In private emails, Perry questioned city's no-bid dog control deal

Apr. 27—Niagara Falls City Council Chairman Jim Perry has said several times in recent weeks that he believes the city acted appropriately and legally last year when it awarded a lucrative contract for animal sheltering services to a Grand Island provider without first seeking bids from other vendors.

Emails Perry sent to critics of the agreement in February and March show, at that time, he had his doubts about the situation and encouraged those who felt the same way to share their concerns with members of the local media and state authorities, including New York's attorney general.

In one of the messages, dated Feb. 5, Perry indicated that he had a "major issue" with awarding the contract without publicly soliciting bids first.

"Before the city signs a contract, they are supposed to make a request for proposals," Perry wrote in the email, which was sent on his private account to Nicole Dyer, one member of a group of individuals who have questioned the city's handling of the contract in recent weeks. "This provides everyone that meets vendor qualifications a chance to bid on a contract. I have questioned the administration and heard excuses on top of excuses for reasons why this wasn't done, but nothing makes a lot of sense to me"

The newspaper obtained copies of the emails this week.

During a telephone interview with a reporter on Friday, Perry, who confirmed the authenticity of the emails, said it was important to put his email messages from earlier this year into context. He said they were written at a time before he had a chance to thoroughly investigate the matter, which dated back to the council's approval of the contract last September when he had not yet been elected to office.

Now that he has done his due diligence, which included discussing it with Restaino and the city's legal counsel, he said his earlier concerns have been addressed and he is now satisfied that the agreement was awarded properly and legally given the city's need to provide adequate shelter to stray dogs in an area where there are few state-approved shelters or providers.

"I did investigate it," Perry said. "I turned the place upside down trying to see if there was something wrong and I could not find anything that was wrong. I questioned everything that was done and there was nothing that was illegal."

Dyer is one of a group of individuals who have for weeks expressed concerns about the city's handling of the animal sheltering contract. Others in the group include Buffalo recycling center owner Janine Gallo, Falls real estate agent Tania Barone and former Falls Councilman Vincent Gauley who all maintain the city had a legal responsibility to solicit bids from other vendors before awarding the 16-month contract, which has a base pay rate of $20,270 per month, to The Pit Chic.

At one point last year, Gallo was working with the Pit Chic's owner, Kelly Swagel, on a plan to purchase a property for the purpose of developing a new animal shelter in Niagara County. She also has expressed interest in providing shelter services to the city, although she insists she's motivated by providing quality care to the city's stray dogs, not by the fees tied to the sheltering deal.

Under general municipal law, local governments are required to undertake competitive bidding for purchase contracts in excess of $20,000 and for public works contracts in excess of $35,000. Some exceptions apply, including contracts involving "professional services," an often-broadly applied classification that generally covers services such as accounting, legal or marketing. Contracts can also be awarded without a bid amid "public emergencies," which the law defines as "arising out of an accident or other unforeseen occurrence or condition that impacts "public buildings, public property or the life, health, safety or property of the inhabitants of a political subdivision."

While Restaino first advised city lawmakers in February 2022 that the city needed to find an alternative shelter for stray dogs because the SPCA of Niagara would not longer be providing the service, the administration sought council approval for The Pit Chic contract last September, arguing that it had to be authorized on an emergency basis.

In an interview with the newspaper earlier this month, Perry said the city's legal counsel sought authorization of the contract as a "professional service" and did so, in part, because there are no other local shelters that could accommodate the city's needs.

"There was a lack of professional services that met the criteria at the time and they had to move forward with it," Perry said.

In his messages, which Perry at one point indicates were written using his private email address because emails written using his city address are "traceable," the council chairman encourages critics of the deal to approach local media outlets, including local television news channels 2, 4 and 7 and a writer from the Niagara Reporter.

Two of Perry's messages include references to the "ABO," a state oversight agency formally known as the Authorities Budget Office, which is responsible for making sure public authorities operate in an accountable and transparent manner.

"The media can demand an answer where all we can do as the city council is ask," Perry wrote. "This loss of the SPCA services was an issue that was brewing for at least a year and yet no one in office had the wherewithal to suggest a bid packet be posted in the newspaper. If the ABO gets this information through the media, they may end up investigating the entire process."

"The people you need to make listen are mainstream voters and the ABO," Perry continues in his Feb. 5 email. "The mayor wants people to trust him, are they going to trust him if they think there is something funny going on with the animal shelter?"

In an email to Dyer dated Feb. 5, Perry encouraged critics of the contract's award to develop a "brief" outlining their concerns, suggesting they start off by asking a simple question: "How does a city award a contract without sending out an RFP?"

"The excuse I got was there were no people in the business at the time," Perry wrote. "I had to follow up by asking, how would you know without a public notice."

In a pair of messages exchanged in March, Perry expresses frustration about the critic's approach to the situation, indicating that he thinks they aren't helping with their "emotional outbursts" and by "repeating yourselves," two practices he describes as "counterproductive."

In a March 4 email, Perry references critics of the contract mentioning "collusion," and writes that if "you ladies can document it," they should not "waste any more time with the course" they've been on. His email includes a link to the online corruption and wrongdoing complaint system overseen by the New York state attorney general.

"Collusion, price fixing, possibly pay-to-play," he writes. "I doubt the FBI would find this interesting at all — the case would be too insignificant for them, but the state should be interested."

On Friday, Perry said, for the reasons outlined by Restaino and the city's lawyers, he now does not believe critics of the deal have a legal case.

"I did suggest that an RFP should have been called for but after speaking with the mayor and the attorney it wasn't required in that case because there were no other vendors," he said.

Barone said Friday it's been difficult for her and others who have questions about the award of the contract to believe the process was handled appropriately and legally when the council chairman continues to say in public that it was all above board while he has privately told them, in writing, about his concerns while suggesting they may be of interest to the media and state authorities.

"What side is he on?" Barone asked.