As I predicted, Tompkins Builders, a District company trying to save the city $4.8 million on the construction of a proposed forensics laboratory, filed a complaint last week with the contract appeals board. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty’s administration seems intent on selecting Whiting-Turner of Baltimore as the contractor, regardless of the cost to taxpayers.
“The District’s justification for awarding the contract to the higher-priced offeror is irrational and unreasonable,” Tompkins Builders wrote in its complaint filed last Monday, the same day I wrote in this space about the growing controversy.
Claude Bailey, formerly with the D.C. Convention Center and the city’s sports and entertainment commission, is one of three lawyers from Venable LLP representing Whiting-Turner. Terry Elling, another of the attorneys, told me Friday that his client did not want to comment about the Tompkins complaint.
Some D.C. Council members want to approve the award to Whiting-Turner; others want to reject it. Most are disturbed by how the Fenty administration has handled the process. They should be concerned.
Many of the problems associated with the forensics lab contract are reminiscent of those cited by the federal Government Accountability Office 2007 report. The mayor promised reform, but the system remains rife with waste, abuse and fraud.
The administration claims it wants to reduce spending; this area, where more than 20 percent of the public’s money is spent, deserves immediate attention.
Fenty administration spokesman Sean Madigan said, “We are confident that proper contracting procedures were followed and that the selection of Whiting-Turner reflects the best value for the District of Columbia.”
Don’t believe the hype.
The city violated the spirit, if not the letter, of its own laws, rules and regulations. For example, administration officials, according to government sources, raised “concerns” to Tompkins about the qualifications of two subcontractors — Southland and T.A. Beach — included in its proposal. Interestingly, those same companies subsequently were included in Whiting-Turner’s proposal, according to “confidential” documents sent to the council by Robin-Eve Jasper, head of the Office of Property Management, and David Gragan, head of the Office of Contracting and Procurement.
Madigan didn’t answer specific questions regarding that action, citing restrictions imposed by “lawyers.”
“It strikes me as improper for OCP to be telling one of the bidders who they can or cannot use,” said at-large Councilman Phil Mendelson.
Tompkins Builders said the administration also altered the criteria in the middle of the process. Initially it stated that “relevant” experience with “scientific research laboratory or similar project[s]” was changed to with “forensics or medical examiner facilities.”
“From the beginning, the District had an inherent and intentional bias in favor of Whiting-Turner,” Tompkins charged, echoing comments made to me last week by government sources.
Tompkins asked the appeals board to stop the city from awarding the contract until the panel rules. It also asked to be awarded the contract. But, Mendelson said, the likely remedy was that “Tompkins will receive a monetary payment.”
That’s your money.
Jonetta Rose Barras, host of WPFW’s “D.C. Politics With Jonetta,” can be reached at [email protected].
