Fort Bend ISD Will Spend More than $20.5M With Non-bid Vendors
by Bob Dunn, Nov 12, 2007, 03 55 PM
Fort Bend Independent School District likely will spend more than $20.5 million with vendors whose goods and services won’t be subject to competitive bidding.
At the request of Fort Bend ISD board trustees, Chief Financial Officer Mike Seale and Director of Purchasing Tim Ford submitted a list of so-called non-bid vendors expected to contract with the district in the 2007-‘08 school year in contracts worth more than $25,000 apiece.
The list, expected to be reviewed during Monday night’s Board of Trustees meeting, includes 96 vendors with whom Fort Bend ISD anticipates spending $20,663,000. . .
Follow the link below for the full story:
http://www.fortbendnow.com/news/3530/fort-bend-isd-will-spend-more-than-205m-with-non-bid-vendors
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
"→ The Leadership and Learning Center, $381,000 for coaching and training of “leadership teams” at “high-risk” campuses. According to the list, the training seminars will include data analysis, “data teams and making standards work.” No specific reason was stated why the contract wasn’t bid out."
Items like these are the ones that need review and explanation. Also I would like to see how many of these items are paid for via bond or ops budget.
comments from FBN:
1 Jimmy Kilpatrick - Nov 12, 04:08 PM
Not surprising and now you know why people want to stay on the board! There have been a few that care but most like the outside perks they receive.
2 chris - Nov 12, 04:13 PM
“→ The Leadership and Learning Center, $381,000 for coaching and training of “leadership teams” at “high-risk” campuses. According to the list, the training seminars will include data analysis, “data teams and making standards work.” No specific reason was stated why the contract wasn’t bid out.”
They all should have detailed explanations for no-bids.
more...
3 anonymous - Nov 12, 04:15 PM
Okay Jimmy. I’ll be the first to bite. What perks to school board members receive?
4 chris - Nov 12, 05:29 PM
I wonder why land developers aren’t listed, much of their sales to the district are no-bid and apparently not even competitive? Maybe this doesn’t include purchases from the bond budget, which is around 30 million? I also would like to know how the public is supposed to track computer purchases moved form the operations budget to the bond (another approx. 30 million)?
Of course it’s just a few million, give or take, right anon?
...
4 Jimmy Kilpatrick - Nov 12, 05:27 PM
Maybe they would release their income tax returns and we can see. Other than that do you really believe what you are reading or just on cloud nine. get real!
We are taking about millions in non-bid contracts.
There are always some do-gooders trying to twist and turn the topics and ask stupid questions without using their own names.
Here's one from the FB Star (Bev's Burner) on the pro-bond PAC:
"Bet you didn’t know.....Several years ago, you could make a $100 contribution to some politician or cause. That $100 was a nice gesture and assured that you had the ear of that politician the next time you wanted to vent.
Okay, let’s face it. It was probably more than several years ago. When you get old, you think everything happened about six years ago. It’s an accepted phenomenon that my friends and I have discussed often in the past six years.
Anyway, I was looking at the Contribution and Expense filing that the Excellence in Education Committee had to make during this bond election, the results of which will be known after we go to press.
Now bear in mind that school districts can’t use tax money to get people to vote on bond issues. So some organization has to develop, probably spurred on by another civic organization, to publicize the bond referendum. In this particular case, the Economic Development Council developed a pact to accept money for publicizing the election.
I thought it was interesting because the days of $100 contributions carrying much weight are long gone.
For example, here are some of the contributions made in this last bond referendum. I’m only going to mention the particularly large ones.
In the Oct. 9 and Oct. 26 reports, the only two reports required so far, individuals gave a total of $3,850 in contributions to publicize the referendum and to persuade residents to vote for it. Businesses and corporations gave $75,850. Of course, some of the individual contributions were made by individuals who work for companies who will directly benefit from doing business with FBISD. Also bear in mind that it is perfectly legal and is, indeed, an accepted practice in school districts all across Texas.
Here are some of the larger contributors: Ben McMillian, Sprint, Christopher Sims Custom Homes, Curtice Real Estate, IDC Ind., Indemuehle, Jamil & Smith, Kirksey, Molina-Walker Architects, Phlugar, Rice & Gardner Consultants, Southwest Securities, Weaver, Davis & Jacob, Windstream, Trendmaker, Tolunay-Wong Engineers, Newmark and Amani Engineering all gave $1,000 each.
Archi*Technics/3, and Auto Arch Architects gave $1,500.
Automated Logic/United Environment, Huitt-Zollers, Linebarger-Goggan, Sienna/Johnson, and Sugar Land Ranch Development kicked in $2,500 each, with NNP-Telfair, SHW Group, Aliana Development, Bay Architects, PBK Architects, and Southern Land chipping in $5,000. Bob Perry ponied up $10,000.
So how was the money spent? Read on: WNW-Andre McDonald got $14,000 for political consulting. Susan Maldonado received $2,365 for graphics and Griffin Creative received $500 for the same task.
Pamela Printing was paid $28,042 for printing three mailers. Right Mail got $4,239 for yard signs and Creative Consumer Research got $4,000 for polling. Custom Design Printwear got $1,396 for tee shirts and Pamela Printing got another $1,438 for doorhangers. The Houston Chronicle was paid $4,053 for advertising with the Sun getting $1,421 and the Star getting $2,370.
You’ll notice that all of the money went to publicize the vote, well, except for the polling and consulting and one could make the case that these indirectly went for publicizing.
Here again, there is nothing wrong with any of this as long as the reports are properly filed. This is just a little of that information that you can tuck away in your already overloaded brain. I thought you might want to know who the players are."
more...
6 Carlos - Nov 12, 08:21 PM
Hmmm I never noticed a line on my return for “Graft & Corruption Fees from Vendors” but then again, I never ran 500 mil a year through my fingers… Maybe it’s all that green ink that makes them sticky…
7 anonymous - Nov 12, 11:57 PM
Jimmy – Are you really insuating that school board members take money from vendors?
8 chris - Nov 13, 07:53 AM
Anon,
It looks like to me you are taking extreme liberties with Jim’s post.
“Maybe they would release their income tax returns and we can see. Other than that do you really believe what you are reading or just on cloud nine. get real!”
I don’t see that in the quote or the post. I think he said he would like to see their returns. I would like to see their disclosures for themselves and family members and any related businesses. I remember in the 2006 election much talk about a past president who had tried to sell cars to the district while serving. There are many tid-bits that need to be looked into, but it is a pretty closed shop anon, as you already seem to know…much is staged for public edification.
I also remember a recent letter at http://fbisdwatch.blogspot.com/2007/10/just-say-no-to-more-taxes.html demonstrating the typer special interest action that goes on in school systems…ck it out…(from an insider)
9 Jimmy Kilpatrick - Nov 13, 07:56 AM
By the way why don’t you use your name?
I didn’t say they were crooks. I suggested board members and administrators release their tax returns. In another words don’t ask silly questions start thinking!
PeytonWolcott.com has published many articles on the parties thrown by vendors for school board members. Look at the tax collection law firms and see which members have spoken at their conferences. There are plenty of stories out here that make me believe there is more than a casual relationship between board members, superintendents and vendors.
I know of one curriculum director who received $25,000 for speaking fees at reading conference. Within a month the publisher reading series were purchased by the district. There is another board member, an attorney who receives $5,000 a month from CEP as a consultant and the district used their services. Another board member whose husband gained millions of dollars worth of contracts for the district. These are not FBISD board members but when millions go in non-bid contracts there should be total transparency in FBISD, don’t you agree?
10 fortbendpractical - Nov 13, 09:30 AM
Jimmy…well said…well said
Millions of non-bid items is an indication as business as usual. Trust me…when election seasons rolls around check the books and sponsored parties…not to mentioned those board members who indirectly benefit from our tax dollars because of their relationship.
Is this bad? Short answer, NO...is it equitable…that’s a NO too.
All capital items including books, technology, etc. should be up for a competitive bid process…I have shopped at some stores for years…but when I saw that other stores offered better quality for a lower cost, then I shifted my focus.
This stagnant philosophy costs taxpayers MILLIONS in the short and long run…this should be a big slap in the face for our district…
Additionally…you will see that the district will have to expend another 5 million to buy insurance policies for the bonds because the state fund or triple A rating is capped thus costing us more money…when will these wise people really starting doing things wisely…well that may not be a wise question to ask…go figure!
11 disaffected - Nov 13, 09:51 AM
Mr. Kilpatrick continues to offer not so veiled allegations of unethical and/or criminal activity by members of the FBISD BOT: “but most like the outside perks they receive.”
He goes so far as requesting that BOT members release their tax returns (as if those who would engage in criminal activity would then disclose it to the IRS).
I, for one, am very tired of bloggers who continuously hint of nefarious activity by their political foes. Dave Stone and his anti-Gillen allies just succeeded in getting the leadership of the local GOP to resign because of the constant drumbeat of unethical activity. I suppose that Jimmy, Chris et al think that if they continue the same type of attack, BOT members will also bail.
I find this a very disturbing trend and am quite amazed at those who will gullibly fall in line to criticize/demonize others based solely upon vague allegations posted online.
Those who have evidence of criminal activity should take it to the appropriate authorities. If they distrust the locals, they can go to the state or federal level. Trying to destroy political enemies with vague accusations is very, very wrong.
12 chris - Nov 13, 10:13 AM
“I find this a very disturbing trend and am quite amazed at those who will gullibly fall in line to criticize/demonize others based solely upon vague allegations posted online.”
It’s amazing that you even make such a statement claiming to be a friend of public education and given the facts stated in several of the posts above. No one is saying anything illegal has taken place. What concerned taxpayers are posting are potential unethical praxis which need to be addressed and made public so that voters & taxpayers can make informed choices, which you apparently don’t seem to concerned about.
What is your connection to public ed.? Are you a lobbyist? What? I live in this district and my kids go to school here, what about you? I pay taxes here as do others posting on this thread, what about you? I post in the open as does Jim, Carlos, Nicole and many other concerned parents….what is your motive and reason for constantly casting shadows on those without million dollar motives, only their kids and taxes?
I could care less if BOT members bail or don’t. Nothing will change until a larger system or process change occurs. Jim, FBP and many others share what they know in here and thanks to open and free press we actually do see things inch a bit towards reform. It is after-all the nature of democracy and thank GOD people are speaking out.
What’s your motive for silencing them?
Sure was nice of Carter to self report on this. What I find more interesting is the development companies who repeatedly use the schools as ads in their large master-planned communities getting involved. I wonder what the total they make out of each bond on land purchases?
"The Houston Chronicle was paid $4,053 for advertising with the Sun getting $1,421 and the Star getting $2,370."
any update on this budget review?
Post a Comment