Stacking the Deck
June 2001
A few years back I worked as the assistant to the director for a state
office responsible for managing capital construction projects. Some of my
responsibilities were defined through a statute that required that contractors
be qualified each year, through a fair and consistent process, to bid on large
construction projects. The process required the submission of a 19-page form, on
the basis of which the contractor would be placed on a list that was distributed
to state agencies.
At the time, the office was under pressure to make the bidding process more
open, particularly to minority owned companies. As a result, the office was
inundated with dozens of forms each week. It was my job to process these forms
and maintain an accurate, up-to-date list and then distribute the list.
The office was also responsible for assessing the state’s “controlled
maintenance” needs, which included everything from toilets that wouldn't flush
to unsafe elevators. The available funding for these projects was estimated at
about 10% of what was needed each year. Accordingly, one of the director’s
responsibilities was to increase funding by working with the capital development
committee. This was primarily a technical responsibility insofar as the
maintenance needs could be documented and prioritized according to their
importance in the operation of state agencies. But there were also politics
involved. The importance of the office, not to mention its funding, depended on
the level of its responsibilities.
I received a call from the director who had been making his rounds on the road
visiting facilities in remote parts of the state. He informed me that a
contractor had sent us the qualification form and hoped to bid on a rather large
capital construction project. He also informed me that the president of this
particular company was a good friend of the local state representative, who
happened to be on the capital development committee. His instructions to me were
simple: “put the form on the top of the stack as soon as it arrives and get them
on the list so that they can submit a bid.”
The dilemma was simple: should the contractor be moved to the top of the stack
so that the office would be in good standing with the capital development
committee? The tradeoff would be that several contractors would not be on the
list and therefore remain ineligible to bid. This would make the process less
accessible, deny otherwise qualified contractors the opportunity to bid, and
violate the statutory responsibilities of the office.
I expressed my reservations about doing what he asked but the battery on his
cell phone was going out so we didn't have time to discuss it. (Yes that really
is what happened.) What to do? Should I have done what the director asked me to
do? Should I have refused to take any action and confront the director? Should I
resign?
--submitted by Jim Heichelbech (jheichelbech@mindspring.com), Graduate School
of Public Affairs, University of Colorado at Denver