Twelve District entities, including the Water and Sewer Authority and Housing Authority, are not under the authority of both the District's procurement law and Office of Contracting and Procurement, and are
allowed to follow their own procurement rules and regulations.[Footnote 12] In many cases, the procurement law specifically exempts these
entities from following the law, which is contrary to the central statutory purpose of the District's procurement law to (1) eliminate overlapping or duplication of procurement activities; (2) improve the
understanding of procurement laws and policies by organizations and individuals doing business with the District government; and (3) promote the development of uniform procurement procedures governmentwide. As a result, the District's law has created a procurement environment where some entities follow different rules and practices, undermining the District's ability to capture an overall view of its procurements as well as placing an added burden on vendors to understand how to do business with the District.

According to NASPO, it is essential to have one uniform law that applies to all agencies and their procurements and exclude blanket exemptions for any executive agency or department. If exclusions are necessary, the law should define them narrowly by types of goods and
services procured. NASPO state procurement leaders we spoke with said that they would be unable to effectively run their own procurement
systems without one governing law. Without it, vendors are discouraged from competing since they do not know what rules apply, which increases the risk that taxpayers pay more for goods and services. According to
several former and current CPOs in the District, not having a uniform procurement law that governs all entities has been problematic in ensuring transparency, accountability, and oversight. Officials from
other cities we reviewed agreed that having a common procurement framework is critical for ensuring transparency and integrity in the procurement system.

Specifically, GAO pointed out that exempting agencies like WASA and DCHA from DC's Procurement Practices Actand allowing them to develop their own procurement processes and regs jeopardized the integrity of the whole system.

Were any reforms made after 2007? Did Nickles read the report, LOL? (Cool, there's my loophole?)

Fuck reality baby, we got spin!

And it get him out of the office.

Regarding your second point, Albert says the "program manager" contract with Banneker/Regan has indeed been signed. It's the contracts w/ architects, engineers, GC's etc. that haven't been signed. Of course, that raises the question---if no ocntracts have been signed, why is Fenty doing groundbreakings left and right?

http://www.dcbiz.dc.gov/dmped/cwp/view,A,1365,Q,608842.asp

click individuals project links -- eg 7th and N St. http://www.dcbiz.dc.gov/dmped/cwp/view,A,1365,Q,610039.asp for examples.

Or is this just the usual DMPED BS about entering into exclusive negotiations with a preferred partner prior to agreeing to any terms whatsoever? Way to make a mockery of the competitive bidding process!