flynnibus
Premium Member
But here's the thing: just because something may not violate a specific rule (and it seems like it may have based on what others have cited) doesn't mean that it was done ethically.
I'm pointing out that the VERY RULEBOOK for the District as written and approved by the board has policies that violate the law according to posters here. Surely if that's the case, wouldn't it be drawing more attention from people looking to critique the new board?
And as I said before about the ethically angle.. I said "The law allows for some crappy behavior. Is this just crappy behavior, or are they actually operating in a fashion in violation of the law?"Even if we play Devil's Advocate and accept their claims at face value that they needed to make this change and make it immediately so there was no time to seek bids, it is still extremely questionable that they quickly and quietly determined that the only option just happened to be a company run by one of Gilzean's pals from his Ethics Commission days.
And let's not overstate this Ethics Commission line... Figgers was added to the EC only at the end of July. This contract situation was already playing basically at that time. So it's not like they shared years together on the EC. The common thread is the Florida GOP and DeSantis - not the EC.
Your logic doesn't fly there. Figgers' decision doesn't declare anything about what they think the competition can or can not do - only that a wimpy $242k deal isn't worth all the negativity. And maybe they can still get the deal anyways. The District can't force Figgers here.. so we don't even know if it was mutually agreed it would not be harmful to the District's intended goals.The fact that Figgers recognized that he should step back and wait for a public bidding process indicates that his company is not the only company in the state that can handle the project, so how exactly did the Board immediately eliminate every other potential bidder?
Such dialog is possible without a formal bid. Plus, as the policy is written, they don't need to confirm a party is the only compatible party.How could they determine that Figgers was the only one who could meet their timeline if they didn't give other companies the chance to show them how fast they could do it?