State says city violated bidding law
It apparently won't have any effect, but an assistant state attorney general issued an opinion earlier this week faulting the way the city went about awarding the contract for building restrooms at the new Amphitheater.
Read the rebuttal from City Attorney Warren Kraft here.
Read the rebuttal from City Attorney Warren Kraft here.
10 Comments:
Three cheers to Geoffrey Matze (whom I do not know and have never met) for requesting an opinion from the attorney general's office on the amphitheatre bid waiver, and three cheers to the assistant attorney general for responding. I hope that Oshkosh News is able to obtain a copy of the assistant attorney general's opinion and will post it on this site.
I find city attorney Kraft's memo to Mr. Wollangk extraordinary in the way it rewrites history in describing the rationale for waiving the bid. In the memo, Mr. Kraft writes: "As the Community Development Director noted in his communications to the Council, the protection of the public's health, safety, and welfare was the first and foremost consideration to recommend a bid waiver."
I do not know what communications Mr. Kraft is referring to, but I do know that the Council in December was provided with a December 9th, 2004 memo from Jackson Kinney to Dick Wollangk that requested the waiver. (see http://www.tonypalmeri.com/jackson1.htm). In that memo, Kinney provided three reasons for the waiver:
1. Given the "sensitive nature" of the site, it is in the city's best interest to have CR Meyer and its subcontractor Terra do the work as they have a "detailed understanding of the site conditions."
2. A need for "standardization and compatibility between the performance facility and other buildings in the phase 1 area."
3. Having CR Meyer do the work would "assist in efforts to open the facility for events on the earliest possible schedule."
Only reason #1 could be interpreted as having anything to do with the public's "health, welfare, and safety" and that is only using the most generous possible interpretation.
I suspec that what happened here is that after Mr. Matze filed his complaint, Mr. Kraft and Mr. Kinney invented a new set of reasons for the waiver and, to his credit, the assistant attorney general did not buy it.
Mr. Kraft concludes in his memo that the assistant attorney general's letter "cannot reverse the Council's approval, not does it halt the construction currently underway." This is true, but it is also true that the Council CAN reverse the Council's approval. I would hope that one of the Councilors who voted for the waiver would read the assistant attorney general's letter and, if they come to the conclusion that his opinion is correct, move to have the Council reconsider the bid waiver.
I also hope that from this point on, the city requests an opinion from the AG's office BEFORE waiving a bid. --Tony Palmeri
Once again Tony does a superior job in clearing the crap-o-la from the radar screen, so that the real issue at hand can be seen. I tto, thank Mr Matze for his effort and concern in this matter that has given many of us great pause. I find it interesting to hear some comment of Councilmembers stating why they support Mr Kraft legal advice. Mr Castle, Ms Scheuermann, and especially Ms Mattox state that Mr Kraft is the legal expert and they feel he knows best. Really this from some of the same people that have voted in direct conflict with Mr Kraft legal advice, like when Mr Kraft told them not to eliminate the insurance for special events and alcohol in our parks. Or when the voted against a business owner who wanted to get a class B licsence and Ms Mattox just didn't like the planned use for the building (not a legal reason to deny a owner)Ya these people are too busy covering their collective backsides to really want to know if they have done wrong by the taxpayer in this community or even the LAW!
Thanks again Tony and Mr Matze and especially Oshblog..who broke the story first again..not our so called NEWS paper
Melanie Bloechl
Can you read, Ms Bloechel? It's not the LAW, it's an OPINION.
I hope that Oshkosh voters, now that they can elect a mayor, choose city leaders who avoid using words like "crap-o-la" when discussing public policy.
Yes thank you I can read, unfortunately you have chosen not to. In my comments, I stated that Ms. Mattox when denying a business owner a Class B licsence did not only defy Mr. Kraft's expert legal opinion, she also stepped outside the scope of the law which regulates how and why Council can deny a licsence. Thus the reference to the law. I also find it humorous that you are offended by my use of the words crap-o-la, but seeming are unoffended by the blantant disregard shown for tax payers when waiving bids. The rules for a bid process are put in place to protect all taxpayers from fraud and over charges by any company or city. I am offended only by arrogance and stupidity, not by ones lack of humor.
Melanie Bloechl
Taxpayer, taxpayer, taxpayer. Choose your battles. This is so ridiculous, over nine cents per thousand dollars of your home's value. If we all itemized where each nine cents of our state, local and federal taxes were going, I'm sure we'd have much more important things to complain about.
I have never heard Meredith Scheuermann, Bryan Bain and Shirley Mattox say "they’re comfortable spending your hard-earned money on proposed projects, even though they haven’t reviewed plans or asked if you can afford them." Translation: Melanie, you are a liar.
Scheuermann, Bain and Mattox don't have to utter the exact words. Taxpayers can easily read between the lines. Just as you don't have to be a chicken to recognize an egg. The simple fact of the matetr is that Mattox has voted on different big ticket projects without having all the facts, while both Scheuermann and Bain have said they support some of these projects - again, without having all the facts. They have also said they support the Five Rivers Resoirt project. Specifically Scheuermann has said she would be "comfortable" with putting $7 million into the project when no one including the city or city council members know all the details of the project. These comments have also been made on local TV shows. What would you call that if not being comfortable with spending taxpayer dollars without reviewing plans or having facts? It is exactly what Mrs. Bloechl said it is. Translation: You are not as sure of your comments or your candidates as you would like people to believe. But nice try!
i have been called many things, liar has not been one of them. I, unlike you have atleast had the courage of my convictions, and documentation to back-up my words. I have also been willing to put my name to what I have to say about issues or people associated with those issues. As a private citizen now, I no longer have to put up with this libel. Which is why a coward such as yourself can't and won't sign your name. Now to the points that you take issue with me over with regard to Ms Scheuermann,
Ms. Mattox and Mr. Bain.
At the March 16th League of Women Voters forum, and at tapings for Eye on Oshkosh these parties were asked (and I am paraphrasing here so stay with me) how they felt about indebting the taxpayer further with the potential 5 River Resort project as the local newspaper has projected a potentiaql cost to the taxpayers of 7 million dollars. Ms Scheuermann stated that she was comfortable with that number, even though she had not reviewed or seen any plans yet. Mr Bain stated that he too felt the the momentum of projects in the downtown area were important and that we needed to continue. Ms Mattox stated she also felt that the momentum was positive and that she has always been a downtown advocate even when she first ran and that has not changed. Not one of these candidates has ever mentioned their concern for the unemployed or the lose of major employers in this community. They stated that they felt the 5 River Resort would bring in more jobs. They never stated what type nor what they might pay (replacing a 20.00 hour job with a 6.00 hour job certainly to me does not seem like progress for the taxpayer or those out of work). In the future, if you are so sure of your facts and that I am truly a liar as you say, please sign your name. If I make a mistake I will admit to it and correct it.
Melanie Bloechl
We could care less about Mrs. Scheuerman's comfort level. It is the taxpayers comfort level she should be concerned with. If elected she will work for us and that is something she better not ever forget.
I think that it is the City Councilor's job to be enthusiastic about any project, as we collect the information.
We should encourage people who want to move business to Oshkosh.
That does not mean going off and giving money willy-nilly, but showing the appropriate level of excitement while the information is collected.
However, saying that you would not spend the money for something drives off potential development.
You can be excited and critical. It is the council's job to be the city's biggest cheerleader.
Even while collecting information.
Post a Comment
<< Home