Jackson Jambalaya

My, my - well, ain't that somethin'.

You are KIDDING me. Why would they possibly seal their proposal.....rhetorical question.

Glad to know unethical politics had nothing to do with the decision.

Who has been unethical? Be specific.

would like to see this "court order"

We hold these truths to be self evident 1:52. Open your eyes.

I do believe they must provide the court order, if there is such.

KF will get it.

That is a trade secret. Posting things like this can reveal whatever competitive advantages the winning bidder has. Why should the competition (losing bidders) get to steal a step just because some taxpayers have a curiosity and like to dabble in government affairs?

2:26 Once the bidding is over this "trade secret" BS is moot. It's not like they're looking for the Colonel's 17 Herbs and Spices here, or Coke's secret formula.

Short answer: If they want my tax money, they can damn well show me what I'm paying for.

You're wrong 2:35. 2:26 is dead on. Maybe Leland can get KF a copy. They're pretty tight ya know.

Dead on, 2:26.

About as transparent as the non-existent Millsaps "study".

@2:26 - I don't want to know what their magic secret way of creating great value and low cost is - but I do want to know what the deal is. If it causes even more people to offer the state of MS a competitive deal, that's good for taxpayers.

Oh goodness; my post wasn't approved since it didn't agree with Kingfish. I'll try again. 2:26is dead on. 2:35 is dead wrong. It's high time Kingfish learn he is not going to get (and is not entitled to) everything he wants. Hello? Life lessons.

4:54 exemplifies the stupidity of posting a "you won't dare post this" comment, since all KF has to do is post it to expose its asininity.

I like how some like what 2:26 posted. Do they like the snark, or whut?

this was fast, you might say light Speed!

I'm confused. Why can't the state keep the bids sealed until a decision has been reached? Once a winner has been selected the bids should be available for the public to view, considering it's taxpayer money and all.

Now the dirty laundry about the Landmark will come out.

It's amazing how 2:26v and other fools like having their pockets picked to pay for a pig in a poke.

MBJ: The rejection of the fully vacant Landmark Center at 175 E. Capital St. is a severe blow to the downtown Jackson office market, which is believed to have a vacancy rate above 35 percent.

7:31. DUH. No go entertain yourself with a new magazine while you salivate with glee.

Come on guys, our state leaders have our best interests in mind, so there is no need for transparency. It is not like our state's policies are partly responsible for Mississippi being last or almost last in just about everything except for poverty, illiteracy, and crime..... oh, wait. Just one example of many of how incompetent our state's leaders truly are. We deserve better.

File a motion to unseal the bid. To hell with DFA. The chancellor doesn't have a good reason to keep it sealed anymore.

All the posters on here better go back to law school and retake their "read the law 101" course. The MS Public Records Law has provisions that allow parts of "proposals" to be sealed, redacted, or in other ways confidential. At this point in the process it appears that DFA has only made a recommendation based on an evaluation. They have not proposed entering into a contract to lease or purchase a building - or so it appears. Until the state is prepared to take such a step they are doing what is called "negotiating". While they do that the interesting details of these proposals are not necessarily releasable.

So - all of you, go back and take a pill and wait. I'll bet that if a contract is entered into by the state for a lease or a purchase, you will have all the transparency you want. But for now, you don't get it just cause you want it. Nor does KF, just because he's KF.

It was easily explained in today's paper in a one-line simple comment. If something falls through with the Clinton proposal, they'd go back to the remaining bids and revisit. How simple is that? Releasing it all to his majesty-fish would negate that possibility or at least expose everyone's hand.

I perfectly understand the concept of not giving competitors an unfair advantage. However, at some point, the taxpayers have a right to see these proposals.

Oh, I forgot, we are in Mississippi where people like you don't want to know nothing or see nothing about their government and then bitch about how we are in last place. The Know Nothings are alive and well.

Absolutely, KF!
We should also need to compare the bids to the request for proposal.

The easiest way for those inclined to " help a friend" get a contract is to include a sentence or two that would only apply to one bidder and thus exclude the other bidders.

Those who have commented should read bid protests over the years.

And, here's a hint,there are reasons that government contracts exceed the original costs cited. There are omissions in the requests for proposals for work that will be required. This is done to make the project look less costly but it's also done to allow those who would not otherwise qualify to make a bid to win the bid and later expand their operation so as to acquire the needed expertise.

If one gets to see bids and compare, a hint gets to be in seeing what work was included in the losing proposals that wasn't in the bid of the winning one.

Should you add your name to that of Speed and Allen on the memo they sent you this morning? You may be right that 'at some point' the information, or parts of it, should be available to the public. Today is not that day.

However, at some point, the taxpayers have a right to see these proposals.


Agree. So you believe that point is right now?

You better believe the bidders want their bids sealed and hidden. All three were probably so desperate that they don't want to show their hand in the next negotiation, if there ever is one.

More experts here than roaches on Mill Street. Everybody is an instant expert on who influenced who, who got bought and who did what in an unscrupulous manner. Throw out the whole bucket of grapes. They're sour!

Can't wait to see Speed's full page letter ('scuse me, advertisement) in the Clarion Thursday. He's got a boy working on it now no doubt.

Ooops. I meant to say: "Dead on, 2:35."

Four glaring questions after review of the materials:

1. What caused Landmark proposal to rise $3 million in less than a year, $48,544,056 to $51,684,393?

2. What caused South Pointe’s proposal to decrease $10 million in less than a year, $51,430, 875 to $41,469,192?

3. Why conditions changed that made both suburban locations, South Pointe and Diversified Technology, decrease in costs while Landmark Center increased?

4. Why do the costs of purchasing the Landmark Center remain relatively the same from the C&W study even with a reduction in selling price of $7 million?

Can only answer number 2. SouthPointes numbers DECREASED because the architecture firm owned by Richard McNeel did the retrofitting numbers for the Landmark Building when it was selected last year...JBHM...Duckworth hired them to retrofit SouthPointe this time around. Yes. Worked for one side last year and the other this.

They had the target numbers to "beat" as they derived them last year, while working for a "now" competitor. Yes. Sleazy and the drive by media doesn't care because it takes effort to dig up, other than KF.

I can answer number 4. The deck was set. 3 types of lies: Les, DAMN LIES, and statistics. This is easy to "hide" in proposals that are secret with no public view. They say it, look believable on TV, and we believe it because it takes mental effort not to. NOW. Who can shed light on 1and 3????

Landmark is 25% MORE EXPENSIVE. This is a NO-BRAINER. Time to move on Ben.

All of the people clamoring for the "guts" behind the Millsaps "PowerPoint" are surely quiet regarding the "guts" behind the Duckworth/McNeel bogus slam dunk presented here.'

It is a given that the slimy Duckworth team would do anything to get their commissions on this sale. Paper thin. Paper.

It is a given that the slimy Duckworth team would do anything...

Like feign illness to avoid accountability? Will they do that?