Breach of Trust

22

During Hector Almundo’s trial, which centered around contributions to Hector’s campaign fund, I became acquainted with the website administered by the State Board of Elections. Through its searchable database, you could track campaign contributions made by any particular person, as well as receipts by any particular campaign fund.

I did a search for the company Charlie Cimino was trying to help, Higgins Sanitation.

The database showed that, prior to this calendar year, Higgins had made a grand total of zero campaign contributions. Not a dime.

But in the past year, Higgins had become more generous in opening its wallet. In the last nine months, Higgins Sanitation had made two contributions to our new governor, Carlton Snow, to the tune of thirty thousand dollars.

Another coincidence, I’m sure.

Next I turned to the other fix that Charlie wanted from me-the school bus contract, which I was supposed to say was so unique that only a single company in the entire state could perform it. The company Charlie wanted for the job was Swift Transportation.

I searched the database and got no hits for Swift Transportation. No political contributions from that company.

But then I searched the campaign fund of Governor Carlton Snow. When I searched for “Swift,” I didn’t get that company, of course, but there were contributions from “Swift, Leonard J.”

Turned out that Leonard J. Swift had also contributed thirty thousand dollars to Governor Snow. And it only took two minutes on Google to confirm that Leonard J. Swift was the founder and CEO of Swift Transportation.

Yet another coincidence. Companies contributing thirty thousand dollars to Governor Snow’s campaign fund were becoming remarkably proficient at obtaining lucrative state contracts.

“Enough,” I said aloud, though I was alone. I got the picture.

I thought again about Jon Soliday’s words: Cover yourself.

Now it was time to do the work Charlie wanted me to do. I reviewed the prison sanitation contracts, the documents Patrick Lemke had left me, and some court decisions on the subject of what it meant to be a “responsible” bidder in this state. In the end, it wasn’t a close call. Each of these bidders was more than amply qualified, and my two-page memorandum summarized it as follows:

Each of the two lowest bidders for this contract qualifies as a “responsible” bidder under the Code. Either of them is perfectly qualified to be awarded this sanitation contract.

Next it was the school bus contract. This one took even less time. How could anyone argue that driving kids in a school bus is a unique skill? My conclusion:

As multiple, qualified bidders could provide the busing services identified in this contract, the contract is subject to sealed competitive bidding. Swift Transportation, Inc., is by no means the only company capable of performing this contract.

I smiled when I printed out the two memos-no emails, I was told-and threw them into my bag. I just wished I could see the look on Cimino’s face when he read them.

Sorry, Higgins Sanitation. Sorry, Leonard J. Swift.

Sorry, Charlie.