Natwar Gandhi Sends Angry E-mail to the Post’s Colbert King

Dear Colby:

This is in reference to your WP column yesterday,
“We’re to blame for the D.C. Council mess,” in which you write, “it
would
be irresponsible for Gray to reappoint Gandhi to another term
as CFO without resolution of the federal probe, including Gandhi’s
role in the matter. Let him stay on the job, but hold off on a
new lease until the feds give the all clear.”

I find this personally insulting and offensive for following reasons:

• There is no federal probe of me or my office. We
have not been notified, in writing, verbally or by any other means, that
I am the target of investigation by the FBI or other law
enforcement authorities. If you have evidence of such an investigation
or wrongdoing, you have a responsibility to bring this
information to the attention of your readers and law enforcement.
Otherwise,
it is irresponsible of you to suggest there is an investigation
or misconduct by me, and it is equally irresponsible to connect
my reappointment to a federal investigation which has nothing
to do with me or my office. I have been the District’s CFO for
eleven years and I am proud of my record and accomplishments.

• Eric Payne was not fired by for reporting incidents
of supposed political pressure relating to the Lottery contract. In
fact, I supported Payne’s recommendation to award the contract
to Intralot, and submitted the Intralot contract several times
for approval to the Council. Moreover, I am satisfied with
Intralot’s performance as our Lottery vendor, which has brought
millions of dollars of revenue to the District.

• Despite attempts to link his termination with politically charged issues in the District, the simple truth is that Eric
Payne was terminated because of his poor performance issues as manager of the OCFO Contracts Office.

One might ask why Mr. Payne’s first attorney abruptly
quit the case and why the testimony delivered under oath in the
depositions
has produced no hard evidence—other than his allegations of
what took place in meetings and conversations where he was not
present—of political pressure to award the contract to a
specific firm.

Finally, I wonder why you so uncritically accept
Payne’s statements and so abruptly dismiss what I and others in my
office
have to say. Frankly, these ad hominem attacks on me are what I
would not expect from some one of your distinguished reputation.

If you wish, I would be pleased to discuss this matter further with you.

Nat Gandhi