the Lycoming- Edison Com
pany, protestant. and as expressed in
the opinion given by the city solicitor
OF Williamsport to the council of that
city. that the said contract was not
given to the lowest responsible bidder
as required by the expressed provisions
OF Section of Article of the act of
June "a, 1918, governing the making
of contracts of this character by cities
of the third class and that the con-
tract so attempted to be made is there
fore illegal, null and void"
The commission explains that the
question is not whether there was
actual fraud In the awarding of the
contract. but whether in the specifica-
tions and proposals upon which the
bids have been invited common
standard has been fixed by which to
measure the respective competitive
bids; otherwise there cannot be said
to be any real competition in the bid
ding or an award of the contract to
the lowest responsible bidder which
the statute imperatively requires
The position of the Supreme Court,
which sustains the position of the COM
mission. was given in the case of Ed
mundson VS.. the Board of Public Edu-
cation OF the school district of the city
of Pittsburgh. decided March 22, 1915.
In that case the Supreme Court, re-
versing the decree of the court below,
held that contract made by the
Board of Public Education of the
school district of the city of Pittsburgh
for the construction of a school build
ing was null and void under the pro-
visions of the school code requiring
that such contract shall be awarded to
the lowest and best bidder because the
specifications and proposal failed to
designate any date for the completion
of the building.