What's the price of a lie? For the city's largest general contractor, a little extra effort.
J.E. Dunn Construction Co. agreed last week to find $1.1 million in work for businesses owned by women and minorities as it puts the finishing touches on its taxpayer-assisted headquarters downtown. The agreement puts an end to the nastiness created when Dunn used front companies to meet diversity targets on the construction of H&R Block's world headquarters.
A group of Hispanic contractors exposed the practice. In 2005, they filed a lawsuit alleging that Dunn had overreported the participation of women and minorities by $11.5 million.
Some of the evidence was bracing. In one instance, Dunn awarded a $3 million contract to a minority electrician who lacked the required expertise. The electrician, Ralph Rodriguez, received $66,892. The rest of the money went to R.F. Fisher Electric Co., whose bid Dunn had accepted before it "teamed up" (as a Dunn project manager put it in a memo) with Rodriguez to provide the patina of minority participation.
The Hispanic contractors lost their case on technical grounds. But the documents they found in discovery could not be ignored ("Dunn Deals," March 19).
Ultimately, the city conducted an investigation. City officials had jurisdiction in the matter because the project benefited from tax-increment financing, an incentive in which taxpayers help developers recoup their costs.
The subsidies — crazy generous in the case of the Block headquarters — come with conditions. Developers who receive TIF and other forms of city assistance pledge to hire a diverse workforce and subcontract with minority- and women-owned businesses.
Think affirmative action is stupid or outdated? OK. But a contract is a contract. H&R Block's TIF deal required Dunn to award roughly $26 million of the construction budget to minority and women subcontractors.
The question of whether Dunn complied ultimately centered on the deal with Rodriguez Electrical.
The city's Human Relations Division concluded that Dunn had not entered into the arrangement in good faith. (Rodriguez signed an affidavit in 2006 outlining his role as a patsy. He has made no other public comment.) This, the city said, constituted a direct violation of the TIF Commission's affirmative-action policy.
H&R Block cut the ribbon on its headquarters in 2006. The city did not formally object to the Rodriguez contract until 2008. Without it, Dunn fell short of the 15 percent target set for minority subcontractors — with no obvious way to reach compliance.
Dunn and H&R Block sent lawyers to the TIF Commission to state their innocence. One of Dunn's attorneys said Rodriguez had "duped" everyone. The companies also argued that the city's vigilance had come a little late in the game.
The lawyers appeared at multiple TIF Commission meetings. They were generally the ones wearing the darkest and best suits. They pulled papers from briefcases stout enough to accommodate old typewriters.
A lot was on the line. H&R Block faced a potential multimillion-dollar penalty for failing to reach the diversity target.
Members of the TIF Commission, who volunteer their time, allowed the matter to drag along. I hesitate to say they were intimidated by the battalion of lawyers. But Block's and Dunn's representatives gave the impression that a multimillion-dollar penalty was unlikely to be met with grace and an apology. Threat of litigation is a powerful deterrent.
The commissioners were also tasked with passing judgment on two pillars of the business community. H&R Block is the largest corporation within city limits. Terry Dunn, the president of J.E. Dunn Construction, chairs the board of the Civic Council of Greater Kansas City, an influential group of Kansas City CEOs.
Showing 1-12 of 12
Under the TIF guidelines there are many project cost categories eligible for reimbursement. Qualifying MBE/WBE participation is but one item. The question to Roger and all Kansas Citians is: If any developer submits fraudulent claims that overinflate his costs, should he be reimbursed those inflated amounts? I�m sorry, I can�t imagine any circumstance in a free economy where this would be considered fiscally responsible, fair or otherwise acceptable. That is what is really at the heart of the matter. To suggest that a peripheral issue like affirmative action was what caused corporate greed is simply ludicrous. Remember on this project, and for just one subcontractor, H&R Block and J.E. Dunn are requesting $3,000,000 for costs that do not qualify for reimbursement. Sure H&R Block and J.E. Dunn have done good charitable work in this City. But does that give them license to cheat? The TIF commission needs to explain to the taxpaying public, (All tax payers be they for, against and those who couldn�t care less about affirmative action) how it is ok to waste their tax dollars in this manner. Roger, as for paying your expenses to come to Kansas City to promote your discriminatory agenda �.nice try, for that you will have to come on your own dime. UNLESS you promise to take back to the hills of the Virginias an individual who we elected our Mayor, in part, due to his promises to stop abuse of the TIF program.
I thought the point of owning a business was to make money? How can you make money if you have to use a women or minority owned business that has bids twice as high as the other bidders? I would venture to say that these minority and women owned business might be taking advantage of the fact they know that companies like J.E. Dunn have to use them to meet requirements on certain jobs. They put in bids to high then pull race or gender card when they don't get the work. In some cases the bids are to high due to the fact the company does not have the equipment to do the job. Thus making them have to rent equipment that other companies have, driving up the cost of the bid. Look at it this way, your lying on the table to get open heart surgery, you are confindent in you doctor and they have all of the credentials to boot from the best of the best schools. Your health insurance companies affirmative action board comes in and says wait. We got this doctor here that you don't know or trust, he has the same degree as your doctor but from a smaller less accomplished school, but they're a minority and we have to let a minority doctor do every 3rd surgery and it looks like thats you. Sounds stupid doesn't it! Best qualified for the job should get the job everytime. It shouldn't matter what color you are, what gender you are. The best qualified, and in this case, lowest bid, should get the job! You can bash on J.E. Dunn all you want, that company gives more to Kansas City than any other company in Kansas City. What? you didn't know that? Oh that's because they don't have news crews present when they donate millions to the local charities and a picture with them holding a big check. If you want to bash on a company for making money then I hope you work for a non profit group because, in case you didn't know, a business has to make money to keep you hired.
Under the TIF guidelines there are many project cost categories eligible for reimbursement. Qualifying MBE/WBE participation is but one item. The question to Roger and all Kansas Citians is: If any developer submits fraudulent claims that overinflate his costs, should he be reimbursed those inflated amounts? I’m sorry, I can’t imagine any circumstance in a free economy where this would be considered fiscally responsible, fair or otherwise acceptable. That is what is really at the heart of the matter. To suggest that a peripheral issue like affirmative action was what caused corporate greed is simply ludicrous. Remember on this project, and for just one subcontractor, H&R Block and J.E. Dunn are requesting $3,000,000 for costs that do not qualify for reimbursement. Sure H&R Block and J.E. Dunn have done good charitable work in this City. But does that give them license to cheat? The TIF commission needs to explain to the taxpaying public, (All tax payers be they for, against and those who couldn’t care less about affirmative action) how it is ok to waste their tax dollars in this manner. Roger, as for paying your expenses to come to Kansas City to promote your discriminatory agenda ….nice try, for that you will have to come on your own dime. UNLESS you promise to take back to the hills of the Virginias an individual who we elected our Mayor, in part, due to his promises to stop abuse of the TIF program.
To Ashley: I don�t deny that discrimination still exists, and in fact discrimination will always exist to some degree. But I don�t think that means we should have quotas forever. There are better ways to fight discrimination, particularly in the contracting area. See our Colorado DOT comments and the report referenced there by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
To Diego: I made it clear that I am not defending the companies involved here; rather, I am saying that the system of racial and ethnic discrimination that provides the backdrop is untenable. I also thought I made it clear what my �plan for achieving parity in this nation� is, in the contracting context: Make contracting programs open to all, publicize bidding opportunities far and wide beforehand, and enforce laws that prohibit racial discrimination against anyone. I�m happy to come to Kansas City or anywhere else to talk about why racial preferences are a bad idea, and in fact that�s part of what I regularly do. But you�ll have to pay my travel expenses, plus a reasonable honorarium for listening to your nasty ad hominem attacks. BTW, Diego, wasn�t �outside agitator� the name the pro-discrimination people called the anti-discrimination people in the Civil Rights Era? The more things change, the more they stay the same.
I thought the point of owning a business was to make money? How can you make money if you have to use a women or minority owned business that has bids twice as high as the other bidders? I would venture to say that these minority and women owned business might be taking advantage of the fact they know that companies like J.E. Dunn have to use them to meet requirements on certain jobs. They put in bids to high then pull race or gender card when they don't get the work. In some cases the bids are to high due to the fact the company does not have the equipment to do the job. Thus making them have to rent equipment that other companies have, driving up the cost of the bid. Look at it this way, your lying on the table to get open heart surgery, you are confindent in you doctor and they have all of the credentials to boot from the best of the best schools. Your health insurance companies affirmative action board comes in and says wait. We got this doctor here that you don't know or trust, he has the same degree as your doctor but from a smaller less accomplished school, but they're a minority and we have to let a minority doctor do every 3rd surgery and it looks like thats you. Sounds stupid doesn't it! Best qualified for the job should get the job everytime. It shouldn't matter what color you are, what gender you are. The best qualified, and in this case, lowest bid, should get the job! You can bash on J.E. Dunn all you want, that company gives more to Kansas City than any other company in Kansas City. What? you didn't know that? Oh that's because they don't have news crews present when they donate millions to the local charities and a picture with them holding a big check. If you want to bash on a company for making money then I hope you work for a non profit group because, in case you didn't know, a business has to make money to keep you hired.
To Ashley: I don’t deny that discrimination still exists, and in fact discrimination will always exist to some degree. But I don’t think that means we should have quotas forever. There are better ways to fight discrimination, particularly in the contracting area. See our Colorado DOT comments and the report referenced there by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. To Diego: I made it clear that I am not defending the companies involved here; rather, I am saying that the system of racial and ethnic discrimination that provides the backdrop is untenable. I also thought I made it clear what my “plan for achieving parity in this nation” is, in the contracting context: Make contracting programs open to all, publicize bidding opportunities far and wide beforehand, and enforce laws that prohibit racial discrimination against anyone. I’m happy to come to Kansas City or anywhere else to talk about why racial preferences are a bad idea, and in fact that’s part of what I regularly do. But you’ll have to pay my travel expenses, plus a reasonable honorarium for listening to your nasty ad hominem attacks. BTW, Diego, wasn’t “outside agitator” the name the pro-discrimination people called the anti-discrimination people in the Civil Rights Era? The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Roger Clegg is an outside agitator who is feeding you a lot of crap. He probably earns a large salary by combing the internet in order to find cases like the H&R Block issue so he may put a spin on instances of corporate abuse to make them appear as affirmative action out of control. His discriminatory views prevent him from completing his original statement. It is wrong to lie. So why should liars be rewarded financially? Why should the tax payers, regardless of how they feel about affirmative action, pay greedy, lying corporate thieves just because they hear Roger's twisted views about equality? If he were to study the H&R Block case he would see that it is the white guy who has cheated here. The combined wealth and power of H&R Block and J.E. Dunn would lead one to believe that they did not need to resort to cheating. They simply could have said, "OK, we fell short of the goal. So be it." Readers, make no mistake about this - J.E. Dunn and H&R Block are being paid MILLIONS more than they earned. Is this really ok with you? They are not to be pitied. If Roger were to do his homework, he would know that the issue here isn't the minority program it is corporate greed. Extremists like Roger offer no other plan for achieving parity in this nation. They like to fake reverse discrimination and, like cowards, they gain courage by joining an out of control blood thirsty mob in order to out kill affirmative action, yet they know not why. Come to Kansas City, Roger and debate the issue with the people in the trenches who know the real story. Not the politicos and old guard establishment who have been devising and perfecting techniques to avoid economic parity since the freeing of the slaves, but with legitimately operating Minority and Women owned businesses whose fate is unjustly influenced by the spreading of discriminatory propaganda by people like you. Are you man enough?
Roger Clegg is an outside agitator who is feeding you a lot of crap. He probably earns a large salary by combing the internet in order to find cases like the H&R Block issue so he may put a spin on instances of corporate abuse to make them appear as affirmative action out of control. His discriminatory views prevent him from completing his original statement. It is wrong to lie. So why should liars be rewarded financially? Why should the tax payers, regardless of how they feel about affirmative action, pay greedy, lying corporate thieves just because they hear Roger's twisted views about equality? If he were to study the H&R Block case he would see that it is the white guy who has cheated here. The combined wealth and power of H&R Block and J.E. Dunn would lead one to believe that they did not need to resort to cheating. They simply could have said, "OK, we fell short of the goal. So be it." Readers, make no mistake about this - J.E. Dunn and H&R Block are being paid MILLIONS more than they earned. Is this really ok with you? They are not to be pitied. If Roger were to do his homework, he would know that the issue here isn't the minority program it is corporate greed. Extremists like Roger offer no other plan for achieving parity in this nation. They like to fake reverse discrimination and, like cowards, they gain courage by joining an out of control blood thirsty mob in order to out kill affirmative action, yet they know not why. Come to Kansas City, Roger and debate the issue with the people in the trenches who know the real story. Not the politicos and old guard establishment who have been devising and perfecting techniques to avoid economic parity since the freeing of the slaves, but with legitimately operating Minority and Women owned businesses whose fate is unjustly influenced by the spreading of discriminatory propaganda by people like you. Are you man enough?
Affirmative action is needed and contracts need to be set aside for MBE's and WBE's because if it wasn't, who's to say that our unconscious biases would not set in and hire the company with the white CEO compared to the one with the black CEO? One has to look back on history and see that we have come a long way but that is not to say that all racial barriers are dropped and everyone is treated equal. That is not the case and until it is, it is only fair that money and contracts be set aside for those MBE's and WBE's.
Affirmative action is needed and contracts need to be set aside for MBE's and WBE's because if it wasn't, who's to say that our unconscious biases would not set in and hire the company with the white CEO compared to the one with the black CEO? One has to look back on history and see that we have come a long way but that is not to say that all racial barriers are dropped and everyone is treated equal. That is not the case and until it is, it is only fair that money and contracts be set aside for those MBE's and WBE's.
It's wrong to lie, but why do race, ethnicity, and sex need to be considered at all in deciding who gets awarded a contract? It's fine to make sure contracting programs are open to all, that bidding opportunities are widely publicized beforehand, and that no one gets discriminated against because of skin color, national origin, or sex. But that means no preferences because of skin color, etc. either--whether it's labeled a "set-aside," a "quota," or a "goal," since they all end up amounting to the same thing. Such discrimination is unfair and divisive; it costs the taxpayers money to award a contract to someone other than the lowest bidder; and it's generally illegal to boot (see comments we submitted to the Colorado DOT here: http://www.ceousa.org/content/... ).
It's wrong to lie, but why do race, ethnicity, and sex need to be considered at all in deciding who gets awarded a contract? It's fine to make sure contracting programs are open to all, that bidding opportunities are widely publicized beforehand, and that no one gets discriminated against because of skin color, national origin, or sex. But that means no preferences because of skin color, etc. either--whether it's labeled a "set-aside," a "quota," or a "goal," since they all end up amounting to the same thing. Such discrimination is unfair and divisive; it costs the taxpayers money to award a contract to someone other than the lowest bidder; and it's generally illegal to boot (see comments we submitted to the Colorado DOT here: http://www.ceousa.org/content/view/655/86/ ).
like
dislike
