From the Desk of Robert Cushman: City of Warwick-Warwick City Council Awards $65M “No Bid” Healthcare Contract to Existing Vendor
“Now that a precedent has been set that allows the mayor and the council to ignore bidding requirements, does this mean that all other ordinances regarding purchasing requirements in the city can be ignored?” – Robert Cushman
On Monday, February 9, 2026, the Warwick City Council disregarded an ordinance mandating a competitive bidding process for healthcare contracts every three years, opting instead to extend the current contract through 2028 or for a total of seven years. This extension results in an additional $65,114,863 no bid award to the existing vendor. Refer to the council finance committee agenda item below.
My testimony on the three-year bid requirement before the committee can be heard at the 32:50-minute in the link to the council meeting video, available above.
The purchasing agent stated that state law does not require the city to solicit bids for healthcare services. In 2007/2008, as a Member of the Warwick City Council, I sponsored legislation that specifically mandated a triannual bidding process for healthcare contracts, which is addressed in Section 2-20 of the Warwick Code of Ordinances.
Here is the ordinance language referenced at the meeting.
Sec. 2-20. – Single health insurance provider and administrator for all city funded labor agreements.
- Benefits of health insurance or health insurance administration provided in collective bargaining agreements shall be provided through the same insurer and/or administrator for all such agreements, to be selected after competitive bidding, at least once every three years, pursuant to Rhode Island State Law, the Charter of the City of Warwick and the Warwick Code of Ordinances, city wide to cover all employees entitled to such benefits
At the 4:29:00 minute mark in the video you can hear the justification for the council to ignore section 2-20 on healthcare bid process and simply extend the contract. The council solicitor uses the last sentence of section 6-12 of the city charter that states, “Alterations in any contract may be made when authorized by the council upon the recommendation of the mayor” as justification. He states, “this charter provision is superior to the ordinance that was presented earlier. The charter always wins when there’s a conflict.
Now that a precedent has been set that allows the mayor and the council to ignore bidding requirements, does this mean that all other ordinances regarding purchasing requirements in the city can be ignored? The ordinances mandating bid requirements are designed to prevent political influence, including contributions to elected officials, from affecting the allocation of municipal purchases. These measures have served as safeguards for decades in Warwick, ensuring that procurement decisions are made transparently and competitively. What the council solicitor has ruled has the potential to make all ordinances on purchasing requirements null and void. With this action there are limited mechanisms in place for checks and balances to protect taxpayers and guarantee that Warwick citizens receive goods and services at competitive prices through a transparent bidding process.
Two Email Threads Exist Between Mr. Cushman & Council Chair Sinapi
Thread 1:
From: Anthony Sinapi <anthonysinapi@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, February 9, 2026 10:26 PM
To: cushmanr44@hotmail.com
Subject: re: Health Insurance Bid
Hi Mr. Cushman,
Wanted to follow up with you re: the Health Insurance bid just to let you know that the Solicitor ended up advising the Council that it could proceed forward on the bid.
My understanding at the time I spoke to you was that the recommendation was going to be to hold it, so I wanted to let you know.
The good news is that there were multiple items docketed tonight re: amending the charter, so this matter may be able to be addressed going forward.
Best Regards,
Anthony Sinapi
From: Robert Cushman
Sent: Monday, February 9, 2026 10:46 PM
To: ‘Anthony Sinapi’ <anthonysinapi@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: Health Insurance Bid
Thanks for the update. I would hope that the council does not fall back to these forever healthcare contracts. The ordinance written almost 20 years ago was to avoid this exact scenario.
When this ordinance was written and passed it was very clear what the intent was. It was specific to healthcare bids. The council solicitor pulling some language out of the charter to let this go forward is ridiculous and sets a bad precedent and in the future could lead a future council to circumvent ordinances to do things the way they see fit. Another attorney could have easily argued that the healthcare ordinance needed to be followed.
Could this same ruling apply to the mayor ignoring the police pension ordinance that requires each officer to pay 1/3 of the actuarial reported annual contribution like he did in past budgets that the council approved? If that’s the case every ordinance needs to be studied to make sure it is an actual law that cannot be ignored.
Most of the members of this council don’t understand what significant last weeks “No” vote on the $50 million bond had. This wasn’t a one off. With another huge tax increase coming this spring, the sentiment in the city by taxpayers is that they are very angry and it will not be difficult to tap into that anger to influence the city council and school committee elections.
This city is being driven into the ground and with the passing of crazy spending like for bumper cars demonstrates how out of touch most of the council is on what is going on in the city.
Good luck in the future, you and your colleagues are going to need it.
Bob Cushman
Thread 2:
From: Anthony Sinapi <anthonysinapi@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2026 10:42 PM
To: Robert Cushman <cushmanr44@hotmail.com>
Cc: Bill Walsh <walshwg@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Health Insurance Bid
Charter Provision 6-12
(which was recently amended by the voters in the February special election, but did not change the highlighted language below regarding alterations in any contract)
· 6-12. – Purchases in excess of $1,000.
All purchases and contracts in excess of one thousand ($1,000) dollars and not exceeding twenty-five hundred ($2,500) dollars shall be awarded by the purchasing agent to the lowest responsible bidder after such public notice and competition as may be prescribed by council ordinance. The purchasing agent shall have the right to reject any or all bids and advertise for new bids. A series of orders for the same project shall be construed to be one order or contract and the finance department shall disapprove the same as circumventing the requirements of this Charter for competitive bidding. The acceptance of any bid for a contract in excess of twenty-five hundred ($2,500) dollars shall be subject to the approval of the city council and shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. Alterations in any contract may be made when authorized by the council upon the recommendation of the mayor. (Note: Council Chair Sinapi’s emphasis)
Best Regards,
Anthony Sinapi
On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 11:12 AM Robert Cushman <cushmanr44@hotmail.com> wrote:
Council President, can you forward me the specific language that the council solicitor used last night to justify the council not following Section 2.20 of the code of ordinance and continue to extend the healthcare contract for 7 years?
Here is the ordinance that was ignored.
Sec. 2-20. – Single health insurance provider and administrator for all city funded labor agreements.
- Benefits of health insurance or health insurance administration provided in collective bargaining agreements shall be provided through the same insurer and/or administrator for all such agreements, to be selected after competitive bidding, at least once every three years, pursuant to Rhode Island State Law, the Charter of the City of Warwick and the Warwick Code of Ordinances, city wide to cover all employees entitled to such benefits.
Thank you,
Bob Cushman
From: Anthony Sinapi <anthonysinapi@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, February 9, 2026 10:26 PM
To: cushmanr44@hotmail.com
Subject: re: Health Insurance Bid
Hi Mr. Cushman,
Wanted to follow up with you re: the Health Insurance bid just to let you know that the Solicitor ended up advising the Council that it could proceed forward on the bid.
My understanding at the time I spoke to you was that the recommendation was going to be to hold it, so I wanted to let you know.
The good news is that there were multiple items docketed tonight re: amending the charter, so this matter may be able to be addressed going forward.
Best Regards,
Anthony Sinapi
Robert Cushman
Robert Cushman is a retired business analyst for a Fortune 500 Corporation. He is also a former Warwick City Councilor and Former Member of the City of Warwick School Committee. He is a regular attendee at meetings of virtually every level of Warwick Government and manages the Facebook Group Warwick Taxpayer’s Spin. His website can be found at TheCushmanReport.com
