March 16, 2010

McCarthy, Helding consider changes to purchasing ordinance

Aldermen Terry McCarthy and Greg Helding are considering changes to the city's policy for purchases over $25,000.

The aldermen have a communication on tonight's City Council agenda to discuss the city's Purchasing Ordinance (see below).

City ordinance requires departments to request bids for contracts over $25,000, unless contracts are for "professional services." This is relevant now because the proposed $40,000 to hire a consultant for CAR25, the city's cable-access TV station, fell under the professional services clause and was not required to go out for bid.

McCarthy asked City Administrator Tom Friedel last month to review the city's policy on bidding out contracts and to consider dropping the exception for professional services.

Here's the ordinance in question (emphasis added):
Sec. 46-28. Purchases over $25,000.00; advertising for bids.
(a) Bids shall be required for every purchase of materials, supplies, equipment or contractual services, excepting professional services, the estimated cost of which exceeds $25,000.00. Bids shall be advertised for in the manner provided in Wis. Stats. § 62.15, except that the notice shall be published not less than twice and bids shall be received not less than ten days after first publication. Advertisement for bids shall not be required for any purchase, the estimated cost of which does not exceed $25,000.00, but in such case the purchasing agent shall secure and record at least three informal bids, if practicable.
If the estimated cost of public construction exceeds $5,000.00 but is not greater than $25,000.00, the purchasing agent shall publish one notice of the proposed construction before a contract for the construction is executed. This provision does not apply to public construction if the materials for such a project are donated or if the labor for such a project is provided by volunteers.
The common council may, by resolution, dispense with the requirement of advertising for bids in any particular case.
(b) A summary of the bids received for each item listing the name of each bidder and a copy of his bid shall be submitted to the appropriate committee of the common council for its recommendation to the common council. The adoption of the committee report by the common council shall constitute the final action of the council upon the bids and shall authorize the purchasing agent to issue a purchase order, countersigned by the finance director as to availability of funds, for the purchase of the items on which such bids were received.
(Code 1973, § 3.18.040; Ord. No. 1-91, pt. 2, 1-15-91; Ord. No. 1-00, pts. 2, 3, 3-7-00; Ord. No. 50-04, pt. 1, 1-18-05; Ord. No. 13-06, pt. 2, 5-24-06)

26 comments:

  1. Gee...why was it ok for Becker and Smith?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Closing this loophole will just make it a little bit harder for Dickert to give jobs and no bid contracts to his friends and family.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It will also defuse some of you hateful bloggers.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Although it's a small step forward, the change should come a.s.a.p. Anything which brings even minor reforms to the most corrupt municipality in badnews Badgerland is worth the effort.

    ReplyDelete
  5. 11:03 = Dickert = Epic Failure

    ReplyDelete
  6. 11:03, do you mean like 12:04? What a strange comment that is?

    ReplyDelete
  7. No, I'm not a Dickert and I am not an epic failure. I do however support the decisions Mayor Dickert has made. And I am still working the same job I had a year ago as is everyone in my family, so don't go there. There is nothing criminal about having a positive feeling about the leadership of this city.

    ReplyDelete
  8. To Anon 10:16 this is needed because Dickert is abusing his power to a level not even seen in the Becker days. The sweetheart deals have to stop and Dickert can't do it on his own. He needs help from the council.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I respectfully disagree that Dickert is abusing his power. He is making tough decisions for a city that needs aggressive action. He is acting within the limits of the law for the position he was elected to.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Lying to the people who elected him is an abuse of power.

    What happened to the campaign promise to get rid of the city administrator?

    Where is the ten year plan?

    $25K to a crony and almost $40K to another, to control and manipulate the information coming out of City Hall.

    Liar, liar, pants on fire.


    But no, it is the bloggers who are the problem. We are the ones refusing legitimate development deals from the community for the community on State Street, so that cronies can make big money off of Racine when they get the exclusive rights to it.

    Yes, it's us bloggers down there at City Hall lying to everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anon 1230-Where is this aggressive action you mentioned? April 2011 can come soon enough.

    ReplyDelete
  12. C'mon folks, Helding & McCarthy were all for the 40k consultant a few weeks ago, NOW THIS? It's embarressing really....

    ReplyDelete
  13. It took Dickert 3 weeks to find his way out of City Hall and he's going lead us? The man has loser tattooed on his forehead. Wake up Racine he's putting the screws to us. He's good at one thing, lying.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Tired of the lies3/16/2010 2:49 PM

    During the campaign, Turner said he wasn't sure about the city administrator position, but Dickert said we couldn't afford it. So I voted Dickert. As soon as he was elected (after holding a re-election fundraiser for himself), Dickert appointed one of his and Becker's cronies to the city administrator position and locked it in for 6 years. The City Council, of course, rubber stamped the mayor. Traitors.

    Look at the shenanigans during Becker's reign. NOT ONE PEEP from the City Council, while average citizens were ashamed for the party animal ruining our city.

    The people championing Dickert are the exact same ones who championed Becker. And when the lawsuits start flooding in from Dickert's blunders, they will be championing another stuffed shirt. What do they care? It's only your money.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dear Tired:

    Dickert never said that. You are lying worse that anyone.

    ReplyDelete
  16. ^ Yes he did say that! And then hired Freidel his cousin for six years and he'll only be in for 2 years himself! Wake up people! In one year under Dickert the city of racine has gone from 9percent unemployment to 15percent in the city! This guy is just not a like able guy plain and simple, snake in the grass!

    ReplyDelete
  17. This needs to be questioned more as does the potential $30,000 payout to Tingle. She bypassed all the regular employees to sit in the catbird seat for 4 years and now we are supposed to pay to make her go away. That is absolutely ridiculous!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anon 3:55 - You don't even know what you're talking about. That position is one us "regular people" in city hall wouldn't want. Nobody gets bypassed for that position. Some of this ignorant talk just gets annoying to read.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Dickert DID IN FACT say the city couldn't afford an administrator.

    Anon 3:07, you are a Dickert tool and a liar!!!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Why $ 25,000.00? Why not $ 10,000? You can create more job opportunities for people if it were at $ 10,000.00.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I'll take a job for $5K. I haven't had one in two years.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The last two mayors hired "friends" to be the secretary. What sort of benefits is Dickert getting?

    ReplyDelete
  23. During the campaign for mayor; Representative Turner stated he would not hire an Administrator. John Dickert clearly stated the need for the position. These are the facts. But what does this matter now?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Dear anon 8:29

    This is from a debate during the campaign taken from the Racine Post:

    Turner says he wouldn't need a city administrator and would return to a "mayor-cabinet" style of government with the department heads advising the mayor.

    Dickert says he would bring in a city administrator to handle day-to-day issues and handle the business side of City Hall. "The city is an $83 million company that serves people," he said.

    Before you start calling names...get your facts straight you stupid moron.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I have started an anti-Dickert campaign. Can I get a cushy job as anti-PIO for $25K a year? Just wondering.

    ReplyDelete
  26. What are the things Dickert has done while being in office?

    ReplyDelete