By Ronda Watson Barber
OhioMBE Publisher
Today, The Columbus Dispatch reported that Columbus City Schools (CCS) spent a staggering $4,374,619 on improvements to eight buildings that are proposed for closure. Among these projects, the district spent a significant portion of this budget on roof replacements at Columbus Alternative High School and Fairwood Elementary, with Fairwood reportedly plagued by mice in the kitchen area. The district also paid over $175,000 in consulting fees—a figure that raises several red flags. With a highly compensated project management team already in place, why is there a need for such costly outside consultants?
As part of my ongoing commitment to hold CCS accountable, I recently submitted a public records request asking for the current LEDE (Local Economically Disadvantaged Enterprises) participation numbers. Additionally, I requested detailed information on the amount of money spent with Black vendors for these summer projects. The district’s response was telling: “The District yearly LEDE report has not yet been started, as there are invoices still being received and payments being applied to fiscal year 2024 purchase orders.” The district’s fiscal year for 2024 closed June 30.
When it comes to the LEDE spend specifically for capital improvements this summer, the district’s position is that the report will cover the entire year’s LEDE spend, without breaking it down by individual projects. This lack of transparency is both frustrating and concerning. How can CCS spend $4.3 million and not know who the vendors are? The district should be able to provide information on spending with all vendors at any given time—not just after an annual report is generated. How are staff, administration, the board, and the community supposed to know where they stand in meeting supplier diversity goals if records aren’t regularly kept or tabulated?
It’s become increasingly clear that Columbus City Schools is not genuinely committed to supplier diversity. The district’s leadership, largely comprised of well-paid white men who don’t even reside within the district, seem to make business decisions based on personal feelings rather than objective criteria. Black vendors have repeatedly questioned why CCS doesn’t advertise its purchasing opportunities in OhioMBE.com. Meanwhile, the district continues to advertise with The Columbus Dispatch, despite the newspaper’s often negative coverage. What is CCS’s reason for not advertising in OhioMBE? Is it because of our advocacy for including local Black vendors in the purchasing process? While their decision doesn’t harm my business, it has a profound impact on Black vendors who rely on timely information to bid on district contracts.
CCS’s actions—or rather, inactions—continue to violate its own inclusion policies and undermine good faith contracting efforts. It’s time for Columbus City Schools to stop gaslighting the Black community and start taking supplier diversity seriously. If the district is truly committed to equity, it must do more than just pay lip service to the concept. It must actively work to include Black vendors in its purchasing decisions, provide transparency in its spending, and adhere to its stated inclusion policies.
Until then, the question remains: Who is Columbus City Schools really working for?
just my thoughts…rwb
