There is more to this story than either you or the Washington Post editorial board (how come the editors have become reporters all of a sudden?) appear to be willing to acknowledge. During the hearing that Mary Cheh hosted, CBI provided a very clear explanation of their cost basis. Basically, it costs a lot to operate a business in DC because regulations include such things as mandatory paid sick leave (something I support). But, even more important is to look at the bigger picture. CBI pays DC taxes. Over 70% of CBI's employees are DC residents. So, they pay DC taxes as well. Lorenz is based in Baltimore and has no DC residents on its payroll.

If you hire a non-DC firm, you may pay less on the one hand, but receive less back in taxes and have to support unemployed workers who could otherwise be cutting our grass. I don't know enough of the details to know exactly how the balance sheet works out, but it certainly is not a $4.2 million loss over five years. I would not be surprised if it was actually a net gain for DC if you accounted for all the derived benefits. For instance, CBI's DC resident employees likely spend most of their money at DC businesses whereas Lorenz's Baltimore employees spend most of their's in Maryland.

Jo-Ann Armao hasn't gotten over the fact that Fenty and Rhee were rejected despite her best efforts. She is now on a rampage. I'll give her credit for being right in the case of Harry Thomas where was able to get out in front of the Post's reporters. But, I think she is off-base this time.

"Administration officials say the decision about the contracts, which they say predated the May 2 meeting, was based mainly on Mr. Gray’s desire to give more opportunity to local businesses. Yet CBI had already been given both opportunity and advantage to compete against Lorenz in a 2009 bidding process. Even though it got the maximum in preference points for its local certification — and, to our mind, there are questions about a company’s claim to be based in D.C. when it’s similarly registered in Maryland — CBI was underbid by what city officials estimated was $4.2 million over five years."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dc-council-ignores-the-real-questions-about-grass-cutting-contract/2011/10/10/gIQAP0e6aL_story.html

Is there any accountability in this city? I mean, you do not even have to cut anything and you would save $4.2 over 5 years. Just pick the lower bid. How much of this goes on? How do you say yes this is a great contract, but lets cut social programs to come up with the additional money? Look at the reaction of some of these council members, what else are they hiding? Does anyone in DC care how the tax dollars are spent?