Local businesses suffer in disputes
It wasn’t a good week for local businessmen trying to renew their contracts with the state.
First, the Liquor Commission tried to drive a lucrative $200 million state contract away from Law Warehouses, a contract the company has had for decades.
Two liquor commissioners had to defend themselves from accusations from their own colleagues, who, in court, said they had it out for owner Brian Law from the start and gave competitive advantages to the eventual winner, shipping giant Excel.
On the same day in Concord, the Department of Transportation tried to railroad Peterborough businessman and state Rep. Peter Leishman out of a contract he’s had to operate trains on a short 3-mile stretch of rail that he’s had since 1992.
Unlike the liquor commission, the DOT had to go before the Executive Council for a vote. But with councilor Chris Sununu, R-Newfields, absent, the DOT’s contract with Pan Am railways was looking like a dead duck with a 2-2 tie. Instead of taking a vote, the matter was tabled until May 12, so Sununu could be there to cast the deciding vote.
In both cases, state officials have decided to go with the big guys at the expense of the smaller guys.
We think it stinks when local business aren’t treated fairly.
Leishman’s case is particularly noteworthy because the only customer along the freight line, Granite State Concrete, wants him to deliver their gravel. But he needs the contract to run his trains on the last 3 miles of his 27 mile run.
Denying him the ability to run his trains on those tracks puts him out of business and puts his customer at a disadvantage.
And there’s nothing Pan Am would like more.
Surprisingly, state officials decided to give the contract to the same people who shut down negotiations over commuter rail in New Hampshire because of a complaint about Leishman.
In 2009, when a truck hit one of Leishman’s trains, Pan Am smelled blood, and they went after Leishman, claiming he violated safety regulations during the crash.
In fact, police ruled the crash was not Leishman’s fault, but they got Leishman on one safety violation – that he failed to get off his train and flag traffic at the crossing.
During a federal court case in 2011, U.S. District Court Judge Paul Barbadoro said he couldn’t understand why the two companies couldn’t work out their dispute, other than to believe it was “because you hate each other.”
“For the life of me, I can’t understand why the two of you are locked in this death battle,” Barbadoro said.
We repeat Barbadoro’s sentiment: Work it out fellas.
More importantly, the state shouldn’t become a part of this death match. And the state’s hope to bring passenger rail to the state shouldn’t be held hostage as a result.
As for the contract, we think state officials should take a look at their contract bidding process. Giving one side an advantage over another because of preconceived bias or threats is not the government’s job.
Keep the bidding process open and fair, and let the little guys compete on even playing ground with the big boys. Anything less smells of corruption.