What will be most informative tonight is how this Council handles 4 resolutions regarding insurance contracts that as written are extensions of previous questioned 'cash cows". The City over the years has not been obtaining the most financial beneficial contracts for the taxpayer.
I am intrigued by the phrase "competitive negotiations" (R047-13). That is used in City Code 2:10-18 in regard to professional contracts. 2:10-19 puts a floor of $17500.00 before mandatory competitive bidding is required. However there is a key clause in that section:
"However, any group of individuals meeting the definition of "professional business entity'' or "vendor'' under this section, including such principals, partners, and officers of the entity or vendor in the aggregate, may not annually contribute for any purpose in excess of Two Thousand Five hundred Dollars ($2,500.00) to all Plainfield municipal candidates and officeholders with ultimate responsibility for the award of the contract, and all municipal or County political parties and PACs referenced in these sections combined, without violating subsection (a) of this section."
The question that is never answered is if this clause is enforced.
I would like an explanation of how one goes about "competitive negotiations". It should be an interesting process.
Once again hours or days after I have posted a blog which after several proof readings seemed to me to be perfect, I have found a weird spelling or word that made no sense. This is not a Dragon error but usually something done by "Word" or even the blogger spelling checker on its own initiative. The latest one I saw this morning is in my Wednesday "**for a snowy day" posting: "how a company can by energy cheaper". Of course I wrote "buy" a word foreign to blogger.
And 'icicles" in today's blog-thanks Rita
No comments:
Post a Comment