ContractsDHS urged to investigate use of DHS grants for Motorola emergency comm. devices

Three senior House Democrats have requested DHS’s Office of Inspector General to investigate allegations claiming Motorola’s contracting tactics have led state and local governments unnecessarily to spend millions of dollars on the company’s proprietary devices, including its two-way emergency radio systems.

“If the allegations in the McClatchy articles are true, millions of federal tax dollars may have been wasted, and millions more are at risk,” Representatives Henry Waxman (D-California), ranking Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Anna Eshoo (D-California), ranking minority member on the committee’s Communications and Technology subcommittee, along with Diana DeGette (D-Colorado), ranking minority member on the Oversight and Investigations subcommittee, wrote to Inspector General John Roth. “We therefore ask that you initiate an investigation to determine whether the abuses described in the McClatchy articles occurred and if so, whether (DHS) grants were involved.”

A series of seven stories published in March by McClatchy DC described how Motorola had used relationships with state and local contracting officials, police and fire chiefs, county sheriffs, as well as aggressive marketing strategies effectively to secure contracts with majority of the public safety agencies in the nation’s twenty largest cities. According to McClatchy, for many years, Motorola’s public safety arm, now Motorola Solutions, has controlled roughly 80 percent or more of the market for emergency communications equipment by embedding proprietary software in its devices, making them impossible to interact with other brands, and leaving its devices to be the preferred choice for communications contracts.

The three lawmakers urged Roth to propose changes “to prevent a recurrence of these abuses” if DHS grants are found to have helped finance any of the contracts in question. The members, referencing the McClatchy stories, claim state and local officials have issued Motorola noncompetitive contracts, and sometimes have amended years-old contracts to acquire entirely new systems, or crafted bid specifications to Motorola’s advantage.

Findings in the McClatchy stories included a $50 million contract the Kansas Department of Transportation awarded Motorola to build a new statewide emergency radio network via an amendment to a 1991 contract with the company. Kansas officials made an exception to forego a state law requiring competitive bidding.

Motorola insists that it offers “solutions and products that achieve cost savings for the taxpayer, improve safety for communities and enable quick implementation for local agencies.”

In the letter to Roth, the House members asked his office to:

• Explore whether, in light of McClatchy’s report that Motorola won a Mississippi contract for a statewide radio system by bidding $90 million less than a rival, the company has a history of submitting low bids to capture contracts and whether DHS grant money has then been used to finance contract modifications after the deals are secured.
• Identify all DHS grants to state and local agencies that have selected Motorola as their vendor for public safety equipment and devices, and specify whether those contracts were competitively bid.
• Assess whether DHS’ guidance to grant recipients is sufficient to deter the use of proprietary features in public safety communications equipment, such as Motorola’s encryption software that won’t interact with non-Motorola radios.