Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Muskego council debates consultant oversight, votes to follow existing purchasing policy
Summary
At its Dec. 16 Committee of the Whole meeting, Muskego City councilmembers debated how closely to oversee staff use of consultants and voted to continue following the city—s current purchasing policy while asking staff for an annual, systemwide list of vendors and consultants for review.
The Muskego City Committee of the Whole debated the council—s role in overseeing staff use of consultants during its Dec. 16 meeting and voted to continue following the city—s existing purchasing policy while asking staff to provide an annual master list of consultants and vendor spending.
The discussion began after Chair (Speaker 1) framed the issue as a choice about how far the council wants to intrude into staff decisions about consultants, noting that "Typically, our practice has been to allow staff to use the consultants that they've been comfortable with and that work well with them as long as it's within the budget." The chair added that some long-standing vendor relationships date back to prior administrations and that staff perform vendor due diligence before switching providers.
Alma Schrader (Speaker 3) pressed for more oversight, saying the council should review some consultant choices because the body approves expenditures and contracts: "With all due respect, I do not think we are nitpicking on Johnny. I mean, when we're talking about finances ... I think having a little oversight over who we're using to do some of these things is very reasonable." Schrader specifically pointed to financial-adviser contracts as council-level decisions.
Councilmembers debated several practical approaches, including setting a dollar threshold for when staff must bring a consultant selection to the council (suggested thresholds ranged from $10,000 to $50,000) and reviewing consultant relationships every three years instead of annually. Several members expressed concern about creating excessive work for a small staff if the list required fine-grained detail on every recurring maintenance contractor.
To increase transparency without adding routine micromanagement, several members suggested that staff compile a single, systemwide master list of consultants and the amounts budgeted and paid, delivered annually (a June report was suggested so it's fresh before budget season). Alderman Wolf (Speaker 4) asked that staff notify the council earlier if there are problems with a consultant rather than only at contract or budget times.
After discussion, Speaker 9 moved that the council "follow the purchasing policy as it is." The motion was seconded and carried by voice vote. The council also requested staff provide an annual list of consultants and vendor payments so members can review and, if necessary, raise concerns for particular items.
What happens next: Staff will follow the existing purchasing policy. They were asked to compile and present a year‑end/June master list of consultants, with suggested dollar thresholds to guide future discussion. The council did not adopt new ordinance language or change purchasing thresholds at this meeting.
