Deep Thoughts, Cheap Shots and Bonbons

“It ain’t over till it’ over” Yogi Berra.

From the Board of Supervisor meeting held on September 17th.

Agenda item

#21C  Purchasing and Contracts

To approve Purchase Order # 2016-8807 for the purchase of roofing supplies from Garland/DBS, Inc., for a total amount $93,091.07 with a 10% contingency amount of $9,309.11 for a total not to exceed amount of $102,400.18 to be funded from Capital Projects.  Late Material included.

The reason for discussing this particular agenda item is the mention of  Late Material - hardly ever does city staff provide late material. Why would late material be provided? Two reasons:   1. Staff had additional pertinent information about the contract, product, or legal advice 2. Board member(s) or a citizen asked a question, made an inquiry or a request  that resulted in additional information being provided.

Basically, since serving on Carson City Board of Supervisor’s for the past 2 ½ years receiving additional late material has happened about as many times as man has step foot on the moon.

#22  Information Technology

To approve an extension of the contract between Carson City and the Brewery Arts Center (BAC) to provide public, educational and government access programming for the period of October 1 through December 31, 2015 as a transition period for the Carson City Information Technology Department (CCIT) to establish policies and procedures to provide these services no later than January 1, 2016.

For all intent and purposes starting next year Carson City IT Department will be filming all governmental board, commission and committee meetings. They CAN NOT alter, change modify or revise any filming of any meetings. They will be providing  better service at a much lower cost to you the tax payer.

What they will be doing is using software that will allow the citizens better access to review and analysis all meetings. This software will finally bring Carson City into the 21st century.     

#23B  For possible action. Discussion and possible action to determine if Staff should provide all Board member with information provide to one member

Here is the motion and action taken by the Board.

I move to direct the City Manager to provide to all Board Members only that information and/or material that substantially impacts the published agenda.

It passed with a 4 to 1 vote.     

Yea: Crowell, Abowd, Bonkowski, Bagwell. Nay: Shirk

Background on agenda items: Hardly ever, is an agenda item presented to the Board of Supervisors that came from another source other than city staff. The vast majority of all agenda items presented by city staff is for the Boards approval to spend your tax dollars.

By so granting to the City Manager this power, as the sole authority to determine what will or will not substantially impact all future agenda items, is completely wrong.

Granting this extraordinary power to one individual goes against the principle of separation of governmental powers. The foundation of government is that fairness must exist. Communication is the first step towards fairness which then leads to an open and transparent government. Any and all information regarding an agenda item that is provided to one Board member should be provided to all Board members, regardless of who may have asked a question, made an inquiry or request.

Remember, agenda items are all about spending your tax dollars and with the passage of this motion it singularly empowers the City Manager to control all communications that could significant impact how a Board member may or may not vote which all depends on the information that is provided or not provided equally among all Board members.

 Correction Notice

In a previously newsletter I misquoted actions taken by the  Utility Financial Oversight Committee – to clarify they have  always recommend/voted for a  five year phase in hookup fees for Commercial rate increases.

 

Nevada Appeal on September 20, 2015 printed the following article:

Carson City Mayor Bob Crowell was honored on Sept. 15 by the Nevada Chapter of the American Planning Association with the DeBoer Award for Distinguished Leadership by an Elected Official, for his role in championing the Carson City Downtown Urban Design Streetscape Project.

Brief History of Streetscape Project

This concept had first been brought forward by Supervisor Abowd and Supervisor  Bonknowski on August 15, 2013 at the Board of Supervisors meeting as Agenda item #17 which reads as follows:

For Possible Action: Presentation by Downtown 20/20 on the Downtown Carson City Revitalization Plan consisting of three major components - Business Activity; Special Events and Promotions; and Beautification, Circulation and Parking. Possible action to accept the plan and direct staff to review the plan and report their findings to the Board at the earliest time feasible.
Summary: In April 2013, the Downtown 20/20, a group of businesses and citizens, appeared before the Board of Supervisors to advocate for removal of the fences that lined Carson Street in downtown and restriping of the street that would have eliminated one lane going each way and added parallel parking. At the time, the Board directed staff to remove the fences and asked the Downtown 20/20 to develop a revitalization plan that addresses other issues related to components of a successful downtown, not just the addition of on-street parking.

Speaking of Narrowing Carson Street

Back in 2012 the people behind the petition effort to force the Carson City Center aka Nugget Project on the ballot submitted 4,559 signatures to the Carson City Clerk-Recorder's office. They only were required to have 2,935 signatures verified by the clerk to qualify the petition.

I have repeatedly stated that the present day project (narrowing Carson Street) is a GO  there are no: if’s, and’s, or but’s. It’s going to happen.

To clarify yes there might be (might be) an exception to this, which is: If someone were to: 1) file for a petition with Carson City Clerk 2) the Secretary of State approves the petition 3) obtain the required signatures on the petition then it is possible that the Downtown Street narrowing could be placed on the November 2016 General Election ballot. This might be possible because your tax dollars are being used to fund this project.

How might that occur, one must look at the 2014 General Election stats which are:

Election day turnout     6,021                                                                                      Early turnout                8,459                                                                                Absentee turnout          1,239                                                     _________________________

Total                          15,719                                                                          

Of the 15,719 registered voters who voted in the General Election. My guessimate is that 10% of that number or 1,572 (+/-) signatures would be needed. Keep in mind all signatures would need to be validated by the City Clerk for the petition to be placed on the 2016 ballot. There might be legal huddles that would have to be overcome; no one can predict how the City might counter this action.

Animal Shelter

The shelter and Carson City were given 30 days by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to rid the Carson City facility of the rodents and deal with asbestos. Presently the dog kennels at Carson City’s animal shelter were closed for perhaps a month. Dogs are now being transported to other locations temporarily while these problems get resolved.

The Nevada Human Society under a contract with Carson City government has operated the shelter and run animal services since last October. It recently learned that CEO Kevin Ryan with NHS had been fired for “serious traffic violations.” Will this have any effect on how our shelter is run, I personally do not believe it will, although I would hope the NHS would appear before the Board and give some reassurances that it will not.   

Three questions about the animal shelter.

1.     The contract for the construction of the new animal shelter has recently been awarded; one might wonder why then reopen this aging structure?

2.     The money they (NHS) has pledged for the new Animal Shelter it is only to be used for equipping the building with furniture and other type accessories. Should their contract with Carson City become invalid, annulled or cancelled what will become of these furnishing?

3.     Why should Carson City Health and Human Resources oversee the  operation of the Animal Shelter? Regardless if it’s stated in: City Ordinances, NRS, Charter or any other document, it is well known our Health and Human Resource Department is understaffed and their main focus should be on Health of our community not the Animal Shelter.   

 

Going back to Yogi Bear                                                                                                       This edition of Deep Thoughts, Cheap Shots and Bonbons is over.

 

Please forward this to family, friends and neighbors.