RSS

E-mail

Twitter

Facebook

Council members say contributions didn’t influence vote

By Paul Tambasco
News Editor

The Raleigh-based trash company suing Garner’s Town Council is alleging that a series of campaign contributions from family members of the winning bidder show that personal relationships unfairly factored into awarding the town’s trash contract to a smaller, more expensive firm.

Ken Marshburn and Kathy Behringer at a Council meeting about the trash vendor decision, Tuesday, July 21

As part of a lawsuit filed in August, Shaw Sanitation Services subpoenaed documents on past political campaign contributions from the parents of Tommy Sims, owner of the winning firm, Benson-based All-Star Waste Services.

All four Garner Town Council members who voted for All-Star on July 21 received contributions from Carol and Andrew Sims between 2003 and 2007, according to public records obtained by The Garner Citizen.

The Simses are well-known, active members in the Garner business community and are also neighbors with Council member Gra Singleton. Excluding the 2009 race, the couple donated to each assenting Council member during his or her most recent run for office. The contributions (see table, “Campaign contributions from the Sims family to Council members“) totaled $950 and ranged between $100 and $350 per candidate.

Shaw says the contributions show a relationship that prevented the Council from making an objective decision.

“The Council was predisposed to All-Star because of its relationship with the [Simses],” said Craig Jackson, Shaw’s Vice President. “The bidding process was colored by that piece.”

All-Star’s bid for the three-year, $4.6 million contract, though under budget, was more than $360,000 above Shaw’s.  Jackson’s company was strongly recommended by the City of Raleigh and also by Garner’s town staff, which completed an extensive review of the four bid finalists, based on price, experience, resources, qualifications, safety and quality of service.

“There’s no logical reason. …Nothing else makes sense,” Jackson said. “[All-Star] had no municipal experience. …They’re basically making the company.”

Initially, Shaw was the leading candidate for the job because of their price, some Council members have said. That changed after WRAL aired a story in May about a customer complaint.

In the segment, the customer showed videotape of Shaw employees dumping recyclables in the same truck with trash. A company employee who was interviewed said Shaw comingles the two on routes where recycling participation is low, separating them by hand before heading to the landfill. Company president Nancy Shaw later issued a statement saying it was against Shaw policy to mix recycling with trash.

Before recommending Shaw to the board at the June 29 meeting, staff said the company had adequately explained the situation and implemented measures to prevent it from happening again. Shaw gave the customer a 15-month credit for recycling and a three-month credit for trash service.

“The only thing they could hang their hat on was the WRAL story, but we still have that person as a customer,” Jackson said.

Shaw did not subpoena the campaign finance records of Jackie Johns, the lone dissenting vote in the 4-1 decision. A review of Johns’ recent campaign records does not show any contributions from the Sims family. Attempts to reach Johns and the Simses for comment were unsuccessful.

Council says money had no influence

The Simses’ contributions represent a small portion of Council members’ total campaign hauls. Councilman Ken Marshburn, for instance, received more from the Simses than did other Council members, $350 over two election cycles. He spent nearly $12,000 on those two campaigns.

On Friday, Marshburn denied that the contributions played any role in the vote. He said the donation was similar to many others he received while running for office.

“To suggest that a campaign contribution of that type would have had an influence is certainly not true in my case, and I don’t believe it was in the case of any of our current Council members,” he said.

Marshburn said he was not aware of the Simses’ contributions to other Council members before a reporter contacted him late last week. The Council didn’t talk about the money prior to the vote, he said.

“It was not part of the discussion,” he said.

Before selecting All-Star, Marshburn didn’t consider telling the Council or audience members at Town Hall meetings about receiving funds from the Simses, he said. Rather, he disclosed the donations in campaign finance reports, which are available for public inspection at the Wake County Board of Elections in downtown Raleigh.

“From my perspective, there was nothing hidden about it. …Anybody can go and see those,” he said.

Marshburn said he considers the Simses to be good, civic-minded members of the community.

“I was appreciative of any contributions that I received from them in my campaign, as I was with any other person who contributed,” he said.

In retrospect, though, he understands that some may wonder whether contributions to the four assenting Council members helped shape the vote.

“Perhaps I wasn’t as keenly insightful about how some might make that connection … but it never dawned on me that [that money] would have any influence. …Knowing that the contribution was public information, it didn’t seem to me that it was an issue that needed to be highlighted in any particular way,” Marshburn said.

Kathy Behringer agrees. She received $100 from the Simses in 2004. She had forgotten about the contribution, she said.

“Can I disclose something that I don’t remember?” she said.

She called Shaw’s accusation “ludicrous.” When the contribution was made, she didn’t know that All-Star even existed, she said. She was not on the board yet, and the town was working with another vendor.

“All-Star was not even in the picture back then … and I was not aware of any intentions to switch at that time.”

Behringer also didn’t know that the Simses gave to others on the Council, she said.

“None of us live in the same neighborhood, the same part of town, we don’t go to the same church, we aren’t in the same social circles. …We don’t get into each other’s business … so why would I have any reason to know that they got campaign contributions?” she said.

Behringer defended her vote, saying it was shaped by confidence in All-Star to offer the best service among the final four bidders.

She expressed doubt that Shaw could handle Garner’s yard waste for the price they quoted, which was roughly 40 percent less than that of the other bidders.

“I thought they would come back later and say ‘We need more money,’” she said.

What’s next?

The suit is still in the discovery phase and appears to be far from settled. The main issue is whether the town abused the discretion it has under state law in awarding a service contract.

Unlike construction projects, bids for municipal service contracts are not subject to state laws which require officials to select the lowest responsible bidder. The laws allow elected bodies wider latitude because of the subjective nature of service contracts.

It is also unclear whether the Council is vulnerable to arguments that it deviated from its own bid procedure. At public meetings, Council members said they chose All-Star in part because they were the only vendor willing to dedicate a supervisor to Garner and house equipment and trucks inside the town.

Shaw says they did not know either service was wanted by the town when they bid. Neither service is listed in the original bid proposal that went out to contractors in February.

Despite the suit, the town is moving forward with its new trash vendor. On Oct. 1, All-Star took over trash and recycling for about 8,500 customers. The first month has been mostly smooth and complaints are down, according to the town.

Amid the controversy surrounding the vote, owner Tommy Sims is confident that the company will show itself worthy of the job. He says his parents have no financial stake in All-Star.

“Our principals are myself, one other person and a family trust,” Sims said. Sims’ parents are trustees of the trust, of which he and his brother are beneficiaries, he said.

“My parents are not owners of All-Star, nor do they work for All-Star,” Sims said.

Meanwhile, Jackson is ready to put the case before a judge. If he had known about the Simses’ contributions beforehand, he says Shaw still would have placed a bid.

“We still would have bid, but we would have been less optimistic,” he said.

In the end, Marshburn wants the public to know that it was not easy deciding among several capable companies. However, he believes that a newer, smaller company will give the town first-class attention.

He’s convinced the courts will rule that the town acted in the interest of its citizens.

“I believe that the decision we made will be vindicated,” he said.

Related articles:

• Campaign contributions from the Sims family to Council members
• Council selects All-Star, despite protests and questions
• Garner amps up recycling with bigger bins

 Print This

Leave a Reply

Comments are subject to moderation. Remarks that are rude, unrelated, or otherwise inappropriate will be removed.