Opinion: Do not doubt the stewardship of Bishop Lynch

I was quoted extensively in a story concerning the contracting practices in connection with the high school in Pasco County. In my interview with the reporter, I was given the opportunity to read the addendum to a standard form of agreement promulgated by the American Institute of Architects. My reading of that addendum was that "either the contractor was a trusted adviser to the client, or the fox had been set to guard the hen house." Alarmed by the tone of the subsequent story, I am writing to set the record straight.

All contracts are designed to fulfill the needs of the parties at the time they are written. My research reveals that the Diocese of St. Petersburg had just lost its construction administrator prior to the letting of this school contract.

Faced with a sizeable construction project without an in-house construction director, Bishop Robert Lynch turned to a trusted adviser to assist in a time of need. Ultimately, a construction director was hired, and the arrangement became moot.

Since I had not reviewed any of the drawings on this project, I was not able to provide your reporter with any opinion as to the projected cost of the school. As to the fee for overhead and profit, those come and go with the nature of the work and are often affected by a number of variables specific to the project at hand.

The selection of this particular form of contract -- "cost of the work -- plus a fee" -- is almost universally used today by those buying construction services, both public and private. The method ensures tight budget control and tends to provide buildings with above average workmanship. This is the contract used with great success on our recent YMCA project in Central Plaza.

The article cast doubts concerning the bishop's stewardship of the gifts to the church which fund their projects. This was unfair and inaccurate, and should be corrected.
-- C. Randolph Wedding, FAIA president, St. Petersburg

Firm delivered quality work and care

Clearwater Central Catholic High School has found Herman Construction Services to be a highly professional and competent organization.

As the principal of a diocesan secondary school, I naturally took the recommendation of the diocese upon beginning construction of our Science Education Center and listened to experience from other diocesan school colleagues in choosing Herman Construction.

My choice has brought me no regrets.

At our weekly project meetings, David Herman was always concerned that his company understood the school's thinking behind the recommended design. At times he or his representatives would ask us to consider alternatives that could accomplish the objective, but perhaps be done at some savings in labor and money for us. He understood our need to consult with faculty who participated in the design to determine the adequacy of any other options.

Also very important to me was the safety of our students on campus during the construction process. The building project was only yards away from an existing instructional building where classes were held. I never had to be concerned that the project site was not securely protected. Also, I never had any concerns about the workforce on campus. Herman's on-site supervisor was always present, alert and mindful that subcontractors and other personnel were restricted to the project site.

It is not often that you find vendors who not only dedicate themselves to your project with quality and care, but also support your cause, which David Herman has done.

I cannot imagine another organization providing us with the caliber of work and the quality of care that this company has. I look forward to continuing our relationship in the future.
-- Sister Mary Dion Horrigan, principal, Clearwater Central Catholic High School, Clearwater

Humility is lacking

Re: Diocese projects go to bishop's friend, May 17.

Your story about building contractor David Herman following the recent sexual harassment and abuse charges brings out the egregious element of the church's response to these problems: arrogance.

Following secretive dispositions of sexual misconduct, we have a financial scandal where Bishop Robert Lynch says it is "within my prerogatives" to use a contractor without competitive bids.

Catholics would be the first to acknowledge the existence of sin in all vocations. But we expect our representatives of Christ in this world to demonstrate his humility and meekness; the absence of these qualities in our clergy is the real scandal.
-- Marjorie P. Baish, St. Petersburg

Court should back colorblind admissions

Re: Another way to deal with diversity. May 17

In his op-ed piece, Jeffrey Lehman, dean of the University of Michigan Law School, tries to put a smiley face on the diversity preference program at his school. But as Shakespeare said, he "doth protest too much, methinks."

For example, he failed to mention that from 1995 to 1998 he admitted 46, 44, 46, and 47 minority candidates, respectively, in each case between 13.5 percent and 13.7 percent of the entering class. These students were much more likely to have been admitted than more deserving white students with similar or superior grades and LSAT scores. University officials admitted that had race not been given extra preference, minorities would have made up 4 percent or less of each class.

Now Lehman would have us believe that all is well as the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has temporarily upheld this travesty. The 5th and 11th Circuit courts have held otherwise, and the matter is now heading for the U.S. Supreme Court. Our honorable Supreme Court justices will have to decide between principle and special interest politics. Let's hope they do the right thing and adopt a colorblind entrance policy, no matter how distasteful it is to dean Jeffrey Lehman.
-- Sam Lasley, Clearwater

Law school should be more inclusive

Re: Another way to deal with diversity.

To me, Jeffrey S. Lehman, dean of the University of Michigan Law School, is both wrong and irresponsible. He applauds a legal decision upholding the school's "cautious" affirmative action policy. Dean, it won't get the job done! It underachieves and sustains segregation. He refers to our Constitution but ignores our American value that "all men are created equal."

Let's bring St. Petersburg and Detroit into the discussion. Lehman writes, "When 361 students enrolled this past fall, only 26 were African-American. That is 7 percent of the class in a nation where 13 percent of the citizens are are black. . . . "our policy led us to reject 70 percent of the black applicants. We rejected a lower percentage of white applicants." This is a taxpayer supported school but it favors children of alumni. Black skin in St. Petersburg means (per census and city figures) that the median family income is 45-50 percent that of whites -- with a 99.98 percent similarity in DNA! Is Detroit much different?

Public-funded education, separate but unequal schools, plus illegal and unconstitutional segregation have resulted in the gap the school now uses for higher black rejections, and for giving another edge predominantly to whites by favoring alumni. The Supreme Court's Bakke case was 24 years ago! With the 13 percent black population Lehman cites, he should be thinking toward 20 percent rather than justifying 7 percent!

Does the Constitution favor imbalance, inequality, this CPR for segregation? Consider being inclusive, not exclusive! Lehman says, "students who learn at integrated campuses are better prepared to succeed." Then 15-20 percent black students would be better for Detroit, St. Petersburg and the United States. Who is responsible to "compensate for segregation"?
-- Fenn Ellery, St. Petersburg

Basic principles are violated

I am dismayed that Jeffrey Lehman, the author of Another way to deal with diversity and the dean of the University of Michigan Law School, cannot see the glaring disconnect between the unconstitutionality of the policy of "separate but equal," and his rejoicing over his school's policy of "joined but unequal."

It violates the very equality that is specified as one of the bedrock principles in the Constitution! And to have the dean of a law school gloat over an appeals court ruling that glorifies the exact opposite, even to promote his cherished goal of diversity or any other worthy goal, is chilling.

Does this put a nail in the coffin of the law and the Constitution, now that popular social outcomes supersede the law?
-- Richard Daughty, Pinellas Park

We need more serious students

On the front page of your Tampa & State section on May 21 you have a large picture of a Plant High School senior with caption quoting him as saying he has had "senioritis" for months. "I've been trying to not to sleep too much in class and doing what I can to get by," he says. This senior gave his name, which I will not repeat as it might embarrass him for the second time.

Is this the product of our schools today, just wanting to get by? What kind of engineer, which he wants to be, will this young man make if he even completes college with this kind of attitude?

Happy to graduate, I can understand -- just getting by for months so that you can party with friends is a pathetic statement of any student in any high school anywhere. When we need serious students to face the serious realities of today, I truly hope this young man succeeds in his life's ambitions for the sake of his children and the future well-being of all of all humanity.
-- Roger Meissner, Sun City Center

It comes down to overpopulation

Re: More development is the real problem, letter, May 23.

The letter is correct, as far as it goes, but it stops short of addressing the real problem. Yes, development and building are more the problem than multihead showers, but it's not enough to simply say, "Let's stop building!" After all, the developers wouldn't build if no one was willing to move in, and people moving in aren't the problem because they are merely transferring their usage from one place to another. So what's the problem? Too many new people!

Reproduction itself takes minimal physical and mental functioning. Unfortunately, society encourages anyone capable of said minimum to add to the population expansion.

Don't blame developers for making a living in a niche created by others. Don't blame politicians who are continually voted in by those who support more, more, more reproduction. The solution to overdevelopment is a combination of better birth control and more responsible reproductive attitudes. Anything else is closing the crib door after the rugrats have escaped.
-- Brent Yaciw, Wesley Chapel

Share your opinions

We invite readers to write to us. Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They can be sent by fax to (727) 893-8675 or by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com (no attachments, please).

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page