In addition to the important decisions voters are facing concerning the election of officials that will lead New York State in the near future, on Nov. 7, residents of Nassau County will be voting on a referendum having to do with personal service contracts awarded in Nassau County. It will appear as Proposition #2 at the top of the ballot.

If passed, the referendum gives the Rules Committee of the Nassau County Legislature the authority to review and approve personal service contracts before the county executive awards them.

Legislative majority leader Judy Jacobs believes contracting out for services will remain a fact of life for the county. Therefore, the Legislature unanimously voted to put a referendum on the ballot, which sets up a system of checks and balances in awarding personal service contracts. The referendum states that any one contract of more than $25,000 or contracts to a firm totaling $50,000 a year must be reviewed and approved by the Rules Committee of the county Legislature.

If the referendum passes, legislators feel it will ensure that personal service contracts are awarded responsibly. "It is certainly better for us to test the waters and let the people of Nassau County know that those waters are being tested to see if some other person or some other firm can do the job better or cost the taxpayers less," said Jacobs.

The referendum on the Nov. 7 ballot states that it limits "the powers of the county executive by providing that personal service contracts proposed to be entered into by the county executive be subject to review and approval by the Rules Committee of the Nassau County Legislature."

According to a press secretary for the Democratic majority of the Legislature, the Rules Committee of the Legislature had been reviewing personal service contracts before they are awarded under an agreement between the county executive and former presiding officer Bruce Blakeman.

However, when Jacobs became presiding officer on Jan.1, as a result of last November's elections, she had no agreement in place with the county executive. An agreement wasn't reached until March. A gap of three months, therefore, existed in which personal service contracts weren't under review by the Rules Committee of the Legislature.

The agreement states that in normal, non-emergency situations, the Rules Committee has 45 days to review service contracts entered into by the county that exceed $25,000.

The referendum, if passed, however, would make the agreement reached between Jacobs and Gulotta law regardless of who the presiding officer is. Therefore, a gap of time with no agreement such as one that existed between January and March of this year would be avoided in the future.

One organization, the Long Island Progressive Coalition, stated that a law giving the Legislature a say in awarding personal service contracts would benefit the residents of the county.

Citing multiple examples in which firms which were identified as campaign contributors to Nassau County Executive Thomas Gulotta were also awarded personal service contracts by the county, the Long Island Progressive Coalition called the practice "a conflict of interest."

At a recent press conference, the Long Island Progressive Coalition revealed research which they say shows a relationship, in some cases, between firms that contribute money to a campaign and those who receive no-bid contracts by the county.

The organization's research showed examples where firms made contributions to the county executive's political campaign as well as the Nassau County Republican Committee and then received personal service contracts. On June 6, 1997, for instance, a law firm made a $400 contribution to Gulotta and three days later received a no-bid contract of $350,000, according to the Long Island Progressive Coalition. Another law firm received two no-bid contracts worth $119,000 nine days before contributing $500 to Gulotta. Six days later, the firm received another no-bid contract for $15,000 followed within a month by another $500 campaign contribution, the organization states.

In another example, on Aug. 19, 1997, the county's labor counsel made a campaign contribution of $1,500 to the county executive. Less than a week later, it received a no-bid contract of $100,000, the coalition said. From July 1997 to Sept. 1999, an appraiser received $4,045,000 in no-bid contracts and made $7,300 in campaign contributions, all within days or weeks of receiving the contracts, the coalition's research said.

The result of the Long Island Progressive Coalition's findings show that $23,308,546 personal service contracts were awarded to 32 different firms that had contributed $170,655 to political campaigns from October 1996 through November 1999.

Richard Kirsch, executive director of Citizen Action of New York, said the research only indicates the matches found when searching a database. He believes there are more examples of the same situation. "We didn't even look at some of the smaller contracts and we couldn't trace every contributor," he said.

"This pattern has happened over and over again and this is quite alarming. It shows a real conflict of interest that is created every time a contract is awarded without competitive bidding ... Regardless of whether this pattern was by coincidence or intent, the conflict of interest is real," said Lisa Tyson, associate director of the Long Island Progressive Coalition. "They [residents] can vote for this referendum. For the first time, we're actually giving them something to [help] solve the county budget problem. There's an action voters can take on Nov. 7 and we're asking them to vote."

County Executive Gulotta took exception to the report calling it "irresponsible, reckless and inaccurate."

Gulotta said that what is being proposed on the referendum has already been taking place. In 1997, he said, he entered into agreement with the Legislature for personal service contracts to be reviewed by the Rules Committee of the Legislature. Many of the examples of personal service contracts awarded by the county executive, cited in the Long Island Progressive Coalition's report were, therefore, reviewed by the Legislature at an open, public forum, Gulotta said.

Before 1997, personal service contracts awarded were noted on a calendar distributed to the public for anyone to question. Therefore, Gulotta said that public service contracts have always been open to public scrutiny.

Trading political contributions for personal service contracts are serious allegations for any elected official. Such accusations in this case, Long Island Progressive Coalition admits, would only be assumptions.

"We can't conclude as to the intent. We're not saying there was any conscious connection. There is a clear pattern. The pattern is systematic. The pattern is serious. It raises real questions about the decision-making process and seems to have cost the residents a lot of money," said David Sprintzen of the Long Island Progressive Coalition.

Those that were awarded the personal service contracts may have simply been the best firms for the jobs they were contracted for. However, the coalition says a system of checks and balances would remove any doubt.

It, therefore, supports a referendum that will be on the Nov. 7 ballot, which gives the county Legislature the ability to review contracts before they are awarded.

"We see systematic fiscal mismanagement and we see a lack of effective oversight on the part of the public, its agencies and its representatives for the handling of the people's money," said Sprintzen, adding that the awarding of personal service contracts without bids has contributed to the county's fiscal crisis.

In fairness to County Executive Gulotta, millions of dollars in personal service contracts have been awarded to firms that did not give campaign contributions.

Gulotta also said that if members of the Long Island Progressive Coalition thought there were improprieties concerning public contracts, they should have reported them to the proper authorities instead of "slinging mud at respectable individuals and firms."

The county executive also said he is in favor of the Nov. 7 referendum and helped craft it together with the Legislature. Presiding Officer Jacobs said the referendum went through the proper process and had the blessing of all involved.