Tuesday, October 2, 2012
THE COMMON COUNCIL OF OZ MEETING
Last night [Monday] I thought that I was going to attend the Agenda Setting Session for the month of October of the Plainfield Common Council. Instead somehow I seem to have entered into an alternate universe, because I was at the meeting of the Oz Council.
Well l that was not entirely true for the meeting began normally and was marked highlighted by the presentation of the planning board of the zoning changes needed for the transit oriented development downtown zone [TODD] as background material for an ordinance that was to be introduced for first reading at the end of the meeting. Typical of Plainfield’s civic oriented government this is the first step in a municipal plan that should have been initiated years ago.
Then all of a sudden there was a universe shift as described in counselor Williams’ blog.click. here.
In an answer to a question about the efficiency of the shot spotter Public Safety Director Hellwig admitted that he was disappointed to date and was hoping to meet with the vendors officials to see if the starting date of the contract could be moved back from the original July 1 until the date the system is operating effectively. Question of whether there was an out clause in the present contract and that was referred to a discussion and executive session at the recommendation of the acting Corporation counsel.
Jekyll and Hyde, Councilor Reid again expressed his objections to a resolution calling for the issuance of a RFQ from vendors to collect outstanding court fees and fines which at present amount to over $750,000. Consensus agreed to place it on the agenda,
If activated there will be no cost to the city since the collection agencies charges, which amount up to 22% of the collective amount, are added on the collective funds.
As anticipated there was discussion about item U for an increase of $6753.00 to C. H. S. Construction Company for the “deconstruction”(sic) of the property located at 326 Leland Ave. There was clarification about the so-called bank vault as a vault found inside the building which contained hazardous material.
Action on this resolution was made dependent upon information of when the original contract was issued. A search of all Agenda resolutions items from Jan. 1,2011 to date by several individuals failed to find it. Also asked was why the city was doing this work on a privately owned property?. Can and will the money will be recouped from the owner. If the property has been abandoned why has the city not seized ownership?
There seem to be little concern about a conflict of interest involving the principal of the construction company and his position on a City Authority. There also was mentioned that one of the removing trash vendor’s (PMUA) contract seemed to be at a higher rate than others.
At this point I cannot go to enough detail about my reaction to a resolution introduced at the meeting by the city solicitor in his role as acting Corporation counsel authorizing the reimbursement of the mayor’s attorney in the sum of $22,000 for services rendered in her suit against the Council [and us taxpayers]. With only one objection from counselor Williams this was agreed to be placed on the agenda
Oz uber alles
More forthcoming in the coming days.Most of this was dictated on Dragon 12, please call my attention to all syntax errors.