|
(September 13, 2002,
letter from J.White P.Eng, Proponent of Snowfluent Bid, to XCG
Consultants Ltd.)
September 13,
2002
Ms. Lynne
Maclennan, M.Sc.
Project Manager
XCG
Consultants Ltd.
File: C-707
2620 Bristol
Circle, Suite 300
Oakville,
Ontario
L6H 6Z7
Dear Lynne:
Re: Munster/OMB et. al.
I want to put
the following on the record in response to the attached request
and as a follow up to the meeting held here a few weeks ago.
1.
I was more than concerned that the meeting with respect to
Munster was held before you had received and/or reviewed the
Design-Build tender call documents by CRA in 1998. This situation
is only exacerbated by the fact that you had not reviewed our
submission to that tender call either.
2.
The cost to us to respond to that call was $67,000 in
direct costs and $13,000 in overhead costs applicable. We want
that money returned to us in consideration of what has transpired
(i.e.) CRA’s preferred “bidder” that did not meet bid
requirements. We intend to recoup that money one way or another,
legally of course.
3.
Now you want us to supply information vis a vis:
-
A rebid?
-
C of A for Westport?
-
Annual reports for Westport?
-
Site visits?
4.
Much too often we have provided detailed information for
Environmental Study Reports and reviews such as you have been
commissioned to carry out, only for our efforts to be converted to
fodder for such reports so that engineering firm after engineering
firm can justify their fees to their unsuspecting clients, as to
having diligently carried out their commission when the opposite
is indeed true.
Again, I draw your attention to the treatise, “Ethics in the
Provision of Environmental Services” prepared by the Doctors Lee
of California, which says it all.
Conflicts
First and
foremost, I want to object to your consideration of the CMS
proposal. They have a lawsuit against the City of Ottawa
regarding Munster. I provided you an email confirming this, from
CMS. This constitutes a gross conflict of interest both set by
legal precedent and is offensive to us as a legitimate bidder. As
a taxpayer and resident of Ottawa, I object as well.
Irrespective
of Katary’s status at OMB, he has no authority to circumvent the
law. Neither does your firm, nor do your partners. You must obey
the law first and foremost.
The law is
the final arbiter in all these matters. Not even the MOE is the
final arbiter of the EAA*. While I do not wish to be
uncooperative, I am concerned that my passive participation is
this could be considered as my acquiescence to what is
transpiring. I cannot entertain that in any way.
As well, R.V.
Anderson’s work at King City is being reviewed by CRA. This, too,
is a conflict that cannot be overlooked. I must say that I am
appalled that they did not withdraw from this exercise considering
that fact, alone.
I have
concluded, in review of the above, that your effort is a placebo
designed to placate OMB et. al. and will result in the pipeline at
an excessive cost and environmental risk to Ottawa taxpayers,
irrespective of what your findings and recommendations will be.
Requirements (Precedent to any further cooperation)
For us to be
any further cooperative, we require a disclaimer from you and your
group that states (1) you have received no orders from any party,
CRA, City of Ottawa, MOE, et. al. regarding a preferred
alternative and (2) you are not involved in any way in these
deliberations in an exercise to eliminate all and any of the
legitimately qualified bidders by further manipulating the now
discredited matrix evaluations.
We already
know that CRA is completely intransigent in this affair.
Katary had
tried to get CMS and CRA to come to a consensus to no avail.
Your
apparent lack of briefing and failure of your client to provide
you with basic documentation further heightens our distrust of
this whole affair and our disdain for the participants.
The
“rigging of the bids” through the evaluation matrix is tantamount
to a breach of the Environmental Assessment Act, the Municipal
Act, the Planning Act and the Criminal Code of Canada. Either
that or our City Engineering Department was anxious to accept the
sloppiest piece of engineering work I have ever witnessed in my
life.
*
Environmental Assessment Act
When the
testimony of CRA personnel during the OMB hearings constituted
direct prevarication, then we rightly and readily concluded that
the process was rigged and we bidders were bilked of tens of
thousands of dollars, as well as those OMB proponents like Gordon
Sample, and the taxpayers of Ottawa.
Trust and
ethics are no longer part of this procedure and I will thank you
and your colleagues, under the circumstances, not to bring such
up. It is simply too late.
Even a
cursory review of the Matrix Evaluations indicates the extent of
the manipulations and subjectivity of the process to date. We
require that such an evaluation process, if you use the same, will
provide identical scores for assessment items, to proponents who
meet acceptable conditions as required, irrespective of any
differences after the acceptability threshold is gained. This
will reduce subjectivity and potential manipulations.
Politicians
here in Ottawa were made doubly aware of this manipulation
circumstance, also to no avail.
So the
lack of trust is complete. The question is, “What are you going
to do about it?” What are you bringing to the table that will
cleanse the issue?
Considering the City hired R.V. Anderson, in spite of our
objections in my letter to the Mayor dated October 24th,
2001, we could and probably should consider this a message to “get
lost”; that the fix is still in.
While all
this seems inconceivable, we have mental geniuses on City Council
who reject OMB’s confirmation of the manipulations and state, for
the record, that “it was a fair and transparent process”.
Transparent – yes. We could easily see what they were doing.
Fair – no!
Our
acquiescence to your requests could readily allow all this dirt to
be swept under the carpet. This must not occur under any
circumstances.
We had
reviewed the whole project and readjusted our price, as we stated
to you, to $2,573,600*** plus any applicable taxes. The land is
there already and so this price reflected the cost of a new plant
with superior, proven technology. When you consider a pipeline
cost at approaching some $20,000,000 in comparison, plus the
$10,000,000 already spent, this is a damn scandal.
Candidly, I
am surprised you have allowed yourselves to become involved, but
involved you are.
You can visit
Westport at any time and I suggest you visit New Hamburg, Port
Stanley, Lucknow and a few other sites to look at intermittent
filtration, as our filtration work is all stateside, but are
designed identically. The only difference is we mount the filters
above the normal ground level to save a pumping station for
draining of the filters.
You can call
our web site references at your convenience (www.watertek.org).
However, my
advice is to minimize the cost to the Ottawa taxpayer and minimize
the run-around expense as being unnecessary.
Currently we
are working for Mr. Jim Collins, an American and an old client, on
such matters. He can be reached at 435-656-3902 in Utah. He will
attest to our credibility or otherwise in all such matters.
Much more
than that, until we get an indication and written conclusions from
you on the negative side of this review, that the qualified
bidders (3) were bilked of design-build bid preparation costs AND
that you are prepared to recommend to the City to repay those
costs forthwith to all bidders.
You
should recommend, as well, that Doran Construction should refund
all fees and expenses to the City and thus, City taxpayers -
$1,192,000.
Joe
Mangione and Jim Taggart, as professional engineers, were part of
this rigging and manipulation and were knowingly in contravention
of the above-noted laws. They also knew they did not meet the
tender call requirements. They must refund all monies, and you
must recommend the same.
Further,
you must obtain, in writing from the City at the highest level, a
clear indication that they will, at any level, not interfere in
this process of reevaluation, as they have in the past. We
require your written confirmation of this commitment.
We also
require confirmation that you will not alter the price above
provided and that this cost appears in any report, with no
add-ons, etc. to OMB and your client This is a design-build
price. Both TSH and CRA manipulated the costs and their reports
bore no relation to facts regarding price. This was, in fact, the
major matrix manipulation.
Finally,
as professional engineers, you must indicate to us, in writing,
that you are prepared to recommend whatever legal and disciplinary
action necessary against any and all engineers, should you find
wrong-doing or breaches of the Code of Ethics of the Engineers’
Act.
While you may
feel this position and these requirements are unworkable and
intransigent in themselves, put yourself in our shoes. I am out
$80,000 plus all the time spent during the OMB hearings. Your
presence does not automatically sanctify and cleanse past
aggravations. The choice is yours. I will respond accordingly.
I am tired of
being painted as the bad guy or sore loser by mental giants like
Councillor Janet Stavinga, and being ignored by the Mayor and his
staff.
If you people
have the integrity and the professional facility claimed during
your meeting here, then you will readily understand our angst and
incredulousness as to the current state of affairs, as well as our
position herein stated.
We will
not, nor have we been, for the record, a part of any manipulation
and rigging in this affair past, present or future.
We win and
lose projects over and over again as the natural consequence of
being in business according to the free enterprise paradigms.
Madame Stavinga has proven she has no comprehension of these
matters. We don’t complain when the process is fair.
We will not
work with anyone who believes in or has been involved with
manipulation and intransigent, unethical behaviour, or who has a
conflict of interest, declared or otherwise.
The Municipal
Act says it best “…must not only be fair, but must be seen to be
fair”.
Your
all-important response, please.
Sincerely,
NORTHERN WATERTEK CORPORATION
Jeffrey A. White, P. Eng.
President
JAW/lp
c.c. R. Chiarelli, Mayor
R. Pyper, CRC
E. Lauzon, CRC
R. Bendall
G. Sample
R. Pellerin, P. Eng., Sco-Terra
B. Matthews, P. Eng., PEO
S. Katary, OMB
|