*
Kteiner, Kimberly
From: Raymond Feoli <rfeoli@inceptiontech.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 6, 2022 9:36 AM
To: Kleiner, Kimberly
Subject: Laura Ortolano
Importance: High
CAUTFION: This email came from outside of the organization. Do not click links/open attachments if source is
unknown.
To the Board of Alderman,
My name is Raymond Feoli, President of Inception Technologies. My company has provided the City with document
scanning services for the Assessors records. | am writing to the Board after having conversation with Kim Kleiner
today. It has come to my attention that | have been deceived by individual, Laura Ortolano, who portrayed herself as
city employee to me on thre different occasions.
My first conversation was approximately a month ago. Ms. Ortolano cailed my company and had left a voicemail asking
for an update on the project regarding the PO Number 158909. | promptly returned her phone call thinking she was a
city employee. She explained that based on the invoices the City had there was approximately $22K left on the existing
PO, | had explained to her that had just finished a batch and was billing another $12K against the PO. She had also
asked about when documents were going to be returned and i told her that we were scheduled to drop off a batch and
pick up another batch. During that conversation, she had mentioned that she would make sure payment was expedited
On any open invoices. | told her we just sent the invoice so it was no hurry on that.
This past Friday | received a voicemail from Ms. Ortolano which | forwarded to Kim Kleiner after speaking with Ms.
Ortolano and finding out about this person from Kim. | called her back thinking she was with the city and we had just
invoiced another batch. Getting close to the original PO amount, | thought she was just syncing up with my company to
make sure we were on track with the PO and boxes. She asked several questions about accessing the documents and
the public having access to those records. She explained that while my company had the documents, she stated “we
don’t have access to those files. When can we get those files back?” | corrected her and said well you may not have
access to the physical records, what we have scanned was searchable and could be emailed or printed by finding the
records in the DocuWare system. | said to her thinking she was an employee “I don’t know if a login has been created
for you or if you are able to have access to those records in the assessors database, but if you don’t, then someone in
the assessors department could provide those files.” | went on to explain that we had picked up a batch of
approximately 80 boxes and due to the remainder on the PO, we had broken that big batch into smaller batches to avoid
exceeding the original PO amount. |! did mention that | had just quoted the City on the remainder of the boxes. She
thanked me ended the conversation.
She called back a little while later on my cell phone. During this conversation she asked me about the files left to scan. |
had explained that | did 2 quotes for the Assessors department. One quote was for the boxes we had sitting in our
warehouse that would most likely not fit under the existing PO. That was approximately 55 boxes. | then mentioned
that | had donea separate quote for 98 boxes that the department has ready to go once the approval or PO was
cut. She passed a comment implying that she was going to help push that along and would let me know when she sees
it. | said thank you and we hung up the phone.
Its important to note that any document scanning project is an estimate on the volumes of paper. When we originally
did the inspection with Bruce Codagone, we estimated that the City had approximately 1.2 million pages which we felt
1
