A recent article appearing in The Blade implies allegations of ethical misconduct on the part of Governor Taft when he awarded government contracts to his supporters. The story headline provided by the Associated Press reads, “Taft donors win majority of unbid school contracts” (5). This article suggests that 85 percent of unbid design and construction contracts for rebuilding Ohio’s schools did not go through the a competitive bidding process but were awarded to companies that donated to his re-election campaign or to a political fund controlled by Gov. Bob Taft. A spokesperson for Taft defended that there was no correlation between soliciting donations and the awarding of contracts. In my opinion, even if the contract awards were legitimate, at the very least there is an appearance of conflict of interest in the awarding of these contracts. Public officials should award contracts in terms of the public interest and merit, not self-interest. This is absolutely essential for the public to have confidence in their government.

As a recently hired Loss Control Specialist for the City of Toledo, I was faced with the dilemma of awarding government contracts. I was handed a

Governor Taft has an obligation to uphold ethical principles of office. These principles include selflessness, objectivity, integrity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership. A governor should make decisions in terms of public interest rather than to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, family, or friends. In carrying out public business, including awarding contracts, a governor should make decisions based on merit. Taft’s should not place himself in a position where obligations to individuals outside agency might have any influence over his decisions. A public official is accountable for their decisions and actions to the public and must submit him or herself to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to their office. Taft should be as open as possible about all the decisions and action he makes. He should give reasons for his decisions and restrict information only when the public interest clearly demands. Public officials have a duty to declare any private interest relating to their public duties and take steps to resolve any conflicts arising in a way that protects the public interest. Finally, Taft should promote and support these principles by leadership and example.

Acquiring bids by negotiation requires the government agency to first issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) stating the project’s needs and anticipated terms of the contract. Once the agency receives the proposals, the agency may then have “discussions,” or negotiations with the offerors. The agency may also look into factors aside from price, such as the offeror’s reputation, experience, etc., in determining which offer to select (1-2).

In conclusion, Governor Taft’s decision not to request open bids to rebuild the state’s schools but rather award the contract to his contributors’ flies in the face of scandal. At the very least, it has the appearance of conflict of interest. Although the impact on society is not yet known, there is the potential for his choices to ultimately cost the state additional money and seriously risk the public’s confidence in the government. Next year I will be faced with the task to award a new safety and clothing contract. Based upon what I have learned as a result of this class and writing this paper, I now have a clearer picture of what I need to do to ensure that the next contracts are awarded in an ethical manner.

Some topics in this essay:
Governor Taft, Proposals RFP, City Toledo’s, According Dobel, Bids IFB, LegalMatch Sealed, Governor Taft’s, Bob Taft, Associated Press, City Toledo, government contracts, sealed bidding, awarding government contracts, bidding process, awarding government, equal opportunity, governor taft, awarding contracts, public officials, government agency, public official, lowest responsive bid, competitive bidding process, equal opportunity obtain, reduce potential ethical,