3 ms·
Was the contract award really corrupt? The company is doing work now, claims to have over 300 employees on the ground and doing work and has accrued $20M worth
by Johnny555 9y ago
Was the contract award really corrupt? The company is doing work now, claims to have over 300 employees on the ground and doing work and has accrued $20M worth of expenses (supposedly).
If the contract withholds payment until deliverables are met, (and since they apparently haven't paid the $20M in expenses yet that appears to be the case, it wasn't a $300M lump sum payment), then the contract could have been legit, but expensive as emergency services contracts often are. Texas and Florida are still rebuilding after their hurricanes so it's not like there are a lot of power company linesmen looking for work.
Or is it buyers remorse where the government signed the first contract that seemed like it'd get workers on the ground faster, and now they think they overpaid?
- zimpenfish 9y ago> Was the contract award really corrupt? I can't speak to the actual legal definitions of that but the optics are incredibly bad - e.g "Zinke [Interior Secretary], a former Montana congressman, knows Whitefish chief executive Andy Techmanski, and Zinke’s son had a summer job at a Whitefish construction site."
- pulisse 9y agoWas the contract award really corrupt? The company is doing work now Whatever the company is doing now doesn't retroactively legitimate a corrupt contracting process. Or is it buyers remorse where the government signed the first contract There were no other contracts considered. It was a no-bid deal.
- liberte82 9y agoThis is why it's important to avoid the appearance of corruption. Fact is, no one really knows, but the details around sole-sourcing a contract with personal ties to a member of the Trump administration stinks like crazy. When the entire government is corrupt and non-transparent, you question everything.