A Scranton taxpayer is suing the city to overturn a contract awarded to a company to build a splash pad and playground in Pine Brook.
City resident Ralph Scartelli filed a preliminary injunction Tuesday in Lackawanna County Court to block the city from executing a contract with the highest bidder, Kobalt Construction Inc., for a “Capouse Splash Pad and Playground Project,” saying the city is paying the low offer had been rejected. by Don Scartelli Construction Services & General Contractors.
The lawsuit does not specify a relationship between Ralph Scartelli and the Don Scartelli construction company.
The dispute centers on whether the Scartelli firm was the lowest “responsible” bidder of six companies that submitted proposals for the project. The city determined that the Scartelli firm was not the lowest responsible bidder, according to the court order, but the plaintiff disagrees.
The location of the Capouse project is the defunct Penn Ridge pool site on Capouse Avenue.
The six contractors who submitted their bids earlier this month, including their amounts:
• Don Scartelli Construction Services & General Contractors: $1.99 million
• Ray Palmer Associates: $2.07 million
• KR Construction Group Inc.: $2.09 million
• D&M Construction: $2.117 million
• Multiscape Inc.: $2.118 million
• Kobalt Construction Inc. $2.24 million
On Oct. 8, the city posted online that it had awarded the project to Kobalt, but did not provide a reason for this selection and rejection of the other five lower bids, the lawsuit said. The difference between Kobalt and Scartelli’s bid is approximately $247,000.
The Scartelli company protested on October 9 and the city gave two reasons for rejecting the lowest bid on October 15:
• The city had previous experience with the Scartelli firm five years ago as the general contractor for the Novembrino Splash Pad project, for which the firm submitted 14 change orders totaling $167,000 and failed to complete the work in a timely manner, which Scartelli disputes. The lawsuit alleges that the Novembrino project was “rife with design issues,” city-induced delays, impacts from other contractors, and work stoppages due to COVID-19; and the city approved 11 of 14 change orders but has not paid for them.
• A company submitting a proposal for the Capouse project was required to disclose any disputes between the company and the city. The Scartelli company indicated it had “no new litigation” with the city, but made no mention of a lawsuit the city filed against the company regarding an unrelated Serrenti Center renovation project. According to the court order, the city was well aware of the company’s pending lawsuit against the Serrenti Center, and the language regarding lawsuits is not a valid reason to consider the company a non-responsive, non-responsible bidder for the Capouse project.
The city told the Scartelli firm that it caused some of the delays in the Novembrino project, which was supposed to start in the summer of 2019 but did not start until June 2020, because the company had to continually negotiate the scope of that project . The company also failed to oversee electrical and plumbing subcontractors, forcing the city to do so. The Novembrino project was not completed until July 2021, according to an exhibit in the summary proceedings. But the city’s version of the Novembrino project is inaccurate and the reliance on change orders in the Novembrino project is invalid with respect to the Capouse project, the judge claims.
“Such revisionist history, labeling the low bidder on the project as not responsible, amounts to bad faith” and violates the state’s competitive bidding laws, the lawsuit argues.
It wants a court to declare that the city wrongly rejected the low bid and that the city should award the Capouse contract to the Scartelli firm.
Lackawanna County Court Judge Terrence Nealon issued an order Tuesday to schedule a hearing for Nov. 8 requiring the city to show why the plaintiff is not entitled to the Capouse contract.
City Attorney Jessica Eskra declined to comment, saying the city does not comment on pending litigation.