A January meeting of the City of Saratoga Springs City Council contained a prolonged and contentious exchange over an addendum to a restorative justice training contract the council previously approved.

Council materials note an RFQ issued and a contract awarded in December 2023 for restorative justice training to support a volunteer panel established by council resolution in May 2023. A July 2024 compliance audit by Beacon Risk Group recommended continued work to develop and implement procedural and restorative justice principles under New York State Police Reform Executive Order 203. According to the accounts office, an addendum extended the contract completion date to Dec. 31, 2025; the approved contract maximum was reported as $29,340 at an hourly rate of $81.25.

At the meeting several council members criticized the timing and legal review of the addendum. One council member said the addendum was issued to provide transparency while work continues to meet the audit recommendations; other members said the city attorney’s guidance had been inconsistent and questioned whether the extension required a new contract. The discussion included references to prior council votes, the city’s RFQ and contract templates, and an earlier independent compliance audit tied to Executive Order 203.

Council members disagreed sharply in public, at one point exchanging personal criticisms while debating whether the item should be moved, placed on a future agenda, or changed into a new contract. The meeting transcript records heated language and acusations but does not show the council rescinding the addendum or taking a final vote on replacing the agreement during that session.

Council members said staff would continue to review contract procedures and the city’s contract templates; deputies and the accounts office indicated the addendum had been processed in accordance with the RFQ and contract language cited in meeting materials. The city manager and city attorney were referenced in the discussion; the transcript also references a person named John Kaufman and the vendor named in meeting materials.

The council did not adopt a new contract during the meeting. Several members indicated they would continue to seek clarification from legal staff and purchasing before future action.

Because the matter involves ongoing work tied to a previously approved contract and to an audit recommending additional training and implementation, councilors said they expect follow-up at a later meeting.