Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Conduct topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Auditors flag procurement irregularities; contractors tied to village figures won multiple close bids
Summary
The audit identified a pattern of concentrated payments to a small set of contractors — notably Tenco/Tenko and work tied to Kevin Nent — and found limited documentation explaining bid selection on several large contracts.
Forensic auditors told trustees that procurement records show repeated awards and high cumulative payments to a small group of contractors and that the file documentation and bid transparency in some cases were inadequate.
Jim Edmondstone summarized the procurement findings and presented contract- and payment-level exhibits. The report traces payments of several million dollars to firms connected by family or business relationships to village officials and shows examples where an apparent subcontractor received most of the contract proceeds. "We went back and over the period of time ... there were three of them but the concentration would have been Kevin Nent construction and Tenco," the auditor said as he described check-level evidence and final releases of lien.
Auditors gave specific examples: multiple contracts where Tenco (also spelled Tenko in the village documents) won awards by small margins over the runner-up, and internal transaction records showing significant amounts flowed to Kevin Nent or related entities. The draft report lists totals for three contracts and their disbursements and shows that across selected projects the village paid millions to Tenco and hundreds of thousands to Kevin Nent as a portion of those contracts.
Auditors stopped short of asserting criminal wrongdoing but said the pattern and lack of transparent bid openings and contemporaneous documentation create an appearance problem and risk to public confidence. Trustees pressed for wider procurement comparisons; one trustee noted the audit focused on specific firms and asked whether other vendors were reviewed. Auditors said their sample targeted the most concentrated recipients and that broader review could be done.
The auditors recommended stronger bid-opening procedures, clearer minutes that document evaluation of alternatives and conflict-of-interest reviews for awards where family or business relationships exist. Trustees asked staff to provide additional contracting records and to review procurement policies to ensure sealed bids, public openings and detailed minutes are preserved.
The audit presentation generated several trustee questions about whether contracts should be rebid, about subcontractor flows, and about whether any officials voted on contracts that involved family businesses; trustees and staff said there were no immediate votes at the meeting but asked for follow-up records.
