Ft Lauderdale airport "chose" Abramoff's pick for wireless in '02

http://www.m-travel.com/news/2002/08/fort_lauderdale.html

August 14, 2002 | E-mail article link | m-Travel.com

Fort Lauderdale airport picks Foxcom Wireless
FORT LAUDERDALE -- Foxcom Wireless, a provider of in-building wireless communications, has been selected by two major wireless operators to install their ModuLite System in the Fort Lauderdale Hollywood International Airport in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The ModuLite, a multi-service platform capable of supporting multiple wireless services and multiple operators over a single common infrastructure, was selected to enable seamless wireless cellular coverage throughout the airport.


The implementation, covering about one million square feet, will provide an infrastructure which supports the cellular and PCS services used by mobile users visiting the airport. At Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport passengers are expected to grow from 16 million in 2001 to over 30 million by the year 2020. In response to this projected growth airport officials plan to increase the size of the terminal complex, from the current 48 to over 70 gates.


snip




http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/030305/abramoff.html

snip

Meantime, Foxcom offered a cut-rate price of $750,000 to each carrier. LGC’s initial price to the carriers was $1.15 million, which it cut to $850,000. The license was worth up to $4 million.Fearing it was losing ground, LGC hired Barbour, Griffiths & Rogers in 2001 to help it navigate congressional politics for a fee of $120,000. According to Senate records, Foxcom did not hire Greenberg until 2003.“The question is whether the contract was awarded on the merits or because of Abramoff’s relationship with Ney,” said Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, left-leaning pressure group.

Walsh said in response, “It’s unfortunate that Ms. Sloan’s own sense of ethics doesn’t preclude her from questioning the integrity of individuals based on matters she has absolutely no knowledge of.”Bill Cune, vice president of sales for MobileAccess and a former lobbyist for Hughes Electronics, said his company’s political connections had nothing to do with its success in getting the license.“We went and sold to the wireless service providers, the ones paying the money who said we want as opposed to ,” he said. “Foxcom did not make this political. Any political activity was really the result of our competition.”

Nevertheless, Cune had pressed Foxcom’s case on Capitol Hill even though he had not registered as a lobbyist.Meantime, some participants in the process said Ney delayed a decision to consult with Hoyer. Hoyer told The Hill that neither Thomas nor Ney kept him informed.The minority staff may have been aware of the Foxcom application,” a Hoyer aide said, “but they were never involved in the decisionmaking for Foxcom to get that specific license.”Ney decided to let the carriers choose the network provider because the companies would be footing the bill and they should have a voice in the process, Walsh said.In the surveys sent to the six wireless companies, Nextel, AT&T and Cingular expressed no preference and Verizon and Sprint leaned toward Foxcom. VoiceStream’s preference was unclear.

LGC said that the mobile wireless companies, which were given the chance to decide which company would get the license, were asked to do so without being privy to any of the details that should have been used to make the selection. The committee had not specified cost or security criteria.On Oct. 4, 2002, the House attorneys responded to LGC’s complaints. They wrote, “The wireless carrier providers — not the Committee or the House — will choose the wiring and antennae installer. … The carrier providers — not the committee or the House — are responsible for paying the installer. Accordingly, this is not a traditional House procurement and thus, House procurement policies do not apply.”

Walsh also said that LGC’s complaint was inaccurate and that over the past few years none of the wireless carriers has complained that it felt misled or was not given accurate information.

much more...snip

doesn't it?