HANDLING A TENDER.

Waikato Times, Volume 105, Issue 17712, 16 May 1929, Page 9

HANDLING A TENDER.

TONE OF FIRM’S LETTER. INSINUATIONS REFUTED. “NO STIGMA ON COUNCIL.” Strong ’disapproval of the tone of a letter from Messrs Tappenden Bros., motor dealers, concerning negotiations between the Borough Council and the firm for the purchase of a lease ol a section of borough land 'was voiced at the Council meeting last night. Councillors were so incensed >vitn what were described as “unwarranted insinuations” in the letter that doubt was expressed as to whether the letter should be formally received. The letter stated that it was agreed Tappenden Bros, should purchase 21 years’ lease after the land had been valued bv a special committee of the Council. ‘ They were given to understand that a tender would be all mat was necessary as there was no competition expected. It was found that a tender had been lodged about 15 minutes before closing time, although half an hour before closing Mr E. W. Tappenden was Hold by the town clerk that there had been no other party who had made inquiries or shown any interest whatsoever. When the two sealed tenders were laid before the Council it was decided that the highest tender should be accepted. When the tenders were examined it was found that the second party had tendered £7 higher than Tappenden Bros., this tender being accepted. Treatment Objected To.

"We consider the Council’s conduct in their dealings with us,” continued Messrs Tappenden Brothers’ letter, “was not what it should have been, because a councillor, who by his position would have an excellent knowledge of the details of our negotiations, is a highly interested party in the conducting of the business of the successful tendering firm. Under the circumstances we consider it was more or less an obligation upon him to see that the lease was sold by auction and not by tender. We desire to be informed if in our dealings with the Council we have received the equality of, treatment that would be expected from a public and disinterested body.” “Council Within Rights.”

Cr. S. V. Tyler said that as one of the special committee, including the Mayor and Cr. J. E. Tidd, set up to consider the matter lie would say the Council was quite within its rights in acting as it did. Tappenden Bros-’ letter, to say the least of it, was quite uncalled for.

Strong terms were employed by Cr. F. W. Luxford to express his opinion of the letter. He said there was no truth whatever in the insinuating remarks made. At no time did he enter into negotiations with the firm. The whole point of Tappenden Bros.’ letter seemed to be this: Tappendens came down to the Town Halt to see if there were any other interested parties tendering. This showed they were quite prepared to go higher if there was another interested party- How could the Council know who would be tendering and what the tenders were for?

“Not Worthy of Reception.”

“The innuendo is that the town clerk divulged this information," he added. “Personally I consider this letter is not worthy of being received, and I would like the Council to institute a thorough inquiry into the whole of the negotiations concerning the lease of that section.”

Cr. Luxford said Tappendens apparently wanted an investigation, as did the other tendering party. The stigma on the Council should be removed. "The letter reflects on the officials of this Council inasmuch as it. insinuates that the tenders have been tampered with,” said Cr. G. Lafferty. “The Council should clean the whole matter up.” > The Mayor, Mr J. R. Fow, said ho was strongly opposed to referring the matter to a committee for inquiry, be- \ cause the whole history of the nego- j tiations was as clear as day. (Hear, hear.) Every formality that was necessary had been complied with. The tenders had been opened before the full Council so there was nothing tu inquire into. It was unfortunate for j Tappendens that competition came unexpectedly, but the Council could nol foresee it and had no reason to refuse it. | Close Inquiry Urged. The opinion that Cr. Luxford, against whom an allegation had been made, should have the opportunity of refuting the innuendo was reiterated by Cr. A. J. Denz, who added: “He should have a right to protect himself against the charge lying behind the innuendo which, but for the libel laws of this country, would have been made.” Cr. R. Cobbe suggested that 'the problem should be solved by putting j the section up for auction. This might : have the effect of removing the stigma. | “There is no stigma against us," replied -His Worship, “Everything is as clear as day. If you go further you arc giving the letter undue value. Although I appreciate the remarks of Crs. Luxford and Denz, I do not think anything will be gained by going over the details." Cr. C. J. W. Barton: You have been, remarkably lenient. You should reply that the letter will not be received unless it is couched in decent terms. Cr. D. D. Wilson thought anyone was justified in fairly criticising, the ! Council, but in this case lie was not ! prepared to agree whether the criticism was justified.

The motion that the letter be received was carried unanimously.