Walbridge's bid after equalization was $69 million. 

Looking at Walsh construction. Before equalization they had the lowest bid but after equalization it was $71 million. 

Looking at other contractor equalized bids which are also shown to be higher than Walbridge's. 

Email from Walbridge executive Ron Hausmann at Walbridge on February 6th 2003 the day of the bid openings. 

A juror just asked Rataj to speak into the microphone. 

In the email, Hausmann opines this is going to be a dog fight because everyone wants the $73 million contract. Gerald Evelyn introduced this email yesterday. 

More juror questions. 

Looking at another document we have already seen. From Daniel Edwards of DWSD to a Scott Penrod of Walbridge. Penrod was second VP at Walbridge under Hausmann. In this, Edwards advises Penrod they were the lowest bidder. 

Now looking at Walsh's protest letter. Beeckman says he saw this document this morning before court. From February 11th 2003. Addressed to Audrey Jackson at the Purchasing Division of Detroit Finance Department. There is a whole lot of legalese in the letter. Basically Walsh objects to the awarding of the contract to Walbridge and formally files a protest.

 9:30AM Series of emails we saw yesterday between Daniel Edwards of Contracts and Grants and Gary Fujita, his boss, of the DWSD. They are talking about protests filed by Walsh, L. D'Agostinin and W3/Barton Marlow. 

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) had an enforced deadline of March 1st 2003 for the Baby Creek project. 

Dan Edwards's email to Gary Fujita. Mentioning that Audrey Jackson has consulted her attorneys and will be rendering a decision that same week so delays will not be as long as thought. Ultimately, Jackson found Walbridge to still be the lowest equalized bidder. 

Now looking at a document from February 18th 2003 between Dan Edwards and John McGrail and other DWSD engineers. Regarding the Baby Creek project, document shows the batting order of the equalized bids after Jackson considered the protests. Walbridge still at the top. 

This is a memo from Victor Mercado of the DWSD on Baby Creek initial bid opening postponement due to an infringement claim. From October 2012 to February 6th 2003. Says that if the Patton Park issue hadn't occurred, the DWSD could have proceeded through the regular channels of Water Board and City Council and not used the Special Administratorship. But timing was of the essence, so they went via Kilpatrick's Special Administrator Order. Beeckman concurring with all of this. 

Now looking at the Special Administrative Order for Baby Creek, 748. It was signed by Kilpatrick in April 2003. 

Now looking at the texts from yesterday where Anwunah asks Ferguson what he thinks about Walbridge's request for a 5% fee and Ferguson's response is less than enthusiastic to put it mildly. 

Ferguson: Hell no thats 5% they are crazy..... 

Beeckman concedes that it is not unusual to have a conversation like this. 

Now looking at Bernard Parker email on February 12th 2003 internally to Walbridge where he says he was trying to find out from Daniel Edwards what Audrey Jackson might doing with the protests.

Looking at Baby Creek bid form signed by Penrod of Walbridge on February 6th 2003, the day of the bid opening. 

Juror asks to see the signature page again. 

Looking at a number of allowances for Baby Creek. Beeckman agrees that the deadline the DWSD was under related specifically to the Baby Creek portion. The bulk of contract 748 was a DWSD contract. $10 million set aside for Patton Park. Total amount is more than $73 million. 

Now looking at the handwritten agreement between Ferguson Enterprises and Walbridge. Signed by Keith Merritt of FEI and Penrod of Walbridge on February 14th 2003. A valentine's agreement! This is the agreement where Walbridge promised to cut in Ferguson if they got the contract. Shows that he would get the $10 million for the Patton Park portion. 

9:50AM Ferguson was objecting to 5% that Walbridge wanted of the $10 million. Rataj says that Walbridge wanted $500,000 for doing nothing. 

Beeckman disagrees.