The following is taken from a more detailed account which includes transcription and quotes from minutes. See the next article for complete details. This centers around a drainage contract for work on Joanna Guillard and Francis Parker. If you read the full article you'll note that in the past the drainage chair has claimed this work is the responsibility of the homeowner, now it is ours. The specifics provided below contain information on contracting. The WPA lacks consistency. The problem could be larger, but you'll decide. It should be noted that President Walton discussed a grounds bidding problem in a sealed bid process during the May meeting. He felt one of the vendors had tried to seek information during the bidding process that would violate federal law. There was an unusual bidding process in the information provided below.
I visited the office Tuesday to review records. I had asked to review the following in regard to the $1,080 contract award: The Request For Bid Specs, The Contract, and The Bidders response. I was provided the bids and the contract. When I asked our secretary where the request for proposal was I was told that these were the items she had been provided. I asked if she knew whether it was a sealed bid process. She couldn't say. Review of the bids left me wondering whether one of the bidders had been assisted in his bidding.
HERE IS WHAT THE BIDS REVEALED:
Great Lawns of Georgetown submitted a bid on March 18, with a note that said they had met and discussed the work with DeMarchi. The bid was for $1,100.
There is a bid from DE&GC, originally in the amount of $1,160.00. Then there are scratch off areas with initials, and the bid drops to a total of $1,085.00. A contract is written and when the invoice is submitted for payment, it is submitted for $1,160.00. Again there are cross off and initials and the total due changed to $1,085.00.
It could appear that the second bidder was assisted in lowering their bid just below the first bidders price. Interestingly, The bidder thanks Wedgefield for "considering us for YOUR LOT MAINTENANCE needs."
Where is the WPA consistency in the bidding process? Where was the written request for proposal specs? Why sealed bids on some things, and others not? Why wasn't the clause called on that McMillin used to avoid bidding on the spoil site, in the Great Lawns of Georgetown contract? Additionally, the contractor includes this "along Francis Parker Road, total of 35 lots. Also along Joanna Guillard, total of 23 lots." HMMM, some lot owners pay for their lot maintenance and others not. Does it just depend whether you live on DeMarchi's road, or a road he owned lots on, and sold and built houses on?
