|
| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
The RTAB minutes are included in their packs. I have been busy, but I can't believe the media did not report on the August 2016 meeting, the minutes of which are included in the September pack.
Resolutions without the proper signatures are sent back for 30 days.
Mayor Weaver made some excellent points. She remarked that Republic was given a 30 day extension in order to work things out. The Council voted 8-1 and created a new resolution that she believed was illegal and that is why she used a veto to override.
This has to stop said Weaver. We have three lawyers we are paying. She addressed Chairman Headen acknowledging that he is also an attorney that was conversant on the laws and rules.
Weaver stated the City had to fight not to go back to an EM and therefore they had to manage all funds prudently. We are fighting, said Weaver, adding that the City was fighting to have the $2 million paid to Detroit for the water switch be returned by the state.
The City can't keep asking the state and the federal government for more funding while not making goof financial decisions. |
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 2:06 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Council President Kerry Nelson was grilled by RTAB member Joel Ferguson . Nelson. Nelson argued the purchasing ordinance stated "lowest responsible bidder." although EM Ambrose changed the language to "lowest bidder".
Nelson wanted to rebid and let the recommendations come from the committee.
In response to Ferguson's question as to was to make the final decision, Nelson said the committee was composed of the Purchasing Director, the Director of the Transportation, and a lady from the DPW. They did the interviews and examined the documents, said Nelson.
Ferguson countered with "that's not my question". "The body who makes a decision for any governmental unit is the council and the mayor." Ferguson went on to say "this committee you're talking about is an advisory committee, wouldn't you say."
Ferguson continued to say this committee was not an end all, they were merely an advisory committee. Nelson disagreed and said he committee was sent to do a job. However, Ferguson countered hat the committee ws not an absolute. Nelson said he understood but, Ferguson continued to say he did not want nelson "to elevate the committee." Ferguson told nelson the committee did not have the final say and said nelson was making it sound like the committee really had more standing then what they have. |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 2:26 pm |
|
|
BillPayer
F L I N T O I D
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 2:29 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Chairman Headen brought up that the resolution from council to override the Mayor's veto lacked the appropriate signatures so the override is not in effect.
RtAB Board member Finney brought up the issue that when council overrides a veto and the document requires the signature of the Mayor and the Chief legal Council to be properly before us, then how will a properly initiated veto ever get to RTAB without the Mayor's signature.
Chief Legal Officer Oakes addressed the issue. It was her opinion the resolution had factual inadequacies. The resolution authorized the Purchasing Director to do something council did not have the authority to put forth. Oakes went on to say tht case law authorized the Chief legal Officer to sign if the language was accurate . She said then the veto could go before the RTAB Board. |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 2:40 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Chairman Headen brought up resolutions #347 and #348, which had been aded to the agenda by board member Ferguson.
# 347 authorizes City Council to become a party to the trash hauling contract litigation currently in the Genesee county Circuit court.
#348 is a companion resolution to request outside legal counsel.
Ferguson remarked that it was rare to bring up a resolution you don't want to pass. Ferguson then asked he body to vote no.
Kincaid was brought up to explain. He told the board how he asked the council to enjoin in the lawsuit he started. Kincaid continued to explain that he filed the lawsuit to prevent the City from entering into an emergency contract over the trash hauler.
We hadn't gone through the process because the Emergency RTAB meeting did not occur. Chairman Headen responded that a meeting was not scheduled. There was a request, said headen, but we didn't act on it. |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 2:56 pm |
|
|
BillPayer
F L I N T O I D
|
| Well I don't have the minutes Infront of me right now. But it says something like the veto could be brought in front of the board with ms. Oaks signature. She however didn't say that if presented with the veto request she would agree with it. Which from my understanding is a power she wouldn't typically have if the rtab want involved. This could be my misunderstanding and I will clarify/research the procedures tonight. |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 3:00 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
quote:
BillPayer schreef:
http://www.co.genesee.mi.us/roaccsinq/ROACase.aspx?CASE=16107434&CASETYP=CZ&FILENAME=C101141940
101 10/11/16 ORDER FROM COURT OF APPEALS
----
Possibly new order coming out today
Good catch.
Not a new one. The order had to be entered eventually. It will probably be longer than what you presently have . Most that i have seen are 1 to 4 pages long and they explain their decision. |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 3:01 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
quote:
BillPayer schreef:
Well I don't have the minutes Infront of me right now. But it says something like the veto could be brought in front of the board with ms. Oaks signature. She however didn't say that if presented with the veto request she would agree with it. Which from my understanding is a power she wouldn't typically have if the rtab want involved. This could be my misunderstanding and I will clarify/research the procedures tonight.
Yes she addressed that issue, but the point is the resolution must have legitimate language. I have written the explanation just above your post. |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 3:04 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Kincaid explained that he knew the Appeals Court had ruled that when there was a conflict between the two branches of government, the City attorney would appoint legal counsel for the City Council. Council appointed three names but the Chief legal officer had not responded.
Chairman Headen inquired if adequate funds have been identified to cover either the litigation or the cost of outside legal counsel.
Ferguson interjected his opinion that the Court should not settle the matter between council and the mayor. It should have been rejected , he said,and it is not about the money, it is the procedure.
KIncaid asked Ferguson f he was saying it was ok for the administration to have 2 outside attorneys to represent the Mayor and the City and City Council can't have legal representation.
Ferguson bluntly told Kincaid that although he was not an attorney, he did not understand how Kincaid had any standing in the lawsuit at all when you went into court. Then i don't know how you retroactively get standing. |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 3:18 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Ferguson continued to say it was the procedure. Any council member or someone off the street filing a lawsuit and playing catch up and then asking someone to pay for it makes no sense for the intention, he said. "So I don't think you had any standing at all.
Kincaid disagreed.
The Chair stated this was an issue for Farah as the matter was before him.
#347 was not approved which nullified to some extent #348. # 348 was disallowed as well.
RTAB Board member Finney brought up the issue of council voting to veto the recommendation for the trash. Finney inquired if there was no trash contract in place at hat time as th extension had expired and the issue is in front of a judge to prevent the mayor from exercising her emergency powers.
I'm trying to understand, said Finney, how this is in the best interests of the City
Kincaid was asked what his expectations were for trash collection if the mayor is prevented from using the emergency powers to do trash collection. |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 3:31 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
Ferguson interjected that the only question in front of the Mayor now is whether she will use her emergency powers . That is not a question for us to ask her now, said Ferguson, that is something that is not in the public domain.
Kincaid remarked he anticipated the Court would continue with a temporary restraining order until the issue is solved. Have the current contractor pick up trash at their new lower rate.
**NOTE- Republic bid was $2 million lower than their current contract. |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 3:41 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
In the public speaking portion Woodson alleged Republic was the low bidder and criticized AC Dumas, Gilcreast, Woodrow Stanley and Pastor Overton.
The RTAB board has requested a more thorough analysis of the $13.5 million dollar deficit of the water fund as of the end of the fiscal year on June 30, 2016. |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 3:49 pm |
|
|
BillPayer
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
untanglingwebs schreef:
quote:
BillPayer schreef:
Well I don't have the minutes Infront of me right now. But it says something like the veto could be brought in front of the board with ms. Oaks signature. She however didn't say that if presented with the veto request she would agree with it. Which from my understanding is a power she wouldn't typically have if the rtab want involved. This could be my misunderstanding and I will clarify/research the procedures tonight.
Yes she addressed that issue, but the point is the resolution must have legitimate language. I have written the explanation just above your post.
I have feelings associated with this. But from what i can tell Ms. Oaks wouldn't have to approve the veto override if it weren't for the RTAB being in place still.
So effectively the check and balance of our local government falls entirely on her shoulders? She of course was appointed by the mayor and seems to work closer to the mayor than the council? This seems inappropriate.
My facts up to this point could be incorrect. But what I plan on finding is any information relating to criteria ms. Oaks may use when deciding to endorse the councils resolution.
(Btw, I don't think she should have signed it) |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 4:24 pm |
|
|
untanglingwebs
El Supremo
|
I think you would get some answers by speaking to the Clerk Inez Brown and inquiring if there is a written policy regarding signatures.
Council has also rejected resolutions from the administration that did not have the proper signatures.
Are you friends with Terry Bankert? He was a former City clerk before he became the City Ombudsman and he would probably have some insight into policy and procedures within the city. |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 4:39 pm |
|
|
BillPayer
F L I N T O I D
|
According to the RTAB transcript referenced above Mayor Weaver references the purchase ordnance 3865. By my understanding this is the most current relevant ordnance.
http://www.amlegal.com/pdffiles/Flint/3865.pdf
--
18-21.3 Competitive sealed bidding
(4) BID OPENING. Bids may be opened publicly in the presence of one or more witnesses at the time and place designated or recorded and published in an electronic invitation for bids management system. The amount of each bid, and all other relevant information, as the purchasing director deems appropriate, together with the name of each bidder shall be recorded. The record and .
each bid shall be open to the public
.
(5) BID Acceptance and bid evaluation. Bids shall be unconditionally accepted without alteration or correction, except as authorized herein. Bids shall be evaluated based on the requirements set forth in the invitation for bids, which may include criteria to determine acceptability such as inspection, testing, quality, workmanship, delivery, and suitability for a particular purpose. Those criteria that will affect the bid price and be considered in the evaluation for award shall be objectively measurable, such as discounts, transportation costs, and total or life cycle costs. The invitation for bids shall set forth the evaluation criteria to be used.
(6) Correction or withdrawal of bids; cancellation of awards. Corrections or withdrawal of inadvertently erroneous bids before or after bid opening, or cancellation of awards or contracts based on bid mistakes, may be permitted where appropriate. Mistakes discovered before the bid opening may be modified or withdrawn by written or electronic notice received in the office designated in the invitation for bids prior to the deadline for submission of he bid.
--
(4) implies that we should be able to get access to the bids upon their opening. This doesn't seem to be related to awarding the actual contract. As this ordnance specifically defines the bid as public record, I'm not sure a FOIA should be required to obtain the bids.
(5) this section gives authority for the life time contract cost and other factors to be taken into consideration when determining the true 'lowest bidder'. So Weaver was wrong at the RTAB meeting when she said that it simply says the lowest bidder, there is more to it.
(5) & (6) I believe Woodson(?) implied that Rizzo was unable to make modifications to their bid at this point. I believe the terminology 'when appropriate' is vague enough to make his comments false. Oh, I would also deem it appropriate to change out Rizzo for GFL.[/b] |
|
|
|
Tue Oct 11, 2016 11:15 pm |
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
