On umbrella contract CM 2012, there were a number of smaller contracts. DLZ was prime contractor and there was an issue with their bond? Yes. They didn't have one.
I had such high hopes that Rataj would be in pit bull mode. Not the case, at least not with this witness.
Rataj shows witness document that has scratched out notation. Who did that? I did said witness.
The document is a reporting log sheet- Edwards recording to his file what conversation has transpired and what he needs to do. On July 16th 2003. the contract is to be for $19.8 million, DLZ's cut to act as construction manager for this project. They manage the umbrella contract,
Witness reads "I spoke to Jay Mehta and he said that DLZ" would not have to get performance bonds but would get them from sub-contractors. Edwards stated his objection that in the past they had always gotten them upfront from the prime.
Edwards says after discussion with Mercado, the original concept was to give them a design build project where they would design and construct the project.
12:00PM Rataj says so you had a problem with DLZ is that they didn't have a bond? Yes that's correct.
As a result of not having a bond, DLZ couldn't do design build contract and had to go to another format.
Judge calls for a break. This is an interminable litany of DWSD contract definitions. Seems unlikely that we'll get to another witness today. Can't believe we have spent 2 days discussing the minutiae of water contracts.
12:12PM Judge calls for sidebar before jurors shuffle back in.
12:15PM Judge tells jury, everyone understands this is a confusing area and that's it's not always crystal clear how it works together. Lawyers will try to keep it simple. If you're confused, raise your hands.
Defense lawyers John Shea, Susan Van Dusen and Bernard all raise their hands.
12:18PM Witness answering jury questions.
Judge tells the court that Edwards is one of 2 pay witnesses who will be back for other chapters of trial. So he can clarify things more later.
And another sidebar.
12:21PM Rataj asks witness about document. It's an email from Robert Walter in city law department to Victor Mercado. It talks about DLZ's bonding issue.
"It boggles my mind that DLZ would take advantage of DWSD in this way AGAIN...They burned us once." Reads the email. From July 2003.
DLZ didn't pay sub-contractors twice in the 80s so DWSD got burned by them.
Rataj says it was an RFP contract on CM 2012? Yes.
So 3 lowest bidders didn't necessarily get contract? Correct.
It was an emergency contract? Correct.
Had to get the streets ready as soon as possible because had events coming up? Correct.
Witness looking at email from DLZ to himself. Awni Qaqish and a few others copied. December 24th 2003. Talks about RFP process to select contractors. Solicitation open to all proposers with strong preference for Detroit-based businesses.
So Rataj says it suggests that as many as 7 contractors possibly more will be working under umbrella contract? Correct.
Government lawyer Michael Bullotta so captivated by testimony that he is leaving the courtroom.