Having been employed by Ozinga Bros. Inc. for 21 years and a Tribune reader for even longer, I was disappointed by your recent article “How firm beat city set-aside program; White-owned concrete company created minority firms to get increased share of business with the city,” Page 1, Jan. 27). In the article you strongly implied (you had to imply since Ozinga has never been charged with any illegal activity in this matter) that the Ozinga company had somehow illegally attained contracts.
What they did was, in fact, in complete compliance with the law. The only way for a successful white-owned business to compete is to forfeit 51 percent of its company. That is the legal standard for minority status. Not 60, or 70, or even 100 percent, but 51 percent. Smart people understand that very few minority companies would ever get started without the help of the other 49 percent.
When the law was written, it allowed for non-minority companies to compete while also helping to start minority companies. Is this an eye-opener to anyone? It was not made to exclude non-minority companies from opportunities. And to Marty Ozinga’s credit, he did not choose any distant family members or friends but rather churches in poor neighborhoods to receive 51 percent of his third-generation business.
How many articles has the Tribune written detailing companies who make such opportunities available to poor churches?
You had a story, but the more accurate headline would have been: “How successful companies, owned by white men, grew and simultaneously aided minorities in the free-market system.”
