BY GREGORY A. HALL
The Cincinnati Enquirer
COVINGTON -- Attorneys for Corporex Cos. and its chairman say the only cover-up in the Kenton County bidding controversy was by government officials trying to hide their own errors.
County leaders improperly concealed bid information while releasing false prices, company attorneys said in court papers Friday.
"I have said from the outset that Kenton County's lawsuit against Corporex and myself are designed to cover up what really happened inside the "courthouse' and to unfairly extract money to pay for their poor judgment," Corporex Chairman Bill Butler said in a statement.
County officials denied Corporex's account.
"I don't think there's anything new," County Attorney Garry Edmondson said. "It continues to show their obvious attempts to get around the facts."
The county is suing Corporex and Mr. Butler to recoup an $850,000 settlement paid to the two losing bidders -- Wessels Construction and Development Corp. and Carroll Properties -- over the 1996 competition for courthouse and parking garage construction contracts.
The county accuses Mr. Butler of manipulating the process to win the $35.6 million contracts. It seeks more than $700,000 in other damages and an unspecified amount as punishment.
Corporex assigns blame primarily to Deputy Judge-executive George Neack, who oversaw the bidding process for the county. The company contends Mr. Neack opposed Corporex's plan because it didn't agree with his own preference for a courthouse location. Mr. Neack "inappropriately tried to manipulate the bids, the design and the award," Corporex attorneys said in a legal response Friday to the county's lawsuit. "In so doing, Neack violated the county's own administrative code, which governs bidding procedures."
Mr. Neack defends his actions, saying he was trying to level the playing field for other bidders but not exclude Corporex. He said he had approval for any changes in the process from either then-judge-executive Clyde Middleton or the fiscal court.
"I was trying to keep a table that was being tilted in a direction toward one developer from being a landslide," Mr. Neack said Friday. Corporex says its officials will prove in the county lawsuit filed against it that its bids were the lowest by $3 million under Carroll and by $8 million under Wessels.
Those figures are aggregate numbers for all the projects and include proposals for a jail, which the fiscal court elected not to build.
Testimony from all of the key county officials showed that Corporex presented the cheapest and best proposal, company attorney Joe Trauth said Friday.
"The county is not harmed by the contract with Corporex; rather it saved money and got a better product," the response states. County officials still agree Corporex's bid was the best, but there is a dispute over whether it is the cheapest because of its parking garage layout.
Mr. Edmondson said Corporex had the most expensive garage, the only project the county had to build.
Corporex attorneys said in Friday's filing that the county used a competitive bid process that meant all records should have been open to the public on April 2, 1996, when the proposals were unveiled.
That's why Corporex and Mr. Butler said there was nothing improper about his meeting that night at the home of Mr. Middleton, where the developer was able to see competitors' bids and later copy them. Mr. Middleton resigned at the time of the settlement, saying he had to accept responsibility for what happened.
In the court filing, Corporex said Mr. Middleton's ouster was more sinister, forced by lawyers in the case who said he would be personally liable for damages.
Corporex also said Friday that Mr. Neack improperly provided financial information from competitors' bids to Wessels.
The county claims specifics of the bids were not available to the public then because the process used was competitive negotiation. Under that process competitors' proposals are to be kept secret until a contract is negotiated.
Mr. Edmondson had earlier said the fiscal court was using a hybrid of the two processes, something not allowed by state law, Corporex attorneys emphasize.
"The county is strategically attempting a historical revision of the bid procedure during the litigation process, two and one-half years later," the response states.
Corporex subsequently sent letters calling for the release of the bids, even though Mr. Butler already had them. The reason for the letters was to get Mr. Neack to comply with the law, the company response says.
