Several lawmakers are raising questions about a massive $1.7 billion E-Z Pass deal that a recent investigation revealed was awarded through a mostly closed door process with virtually no public disclosure.

The report, from journalist Jeff Pilates found the new Jersey Turnpike Authority recently selected a company named Trans Core LP to run E-Z Pass operations, despite its bid being hundreds of millions of dollars higher than any other bidder.

And Trans Core's alleged ties to the Chinese Communist Party.

It comes as tolls on the turnpike have shot up more than 40% over the past few years, and amid broader concerns about government transparency.

Jeff Pilates with the Jersey Vindicator joins me now to share more from his investigation.

Jeff, thanks for coming on the show.

So the new Jersey Turnpike Authority sets out to award a new contract.

You looked into why, in particular, this company, Trans Core, was chosen, and what did you find?

Well, they the Turnpike Authority said that they were chosen because they had the best experience and that they offered the best solutions to customer service that have plagued the turnpike, E-ZPass for a long time now.

But what we found that there were questions about about the background of this company that were issues, connecting it to security issues, connecting it to, foreign governments, China in particular.

And we also found that there was issues in the way it was rewarded that would seem to be sort of a veil of secrecy and a lack of public documentation over the process in which this contract was awarded.

It's also the biggest contract, probably, that the turnpike has ever awarded.

At $1.7 billion.

So it's it's not really chump change.

Yeah, I mean, that's a big leap from the contract that exists right now that's expiring this year.

With conduit, which was the second place bidder.

Yeah.

According to your reporting, their bid was significantly less than, trans CRS, and they're already managing the operations there.

So the question is, what gives?

Yeah, their bid was $250 million lower than trans gores did.

The losing bidder, conduit, as you mentioned, they're they're raising hell over this.

So they're saying that there was not a public, there was not a lot of, transparency in this process.

They're claiming that they're that their attorney, that one of the attorneys for the winning bidder already had an existing contract, a legal contract with the Turnpike Authority.

They're raising issues of conflict of interest, whether there are any issues, I don't know, but that's one of the issues they're raising.

Basically, they're saying the losing bidder is saying that they never really had a chance, to to really explain to, to make their case or to explain why that there are $250 million less expensive bid was worse.

So they're asking for those documents and they're probably going to go to Superior Court.

I'm sorry, to appellate court.

So their case is the Turnpike Authority, Jeff, obligated to share those reasons, with the company and for that matter, with the public, given the fact that it is a public agency, they are obligated to some extent.

But it's it's very it's very iffy about what they really have an obligation to share in terms of public documents.

If you go on that website, if you search for, rationale for this, there's very little there might be three pages of, of an evaluation committee report.

But the losing bidder claims there is really not much available at all.

I haven't been able to find that much.

This agency has historically faced, criticism for cronyism, lack of transparency, etc.. Did you find any evidence that that is at play with this deal with transport?

Deals made, promises given.

I haven't found any specific, specific evidence of that.

There are suspicions on on the point of the losing bidder.

And and I will say that the losing bidder is the 20 year incumbent in this contract.

You know, so they are an experienced company, as is TransCore, or the winning bidder is an experienced company as well.

They're not a fly by night firm, but these are legitimate questions that are raising.

That's why we wrote the story.

I mean, there's always losing bidders, but there seem to be some really pressing public, public questions on this on this incident.

Yeah.

And of course, at least one state and one federal lawmaker from from both parties are now calling this into question.

Can you just tell us quickly what are TransCore's ties to the Chinese Communist Party and the government of Singapore, and why does that matter here their own?

In 2021, they were bought.

It's a Tennessee company.

They were bought by the Singapore government.

The purchase was approved by the US government.

And there is some the ownership of Singapore, the Singapore parent company is up for grabs.

We don't really know who.

There was.

At one point they were all owned.

They were had them up, board member who was a member of the Chinese Communist Party, one parent firm.

They claim he's not he's no longer on the board, but the losing bidder says up to 20% of the ownership of TransCore is not known.

And they haven't disclosed it.

That's part of their protest.

So we'll see.

Jeff Pilates is an investigative journalist with the Jersey Vindicator.

Jeff, great work.

Thanks for sharing it with us.

Thanks, Brianna.