Document text
Man questions Ashland's bid habits By DANI DODGE ASHLAND -- An Ashland man has filed a complaint with the city about public contracts he believes violate city law. Russ Silbiger, an outspoken columnist for a monthly Ashland publication, said he began investigating city contracts at the request of another city resident about six months ago. He filed a complaint on Friday outlining concerns about three contracts to an Ashland-based company called the communications group inc. The three contracts, which did not go through a competitive bidding process, were a $53,000 contract for marketing the Ashland Fiber Network, a $29,000 additional contract for continued marketing, and a $21,000 contract for Web site development. "The purpose of the public bidding process is to allow open competition, and clearly that hasn't happened in this case," Silbiger said. "There are something like 30 marketing firms in the Medford phone book that could have had a chance at this. There are hundreds of firms in the state not given their legal opportunity to bid on this." But Mayor Cathy Shaw said the contracts, which were signed by City Administrator Mike Freeman, were within city regulations. One exemption to competitive bidding requirements is contracts for advertising, she noted. "The resolution does not define advertising," she said. "One of the common dictionary definitions of advertising includes, `the business of preparing advertisements for publication or broadcast."' She said under existing city rules, Freeman was correct to let the contracts without bidding. She said the exemption was included in the 1993 city competitive bidding rules because advertising often has a time element that doesn't allow for a lengthy bidding process. "That sort of thing gets an exemption because bidding takes quite a bit of time, and advertising is always time sensitive," Shaw said. "You create and publish sometimes within hours." City Attorney Paul Nolte said Freeman consulted with him about the contracts, and he gave Freeman the same advice: The contracts did not need to go through competitive bidding. But Silbiger scoffed at the mayor's reasoning. "To claim the marketing services contract is merely a contract for the purchase of advertising is ludicrous," he said. "It's an excuse and not an explanation." The city has no formal process to deal with Silbiger's complaint, Nolte said. However, a marketing firm that felt it lost money because of the way the contract was handled could sue the city. Silbiger manages investments and is not involved in the marketing field. Councilman David Fine said he's willing to revisit the question of competitive bidding after Silgiber's complaint is resolved. But Fine said it is important for him not to get involved in Silbiger's complaint because it should be handled by the mayor, who is officially Freeman's boss. "I very well might bring this up," Fine said. "I would like to see this issue play itself out first, then I want to look at the entire issue in a global way. It's always appropriate to revisit the adequacy of our public bidding in order to avoid favoritism and to assure that the city gets the greatest possible value for its money." In his complaint, Silbiger requested that all work being done by the communications group inc. cease immediately, that an independent investigation of the violations be started, and a legal request for proposals be initiated by the city for AFN marketing services. Silbiger said he hopes that, at the very least, his complaint will force the city administrator to look more carefully at the way he's handing out contracts using taxpayer money. Freeman could not be reached for comment because he was out of town. Mail Tribune Copyright � The Mail Tribune 1999, Medford, Oregon USA