What was Red Whiddon; an auditor or an analyst?

I dunno.

Neither do you.

But let's assume that Red knows more about what he's doing than Dr Lewis. Red is the one who says he's (only) an analyst. What sorts of things could an analyst tell us about the 2004 Bond projects, and the money spent? (Not that every dollar spent is accounted for -- that WOULD be a job for an auditor. ) But just in general, what kind of thing might he be able to tell us, that we would like to know?

Well, what would you like to know?

Speaking for myself, I'd like to know about the bidding process.

According to the LISD Board of Director's minutes, even a well-run and fair bidding process does NOT mean that we got the lowest cost projects. Higher bidders could --and might even be expected to -- win the awarded contract. From the minutes November 12, 2003 (Page 1 )


Gallagher staff discussed the RFP process from going out for bids to opening bids and recommending a company to the Superintendent. Gallagher staff discussed that bids are opened in a public meeting -- not a Board Meeting. After reviewing the bids, Gallagher staff reviews the proposals, including the history of the companies and makes recommendation(s) to the Superintendent. Gallagher shared that sometimes the low bidder is not always the company recommended. In that scenario, Gallagher prepares a memorandum to the Superintendent stating why they believe the low bidder is not the best company. The
Superintendent then reviews the recommendation(s) from Gallagher and brings the best company to the Board to present and be approved. Discussions evolved about bringing several companies to present to just being presented with the best company. Dr.Lewis shared, as Superintendent his responsibility is to review all recommendations and
bring — the "best“ to Lancaster.




Okay, so I wish Mr Whiddon had told us of some hundreds of proposed jobs, how many were awarded to OTHER than the low bidder. If the number of jobs is J and the number of higher bids awarded is H, what's the percentage of H / J?

10% ?

30% ?

90% ?

I dunno.

Neither do you.

*sshhh* It's a secret. The District doesn't want you to know. Or so it seems.

Why?

Another question: How many of the High Winning Bids were from contractors closely associated with Gallagher Construction? Gallagher, as a company, is not only the project manager and in position to recommend awards, but was, after all, a bidder itself?

How many of the lower-but-losing bids were from minority-owned companies? Or woman-owned, or locally owned small businesses?

Was most of the Bond 2004 money diverted to rich corporation white guys from outside Lancaster? Or was it shared with Black, Hispanic and local small business?

I dunno.

Neither do you.

Red Whiddon, our analyst, didn't tell us.

I DO know that one local businessman who tried to bid on the project says the rules changed in the middle of the process.

Also from Lancaster IDS Board of Trustees minutes November 1, 2004 (Page 2 )


Citizen’s Communication Larry Jefferson, Sr., 507 Martindale, Lancaster, Texas

Mr. Jefferson also shared his concern about awarding of contracts, he stated that he bid on 2 jobs and felt the rules on bids changed.


I bet he said a lot more than wound up in the minutes, too.

Was the bidding fair? Were a significant fraction of the projects awarded to local contractors? Did the taxpayer get good value on the projects, as evidenced by the low bidders being awarded most contracts? Aren't these things you want to know?

Wouldn’t having such answers help you make up your mind about trusting the district with another $215 MILLION? ( Or is it $211 Million, and what’s a mere $4 Million discrepancy when it’s only taxpayers’ money we’re playing with?)


I sure wish some independent outsider could take a look at the overall 2004 bond projects and tell us how fairly it was spent.

That is, I wish some such person would do more than shake my hand, look me squarely in the eye, and recite the district’s script as written.