$1 million Richmond police car deal broke rules

$1 million Richmond police car deal broke rules

TIMES-DISPATCH

“It angers me that that kind of behavior went on,“ Richmond City Councilman Charles Samuels said of the police car deal reported by the city auditor.

» 24 Comments | Post a Comment

RELATED STORY: Richmond City Council member blasts police car deal


AUDITOR'S REPORT: Police cars bought without competitive bids

Richmond officials violated procurement rules when the city bought 40 police cars for nearly $1 million in 2007 without allowing vendors to compete for the business, according to a city auditor's investigation.

The procurement services department wrongly treated the purchase as though only one vendor could provide the Crown Victoria vehicles when numerous Ford dealers across the city and nation could have, City Auditor Umesh Dalal wrote in a report Tuesday to Mayor Dwight C. Jones and other officials.

Eric R. Mens, who authorized the purchase of the vehicles, gave notice June 30 that he would resign effective Aug. 30, city spokesman Michael Wallace said yesterday. Mens has been the director of procurement services since January 2007.

His resignation was not requested by the administration, and so far, no disciplinary action has been taken as a result of the investigation, Wallace said.

"The administration just received this report today, and it's under review by senior staff," Wallace said yesterday.

Mens could not be reached for comment and is scheduled to be out of the office until Monday, according to an automated response to an e-mail message.

Richmond paid $993,520 -- an average of$24,838 per vehicle -- to an unnamed vendor for the police vehicles, according to the auditor's report.

State officials said the city and other localities can piggyback on the state's contract for police vehicles, but it was unclear what savings, if any, could have been realized.

In 2007, Virginia State Police paid a base price of $20,626 for Crown Victoria cruisers, spokeswoman Corinne Geller said. It could not be determined whether the vehicles were equipped similarly to the vehicles purchased by the city.

City code requires all public contracts with private vendors to be awarded after competitive sealed bidding or negotiation.

Notices inviting bids or requesting proposals are supposed to be posted publicly for at least 10 days if the contract exceeds $50,000. But that did not happen when the city bought the police vehicles, according to the auditor's report.

Exceptions to procurement rules can be made if officials determine after a "good-faith review" that only one source or vendor is practically available.

The auditor's office said a contract specialist with procurement services had questioned the sole-source designation for the police-car purchase but was directed by the deputy director to treat the purchase that way.

The investigation also found that the deputy director had instructed the contract specialist to send faxes to three Ford dealerships requesting bids for the vehicles. The faxes went out at 3:30 p.m. on Nov. 7, 2007, and they required responses 17½ hours later, at 9 a.m. Nov. 8, 2007 -- well short of requirements, according to the report.

Before the purchase, the department had contacted Ford Motor Co. about buying the vehicles directly, according to the report. However, the deputy director told an investigator that he was advised to contact local dealerships to get the vehicles, according to the report.

"The investigator questioned the deputy director about the manner in which the three vendors were contacted and why the purchase was treated as a sole-source purchase," Dalal wrote. "The deputy director could not explain their rationale for procuring the vehicles as a sole source."

The report added that the deputy director stated that "the original contract awarded to the vendor was canceled and a new invitation for bid was initiated," and that the contract was awarded based on the new bids.

"However, the deputy director could not substantiate his claim with any evidence," the report said. "Subsequent inquiries with other procurement personnel revealed that the department did not solicit any other invitation for bids for this purchase."

The report recommends disciplinary action and was copied to City Council members, as well as Commonwealth's Attorney Michael N. Herring. Herring was unable to say late yesterday whether his office planned to investigate.



Contact Will Jones at (804) 649-6911 or .

Advertisement

 
View More: umesh dalal,mike wallace,michael herring,eric mens,dwight jones,city of richmond,
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by tadchem on July 10, 2009 at 1:35 pm

The equation is at least as old as Rome:
Public Money - Oversight = Corruption

Flag Comment Posted by R on July 10, 2009 at 1:25 pm

This one got all Bushed up, huh?

Flag Comment Posted by Jeff E. on July 10, 2009 at 10:55 am

Umesh Dalal for Mayor… seriously.

Flag Comment Posted by munbun3 on July 09, 2009 at 6:36 pm

Could this be just the tip of the iceberg??

Flag Comment Posted by oneuser on July 09, 2009 at 4:11 pm

No one is going to be fired behind this discriminatory practice? Richmond should lead by example not by brushing this under the rug.

Flag Comment Posted by tadchem on July 09, 2009 at 1:35 pm

To go one step beyond the obvious, the question arises as to how someone as evidently ignorant of the rules of sole-source procurement as Eric Mens could have become Director of Procurement Services.  Obviously the city HR department also has some explaining to do.  Combined with the procurement gaffes, this fiasco demands corrective action by the Mayor’s office. Don’t try writing this off as naiveté, either.  Mens shouldn’t have been *considered* for the position if he is that naive.

Flag Comment Posted by hahahahaha on July 09, 2009 at 12:57 pm

It’s pretty comical to see someone who wasn’t even a member of city council in ‘07 jump on this perfect opportunity to get his bad haircut and goofy face in the paper. If he wasn’t so busy trying to look like Eric Cantor, maybe he could single-handedly rid the city of all its Liberal wackos and restore the Capital of the Confederacy back to its past glory. I guess its too bad that rich, white conservative idiots are in such a minority within the city limits. Maybe you should take a walk OUTSIDE of the FAN Charles, and see what’s really going on in “your” city.

Flag Comment Posted by badger on July 09, 2009 at 12:56 pm

Who was mayor of Richmond in 2007—was it Doug Wilder? Nah…it couldn’t have been. He was a really honest straight-shooter gonna show us heathens how to be accountable. No way a mistake could’ve happened on His watch.

Ps. Nice job Mr. Samuels. We could use more like you.

Flag Comment Posted by as it should be on July 09, 2009 at 11:36 am

Yet another Richmond City issue comes to the “light of day”.  I am also in Samuels district - tried to get him to vote against Marshall coming on as Chief Admin officer b/c of Marshall’s past record - of course he was confirmed.
Thank GOD for the City Auditor - one of the few who is actually doing their job it appears.  I apologize to the hard working city employees who are truly trying to make the City a better, more efficient place…but the number of issues that arise with the City, Richmond City Schools, etc. is just amazing!

Flag Comment Posted by dee65 on July 09, 2009 at 10:29 am

Why are we surprised? This happens in every city in America and yet we never see it coming. No matter who’s in office, democrat or republican its always the same story, the taxpayer gets ripped off. There’s no excuse for violating city code or procurement purchase contracts, obviously someone was lining their pockets and now the cat’s out of the bag. The vendor needs to be identified because that’s supposed to be part of the public record. All politicians and their cronies lie so that THEY can get ahead and the losers are always the tax payers. Don’t fingers at a particular party just accept that there’s corruption all around and that as a taxpayer no matter what party you belong to you’re always going to be short changed.

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

  • Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
  • Respect others.
  • Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
  • See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Click here to post a comment.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Online Features
Blogs
DataCenter
Videos
Weekend
 

Advertisement