Athletic directors at Fairfax County high schools, who togetherspend more than $1 million a year for team uniforms and sportsequipment, have mostly ignored competitive bidding requirementsenacted two years ago, according to a review of school districtdocuments.
Instead of requiring suppliers to compete to offer the bestproduct at the lowest price, most athletic directors used a systemthat steered a large share of the county's business to one or twosellers, interviews and records show.
One of the major dealers enjoyed a close relationship withFairfax schools, offering discounts to coaches and athletic directorsfor their personal purchases, picking up the tab for monthlyluncheons with them and putting at least three former athleticdirectors on the payroll.
The frequent absence of competitive bidding could result inFairfax schools' paying higher prices for sporting goods, which mightamount to tens of thousands of dollars a year for a district with129,000 students, the area's largest.
In fact, records show that Fairfax schools paid substantiallymore for some items than Prince George's County, which usescompetitive bidding for all athletic purchases. Montgomery Countyschools follow guidelines similar to those in Fairfax.
School system officials, who launched an internal investigationinto buying practices in March, acknowledge that notices identifyingplanned purchases of more than $3,000 have not been posted asrequired and that documentation of bidding has been 'sloppy.' Thedistrict has begun requiring athletic directors to formally requestbids from suppliers and to document bids they received for everypurchase of more than $500.
'They have taken bids, but the documentation for that is aproblem,' said Alan Leis, a school official involved in overseeingthe Fairfax investigation.
Several athletic directors said they did not follow thecompetitive bidding regulation because they did not know about it.Instead, they said, they bought from companies that had provided goodservice in the past.
'I can't ignore something I didn't know about,' said one athleticdirector who did not want his name used for fear of reprisal. 'Wedidn't know about it.'
'Maybe we didn't go through all the proper procedures all thetime, like getting the three bids . . . but we tried to deal equallywith the dealers,' said Tom Secules, of Chantilly High School. 'Welook primarily at the personal feelings of the coaches. Theyestablish a certain rapport with certain people and as long as wewere getting good products, we went with them.'
Considering those personal feelings did not always result ingetting the best prices for the district, however.
For example, for the same brand of football helmet, one Fairfaxschool paid $109.95 each while Prince George's schools-wherecompetitive bidding is used-paid $92.66.
The Fairfax school system's purchasing regulation issued in April1988 required all schools to post notices of their plans to purchaseathletic equipment costing $3,000 or more-less than thestate-mandated $15,000-and to solicit written responses from two ormore suppliers. That regulation applied to the total amount on everyorder form filled out by each school, Fairfax officials said.
For orders of less than $3,000, the regulation said that two ormore bids must be sought, but did not say whether they must be inwriting.
A review by The Washington Post of files involving more than 850purchases totaling nearly $570,000 from the 23 high schools since theregulation went into effect showed little documentation thatcompetitive bids had been sought.
However, a few schools, such as West Potomac, South Lakes, ThomasJefferson and Marshall, did document attempts to compare prices.
Of 39 purchases for $3,000 or more, in eight cases some documentsreflected price quotes from more than one company either in writingor in notes taken from telephone conversations.
For the majority of the purchases costing less than $3,000, therewere no documents indicating any price-shopping.
After a review of purchasing practices, school district officialslowered the threshold amount to $500, held a training session inApril to educate athletic directors on competitive bidding, anddirected auditors to begin checking for compliance with regulations.
'We saw some potential problems developing and we alerted ourpeople that if they were getting into any sloppy habits to get backto playing it straight,' said Superintendent Robert R. Spillane.
'There was no fraud, no theft or anything like that, just sloppybookkeeping practices.'
The new guidelines were adopted at about the time a lawsuit wasfiled by C. Robert Brewer, president of Athletic House Inc., asporting goods supplier in Fairfax. The suit seeks to force theschool system to comply with its own bidding regulation.
Brewer, whose company once had a large share of the lucrativeFairfax sports equipment market, complained that he was virtuallylocked out after his star salesman, three former athletic directorsand a former Fairfax baseball coach left his firm late last year tostart a competing business, Metro Sports Inc. in Fairfax.
Between them, Athletic House and Metro Sports made about 40percent of the $570,000 in sales reviewed by The Post..
The questions about purchasing practices come at a time when ataxpayer revolt has focused attention on government spending andmoney management in a county that prides itself on efficiency.
Money for sports team equipment and uniforms is generally raisedthrough game ticket sales and athletic booster fund-raisers, but isadministered and regulated by the local schools.
Other school districts have different systems for purchasingathletic equipment that apparently could save money for the Fairfaxschools.
Prince George's County schools, for example, have a centralizedbidding system. Requests are sent out annually for bids. After theprices are examined and a seller is selected, contracts are signed,the prices are kept on a computer and every school buys equipment anduniforms off that contract throughout the year.
'We find out that by going to the same firm all the time, theycharge what they want to,' said Milton McLeod, assistant forpurchasing in Prince George's. 'When you bid things out, you'd besurprised how much people sharpen their pencil.'
For many football items, Prince George's schools paid less thanFairfax County. For the same brand of football jerseys, for example,one Fairfax school paid $9.75 each while Prince George's paid $7.52.For the same practice jerseys, a Fairfax school paid $10.30 eachwhile Prince George's paid $5.60.
The lack of bidding in Fairfax came to light after AthleticHouse's chief salesman, Charles W. 'Togie' Payne, left to form hisown firm, Metro Sports, and began getting a share of the businessAthletic Househad come to expect.
Athletic House, which said it had expected to sell about $740,000in sporting goods to the district under the old purchasing systemwith few bids, then complained that required bidding procedures werenot being followed, prompting the school system investigation.
While acknowledging that he profited under a system that did notadhere to regulations, Brewer said his company was unaware thatnotices and written bids were required until he approached schoolofficials earlier this year to complain.
A school official 'was shocked that we had monopolized theFairfax County schools business over the years without competitivebidding,' Brewer said.
Now, he said, 'we just want a fair opportunity to bid.'
Athletic House had made a practice of having a $100 monthlyluncheon for athletic directors at Kilroy's in Springfield andhanding out 'VIP cards' giving 20 percent discounts for personalpurchases to favored customers, including coaches and directors,Brewer said.
In addition, Athletic House hired three former athleticdirectors: Robert L. Carson, a school employee for 26 years, mostrecently at Lake Braddock; Harry Smith, of Robinson SecondarySchool; and Carl E. Zaleski, of South Lakes High.
All left Athletic House around the end of last year and now workfor Metro Sports.
Carson and Smith both said they believe they were hired for theirexpertise and experience in athletic goods, not because they weregood customers of Athletic House while making purchases for theirschools.
'I think {Brewer} hired me because he had respect for myknowledge and expertise in the field of athletics for all thoseyears,' Carson said.
Payne declined to comment. However, his business partner inMetro Sports, former Fairfax High School baseball coach Jim Moeller,defended the old purchasing system that operated with few bids.
'The thing athletic directors cherish most is someone that theycan rely on and have confidence in, so they can deliver the goods andservice,' Moeller said.
One athletic director said that Brewer's son and vice president,Craig, gave him a VIP card several years ago and that he has used itfor discounts on personal purchases.
'I just felt I knew Craig Brewer as a person,' the athleticdirector said. 'He did it as a courtesy to me.'
Secules, of Chantilly, who attended two of the monthly luncheonsgiven by Payne while he was still at Athletic House, said he did notconsider it a conflict of interest at the time but would no longerattend.
'Looking at the regulation now, the {athletic directors}shouldn't have been partaking of his generosity,' he said.
