minfin_11-13-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

type of processes to be implemented. In response to a question, he clarified that “competitive process” here means something other than a formal bid process. Law Director Vargo strenuously objected to the amendment, viewing it as unnecessary and potentially risky for the City. He argued that the term, “competitive” is subjective and open to interpretation. He expressed concern that a disgruntled vendor may use the language as a means to sue the City. He maintained that the internal controls themselves are most important and ought not be described further in the ordinance. He noted that if the City is sued, it will be the Administration, not Council, that must defend the ordinance in court. After additional debate and discussion between the committee and the Law Director, Chair Shachner concluded that he believes the risk to the City is minimal and called for a vote on the amendment. All members voted in favor. Motion passed. S. Ord. 18-2023 amended a second time. Motion by Chair Shachner, seconded by Councilmember Bullock to amend Section 5 (b) of S. Ordinance 18-2023 as follows: The Department of Finance shall submit to Council on at least a monthly basis, as a communication on the Council Docket,a report of contracts or purchases in amounts greater than seven thousand five hundred ($7,500) and less than fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) containing information substantially similar as set forth in the form filed with the Clerk of Council but shall at least contain the date, amount, payee, and a brief description of the purchase/services. Law Director Vargo raised questions and concerns about the practicality of the proposed amendment. He argued that because Council controls its own docket, it is questionable that the code should require the Administration to place the report on the docket, when Council has discretion to do that at any time. He questioned whether the report should instead be placed on the City website. Mayor George suggested that the specific details of the report be codified, but not necessarily placed on the docket. Chair Shachner likened the requirement to that of other notices to Council on the docket, such as those regarding grants or donations to the City. He characterized the requirement as a fair compromise given the significant changes proposed to the bidding and Board of Control threshold. Director Rancatore remarked that it seems onerous to place the report on the docket and that the Finance Department has a great interest in maintaining financial controls. He pointed to the recent awards and recognitions received by the department. Chair Shachner argued that the significant public interest in the expenditure of taxpayer dollars justifies financial reports being given special treatment. 3