Money to help poor people buys furniture for Detroit department

**begingri** · May-12-11, 12:26 PM

A contract in question

What happened: The Detroit Human Services Department issued a no-bid contract to the nonprofit Clark & Associates.

Contract: $1.2 million to pay employees to help the city with food and clothing programs for lower-income residents.

What went wrong: Clark & Associates spent $210,344 on furniture, despite the contract requiring the money to be spent solely on employee salaries providing the services.

Where's the furniture? The Human Services Department, 5031 Grandy.

What's next: The City Council's research and analysis division is investigating.

Story at: http://www.freep.com/article/2011051...oit-department

**preserve** · May-12-11, 02:26 PM

Get rid of those people! I can't believe the audacity especially with all of the exposure to this type of thing. No excuses, fire them. No pensions, no benefits - clean house.

**Wesley Mouch** · May-12-11, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by begingri

What happened: The Detroit Human Services Department issued a no-bid contract to the nonprofit Clark & Associates.

That's the part that I don't get. Why no-bid. There's a whole story on anything that's not sent out to bid.

[[Having said that, I do understand that there are times and places for 'no-bid' contracts. And there are other controls in place for them. Does the city follow these? What are they? Who oversees? Can we learn more?)

Does anyone here understand 'no bid' procurement. I think we could all learn something valuable here.

**Jimaz** · May-12-11, 05:21 PM

Wikipedia's article on "no-bid contract"

**Wesley Mouch** · May-12-11, 05:23 PM

From article... "Whether all of the furniture ended up in city offices remains a mystery because department leaders declined to explain the purchase with the Free Press, saying they would reveal information only under the Freedom of Information Act.

In addition, neither Mayor Dave Bing nor officials with Clark & Associates would comment on the contract and furniture purchase."

For 'our' city department heads to say that is unacceptable. Telling a newspaper person that they must get their information through a public affairs department, yes -- but saying we only talk when FOIA'd?

But I'm more disappointed in Mayor Bing. The right answer should have come pouring out of his mouth. "I expect all city officials to spend taxpayer money responsibly, in accordance with our rules and regulations, and of course within the law. I don't know if we needed this furniture, or what the guidelines for these funds were as I stand here, but know that I will not tolerate anyone wasting taxpayer money. I will make sure that our internal audit department investigates this, that action is taken, and that you are told exactly what happened and why."

**Ray1936** · May-12-11, 05:48 PM

Aw, come on. With what's running the City, what would you expect?

**Fnemecek** · May-12-11, 09:00 PM

What?!? But Mayor Bing said that you could trust this administration?

**begingri** · May-19-11, 10:47 PM

Detroit Mayor Bing suspends employees in furniture misspending, pledges crackdown on corruption

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...=2011105190675

**Richard** · May-19-11, 11:19 PM

But it was the newspaper that had to expose it.

Makes one kinda wonder how can one work on a budget and make cuts to services when you do not really know where the money is going in the first place or where you actually stand?

Still a nice step hopefully more to come in the near future.

**Det_ard** · May-19-11, 11:31 PM

Kinda makes me wish we still had that aggressive auditor that kept calling out Kilpatrick on his financial shenanigans. Wait, isn't he the guy everyone hates now for his tough love over in Benton Harbor?

**RaumVogel** · May-20-11, 01:04 AM

Yes, and here's an interesting article on it:
http://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/...04/column.html

**SWMAP** · May-20-11, 06:12 AM

Not to take anything away from the Freep and the News on this story and the story on the misspending in the DPL, I do note that both stories had their origins in complaints and detailing by the employees unions. While I often tremble at what might happen if we didn't have our watchdog newspapers [[corruption rampant in the City), I see that the unions can be inside eyes.

**jtf1972** · May-20-11, 06:55 AM

I'm also wondering why $1.2 million is being spent on food & clothing for the poor when we can't keep up with the basic necessities of running a city. I'm all for helping the poor, but when you don't have any money $1.2 million is a lot.

**Hermod** · May-20-11, 07:52 AM

My late father always said this back in the sixties. He felt it applied to all levels of government.

When you appropriate money to help the poor, they acquire nice offices, buy expensive furniture, and hire a bunch of expensive bureaucrats. Then they go back to the legislators and say they need more money to help the poor.

DetroitPole · May-20-11, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by SWMAP

Not to take anything away from the Freep and the News on this story and the story on the misspending in the DPL, I do note that both stories had their origins in complaints and detailing by the employees unions. While I often tremble at what might happen if we didn't have our watchdog newspapers [[corruption rampant in the City), I see that the unions can be inside eyes.

I noticed this as well. I know the municipal unions can be rather reactionary, but credit should be given where credit is due.

Ironically, if there are two very endangered species in this country it is print media and unions.

**Richard** · May-20-11, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by SWMAP

Not to take anything away from the Freep and the News on this story and the story on the misspending in the DPL, I do note that both stories had their origins in complaints and detailing by the employees unions. While I often tremble at what might happen if we didn't have our watchdog newspapers [[corruption rampant in the City), I see that the unions can be inside eyes.

Thank you for that clarification,duly noted.

**BagAJellyDonuts** · May-20-11, 04:33 PM

Originally Posted by Ray1936

Aw, come on. With what's running the City, what would you expect?

With who ran the city, what do you expect?

**SWMAP** · May-27-11, 10:49 AM

Here's how the fired Director justifies her role on today in an interview in the Detroit News:

"Just because I am the director doesn't make me responsible for everything in the department," said Coleman, whose department provides anti-poverty programs, Head Start efforts and home weatherization services.
"I, Shenetta Lynn Coleman, do not order furniture. I do not order equipment. That was not my job. I have a staff person who was responsible for that."
"If I don't know about it, then there's nothing I can do about it. I cannot be in 29,000 places at once."
When asked if she was ultimately responsible as director, she said her job isn't to "hold someone's hand."

The employees union rep makes this tremendous, telling point:

Greg Murray, vice president of the union, Senior Accountants, Analysts and Appraisers, that represents about 20 department staffers, bristled when told that Coleman defended the furniture expense.
He said some of the replaced furniture was only 2 years old: "$200,000 for furniture in a city department that was reluctant to open a warming center is heartless."
This winter, Coleman was at the center of a controversy because the city's warming center didn't open until the end of February. A longstanding policy mandated its operation, but Coleman said it couldn't open because of budget constraints and called a center a "nice extra to have." The city eventually released $150,000 in emergency federal funds to open the center two months into the season.

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110527/...#ixzz1NZIguoCl

:

**iheartthed** · May-27-11, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by SWMAP

Here's how the fired Director justifies her role on today in an interview in the Detroit News:

"Just because I am the director doesn't make me responsible for everything in the department," said Coleman, whose department provides anti-poverty programs, Head Start efforts and home weatherization services.
"I, Shenetta Lynn Coleman, do not order furniture. I do not order equipment. That was not my job. I have a staff person who was responsible for that."
"If I don't know about it, then there's nothing I can do about it. I cannot be in 29,000 places at once."
When asked if she was ultimately responsible as director, she said her job isn't to "hold someone's hand."

The employees union rep makes this tremendous, telling point:

Greg Murray, vice president of the union, Senior Accountants, Analysts and Appraisers, that represents about 20 department staffers, bristled when told that Coleman defended the furniture expense.
He said some of the replaced furniture was only 2 years old: "$200,000 for furniture in a city department that was reluctant to open a warming center is heartless."
This winter, Coleman was at the center of a controversy because the city's warming center didn't open until the end of February. A longstanding policy mandated its operation, but Coleman said it couldn't open because of budget constraints and called a center a "nice extra to have." The city eventually released $150,000 in emergency federal funds to open the center two months into the season.

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110527/...#ixzz1NZIguoCl

:

What kind of operation was she running where she didn't have to sign off on a $200,000 purchase?

**fryar** · May-27-11, 12:31 PM

Just because I am the director doesn't make me responsible for everything in the department

How do I put this delicately...

**msawyer91** · May-27-11, 12:40 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

That's the part that I don't get. Why no-bid. There's a whole story on anything that's not sent out to bid.

[[Having said that, I do understand that there are times and places for 'no-bid' contracts. And there are other controls in place for them. Does the city follow these? What are they? Who oversees? Can we learn more?)

Does anyone here understand 'no bid' procurement. I think we could all learn something valuable here.

We're dealing with this very problem in Shelby Township. Our township supervisor, Richard Stathakis, is facing a recall being primarily pushed by Nightingale Towing Co. Nightingale has been the "exclusive" towing company for the township for many, many years, thanks largely to no-bid contracts.

Supervisor Stathakis chose to send the contract out for bids when the contract expired, and Nightingale didn't win. So now they're all hot and bothered because they figured they should've been "guaranteed" the contract!

I applaud Supervisor Stathakis for taking a stand against cronyism and actually watching out for the taxpayers that pay for these services.

Detroit's Human Services Department stands to learn something from this. ALWAYS send it out for bids. There are plenty of good companies out there happy to bid on the work.

**Bong-Man** · May-27-11, 02:09 PM

There should be no such thing as a no-bid contract. The only time that is acceptable is when you are requesting a very specialized service, and even then you must show cause. If the purchase or service is less than say $10,000 dollars, a minimum of 3 bids are solicited. Any over $10,000 [[or whatever limit is used) should be publicly advertised.