Monday, September 3, 2012


The fall season starts with Labor Day. The pools are closed. In the olden times whites and/or seersucker slacks and short sleeve shirts went into hibernation till next Memorial Day.

Now-a-days there is a month of baseball before the “Post-Season play”. College football has started and the pros this week. Hockey preseason will not be far behind.

There will be three days of silliness in Charlotte NC and the name smearing will be on in earnest for the next eight weeks. In Plainfield normal (?) life will return with the Council Agenda Setting Session Tuesday night setting the pace.

With the Library closed over the long weekend there is no opportunity to research the background material for the items on the short agenda. Thus any comments are purely speculative.

There are 6 Ordinances to be presented for second and final reading; two have to do with “union contracts” and one creating if I recall a position of Financial Officer in lieu of CFO.

Three that I do not remember being on any agenda in August are for ‘re-adoption” of Bond Ordinances relating to the street repavement projects. All are presented as “(State Local Finance Board Requiring Re-Adoption)”. No reason is given but I would assume that the original Ordinances were either improperly written or enacted. Either should be inexcusable since Plainfield has an extensive high priced Corporation Counsel department with full time staffing.

On the short list of 12 Resolutions to be considered most are of routine nature. However of the 3 that are of interest two require clarification that should be in the support material.

“B” is for submitting a Grant application for the implementation of the “Plainfield Municipal Ailiance Programs”. The amount requested and the nature of the programs is not evident on the agenda.

“G” is to authorize the submission and acceptance of a “Kids Recreation Trust Fund Grant Application for Open Space Improvements and Recreational Improvements in the amount not to exceed $37,500.00. Again to particulars but this recalls a reject Resolution last month to authorize engineering fees for a ‘Concession Stand” purchased by Recreation that did not meet the expectations of the Council as originally approved. Perhaps there is a better explanation.

“C” should be a no brainer; authorizing competitive contracting for a vendor to collect nearly a million dollars in outstanding Municipal Court fees/fines. Last month thee of the Councilors objected to the concept that the collector would “harass’ the debtors in order to attempt to collect money. TS . Sometimes I wonder about priorities.

No comments:

Post a Comment