Kansas City's Hispanic contractors say H&R Block didn't earn its tax break

As it is, we have to rely on a short affidavit that Rodriguez signed as part of a lawsuit filed by an organization of Hispanic contractors against J.E. Dunn Construction; H&R Block; the city of Kansas City, Missouri; and the TIF Commission, which oversees tax-increment financing.

In the suit, filed back in 2005, Armando Diaz of Diaz Construction Company and other members of the Hispanic contractors' association claimed that, during the construction of its new world headquarters, H&R Block and its general contractor, J.E. Dunn, paid fees to minority-owned businesses that acted as fronts, or "pass-through" companies, sending the work back to white subcontractors (“A City that Works?” November 15, 2007). It was a tricky way for H&R Block and J.E. Dunn to appear as if they were meeting the city's minority-hiring goals without actually giving work to minorities, the contractors claimed.

Jackson County Circuit Judge Charles Atwell dismissed the case in December, saying that the contractors lacked legal standing to file the suit. But his ruling did acknowledge that the contractors had "presented meaningful evidence ... suggesting that certifications provided by J.E. Dunn were inaccurate, false, or misleading."

The contractors have now gone public with that evidence. Over the past few weeks, while preparing to file their appeal, they've sent copies of affidavits and excerpts of depositions to the mayor, City Council members, City Manager Wayne Cauthen and the TIF Commission.

That's where Ralph Rodriguez comes in.

Among the documents is Rodriguez's sworn affidavit, in which he describes how R.F. Fisher Electric Company approached him about "a bidding strategy" on the H&R Block project. In his July 13, 2007, affidavit, Rodriguez said R.F. Fisher wanted Rodriguez's company to do nothing more than submit the bid to J.E. Dunn, which approved the deal. "Despite my requests to R.F. Fisher, I was not given the opportunity to perform some of the work; in fact, no Rodriguez Electrical employees ever performed work on that project," Rodriguez stated. For its work on the H&R Block headquarters, J.E. Dunn paid R.F. Fisher $2,973,010. For nothing more than Rodriguez's name on the bid, R.F. Fisher paid Rodriguez $66,892.73.

But then Rodriguez came forward and admitted his role in an effort to help the Hispanic contractors make their case about what they say is a widespread practice in the construction industry.

The documents contain other names and affidavits besides Rodriguez's. They claim that, for laying cable, reinforcing steel, putting up studs and drywall, hauling in stone, excavating and other jobs, H&R Block over-reported its payments to minority contractors by more than $11 million.

The depositions are incomplete — just 70-some pages of excerpts of what must be thousands generated in the lawsuit. It's not clear what testimony is missing. One recurring theme emerges, however: Everyone in charge of enforcing the rules seems to have passed off that responsibility to someone else.

Sandra Rayford, the TIF Commission’s affirmative action compliance officer, acknowledged that the use of front companies was "morally" wrong. But, in a deposition dated May 23, 2007, she said, "I don't know how it would be my job responsibility" to investigate. That, she said, would be the responsibility of City Hall's human relations department.

Kimberly Gale, the compliance officer at City Hall, said in a May 24, 2007, deposition that she knew nothing about claims that J.E. Dunn had used front companies — but if she did, she would report it to the TIF Commission, "and they would take appropriate action" against the developer, H&R Block.

Meanwhile, Karen Orosco of H&R Block said in a deposition that it was J.E. Dunn's responsibility: "We made it clear to J.E. Dunn on multiple occasions, both verbally and in writing, that we considered ... J.E. Dunn responsible for ensuring that we were compliant."

The docs don't prove that anybody did anything illegal. But the Hispanic contractors say the depositions make it obvious that H&R Block didn't make a good-faith effort to meet the city's rules for making sure all of the city's workers get a share of publicly financed projects.