The Lawrence Township Council has rejected a proposal to lease and operate the vacant Lawrence Community Center after the nonprofit organization seeking to take over the building requested township funding and proposed annual rent renegotiations.
Lawrence Non-Profit Housing Inc., the only organization to respond to the township’s request for proposals (RFP), proposed paying $1 per year in rent, subject to annual renegotiation based on programming costs and revenue, while asking the township to contribute $135,000 toward operating expenses in the first year and $110,000 in the second year.
Those financial terms did not comply with the RFP, which called for the nonprofit to pay rent to the township but made no provision for township contributions toward operating expenses.
The council rejected the proposal at its Oct. 20 meeting, despite requests from the organization’s representatives for an opportunity to negotiate the financial terms. Township officials will review the RFP to determine whether changes should be made before advertising it again.
Earlier this year, the council sought proposals from nonprofit organizations to lease and operate the township-owned building on Eggerts Crossing Road, formerly known as the Lawrence Neighborhood Center.
The township wants an organization that would provide community-based programming, including youth and family support, education, personal development and social services, while ensuring the center remains accessible to residents. The RFP called for a five-year lease, with two additional years of renewal.
Tom Wilfrid, a member of the Lawrence Non-Profit Housing Inc. board of directors, said the organization spent two months preparing its submission and believed it had followed the township’s requirements.
“We put together a pretty thick proposal after a lot of work over a two-month period during which we were not able to talk to any of you by the rules of the proposal process,” Wilfrid told the Township Council.
Although direct discussions were prohibited, the organization was allowed to submit questions through a formal process. Wilfrid said the group asked whether there was a minimum rent requirement and was told there was none. He said the organization relied on that answer when preparing its proposal.
Wilfrid said the group learned a few days before the Oct. 20 meeting that the council would consider a resolution rejecting its submission. It received a copy of the resolution outlining the legal deficiencies just hours before the meeting.
“We disagree and we would very much like the opportunity to talk this through before taking action. Agree with us to a 30-day extension (for the Township Council to act). We will explain what we were thinking when we put the proposal together. Give us a chance to rebut the legal opinion,” Wilfrid said.
Attorney Gary Backinoff, representing Lawrence Non-Profit Housing Inc., said the dispute stemmed from a lack of communication and understanding. He argued that the financial terms and operational details could have been addressed through negotiations before a lease was finalized.
“I don’t agree with the legal memorandum (on which the RFP rejection was based) that says there is a defect in the RFP. I think we could have talked through the issues,” Backinoff said.
“We are looking to serve the community. I think if we work together and start to communicate better, we can accomplish wonderful things,” Backinoff said.
Municipal Attorney Tyler Newman disagreed, saying New Jersey’s public bidding requirements do not allow negotiations to correct a legally deficient proposal after it has been submitted.
“The RFP laws in New Jersey do not contain any sort of mandate to negotiate or to meet and confer or to work out issues with bidders. There is strict compliance with requirements. When there is a legally deficient bid submitted, it is a legally deficient bid,” Newman said.
Councilwoman Amanda Santos said she understood the organization’s position but agreed that its proposal was materially deficient. Allowing negotiations after the submission deadline would undermine the public bidding process, she said, potentially establishing a precedent for other bidders to seek changes to their proposals.
“I think the path forward to having conversations lies with the rejection of the proposal so that we can figure out how to work together in the future,” Santos said.
Councilwoman Bonne Giglio said she had hoped the township would find an organization to take over the community center, but the proposal’s deficiencies left the council no choice but to reject it.
“No amount of wishing the situation were different can change the legal obligation we are under,” she said.
Mayor Christopher Bobbitt acknowledged the organization’s frustration but said the council could not disregard the law or the municipal attorney’s guidance.
“We can come with an RFP again at another time. This is not the end. This is simply a road bump, a pothole,” Bobbitt said.
