March 16, 2006
The Honorable Susan Bysiewicz
210 Capitol Ave., Room 104
Hartford, CT 06106-1591
Dear Secretary Bysiewicz:
I am returning to you without my signature, House Bill 5684, An Act Concerning Reform of the State Contracting Process.
From my first day in office as Governor, I have worked to restore faith in government. I immediately set out to rebuild the trust of each Connecticut citizen in its elected leaders, governmental agencies and governmental contracting. Shortly after taking office, I formed the Contracting Reform Task Force. The Task Force developed and made recommendations for the implementation of a clean contracting process for the State that would be free of undue influence and which would codify the ethical standards our citizenry demanded of us.
To that end, the Task Force made recommendations which I supported and proposed to the Legislature both this session and last. What began as a thoughtful proposal to create a Contracting Standards Board to review and revise Connecticut’s policies for conducting State business was undermined by the inclusion of unreasonable constraints on the State’s ability to contract for services under the disingenuous misnomer of “privatization.”
Having had to veto Senate Bill 94 during last year’s regular session due to the inclusion of the privatization language, I issued Executive Order No. 7A, which created a State Contracting Standards Board. Legislative complaints regarding the establishment of this Board by Executive Order were met with my repeated commitments to codify the Board into law by working cooperatively with the General Assembly. Unfortunately, what was presented to me for signature a second time in November of 2005, in Senate Bill 2101, and for the third time in House Bill 5684 of this session, was not the result of cooperation between my office and the Legislature. Both bills continued the Legislature’s insistence of including the “privatization” provisions that I indicated would result in a gubernatorial veto.
While I have been Governor, I have repeatedly affirmed both my commitment to State employees and my desire to avoid layoffs. I have shared, both publicly and in written correspondence with legislative leaders, my willingness to address the privatization issue if the intent was to trigger protections in the event state employees were to be laid off. I stand by my position that contracts that do not negatively impact state employees are not “privatizations.” Rather, such contracts are the result of a manager making a business decision as to how best to procure goods and services in as cost effective a manner as possible.
I was perfectly clear in my communications with legislative leaders that as the chief executive of this State, I cannot allow this administration or a future administration’s hands to be tied concerning every contract that might be entered into with a non-governmental business for goods and services. Yet
for the third time, legislation was passed by the General Assembly, which was delivered to me in the form of HB 5684 for my signature that does just that.
The Legislature has again chosen to include provisions in this bill that carve out certain so-called “privatization” contracts for a separate and severe set of restrictions. As written, this category affects a large number of contracts. More importantly, the “privatization” provisions continue the Legislature’s willful disregard of how negatively this provision will impact those small- and minority-owned businesses that have struggled for years to get their rightful fair share of the state contracting pie.
As Governor, it would be unconscionable to allow this anti-taxpayer and anti-job legislation to become law. This bill, if signed, would require that nearly all private contractors performing State contracts compensate their employees with wages and benefits linked to the compensation scheme, including healthcare and pension benefits, that state employees are provided for doing the same type of work. This onerous requirement would make it very difficult for private businesses to continue doing business with the State. For example, just within the four categories of security services, print services, laundry and office supplies, this bill would compromise approximately 120 private companies throughout our State, which employ an estimated 300,000 people.
This bill fails to take into consideration the best interests of citizens and taxpayers of Connecticut and was adopted without consideration of its impact on the State to manage its day-to-day affairs. I cannot sign a bill that continues to pose a threat to interfering with the delivery of state services and that will result in the potential loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs.
I continue to hope that the Legislature will vote to codify the State Contracting Standards Board into law and I remain committed to working with the Legislature to enact comprehensive contracting reform. I look forward to the day when the Legislature will join me in that effort. Until that time, I will do everything within my executive authority, with the help of the Board I established by executive order, to move the work of reforming the state contracting process forward.
For all of the reasons stated herein, I disapprove of House Bill 5684, An Act Concerning Reform of the State Contracting Process. Pursuant to Article Four, Section 15 of the Constitution of the State of Connecticut and Article III of the Amendments to the Constitution of the State of Connecticut, I am returning House Bill 5684 without my signature.
Very truly yours,
M. JODI RELL
Governor
