I wish to direct the reader of this thread to the other two Watertowergate threads for the necessary background.
I was determined to get to the bottom of Watertowergate, so I spent the $57.23 the FOIA Coordinator requested and required (but never adequately explained what it was for) to see the competitive bids for the recent water tower painting and maintenance contracts. The clerk at the City asked for the money, I paid it, a receipt was given to me:
XT%201%20Receipt%20%2457.23%20for%20inspection.JPG
And then I was given 22 pages which I was told I could not only inspect and return (which I had requested), but keep for myself. Thank heavens for small favors. I reviewed them and present them for your inspection with limited commentary by myself, courtesy of the Ludington Torch.
The first two documents are from pp. 2 and 3 of the 9-18-2009 Public Safety/Utilities Subcommittee minutes which consisted of City Council members Gary Castonia (Chair), Brent Scott, and then-Councilor Greg Dykstra. WTP Kurt Malzahn and CM Shay were also present. Malzahn presented a report prepared by a Utility Services (USC) consultant (Mike Trombley) based on prior reports done in 2005 and 2008. Several things were discussed by Mr. Trombley, who as any good salesman would, tried to show the need to do the project and the need to do it with his company. The Committee unanimously agreed that it "makes sense for the City to go ahead with the USC program" and Shay invited Trombley to the 10-12-09 CC meeting to present it to the rest of the Council.
XT%202009-9-18%20PSU%20subc%201.JPG
XT%202009-9-18%20PSU%20pg%202.JPG
Mike Trombley presented his material at the 10-12-09 CC meeting where it was briefly discussed and considered at the time in the minutes of that meeting (available at the city website). He included these nicely done graphics of the cost breakdowns, including if the city went the traditional route:
XT%202009-10-12%20Gaylord%20proj.JPG
XT%202009-10-12%20Danaher%20proj.JPG
XT%202009%2010-12%20Trad%20Gaylord.JPG
XT%202009-10-12%20Trad%20Danaher.JPG
As the original Watertowergate thread stated, the contracts were prepared and presented to the CC at its first December meeting, where they were unanimously approved. This was a memo to the council presented by CM Shay before that meeting recommending its adoption.
XT%202009-12-4%20Memo%20to%20LCC%20to%20adopt%20contract.JPG
The City Manager was quoted in the minutes as saying this project would cost $151,000 per year. The contracts for each tower had this cost being accurate for the first six years, but the cost became less afterwards, making the overall cost slightly less than $1.2 million over the ten year period.
Gaylord:
XT%202009-12-22%20Gaylord%201.JPG
XT%202009-12-22%20Gaylord%202.JPG
XT%202009-12-22%20Gaylord%203.JPG
XT%202009-12-22%20Gaylord%204.JPG
XT%202009-12-22%20Gaylord%205.JPG
XT%202009-12-22%20Gaylord%206.JPG
XT%202009-12-22%20Gaylord%207.JPG
Danaher:
XT%202009-12-22%20Danaher%201.JPG
XT%202009-12-22%20Danaher%202.JPG
XT%202009-12-22%20Danaher%203.JPG
XT%202009-12-22%20Danaher%204.JPG
XT%202009-12-22%20Danaher%205.JPG
XT%202009-12-22%20Danaher%206.JPG
XT%202009-12-22%20Danaher%207.JPG
Conspicuously absent among all the public records about the competitive bids for this project is the lack of consideration of any competitive bids, or any public official/Ludington Water Service Employee questioning the USC's salesman/consultant about why the towers had to be painted now or the inherent need to do so in the upcoming years. The Ludington City Charter requires any project over $10,000 to go through a competitive bidding process unless there is an emergency or obvious benefit for the city to enter into one without such process.
Realizing that Scottville had their tower painted this year for under $50,000 to their taxpayers due to shrewdness by their leadership, and Ludington (under CM Jim Miller) had both towers painted for about a million less than $1.2 million (even adjusted for inflation) back in 2000, I do think these contracts do not pass the smell test.
Tags:
Wow. WOW. Really? no other bids! that is crazy!
Not even any thought of using any other bids, if you look at the subcommittee meeting and the city council meeting. A project that cost the taxpayers of Ludington $1.2 million...
On another project I am looking at, the City had to use the bidding process to approve the five contractors required to work on a certain building's rehab with State oversight. Each time they used the minimum required (two), but even then the savings amounted to a lot of cash:
The winning bid on the project was 5.5 times less than the losing bid. Could we have done the water tower painting 5.5 times less than what it cost us? I think so.
This totally sucks.
I'm hoping for a scanner for Christmas, Aquaman. Or maybe I'll get one for a friend or family member and use it when needed ; )
When I get that capacity, I will do so; until then, if you do have problems with some areas, let me know and I will tell you what the copies had there.
You are correct C-mag, double incompetents are not double negatives; in fact, I think it's multiplicative, so you push it up to four incompetents.
I agree with the others. It looks cheesy when done with a camera. You can probably buy a scanner/copier for the same amount as you paid for these few pictures.
That being said, let's step back and consider this. XLFD and other Ludington residents hire the City Council, Mayor, Clerk, and Treasurer through the election process. They in turn, hire the City Manager and others through the appointment process to take care of operations. The CM is a contractor of our hirees.
They all do their business on our behalf. A red flag comes up, and one or more of the employers, asks their employee's contractor to show them some records to address their concerns about mismanagement. Instead of showing them the records to either confirm or abate those suspicions, the contractor balks and sets up barriers for the employer to check on his dealings. Some that even go against what the law says. Your employees confirm their contractor's right to do so.
Do you think the contractor of your employees are doing things in your interest? Do you think your employees are doing things in your interest by not helping address your concerns? Do you need any more members of your Information Please, Gang, XLFD? I want to join!
I welcome anyone into this group, and I will contact you after Christmas, because some recent ambiguous replies and dodgy behaviour seems to indicate a 'culture of corruption' that is deeply ingrained.
I have read through the new policy, and it will make it difficult to petition our government for information. City Hall will tell you that I am trying to cripple their functioning, but there is nothing I have did an FOIA on that I have not used in my capacity as an e-journalist,.
Much of it has shown more than a hint of corrupt functioning. Watertowergate is just the big ticket item as determined by cost. If anyone else is interested, send me a message. I welcome those who are from out of town.
© 2024 Created by XLFD. Powered by