Sep 19, 2024, 12:00 AM
Sep 17, 2024, 8:22 PM

Tennessee officials charged in $123M contract bid rigging scandal

Provocative
Highlights
  • Wesley Landers and Jeffrey Wells are charged with conspiracy to obstruct justice and commit perjury.
  • They allegedly rigged a bid for a $123 million behavioral health care contract by sharing confidential information.
  • If convicted, both men could face up to five years in federal prison.
Story

In Nashville, Tennessee, a former prison official and a private contractor executive have been charged with conspiracy to obstruct justice and commit perjury. The charges stem from allegations that Wesley Landers, the former chief financial officer of the Tennessee Department of Correction, shared confidential information about a $123 million behavioral health care contract with Jeffrey Wells, a former executive at Centurion of Tennessee. This information was reportedly sent via personal email accounts, which included a draft of the request for proposals that had not been publicly released. The lawsuit filed by Corizon, a rival contractor, claimed that the performance bond for the contract was raised from $1 million to $118 million, effectively disadvantaging Corizon, which had previously won the contract. Following Centurion's acquisition of the contract, the award amount was increased to $123 million, further complicating the situation for Corizon. The lawsuit was settled in 2022, but the allegations led to federal scrutiny. Federal prosecutors revealed that Landers and Wells attempted to conceal their collusion after Corizon initiated legal action. They allegedly deleted emails using a special program and acquired new cellphones to discuss how to hide incriminating information. Both men reportedly lied during their depositions, which has contributed to the legal proceedings against them. If found guilty, Landers and Wells could face up to five years in federal prison. The case highlights significant issues of corruption and misconduct within the Tennessee Department of Correction and raises questions about the integrity of the bidding process for state contracts.

Opinions

You've reached the end