MONDAY SUBSTITUTE

(Execution-1940 Bendor Mark)

Monday is suppose to be a blogging day this August. However, since the agenda for tonight's Council meeting has been well covered all week and there was nothing new this weekend; the above picture can be symbolic of Plainfield's governance.

Oh yes; there was Adrian Mapp's Presidential like announcement that he is a candidate for Mayor in 2013-no surprise. There may be hope, but there will have to be a drastic change in the Council.

Probably late Tuesday morning I will post some impressions of tonight's meeting.

JAMA the Journal of the American Medical Association has for decades featured a work of art on its weekly cover. Some are to say the least weird; most by artists not popularly known but so recognized by connoisseurs .

A more cheerful painting below "Fireworks on the Hudson (1976) painted by Herbert Katzman.

The explanation of the paintings follows. By clicking on them they can be enlarged to be readable.

NEED ANSWERS

My electronic copy of Monday’s agenda arrived late Friday night and I have only have had an opportunity to scan it. However as expected most of it is a duplicate of material covered after the Agenda Setting Session this week.

There is a major exception; 13 Resolutions from the “Corporation Solicitor” acting as Corporation Counsel;” which were not discussed prior to this agenda. In my interpretation of Parliamentary procedure they will have to be introduced as “new items”.

These 13 Resolutions are devoted to a list of appointments of multiple special attorneys for various duties such as (a) Workman’s Compensation Counsel  (3);(b)Litigation Defense Counsel (6)-there must be a great number of suits against the city;(c) Independent hearing office(1); (d) special defense Counsel (1);(e) Tax appeals Counsel(1);(f) Bond Counsel(1) and  an additional appropriation for $75,000.00 for David L. Minchello, Esq. !!!.

Everyone has an “amount not to exceed $5,000.00 which I wonder is a retainer and there will be additional fee for service charges. Without any contract available we are in the dark.

Mr. Minchello stipend as City Solicitor was set ‘in an amount not to exceed $75,000.00 per budget per Resolution 185-12 (May 2012). If this additional $75,000.00 is paid that will be a total of $150,000.00 this year. Not bad for a part time job.

What were Plainfield’s “legal costs” in 2011 and to date this year? How are they broken down?

Once again there is a question about the necessity of having a “full time Corporation Counsel, This and the need for the City Council to have its independent legal counsel must be addressed and I believe could be done by Ordinance.

Again there are items on the Consent Agenda that would be adopted unanimously but do not belong on that agenda since they are not routine and of a great amount of money. One is for a $717,583.00 contract with the State for the supplemental nutrition WIC program. Also the three financial resolutions related to the Bilingual Day Care Center do not belong on the Consent Agenda.

Other controversial resolutions on the agenda which have been a matter of concern for all the “Bloggers" are the Concession Stand and the additional costs for the Police Headquarters work. These three resolutions have problems which no one on the Council has received satisfactory explanations.

DAY FOUR COUNCIL REPORT

Four days after the Council agenda setting session and the three bloggers have focused on only one pair of Resolutions relating to the Joe Black field Concession Stand. In addition one other; the Police Headquarters alterations has been briefly mentioned.

Moreover only one proposed Ordinance which failed has been a subject. Yet there will be two Ordinances for second reading approving of contracts with the two Police unions and another raising the fees paid to office duty officers for private functions.

Two new Ordinances for first reading concern new contracts for the PMEA and the FMBA will be on the docket.

A third new Ordinance to be presented has to do with changes in Audit and Controls; to address repeated concerns of the City Auditors. Regrettably I have yet to read it by hope to before Monday’s meeting.

What is common in all the writings and discussions the past three days is a concern with the lack of controls in financial matters and the seeming reluctance of the Administration to adopt measures.  An example is that professional contracts that could merit awarding by RFP are still allocated by the “fair and open” favoritism route.  Building contracts seem to have been signed by division heads without the true costs being known or even transmitted to the Council.

The Council has failed by not insisting on being advised if there could be additional costs. It has failed by not following Cato the Elder’s policy of demanding at ever meeting for a report why critical posts remain unfilled.

To accept an under-chief’s comment that  an attempt to procure a CFO at a meeting that will take place almost three months from now as adequate effort to fill an inexcusable vacancy is untenable.

Back to the Agenda; the three Resolutions relating to the Plainfield Bilingual Day Care Center, of which two are for food and the third for an application and acceptance for funds from the State DOE  should question why this agency is a City Social Services Organization and if it could be run  by Non For Profit?

It should be noted that the city receives $12,300.00 per child from DOE and there are 30 children registered. This $369,000.00 is for educational purposes; why is it not a function of the BOE/PSS? Director Restaino was unprepared to answer questions relating to this institution.

The bids for Contract 4 of the 2012 re-pavement boom will b e rejected since they all came in well over estimate. There will be a slight revision of the specifics and it will be open for new bidding.

Tonight the agenda for Monday’s Council meeting will be available and I shall be able to post some remarks over the weekend.

MORE COUNCIL STUFF

There were three “Unfinished Business” items on the agenda. One, the discussion on non-renewal of liquor license I have referred to in the report on the failed Ordinance. Another, the ShotSpotter fiasco has been well covered in the past two days by both Plainfield Today (Dan Damon) and Plaintalker II (Bernice Paglia) and there is little to add at this time. 

The third item was the vacant CFO position.  I agree with Damon; this was a subject that the City Administrator should have addressed instead of bucking it down to the Director of Administration and Finance. Director Restaino remarked that there had been three interested individuals in the position. Two had experience but either their salary demands exceeded the range authorized by Plainfield’s Ordinances or had accepted another position. The third had just received “his” certification and thus was inexperienced.

The latest plan was for the Mayor and Restaino to seek candidates at the League of Municipalities meeting (date not mentioned). Several questions remain  unanswered;  how aggressive has been the search for a CFO, Is Plainfield’s salary range unrealistic, and finally; what is the function (job description) of the newly employed “City Treasurer” who is supposedly a qualified CFO?

Among the Resolution was item Z5 is for approval of a $48, 3354.00 increases in the contract award to Procom Systems Inc. to extend the demolition and construction of space  for the upgraded 9-1-1 center and CCTV command center in the basement of the Police Headquarters.  Several Councilors questioned the  amount since the space found was a very small area.

There have been on previous agendas resolutions for extra contracts for additional engineering work on this project necessitated by the “discovery” of a small empty space behind a wall in the area being converted. 

Unanswered is the mystery why this was not accounted for in the original contracts; there must have been blue prints available for study before new plans were drawn. Once again the ultimate cost has changed from that which the Council approved.

The positive about these unexpected extra costs in the CCTV Center is that this is not a prefabricated building purchased by Recreation. Yet there is a similarity in that original cost approved by the Council did not cover the entire project, it is sort of a curve ball.

For those who do not recall the  Bryant Park 2008  Taj Mahal restrooms; it was presented to the Council as a $124,000 pre-fabricated unit that would only need plumbing and electrical hookups to be operational. The final cost was  $272,432.

I will have a day or two to comment on some of the Resolutions that will be acted upon Monday.

COUNCIL NOTES CONT.

Of the other three items that failed to make it out of the starting gate two were anticipated. .

One was the monthly communication from the Mayor appointing Cecil H. Sanders Jr., Alex Toliver, Darcella Sessomes as “members” of the PMUA and Harold Mitchell the incumbent President as an alternate.    

There is no reason to reiterate why Council President Mapp justifiably refuses to place this previously rejected slate on the Agenda.

The other recommendation was for the nomination of Hattie M. Williams and Eric Graham to the Library Board of Trustees.

Councilor Storch objected to them since the Council had not been able to interview these two to determine their position on the city’s funding of the Library. The fear that they would be advocates of the Mayor’s plan for minimal City allocations seemed valid in view of the documented contribution to Rev. Brown’s campaign by Williams using HUD funds. This supposed illegal action was remedied by replacement of the money.

There was a proposed Ordinance creating a three person Alcohol Beverage Commission to replace the Council’s role as this Board which approves of the issuances of the annual licenses.

 The Council has not yet renewed  the licenses for three establishments pending review of  reported repeated infractions and other police incidents. Howeve, the Police Department had not recommended non renewal and as the Acting Corporation Counsel stated the State ABC would not uphold the Council’s action on appeal.

One of the problems is that the Council only functions in its ABC role at the annual license renewal time. The Commission would meet monthly and get all concurrent reports. Thus it would be in a better position to act on problem venues.

When it was suggested that the Council meet monthly or bi-monthly to negate that complaint one of the members objected saying that the extra meetings would be an imposition on its personal time.

Councilor Williams strongly objected to that attitude. She noted that she attended all Council and sub-committee meetings as part of the obligation inherent in the position as Councilor. (Bravo). She also noted that the Council has cut its burden from 4 meetings a month to 2.

The present majority of the Council does not appear willing to surrender more of its authority to the Mayor considering the state of existent appointments to all the other various Boards, Authorities and Commissions.

It appears s that this Council will try to work something out so that it still has control over the licenses.

Once again one of the major flaws in the Charter has reared its ugly head; the fact that the Corporation Counsel a Mayor’s appointee, also acts in a legal capacity for the Council.

CONCESSION STAND MESS

Once again that which will not b e on next Monday’s Council agenda was of greater interest than most of next week’s resolutions and ordinances.

One Resolution, one Ordinance for first reading and two Mayoral Commission/Board recommendations were not approved for action next week. There was a long discussion on the road resurfacing program and the Water Companies multiple cutting of Watchung Ave about 24 hours after the pavement was laid. More on this subject and the appointments in subsequent blogs.

There were two potential Resolutions relating to the Concession Stand at the Joe Black Rock Ave. complex; Item “F” and Item “X”. Although inter-related the Chairman insisted they not be discussed together but in order.

Item F amended Resolution 126-12 which approved the awarding of a $71,432.03 contract to a Washington State Concern for a pre-cast concrete stand. There was no change in the contract but it had to be amended to comply with the fact that the vendor was part of Washington‘s approved vendor group. (If you are confused so am I).

It seems that this contract was enacted through an approved vendor list without open bidding. The Stand is ready for shipping but Plainfield asked for a delay until November as was clarified in Item “X” which was to award Remington et al a $29,250.00 contract for engineering services for construction of the Concession stand.

It seems that contrary to the impression given when R126-12 was approved the “Stand” is only a shell not a complete “turnkey unit. Site planning, utilities plans, construction contracts including sub-contracts and oversight were not included in the original costs. 

This information which will raise the total cost to near $200,000.00 was never given to the Council. Except for Council approval of R126-12 it is a mystery of who placed the order. When was it placed, and why the supplemental work was not requested.

The impression received previously was that Recreation was handling the matter.

Resolution ‘X” was tabled pending a RFQ for the engineering studies and sub-contracts. In addition Council wishes to speak with Director of Public Works, Eric Jackson regarding why the lack of information prior to submitting R 126-12.

Once again the lack of fiscal controls and following a centralized purchasing process is going to cost the city. Did Recreation act without consulting engineering?  

OLYMPICS OUT-COUNCIL IN

TGI CM (Council Monday) There may be enough material to post on Tuesday and Thursday in anticipation of the business meeting.

The next four months will be an indication if there is hope (choice) in Plainfield politics.  The Mayor has once again submitted the same slate of appointees to PUMA. If this is placed on the Agenda for action and is approved we will have a true indication of the Councilors’ colors.

The Mayor is truly in a Win-Win position; if the Council accepts the slate she will have control of PMUA. Since the sitting Commissioners stay in office until a successor is chosen and the Council takes no action the mayor can let status quo stand and maintain her de facto control.

Should Councilor McWilliams submit her resignation the party can appoint a replacement to serve until the general election. Since the party candidate for the3 office would be the logical choice that will mean a premature shift in the Council status.

Once again we could have a recreation of the Gibson Rubber Stamp Councils and the 30 minute meetings.  At best the outlook for the coming year is bleak.

The continued failure to fill vacant Board and Commissions post is perhaps another reason that the Charter needs revision. There should be a mandatory right for the Council to makes such appointments if after reasonable number of attempts by the Mayor  fail to produce acceptable individuals.

It is most likely that unless there is unexpected intervention from the State; Plainfield’s deliberate disorganized government will benefit for at least the next 15 months.