Overdue Minutes - Taking Responsibility and Proposing a Plan

Responsibility
At last night's meeting a resident brought to the forefront a very important issue - the proper submittal and approval of minutes from Council meetings which are handled by the Clerk's office. Her point was well made - the Council has not received and approved minutes in many months. There is simply no excuse for this error on the Council's part. As Council President I accept full responsibility for not dealing with this matter sooner and intend to mend the situation by the November meeting.

Background
The Clerk's office is the hub of the City and is responsible for a myriad of responsibilities. It serves as the licensing bureau for the entire City, dealing with chauffeurs (i.e. limo/taxi licenses) and establishments with alcoholic beverage control licenses among others. It is also charged with overseeing local elections and maintaining public documents. It is responsible for research of and response to all City OPRA requests which can require many hours of effort at any given time. In addition, this office bears the extra weight of working with the Council to pull together agenda items, write resolutions, update the City's code book and keep minutes of Council meetings.

Following last year's budget cuts, the Clerk's office suffered severely with the loss of 4 long-time employees that were either laid off or displaced from the office. For the past 15 years, a consultant wrote and submitted minutes to the Council. The memorandum of understanding signed by the City in exchange for receipt of state extraordinary aide prevented the reinstatement of that consultant. Low on staff, the Clerk's office has been unable to submit proper minutes to the Council for many months. Thus, the Council has not had minutes to approve for many months. While this is not the way to conduct government business, to my knowledge there has been no request by the public of Council documentation that has gone unanswered.

Plan
This situation is completely unacceptable and must be rectified as soon as possible. I will be recommending to the Council that we hire a consultant to do the following:

1) Immediately write and submit for approval bare bones minutes.
According to state statute, minutes are only required to reflect the time that the meeting opened and closed, who was in attendance, items that were discussed, and a record of the votes. In the past our minutes have reflected more detail and included statements from Councilors on why they voted as they did. In order to meet our legal requirement as soon as possible, we should move quickly to meet the minimum.

2) Amend basic minutes to add details
Once we meet the minimum, we should amend these minutes to reflect the dialogue and statements made by Council. Although this is not required by law, in the interest of transparency it is important to include the reasoning for decisions made. This is beneficial not only for the public who can better understand the often complex nature of our decisions, but also for future Councils that may rely on minutes to understand why decisions with long term impact were made.

3) Require the consultant to maintain a complete log of minutes going forward
This is not a position that we should be in ever again. Minutes should be submitted for approval at each Regular Business Meeting so that we stay up-to-date.

Neither the situation nor the solution is ideal. However, I believe that the entire Council will support this effort and that this matter will be adequately addressed by the next meeting. In the meantime, videotape of all public meetings continue to remain available in the Clerk's office for viewing by any resident. In addition, minutes of Committee meetings that have been submitted are also available in the Clerk's office. These minutes often reflect a deeper level discussion of items that are eventually brought to agenda fixing sessions.

I will provide a status of this matter at the next Agenda Fixing meeting.

**I will be blogging about the budget shortly.

.

Monday's Agenda, the Shotspotter Bond Ordinance and A New Policy

I have received numerous phone calls and emails from residents concerning the budget and the Shotspotter bond ordinance. I want to clarify some facts before Monday's meeting.

On The Budget:
Earlier in the week it seemed prudent to re-advertise Monday's meeting as a special meeting so that we could take action on the long-awaited budget. This was a planning and precautionary measure taken due to certain expectations. It became clear to me later in the week that the budget might not be introduced on Monday as hoped. As the public well knows, the Council has asked for a timely budget introduction all year, going as far as passing a resolution setting a budget timeline. The Administration has not adhered to this request; however, I do expect a budget introduction earlier this year than last year.

On the City’s Finances & the Spotter Bond Ordinance
At Thursday's Administration & Finance Committee meeting, the City's auditors reviewed the AFS documents with the Council committee. As expected, the City's financial situation has not improved. In fact, it has gotten worse. Based on this new information, it became clear that the Council could not responsibly move forward with Shotspotter at this time. At that committee meeting, I alerted the City Administrator, Corporation Counsel and auditors that I would urge the entire Council to table the Shotspotter bond ordinance indefinitely.

Yesterday the City Administrator informed the Council that the Administration wishes to withdraw the bond ordinance. This ordinance cannot be removed from the agenda by either the Council President or the Administration after being approved on first reading. The majority of the Council must agree not to move forward. I believe this will be the case on Monday.

On the "New Policy"
Given the information from the AFS documents, the still vacant CFO and Director of Administration & Finance positions, and the lingering concerns regarding internal financial procedures, the Council should no longer consider any Administrative item that is not essential to the day-to-day operation of the City.

As Council President, I am responsible for setting the agenda. Until the City is on a corrective course towards financial responsibility, I will not put any non-essential items on the agenda. I do not believe it is prudent for the Council to allow any additional expenses* to be made unless they are obligatory.

Furthermore, as you will recall, one of the FAIR ordinances voted down by four Councilors last month would have lowered the bid threshold to the pay-to-play level of $17,500. This would have ultimately meant that the Council would have had greater financial oversight. This month the Mayor proposed a resolution INCREASING the bid threshold which would DECREASE our financial oversight. I did not and will not place this item on the agenda for consideration. This proposal illustrates a flagrant lack of respect for the authority of the governing body and the officials elected by the public. It highlights a dangerous mindset that threatens the balance of power in this City which was created to protect the public. This makes the FAIR legislation package even more important to consider.

*word added at 7:45pm...it was inadvertantly left out
,*=

Plainfield PAL's Youth Exposure - Mentoring Program for Middle School Students

Below is a press release regarding Plainfield PAL's Youth Exposure, a mentoring program that I have been involved with for several years. Our orientation is this Saturday at 10:00 am at Washington School. All interested parents and students are welcome to attend. The application can be found online at www.youthexposure.org.



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Nancy Jordan
Tel: (908) 753-9281
Email: youthexposure@gmail.com


LOCAL MENTORING PROGRAM SEEKS PARTICIPANTS
Orientation to be held Sept. 25, 2010 at 10 a.m. at Washington Community School

Plainfield PAL’s Youth Exposure will hold orientation for potential mentees and their parents on Saturday, September 25, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. at Washington Community School. Any Plainfield residents interested are invited to attend. The application is available at www.youthexposure.org.

This year will be filled with exciting trips and interesting speakers. Participants will travel to New York City and Washington, D.C. They will tour a college campus, go horseback riding, ice skate at Rockefeller Plaza, see a Broadway show, explore museums, volunteer locally and enjoy an overnight retreat. They will also hear guest speakers address issues ranging from financial empowerment and environmental leadership to advancements in technology and living a healthy lifestyle. We are especially pleased to announce that we will be launching the first annual “Plainfield’s Promise” Speaker Series. Our first speaker will be Film Director Alrick Brown, a Plainfield native.

Youth Exposure is able to offer this program at minimal cost to community members through Plainfield Police Athletic League (PAL). Plainfield PAL is proud to announce a grant award in the amount of $20,580.00 in support of the Youth Exposure Program for the 2010-2011 program period. Funding has been made possible in part by a sub-grant from the Police Athletic League of New Jersey Afterschool Initiatives, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Washington Community School is a key partner with Youth Exposure, offering space and support for our activities.

Youth Exposure meets every other Saturday at Washington Community School from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m., unless there is a scheduled trip. There is a one-time fee of $50.00 for participating, however scholarships are available. Transportation and admission fees for all trips are free-of-cost. Breakfast and lunch is provided. There is limited enrollment.

Plainfield PAL’s Youth Exposure is a mentoring and enrichment program for middle school students established in Plainfield, NJ. Founded in 2007, Youth Exposure’s mission is to empower middle school students, encouraging them to strive for high levels of success through pursuit of education, leadership development and community service. Mentees are youth, ages 11-14, enrolled in the Plainfield School District. Mentors are young professionals who are dedicated to their community. Youth Exposure’s vision is to create a village of supporters for these students by organizing a locally-based network of mentors and like-minded peers. Through mentoring, tutoring, exposure to new activities, and support for scholarships and job opportunities, Youth Exposure provides a wide net of guidance and avenues for personal enhancement.

###

For more information please contact Nancy Jordan of Plainfield PAL (908) 753-9281 or visit our website at http://www.youthexposure.org/.

Next Steps in Fiscal Oversight Discussion

As most know by now, the Council fell one vote short of overriding the Mayor's vetoes on 2 ordinances that were part of the F.A.I.R. (Fiscal Accountability, Integrity and Responsibility) legislation we had been discussing and carefully advancing for the past 60+ days. Needless to say, I am deeply disappointed in this outcome. I firmly believe that transparency and financial oversight are crucial to stabilizing taxes, improving the operation of the City and repairing our public image. More importantly, I know that this issue matters to residents and taxpayers who want to see Plainfield reach its full potential.

Homeowners from every neighborhood in our City constantly express their concerns about taxes and other local costs. Our taxes have been steadily increasing over the years. This is due in part to costs we can't control (pension, healthcare, etc) and in part because of poor planning and uncontrolled spending. This may not be a pretty truth, but it is the truth. I say this not to incite fear or anger, but to acknowledge the problem so that we can work towards a solution. Financial oversight will help to combat high taxes and allow us to direct funds towards addressing the real, critical needs of Plainfield such as safety and economic development.

The upcoming budget discussions will no doubt be extremely challenging. When the Council received last year's budget, we made the conscious and difficult step to cut extraneous costs in order to alleviate homeowners, saving residents nearly 1 million dollars. We may not be able to cut so much this year. We can, however, ensure that each dollar is being put to its best and highest use and that not a single dime is being wasted. Every resident deserves the right to live in a city they can afford with quality services they can enjoy. Financial oversight can get us to that utopia. Achieving this will continue to be my goal.

I will be placing "fiscal oversight" on the Council's October agenda as a discussion item. I want to revisit the issues raised regarding the ordinances and collectively assess 1) whether or not we have a majority on the Council who is comfortable with and committed to fiscal oversight and 2) what adjustments to the vetoed ordinances can be made or new ideas can be formulated that will garner the necessary support. Plainfield needs a Council that is proactive in handling its fiduciary responsibilities to residents. The solutions don't have to be my ideas or those put forth by the Administration & Finance committee. I am open and eager to hear solutions that other Councilors may have to address this important issue.

If it turns out that the Council has neither the will nor the ideas, I will drop the matter for the rest of this year and focus on other areas of importance. I have asked each Councilor to be prepared to explain their views and ideas so that we can have a meaningful, open discussion. In addition, I have asked the Administration to participate in the conversation. While I don't expect their negative view on oversight to change, we must continue to weigh their concerns in this discussion. It is only right to do so as our City Charter and Code mandate that the Mayor and Administration execute the policies set by the Council.

Financial oversight is a matter that cities, townships and boroughs across the state are grappling with, not just ours. What will set us apart from these other municipalities is the courage to take action. I urge the public to consider their stance on this matter and share their concerns and suggestions with the Council and Mayor. If you believe in financial oversight, contact your representatives and attend our meetings. Everyone's voice matters. This is not a giant that I can slay alone.

I hope that the Administration will see the benefit in being transparent and working with the Council. I expect the entire Council to come together and work towards what's best for the City. I believe that if we put Plainfield First we will not only reap immediate benefits, but will sow seeds of success for our children and grandchildren.

.

On the Mayor’s Veto of F.A.I.R. Legislation

As has been widely publicized, the Mayor vetoed the following 2 key pieces of the F.A.I.R. legislation which, if implemented, would empower the Council to have more financial oversight:

1) ORDINANCE 2010-22 requires the Administration to present all bills for the Council review prior to payment.

How will Plainfield benefit from this Ordinance?
- Many municipalities require the governing body to review bills before payment is made. In some cases these bills cannot be paid without Council approval. Due to Plainfield’s Charter, our Council does not have the authority to approve bill payment. However, we absolutely have the right to oversight and that includes the right to review bills prior to payment. If the governing body recognizes a pattern of spending that is worrisome or warrants further review, we can take the necessary steps to ensure that tax dollars are being spent wisely. A perfect example is the recent WBLS event. I doubt $20,000.00 would have been spent on a 4 hour event had the Administration been required to review the expenditures with the Council first.

What are the Mayor’s primary objections?
- The Mayor argues that additional work will be required of limited staff that is already overworked in order to present the bills in advance each month. This ordinance will force the Administration to pay bills once a month, instead of twice a month. The Mayor believes that this could cause problems with payment schedules for vendors, translating into late fees and other fines charged to the City.

Do the Mayor’s concerns outweigh the benefits? Absolutely not.
- The fact that we have limited staff is not caused by Council decisions. The Mayor has not appointed a qualified CFO and or Director of Administration & Finance. This has been an ongoing issue for years. The Council stated in resolution form that we not only support, but strongly urge the Mayor to move forward quickly in hiring the right financial leadership for the City. It may not be ideal that we are short-staffed, but we should not perpetuate one problem because we have yet to solve another.
- It is true that the Administration will need to pay bills once a month due to the Council’s once monthly meetings. If other municipalities can make it work, we can too. Furthermore, the code already requires that bills be brought before the Council at some point after being paid. So if additional work is being forced on staff it is because they will have to actually provide the documents in a timely fashion, not because there is additional work.
- The late fees, fines and other costs that the Mayor believes will be charged to the City are not a valid concern. Any bills that absolutely must be paid on a certain date (insurance, etc), are specifically stated as exceptions in the ordinance. For all other vendors, a conversation to adjust the payment schedule is all that is needed.


2) ORDINANCE 2010-23 sets the bid threshold at a lower amount to encourage greater competition between vendors.

How will Plainfield benefit from this Ordinance?
- Governor Christie recently adjusted the bid thresholds for awarding contracts by municipalities. The bid threshold for contracting units governed by the Local Public Contracts Law rose from $21,000 to $26,000 on July 1, 2010. If any municipality has an appointed Qualified Purchasing Agent (QPA) the maximum bid threshold increased from $29,000 to $36,000. Local governing bodies have the authority to adjust this threshold as necessary. This ordinance will adjust that threshold to the pay-to-play level of $17,500. Increased bid competition usually means a better product at a lower cost (which is eventually passed on to taxpayers).

What are the Mayor’s primary objections?
- The Mayor points out this ordinance is lower than the threshold recently re-established by Governor Christie and argues that a lower threshold will prevent quick action to be taken by the purchasing agent. The Mayor states that “procurement/purchasing involves so much more than finding the lowest price”, suggesting that the right quality and quantity of goods will be impossible to find with this ordinance in place. Finally, the Mayor argues that departments will suffer a delay in receiving goods and services.

Are any of the Mayor’s objections valid? Not at all.
- These concerns are not only invalid, but point to a lack of understanding of how the bid process should work. The Governor did raise the bid threshold, and as I explained above, this ordinance is in direct response to this action. In fact, the State recognized the changes that would be caused locally as a result of Gov. Christie’s action and recommended that each municipality decide what bid threshold is appropriate for them.
- Not only do I agree that quality of product should be considered when making a purchasing decision, but I believe this ordinance will achieve exactly that. If there is greater competition, vendors will provide the best product they have at the best rate they can offer. Furthermore, if the correct specifications are put in place when going out to bid, we will receive responses from only the vendors that can meet our needs. If the City’s purchasing department hasn’t figured that out yet, then perhaps this is another area the Council needs to look into.
- Finally, if there is a delay in receiving goods or services, this is due to lack of organization and planning by the Administration and Purchasing Department. Most purchases that the City makes are standard and routine. There is no excuse for not being able to anticipate the expected needs of Departments and make the appropriate purchases in a timely fashion. Again, this sounds like a management problem, not a policy problem.

___________________________________________________________________________________
This veto is the culmination of several steps:

1) The Council approved both ordinances on first reading.

2) The Council approved both ordinances on second reading. Ordinance 2010-22 passed 6-1 with only Councilman Reid dissenting and Ordinance 2010-23 passed 5-2 with Councilman Reid and Councilwoman Carter dissenting.

3) After approval by the Council, the Clerk’s office delivered the ordinances to the Mayor’s office for her signature. The Mayor usually signs the ordinances and returns them to the Clerk’s office. If she does not sign them within 10 days, the law is considered in effect anyway, unless she vetoes the legislation.

4) The Mayor had 10 days from receipt of the ordinances to veto the legislation. As required, the Mayor put her decision in writing and listed her objections to the ordinances in question.
In order to override a veto, the Council must approve a resolution declaring such. The resolution must pass by a super-majority (at least 5 positive votes of a possible 7). The Council agreed to consider the two resolutions allowing us to override the veto of both ordinances at Monday’s meeting. This by no means indicates that the required votes are in place to support the necessary resolutions.

As you can see from above, the ordinances passed on second reading with a super-majority vote although it was not required at the time. If no Councilmember changes their vote due to the Mayor’s ill-founded concerns, the Council can override the veto with no problem. If they do not pass, it is because someone who originally voted in the affirmative changed their vote.

This is the bottom line: a vote against these ordinances is a vote against transparency and fiscal oversight. No resident will be harmed if these ordinances are approved. In fact, taxpayers will benefit tremendously.

.

Letter Regarding Muhlenberg Commemoration

Thank you to Dottie Gutenkauf for reading this on my behalf at the Muhlenberg Commemoration.


August 11, 2010

To the residents of Plainfield, esteemed elected officials and all who have been affected by the closure of Muhlenberg Regional Medical Center:

On behalf of the Plainfield City Council, I thank you for attending tonight’s commemoration, for continuing to fight for access to quality healthcare and for being the force behind your representatives as we deal with major health policies impacting our community.

The closure of Muhlenberg Hospital has had catastrophic affects on Plainfield and neighboring communities. We are left dealing with increased travel time to emergency rooms, inadequate ambulance service and the loss of the personal touch that only the doctors, nurses and staff at Muhlenberg could offer. Sadly, that is not all. As a major employer of Plainfield residents, the hospital’s closure has added to an already high unemployment rate at a time when we need jobs.

This is an injustice that must be dealt with. Earlier this year, the 2010 Plainfield City Council unanimously approved a resolution that was sent to Governor Chris Christie, urging him to re-examine the closing of the hospital. We want him to see for himself what we already know – that the closure of our hospital was an injustice.

Although the Supreme Court has declined to hear the appeal regarding the dismissed lawsuit against the New Jersey Department of Health, we will support the Administration in pursuing further legal action. As Council liaison to the Community Advisor Group, I have been keeping the entire Council informed of ongoing matters. We are here to continue the fight alongside Plainfield residents and the heroes and sheroes of the POP Restore Muhlenberg Coalition.

Warmest Regards,
Annie McWilliams

.

F.A.I.R. Legislation Passes, More Action to be Taken

On Monday, the Plainfield City Council advanced major items improving financial oversight and management of all City funds. Three resolutions were approved and two ordinances were approved on first reading (with seconding and final reading to occur in August). Two additional ordinances will be introduced in August (with second and final reading to occur in September). Collectively, these 7 items can be referred to as the Fiscal Accountability, Integrity and Responsibility Legislation Package (FAIR for short).

There were several changes made throughout the night. Here is a review on Monday night’s meeting as it relates to these items:


3 RESOLUTIONS AMENDED AND APPROVED

1) Resolution requesting that the State appoint a temporary Certified Financial Officer (CFO) and assist the Administration in hiring a qualified, certified permanent CFO

At Monday’s meeting, the Administration announced that a candidate for CFO had been offered a position and as such, this resolution was no longer necessary and should not be considered. Upon hearing this, I requested that a copy of the offer letter and applicant’s resume be provided to the Council. The City Administrator informed the Council that such information was not available. I requested a 10 minute recess so that the information could be retrieved from City Hall by the City Administrator, Corporation Counsel, Mayor and Mayor’s Confidential Aide (all of whom were at the meeting). Unfortunately, the Administration opted to not retrieve any of the information that the Council requested. As such, several members of the Council urged that we move forward but agreed to amend the resolution so that if a qualified candidate was brought before the Council and approved on or before July 28th, the resolution would be considered null and void. The purpose of this resolution is not to embarrass the Mayor or Administration, but to ensure that we have adequate staff in place. If the Mayor was able to find a qualified person, even if it was at the last minute, the Council should be willing to look into this candidate. A special meeting on July 28th will provide us with the opportunity to review and possibly approve a CFO. If this happens, then the resolution will be considered null and void and no copies will be sent to the State. If not, the resolution will be put in our records and sent to the State as originally intended.

2) Resolution urging the Mayor to fill the position of Director of Administration & Finance immediately

Similar to the CFO position, the Administration announced that a candidate for this position had been identified, although no offer had yet been extended. Again, the Council opted to move forward with the resolution, but amended it so that if a qualified candidate was approved on or before July 28th, the resolution would be considered null and void.

3) Resolution appointing FY2011 Citizen’s Budget Advisory Committee (CBAC)

Minor changes were made and 2 new names were added to the list of appointees.


2 ORDINANCES APPROVED ON FIRST READING
** These items will return to the Council in August for second and final reading

4) Ordinance requiring the Administration to present all bills for the Council review prior to payment

5) Ordinance setting the bid threshold at a lower amount to encourage greater competition between vendors


2 ORDINANCES SET FOR AUGUST AGENDA
**If approved in August, these items will return to the Council in September for second and final reading

6) Ordinance setting a strict policy limiting discretionary spending for this administration and every administration that follows

7) Ordinance requiring the City to utilize an RFP process for City’s designated banking service provider

This item was originally on Monday’s agenda as a resolution. However, upon discussion with Corporation Counsel, it was advised that the Council put this in Ordinance form to better meet the Council’s intentions or making this a long-term practice. The resolution was tabled indefinitely, but the item will return in the form of an ordinance in August.

.