Commissioners approve "relative" contract

Jun. 14—A contract with an architecture and engineering firm and a related invoice was approved by two Cleveland County Commissioners despite a blood relative in the company also working for the county.

District 1 Commissioner Rod Cleveland voted no on a $15,000 invoice of a $55,000 contract with Rees & Associates.

Commissioners Darry Stacy and Harold Haralson voted Monday to it after the county's attorney Jim Robertson said that it was not illegal, despite the fact that the county's project manager Brian Wint is brother to Jason Wint, a Senior Associate at Rees according to the website.

With the approval, the company will construct a multi-use "space that can serve for more farm market space, much needed equipment storage space for the farm market, mass immunization distribution, healthy living space and special events," Stacy said during discussion on the agenda item.

The Rees firm was handpicked by the county to perform design services for an upcoming project at The Well instead of by public bid. Brian Wint said according to state law, commissioners can choose to select a vendor instead of using the bid process under certain circumstances.

"As far as specialty firms, those have to be licensed engineers, architects, sometimes inspection firms, if you have to be licensed, there's a process of which you can put it up for bid if you so choose, but according to state statute, you don't necessarily have to," Wint said.

Large scale projects "typically" go out for bid, but smaller projects such as Rees, for $55,000, would not normally go out to bid, he said.

"This is a very small project," Wint said. "The nice thing about Rees is they do a lot of good things for the community, a lot of pro bono work as well."

Wint added that the county has used Rees in the past for other small projects and "we've had good experiences."

"They've been willing to take on the smaller [projects]," he said.

Wint said the project is so small it did not "rise to the level of a contract" but rather a Letter of Agreement. However, a review of numerous legal websites and definitions online state that a letter of agreement is a contract, or a legal agreement.

Questions answered

Cleveland raised several questions during the commissioners' regular June 6 meeting, including the use of American Rescue Plan Act money for the expenditure and whether the expenditure would be a conflict of interest if it hired Rees due to the sibling relationship between Brian and Jason Wint.

Wint admitted his brother did do some work on the project and had approved invoices before the firm's accounting department submitted them to the county.

"He's the one who's kind of coordinating the engineers," Wint said of the work his brother performs.

The invoice dated June 2 shows a stamp by Brian Wint that reads "approved" before it was sent to the commissioners for approval. Brian said that the stamp should read "reviewed."

Stacy read a letter from Rees that said Jason Wint does not receive bonuses based on awarded contracts or individual projects, but "based solely" on the end of the year assessment of the firm's income.

Stacy read a statement concerning the potential for a conflict of interest from Robertson, which noted that while Brian Wint oversees various construction projects for the county, he does not have any authority to "pay contracts, terminate contracts, pay invoices, etc.," he read.

"He reports to the Board of County Commissioners who have exclusive authority to award contracts, terminate contracts, and defend lawsuits, etc.," Stacy read.

Melissa Houston of 929 Strategies addressed Cleveland's concerns regarding the use of ARPA money for the invoice.

The county hired Houston to oversee the proper expenditure of projects that fall within the U.S. Treasury Department's guidelines.

She noted community members who participated in stakeholder meetings last summer approved of increasing support for the Well, which falls within authorized American Rescue Plan Act expenditures for health and safety projects.

Stakeholder meetings were not open to the public.

Cleveland had additional concerns that they didn't give him enough information about the project, and that there had not been enough public discussion about the project.

Stacy said during the March 7 commissioner meeting that Houston presented a $1.5 "spending plan" for "public health support" for the Well.

He said the plan was approved unanimously.

"This presented [a] discussion opportunity to discuss the public health support proposal," Stacy said.

During the March 7 meeting, Stacy said he informed the board funds would be used for the "farm market improvement of the surrounding area at the Well. There was no further discussion."

Cleveland had also previously asked about recurring costs associated with the project to which Stacy answered Monday would total around $300 per month and easily "absorbed" by the farm market.

After the meeting, Cleveland said he voted no because the project discussion was "it was too little, too late." His concerns about conflict of interest between the county and Rees were satisfied.

"This had nothing to do with the professionalism of Rees & Associates and what kind of products that they offer," he said. "It was a legal question, and I wanted that clarified.

"That has been a concern that constituents brought up."

Mindy Wood covers City Hall news and notable court cases for The Transcript. Reach her at mwood@normantranscript.com or 405-416-4420.