Wasteful Spending: Is $95,000 Needed to Count Council Votes?
One item buried in the consent calender of next week's Elk Grove City Council meeting seeks council approval for a $95,000 expenditure...
https://www.elkgrovenews.net/2010/09/wasteful-spending-is-95000-needed-to.html
One item buried in the consent calender of next week's Elk Grove City Council meeting seeks council approval for a $95,000 expenditure. The vendor for the non-bid purchase is the city's current video vendor, Granicus. Inc.
What is the $95,000-plus two year expenditure for? The short version is this purchase will reportedly enhance the current audio video recording and streaming system and will count roll call votes of the council.
City staff reports state the enhancement will benefit the council proceeding by amongst other things "reducing time for routine procedures such as roll call votes, speaker request, and allowing members to queue to speak during council deliberations" and "expanding public awareness with broadcasts using the public display."
While this $95,000 may indeed aid roll call votes, not that there have been any glaring problems with the existing "manual' system, is this enhancement really crucial to the smooth operation of city services? In these times of great fiscal uncertainty, could there not be a more productive use of taxpayers money?
Furthermore, the council should reflect on the wisdom of this expenditure given the fact at this very same meeting they will be asked to approve a staff recommendation and "adjust" (read reduce) service to the city's e-Van transit services, which enhances life and supports independent living for some of our most vulnerable residents.
At the very least, out of respect to e-Van riders the city council should pull this item from the consent calender, place it on the regular agenda and discuss whether or not we really need to spend $95,000 on the glorified system enhancement that counts roll call votes.
Posts
9 comments
This is just WRONG! How difficult can it be to count five votes? We've been doing it for ten years and with both audio and video recordings of the meetings, it seems pretty secure. AT the very least, this should be postponed until the economy improves, and only then if a very good reason is presented and discussed in an open meeting. Burying this sort of thing in the Consent Calendar, I thought, was a thing of the past. Do we have to go back and fight that battle again?
Besides e-Van riders there was just a plea for the Food Bank....shelves were empty, homeless numbers had increased greatly. Another was the parks, neighbors were cleaning the weeds..I know, that's CSD, but if we're throwing money around willy-nilly how about a little water and cleanup at the parks? Seniors had to start paying more for their rides....well, I could go on and on that's for sure. Are our coffers that loaded? Seems city employees have way too much free time....see if we can find some way to spend some of that money. Might try to find some time to post the minutes for the last four months!!
You got it Sarah! A lot of us learned a long time to look at the consent calendar. Why? Because we learned that that is where John Danielson would hide items that he wanted to "slip by us." And the "gang of three" would rubber stamp whatever Danielson wanted every single time.
In reading Elk Grove News about the $95K on the consent calendar, I implore the council to rethink this expense. And if you need another reason why, please watch the tape of the July 28, 2010 council meeting, Agenda Item 9.5.
Every child in kindergarten can count to five, so why does the council need help doing that as well. There is something to be said for doing things the “old fashioned way.” Has the city clerk of the city of Elk Grove even recorded one vote incorrectly? Come on now. Council chamber’s equipment has been have been updated to “state of art” four times, the last time it cost us $465,000.
We know the second you install by the latest and greatest equipment, six months later the next latest and greatest is out, only to find out that is wasn’t so great. So why spend the money again? Our city clerk can count and as a back up, the council meetings are recorded.
And besides, if a vote is controversial, a roll call vote is the best way to vote anyway.
But we can count is how many of the E-van routes have been cut, with our special needs residents begging the council not to cut their services.
Which comes first, counting to five or our special needs residents counting on the council?
My .02 cents worth:
Consent items are considered "non-controversial". Consent agendas are NOT to be used to hide actions that will be controversial...to do so breaches the trust of the people. It is my belief that this item should be placed onto the overall agenda for discussion & action. It seems it would be useful to those who plan the overall meeting agenda & the consent agenda to have guidelines to clarify which types of items might be appropriate for the consent agenda. It should not be used unless all council members agree to its use.
Maybe it is because Connie's pet Council Member votes one way in a meeting, approves the minutes that shows how he voted, and then when his handlers complain he claims to have never voted that way.
I am sure Mr. Detrick will vote against this because CC tells him to however, if he was really concerned about ensuring his vote is correctly recorded then he will vote for it.
Good heavens James, how can you read this article and come up with all that garbage. (BTW he's not running for reelection, named the wrong person) And as for Mr. Detrick voting against it...I hope to see every council person vote against it or in the very least place it on the agenda where it belongs. Possibly you're in a situation and I hope you are, that loss of a home and a job have not affected your lifestyle. We just feel that there is a better use of the funds, but more than anything, we dislike that it is placed/hidden as a "consent" item!
Sobriety is a must when navigating the internet.
No matter how you try to justify it James, $95,000 to count five council votes is outrageous.
Also, do I hear a little jealously in your voice?
Say Josie, Phyllis and Capt. Willard, looks like you saw right through James. Now only if "James" were as "transparent" as a candidate, he might get a vote or two!
Post a Comment