Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement And Grants Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents question ERP consultant contract and grant details during public comment
Summary
Two public commenters raised questions about the county’s proposed ERP accounting-software consultant fee, hiring in the administrator’s office, and grant reimbursement language for material management and renewables-ready programs.
During public comment at the April 1 Committee of the Whole meeting, two residents raised substantive questions about procurement and grant language in agenda materials.
Gary White, who said he previously served as a village council trustee in 2019, criticized a proposed ERP (enterprise resource planning) software consultant engagement and the county administrator’s handling of procurement. "ERP software consultants at almost $46,000 is ... a full consulting fee," White said. He questioned why taxpayers would pay that amount if, he said, local accounting staff and current consultants already know the county system and could recommend software. White also complained that the county administrator appeared to be disregarding the commissioners’ adopted bid process and that an earlier approved raise for a deputy administrator had been given without the position being filled. "The raise was given. I am not sure why this has not been questioned by the commissioners," White said.
Shelley Lake of Irving Township asked for clarification of contract language and grant terms. She pointed to an employment contract section that on one line indicated the position was not eligible for sick time and elsewhere referenced paying up to 72 hours of sick time, asking the board to reconcile the inconsistency. Lake also asked about wording in the material-management plan that an "EGLE grant" (Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy) would pay consultant fees "on a reimbursement basis" and asked how that reimbursement process would work. She raised questions about a "renewables ready" grant, asking whether grant funds must be spent only on a solar project or could be used for other items such as meeting-room improvements or sheriff’s-radio replacements as indicated in the packet.
Both speakers asked commissioners to read agenda packets and to ensure procurement and grant language are clear; the board moved on to the regular agenda after public comment.
