County reaffirms vote, rejects lowest bid for road project

Beltway bid awarded to Las Vegas Paving after concerns about lowest bidder

Steve Marcus

Parts of the Las Vegas Beltway fall short of freeway standards. The County Commission voted 5-2 on July 21 to award the upgrade project to Las Vegas Paving, whose bid is $4.6 million more expensive than competitor Fisher Sand and Gravel. Fisher plans to seek legal action against the county for its decision to go with the higher bid.

By Jeff Pope (contact)

Tuesday, July 21, 2009 | 6:51 p.m.

Beltway widening

Construction on widening 2 1/2 miles of the northern 215 Beltway was supposed to have started last month. Instead, the project is going to court.

An attorney for Fisher Sand and Gravel has said his company should have been awarded the contract because it was the lowest responsible and responsive bidder.

But county commissioners said Tuesday that tax fraud convictions of former employees and environmental violations are reason enough to deny awarding the construction contract to Fisher, even though the company submitted the lowest bid.

Commissioners voted 5-2 Tuesday to award the project to Las Vegas Paving, whose bid is $4.6 million more expensive.

It was the second time the commission approved the $116.8 million bid from Las Vegas Paving. In April, commissioners threw out Fisher’s $112.2 million bid, saying the company was non-responsive because its subcontractors lacked appropriate licenses.

Commissioners based their earlier decision, in part, on a bid protest from Las Vegas Paving. But last month, a District Court judge ruled that that protest was filed too late and could not be considered in their decision.

On Tuesday, commissioners called Fisher a “non-responsible bidder” citing convictions of three former employees on tax charges in North Dakota, a discrimination suit filed in New Mexico and allegations the company violated water and air quality laws on projects in Arizona.

The transgressions were raised by Commissioner Steve Sisolak, who also replayed a news report from a Phoenix TV station about 1,368 violations levied by the Arizona Department of Air Quality during a 20-month period.

Commissioners Rory Reid, Tom Collins, Chris Giunchigliani, Lawrence Weekly and Sisolak voted in favor of giving the contract to Las Vegas Paving.

“The fact that your company has so many issues in the other states is more than adequate and more than a justification for us to make a decision,” Collins said.

Attorney Stanley Parry, representing Fisher, called the allegations “superficial” and said they failed to meet the statutory criteria for being an irresponsible bidder.

After the commission’s decision, Parry said the vote was politically motivated and accused the commission of kowtowing to unions. Fisher is a non-union contractor that does use union subcontractors, he said.

“The truth was slayed today. The truth was suppressed,” he said. “The union decided to exercise their political influence to dirty up Fisher and get this bid awarded to a union contractor, Las Vegas Paving.”

Parry said the company will take its complaint to court.

“We have never been charged with destroying or harming in any way a project or any mismanagement of malfeasance of any project we have done,” he said.

An attorney representing the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 12 also spoke Tuesday, saying Fisher showed a history of deceiving government agencies. The union’s local shop is headquartered in Pasadena, Calif., with offices in Las Vegas.

“The public interest is not served by awarding the contract to an entity, which in and of itself may become the subject of public scrutiny,” attorney Lewis Levy said.

Levy said the union became involved following the judicial decision and raised the issue of responsibility.

Joe Miller, Fisher’s project manager, released a statement Tuesday saying the company was slandered during the commission meeting.

“This was the Union Operating Engineers Local 12’s second attempt to discredit Fisher Sand and Gravel and we are disappointed in the decision today by the Clark County Commission,” he said. “We believe it would have been in the best interest of the public to allow a continuance so that we could have responded to the allegations and charges brought against our company.

“It is unfair to have double standards within the construction industry based on union preference. Non-union craftsmen should have the right to work in Clark County on prevailing wage projects in a right-to-work state. It is disconcerting that Las Vegas Paving was not placed under the same scrutiny or investigation as endured today by Fisher Sand and Gravel. Yet, Fisher -- the lowest responsive, responsible bidder with the best bid -- was slandered in a public hearing.”

Owner Tommy Fisher defended the company his father started in 1952 in North Dakota. The company operates in 10 states and has worked in Nevada for more than a decade.

Tommy Fisher and the company cooperated with the Internal Revenue Service during a two-year investigation that resulted in minority owner Michael Fisher, chief financial officer Amiel Schaff and comptroller Clyde Frank pleading guilty to tax fraud in April.

Authorities said Michael Fisher used company profits to pay for personal expenses, then deducted the payments on corporate tax returns. He also failed to report all of his income on his individual income tax returns.

Tommy Fisher was never implicated and took over full ownership of the family business after he learned of the allegations against his brother.

The company paid nearly $1.17 million in restitution and fines and is in compliance with an agreement with the Department of Justice.

On April 1, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit alleging Fisher Sand and Gravel subjected female employees in New Mexico to sexual harassment and fired one of them for complaining about it.

The case has not been settled.

Tommy Fisher said the suit was filed by a disgruntled former employee.

In March, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality filed two separate violations of state water quality statutes against the company for a contracted project near Sedona.

The violations allege that Fisher was responsible for a sewage spill into a creek and the company failed to report it.

A spokesman for the Arizona Department of Transportation said at the time that the alleged violations were an administrative issue and the spills did not cause any damage to the waterway.

In May, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency fined Fisher’s subsidiary, Southwest Asphalt, $18,200 for failing to provide annual chemical hazard reports for its gravel pit near downtown Phoenix. The company has since corrected the violations.

The Maricopa County Air Quality Department cited the same gravel pit for violating standards between January 2007 and August 2008. On June 24, the agency filed an additional eight notices of violation, bringing the total to 1,368.

The alleged violations include exceeding emission limits, exceeding daily asphalt production limits and failure to provide accurate and complete records.

Tommy Fisher said Tuesday that many of the violations were redundant and caused by poor bookkeeping. The company has started new procedures to correct the mistakes and is working with Phoenix and Maricopa County to address complaints, he said.

Fisher couldn’t provide answers to a couple of allegations, saying he would have to investigate them.

“If I had known this was going to be on today and I could have been prepared, I probably could have been prepared for all the good things we’ve done in the community,” he said.

The Arizona Department of Transportation has not been scared off. ADOT awarded Fisher a $21.8 million freeway contract this month over similar protests made by the second-lowest bidder.

Fisher said his company is highly qualified to do the work, citing its experience building the largest contracted NDOT project, the I-580 freeway extension connecting Reno and Carson City; and the largest private grading and paving project in the state, the Crystal Ridge/Ascaya residential development in Henderson.

“There is no question that we can perform the work that you need. In my heart, I think I can do it better than the competition and quicker,” he said.

Commission Chairman Rory Reid said the allegations wouldn’t bother him so much if they had occurred years ago.

“This is not a cavalcade of what was done over the past decade. This is what happened this year,” he said. “I think that’s a basis for this board to be very concerned.”

Commissioners Larry Brown and Susan Brager voted against awarding the contract to Las Vegas Paving. Brager said she needed more time to review the allegations and Brown tried to delay a decision for two weeks but failed to garner enough support.

“I’m not even sure if the applicant was given the opportunity to see all the charges against him,” Brown said. “But I am not going to base a decision on some investigative reporter from Phoenix.”

Brown also warned that the county was headed down a slippery slope by denying contracts to companies with rocky histories with government agencies. There are many good companies that have completed billions of dollars of work for governments in the valley that also have sued those governments, he said.

“If we start turning over rocks for local companies, out-of-town companies, all companies, contractors, subcontractors, boy, you better be ready to see some crazy things under those rocks,” Brown said.

Even Las Vegas Paving is not immune to government sanctions. The company agreed to pay $82,500 in 2000 for alleged violations of the Clean Air Act at its Lone Mountain and Apex rock crushing and asphalt batch processing plants that occurred in the mid- to late-1990s.

Discussion: 45 comments so far…

By nednougat

7/21/09 at 9:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

No doubt the fix is in. Las Vegas Paving has greased more hands than the soap dispensers at McCarran. Remember those tennis courts that peeled? Thanks, LV Paving, and a special shout out to your union butt boy, Mr. Ross..
By 70aarcuda

7/21/09 at 10:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

lvp got the homeboy vote...i hope fisher sues the hell out of clark county commissioners.

and local 12...what a great bunch of guys there are too...
By bosley23

7/22/09 at 1:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

So now this is interesting...

Aren't LV Paving and APCO Construction connected somehow ?
(same ownership or partnership ?)

So they award APCO the MOB Museum project (and Flagship sues) and now LV Paving the 215 Widening project?

How deep are these guys into our local govt?

Verrry curious events here.
What a surprise...
By nogophers

7/22/09 at 5:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Sisolak is the most corrupt politician I have seen in years. No doubt the union fashioned this demonstration.
Where in the specifications does it define an irresponsible bidder as one who in in compliance with all agreements and has never defaulted on a job?
What a sham and what a shame!
By LVWATCHDOG

7/22/09 at 8:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

Obviously the previous posts have been submitted by disgruntled Fisher employees. Anyone with half a brain realizes the Commission acted appropriately. Fisher has more garbage than all the waste at Apex. Just look at the way their president appeared before the commission. Shirt tail out, blue jeans, sun glasses on top of his head. He looked like someone who just got off a 10 day drunk. Maybe if he would have dressed properly the commission might have given him a little more respect. He got what he deserved. Take your toys and go home Tommy Fisher, Las Vegas and Clark county do not need contractors like you!
By neiman1

7/22/09 at 8:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

The unions file charges against a non union contractor in state after state and then use those allegations against the firm when it wins a bid here. The next headline will be using the Nevada listing them as a non acceptable bidder as an excuse in another jurisdiction.

When government is owned by the unions, they will pick winners and losers amongst contractors and the real losers are the taxpayers. We must raise taxes as they isn't enough money and then we find the waste of millions on this.
By mrapholl

7/22/09 at 8:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

LVWATCHDOG, didnt matter if Fisher walked in there naked, that was an ambush from the beginning. Las Vegas Paving is afraid of a little competition and had to pay to get rid of it! Obviously the Wild, Wild West still exists!
By vc

7/22/09 at 9:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Las Vegas Paving bid is only 4.6 million more now, but you can bet it wont come in anywhere close to budget. This will cost the county alot more. I smell corruption.
By hello1

7/22/09 at 9:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

The county commission just turned over a big rock, hope they are ready.
By Randy

7/22/09 at 11:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

Did anyone ask the question or dig into the past wrongs by Las Vegas Paving to determine whether it is a "responsible" bidder? It is interesting that the "responsible" analysis was only applied to Fisher.
By briant

7/22/09 at 11:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

How about some serious investigative journalism to answer these questions from both sides? Jeff Pope, it seems your assignment has just begun with this article. Please server the community and get us some answers.
By kvg2009

7/22/09 at 11:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

Could this article be any more one sided? How much is Fisher kicking to the Sun to post All of the articles regarding this project. All of your quotes are from Fisher's atorney or president. All of the documents attached are from Fisher. Where are all the articles regarding the crimes that have been committed, and air quality that has been sacrificed, and sexual harassment. They come across as though they are all squeaky clean and this is all in the past. These are recent events. They weren't slandered or blindsided. They knew about these charges for some time now. They obviously just don't know about Nevada legislation. They can complain all they want. The commissioners followed statute, they have the discretion, and they felt Fisher is not a "responsible" contractor. It appears they've had enough charges to justify it. LVP can't pay off the entire Nevada legislature who drafted this statute.
Tommy Fisher can plead ignorance all he wants. He was an officer of the company, if you don't know what your own brother is doing, maybe you shouldn't be in charge. Stan Parry is just mad that the judge didn't hand this case to him on a silver platter. They can go back to court but they can't change the Nevada Revised Statute.

You could only dig up one little air quality issue on LVP that happened 9 years ago. Keep trying.
What happened to impartial and fair journalism. Apparently it doesn't exist unless YOU are paid for it.

and Randy:
It was Fisher whose responsibility as a bidder was being challenged not LVP
By mrapholl

7/22/09 at 11:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

kvg2009, you obviously didnt watch the hearing yesterday! Complete ambush, if youre going to be accused of these things, which wasnt even the original issue, then you should have a chance to defend yourself. And what about the employee of LVP that was killed back in Feb. If theres gonna be mud slinging it should go both ways. If you live in a glass house you shouldnt throw rocks, at thats for the commissioners, obviously the names "Herrera, Kincaid & Kenny" mean nothing to them.
By kvg2009

7/22/09 at 11:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

i believe that was an accident, that was investigated by OSHA, not a federal crime. Not the same thing.
The commissioners followed a Nevada Revised Statute that was reiterated by counsel. They didn't do anything wrong so I doubt they can be tossed in the same pool as Herrera etc.
By rumrunner

7/22/09 at 11:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

AND THIS SURPRISES WHO? GIVE A KICK BACK,GET THE JOB! ITS THAT EASY!TIME FOR THE FEDS TO LOOK INTO OUR OWN FOR CORRUPTION! OH WAIT THERE IN AS WELL!Ya gotta love this town.
By mrapholl

7/22/09 at 11:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

kvg2009, do you know what youre family is doing at all times? Notice there was no comment on being able to defend yourself against an outright ambush. Is there a company in existence that doesnt have some sort of violation, be it paper or otherwise, against it?? Sexual harrasment? Give me a break, that usually amounts to not getting want you want, and what better way for a women to attack than that? And I am a woman! By the way!
By kvg2009

7/22/09 at 12:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

yeah, pretty much. I don't think it's an ambush if these are charges you are familiar with as the president of a company. I am sure most companies have done something wrong, but to what extent.
And you are a shame to women to say that claiming sexual harassment is a way to get something you want. You also probably feel that a women deserves to be raped if she dresses a certain way.
And I guess this goes to all of us, myself included, who cares who won this anyways. It needs to be done and it will be once all this bs stops and the project gets started. Larry Brown said at the last meeting how important it is for projects like this to get moving. Now Fisher wants to drag it out in court further. They didn't deserve to get it, stop crying and get construction started. I for one am tired of driving this road without a median separating me from all the speeding idiots.
By mrapholl

7/22/09 at 12:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

kvg2009, yeah I am ashamed when women use theyre sexuality,unfortunately it happens all the time! Larry Brown was the only voice of reason yesterday, said several times how uncomfortable he was at was occurring and motioned for a 2 week postponement so Fisher could defend himself! You are obviously not in the construction biz, this is gonna cost you as well and if this goes to litigation, which it should, thats going to cost more out of your pocket as well! Notice that most of the comments are directed towards the outright corruption, no-one is stopping comments defending LVP or the commissioners from being posted!
By kvg2009

7/22/09 at 12:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

it does happen, however you or I know nothing about their situation or what happened so cannot pass judgment.
Larry Brown was read the same statute as the rest of the board and only him and one other didn't agree, they are entitled. Just because he wasn't comfortable didn't exactly mean he didn't comprehend what was discussed. It only takes 4 votes. And it was 5-2. Five of those commissioners didn't feel Fisher was responsible, the statute gives them the discretion, and that shouldn't warrant further litigation. Its pretty cut and dry. They were given an opportunity to defend themselves and on a few occasions couldn't even give an answer. what kind of company president doesn't know Everything that is going on with his company..that's right, the one who is convicted of tax fraud. It wasn't just his brother but also the company itself.
The only people that feel corrupted are obviously non-union, or friends or employees of Fisher. If you are so concerned about the costs maybe you should favor a local company, with local employees, who will spend dollars locally to help our economy, instead of leaving Nevada and going back to North Dakota.
By mrapholl

7/22/09 at 1:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

When an outside company comes in, there has to be 95% local employment. My family is directly effected by this. Most likely out of a job, but theres Obama to support us. So thank-you for that.
By maybevegas

7/22/09 at 1:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

kvg2009;
So you expect me, as a non-interested taxpayer, to take your word for it that Fisher is a bad company and I as a taxpayer am better off now that a local company will get paid more to do the job? It was LVP who first cried foul after bidding too high for the job and resorting to subcontractor qualification questions. So, they started the process of making this construction job take longer. Union power. Kind of like the ongoing fire department contract negotiation which gets no Sun coverage for one reason or another.
By mrapholl

7/22/09 at 1:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

..........and sending in their complaint 5 days after the bid was closed! shouldnt even have been heard in the first place!
By 70aarcuda

7/22/09 at 2:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

has fisher been barred from bidding on any project from ADOT, NDOT or anyother state agengy?

since their bid was deemed unresponsive..are they now barred from bidding on any new clark county projects? if that answer is NO...how can their bid be deemed unresponsive?
By kvg2009

7/22/09 at 2:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

they were deemed "not responsible". Nothing to do with unresponsive.
By 70aarcuda

7/22/09 at 2:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

but are they being allowed to bid on new work???

also..since these are Public Work projects, anyone can ask to see what the final price is at the end of a project and compare it to the bid price. You can also see copies of change orders to see what scope of the work changed or where there design problems....

public works...public money...
By mrapholl

7/22/09 at 2:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

no they are not allowed to bid on new work.
By 70aarcuda

7/22/09 at 3:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

can you point me to documentation that says they can not vote on clark county public works projects?
By bmj

7/22/09 at 4:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

How do you figure they were ambushed..Didnt you watch the proceedings. They submitted into the record a six inch binder that their attorney represented as being a response to the responsibility issues..They knew exactly what they were going to be up against but when you have no defenses to the truth you look for excuses for you shortcomings(i.e. crying foul) More importantly, if you would go and do your own research you would be shocked at what else you can find out about the good old Fisher family. For example, prior to Tom Fishers brother Mike being nailed on the the tax fraud issued while serving as President of the Company, their older brither David Fisher was President..Guess where his current address is---prison...for possession of child porn obtained from a 13 year old employee of Fisher...seems he, while serving as President of this oh so reputable company, hired a MINOR child to do work around the office...he then photgraphed himself and the MINOR child in compromising poses which led to his being fired and removed from the company..thenalong comes tax cheat Mike Fisher..he gets caught and run out of the company..any body see the pattern of a company that has lost its moral compass....is this really the kind of company that Nevada wants to hand a 100 million dollar contract to...you can say all you want about LVPC...good , bad or indifferent..the bottom line is that as low bidder, Fisher was the one that was obligated to show that it was both responsive and responsible..They failed at the responsible part based on their own conduct over the last six months alone...The commissioners have an obligation to look out for the good of the public..I am quite sure that had this contract gone to Fisher and news of their problems come to light, the very same people slamming Las Vegas Paving would suddenly shift sides and be slamming the commissioners for not doing their job of looking into fishers past history. Bottom line is, 200-300 people are going to go to work on this job very shortly and that is good for this community...
By mrapholl

7/22/09 at 4:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

What about the 200-300 that are OUT of a job? LVP has jobs, they're not in danger of having to close their doors. The original issue was licensing, period. AGAIN never mind that LVP filed the complaint 5 days late. The licensing issue was resolved. If Fishers reputation was in question, why wasnt that addressed from the beginning? LVP owns this town, everyone knows it and they didnt want the competition. Say it like it is.
By kvg2009

7/22/09 at 4:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

I'm sorry didn't Tommy Fisher himself say they were just awarded a $20 million job by ADOT and another unknown amount from USDOT.
Yes LVP did apparently file the protest late, and the judge decided against them by sending it back to the commission. Done and over. I find it funny though that if licensing was never an issue why did Bravo go and obtain an A2 license from the contractors board.
Fisher's reputation may have not been addressed because it wasn't known at the time. There is no time limit on NRS 338.143 or NRS 624. Your responsibility as a contractor does not have a time constraint.
By bmj

7/22/09 at 5:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

MRAPHOLL---what kind of fuzzy logic are you using..If LVPC would not have gotten the job then there would have been 2-300 out of a job there...bottom line is there will now be 2-300 working..Its a step in the right direction for this city..Lets get people working...
By mrapholl

7/22/09 at 5:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

That job is not here in las vegas. and why not obtain it? If LVP wants to deal this way, why give them anything to use? that was a bogus reason from the get go, go back to the hearing, in previous contracts the sub-contractors were not required to carry the A-2. Again, thank-you Larry Brown for pointing that out.
By mrapholl

7/22/09 at 5:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

LVP has many, many jobs. Noone was in danger there of being out a job. I was referring to all the companies that would have had a job under Fisher. Those were all local companies.
By bmj

7/22/09 at 5:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Again--mrapholl--dont you think that LVPC uses local companies for its sub work....PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WORK EITHER WAY....
By mrapholl

7/22/09 at 5:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

except mine. All this bitching in the long run means nothing, because LVP got their way and nothing is going to change. They ran Fisher out of town, so whos next.........
By manhole

7/22/09 at 8:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

Fisher is a bid shopping piece of dirt contractor. I know this firsthand. They forgot to mention the child porn charges against the eldest Fisher as well. Love or hate LVP they are great for our industry and are loyal to our city and state. Fisher can care less about our community. If they push the issue all you local haters will see what scum the Fisher's really are.
By 70aarcuda

7/22/09 at 10:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

if fisher pushes the issue they will probably be awarded the contract by the court...
By oliveu

7/23/09 at 6:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

NOGOPHERS you are really DUMB. And its obvious you are Joe Miller. If the commission loved the unions so much, they'd give the firefighters what they want. Its esaier for you to bash the commission than accept you're a terrible business man, skirt chaser and sore loser. Didnt your redneck dad teach you anything about good sportsmanship? Go away. And read book on business management & class. You're stupid and mean. What have you done to make the community a better place to live? Las Vegas Paving is an assett to this community and has been for years.you and your cowboy friends need to leave town.
By LSinLV

7/23/09 at 6:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

doe any of you have actual 1st hand knowledge in dealing with either contractor on a public works job???? do any of you deal with the NAC/NRS on a daily basis with regards to public works projects?? Do any of you have any 1st hand knowledge dealing with contract management of public works projects???

maybe if you did, you would realize there is NO conspiracy....maybe you would spend more time actually reviewing the public documents surrounding the bidding process and understand that this is how the county works....how the lowest responsive and responsible bidder is awarded a contract. how the county, in this instance, did not pre-qualify the bidders, thus opening it up for any licensed contractor. many bid, only 1 can win. It takes more than just having the correct license to be awarded a bid.....like post qualification of the bidder....thus the fatal flaw for the contractor. Staff presented this to the board, and the board agreed.
By jsbfan66

7/23/09 at 10:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

this is just hilarious. i watched the hearing. i saw the rebuttal that fisher's lawyer had. they didn't have time to respond, with their 6" binder did they? and then brown uses the "slippery slope" fallacy to make his point. not condusive to logical thinking there, are ya larry? i have lived in vegas my entire life and am well aware of LVP's presence here. if they have all of the jobs in the city, why on earth could that be? god forbid it actually be based on merit, or of having ethics, being the best, and doing good work. no. let's insert the "ad hominem or omniscience" fallacies here that are always condusive to the uneducated, lowest common denominator, typical las vegas trailer park thinking. you disgruntled fisher employees posting here are just mad because the "good ole boys" that you accuse the commission of being weren't on your side this time. the job is in las vegas, therefore, las vegas citizens will be hired for this work. am i going too fast for some of you? shall i spell it again slower this time? i don't want my tax dollars supporting a tax evading, earth polluting, child pornograher, indolent redneck who cant even bother to appear before the county commission to try to present himself as an upstanding citizen. do your research and see how many people in the dakotas, let alone the southwest actually revere good ole fisher. the concensus is that the whole lot of the fisher brothers should be in jail. typical provencial, impudent las vegas thinkers. tsk, tsk.
By mikegino

7/23/09 at 2:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Las Vegas at its worst, valiantly leading the rest of the country into the Third World.
By unclegig

7/23/09 at 6:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

After reading some of the above comments, I can see that a few of them are connected to both parties. I am an outsider who did some govt contracting in California before I retired and I know you don't always award the contract to the lowest bidder. You are supposed to award it to the "lowest responsible bidder" but you have to justify your decision. Besides, the City or County will get full benefits of tax if the company is local compared to an out of state contractor.
By manhole

7/23/09 at 8:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

I own another non-union company that bid this job as well. I am not a supporter of either contractor, but I personally heard Joe Miller say right after the bid to one of the LVP management at the bid he would let them do the paving if they cut their bid by 500 thousand dollars. He had a smug, smart ass look on his face. I also know a minimum of five other subs who were told if they could cut their price they would get the work with Fisher. All this after the bid. Fisher is a bid shopping whore and we do not need that lack of integrity in our industry. Did I mention child porn?
By Kroc8U

7/24/09 at 2:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Is this a case of Union vs. Non-Union? or... is it Dem vs Rep? or... are we all on that "slippery slope" like whats his face tried to articulate... Heard it all now.. Mormon mafia, passing envelopes, turning stones, theatrics. We should make a reality show on how Fisher operates.. We only saw the tip of the iceberg on this Out of Town company and furthermore if only they had followed the contract instructions and disclosed some of their on-going problems this may have ended differently. Or the smoke could of been blown away a whole lot earlier and this job could of been started and moving by now. No one with a history like Fisher should come in and tell anyone in any town "what time it is" Thanks for our communities well being, commissioners.. Now, move on people!!! Get a job and stop waiting for someone to bail you out.. Obama could do you only so much...