Opinion ID: 43762
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Virdi’s Interaction with the District

Text: Virdi first contacted the District in October 1991, by sending a letter expressing interest in obtaining architectural contracts.3 Virdi sent his letter to then-Manager C. H. Huff. Virdi followed up on his letter by submitting promotional literature discussing his firm’s qualifications and by contacting Huff’s office again in March of 1992 and December of 1993. Virdi again contacted the District in August 1994, this time through Jeff Prine, a project manager employed by Heery International. Virdi called Prine, sent him a qualifications package, and then called him again in September to follow up. Prine told Virdi that Virdi’s firm had not been selected. Prine also allegedly told Virdi that the rejection was not based on a lack of qualifications, but was because the District was only looking for “black owned firms.” Virdi subsequently sent Prine a letter asking him to confirm this statement in writing. Instead of responding to the letter, Prine forwarded it to then-Manager Richard Beard. No 3 It is settled that the statute of limitations bars any claim based on events occurring prior to November 19, 1995. 6 District official ever responded to Virdi’s letter. About the same time as his letter to Prine was being forwarded up the District’s chain of command, Virdi tried to set up a meeting with Beard. He met instead with Beard’s assistant, Bob Cox, on September 21, 1994. Virdi asked Cox how to ensure that he was considered for future architectural projects and was told that projects were assigned out of the District’s resource files. In July of 1996,4 the District hired Mike Cunningham as its new Manager and Dr. Stanley Pritchett as its new Executive Director. Neither Cunningham nor Pritchett received any information about architects who had previously submitted their qualifications. One of the reasons that Cunningham and Pritchett did not need information about previous applicants is that the District was inundated with inquiries from architectural firms in 1996 as a result of the anticipated passage of a Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (“SPLOST”). The District began selecting firms for phase one SPLOST projects in late 1996 and completed the process in early 1997. All of those projects were assigned to architects who contacted the District during the summer and fall of 1996. Virdi did not contact the District during that 4 While the statute of limitations allows Virdi to base a claim on any actions occurring after November 19, 1995, no projects were taken on between that date and July 1996. 7 time. The District maintains that, unless a specialty firm was needed, all SPLOST projects were to be assigned from the list of architects prepared in late 1996 and early 1997. In September 1997, Virdi met with Dr. Edwards, the District’s Director of Community Affairs. During the meeting, Virdi mentioned Prine’s claim that the District only wanted to hire black-owned firms. Edwards did not confirm or deny this statement, but he did arrange a meeting between Virdi and Dr. Tucker, the District’s Equal Employment Opportunity Director. Virdi also telephoned Pritchett in September 1997. Virdi repeated Prine’s statement to Pritchett, who asked Virdi to resubmit his qualifications. Pritchett met with Virdi after receiving his qualifications. He told Virdi that the District would keep Virdi’s firm in its files, but that it was too late to be considered for phase one or two SPLOST projects. However, Pritchett said that Virdi could be considered for phase three SPLOST work. Virdi filed the instant claims before any phase three SPLOST projects were assigned.