Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Councilor questions whether Board of Works approvals complied with 2025 ordinance limiting certain contracts
Summary
Councilor Dunning asked why expenditures or contracts approved by the Board of Works were not submitted to the council for review as required by a Sept. 23, 2025 ordinance that limits professional‑service contracts of $5,000 or more, and said he would continue to vote 'no' on related bills until the city attorney clarifies legality and process.
Councilor Dunning told the council on March 2 that he sought clarity about how the city has handled approvals of professional‑service contracts and claims he believes should have come to the council. Quoting language he read from an ordinance adopted Sept. 23, 2025, Dunning said the law requires council approval for professional services that equal or exceed $5,000 in a fiscal year and that contracts should not extend past the fiscal year in which they are executed.
"By reading this, my understanding is anything that was approved by the Board of Works should have been submitted directly to the council for approval," Dunning said. He said he called the city attorney but had not yet received a full explanation. Citing specific ordinance language, he noted a process for council review and wrote that approvals under the section require a simple‑majority vote obtained by written request to the clerk.
Dunning said he was criticized at the last meeting for raising the issue but insisted he was following the council’s previously adopted ordinance and said he would remain a no vote on pending bills until the attorney clarified the legal basis.
The transcript does not record the city attorney’s explanation or any immediate corrective motion; the chair later continued with agenda business. The transcript contains references to proposal numbers (including items read by the clerk and described as remaining before a public‑safety committee) but does not show final actions on those specific ordinances in the provided excerpt.
Votes at a glance (recorded during the March 2 meeting excerpt): - Approval of minutes (02/18/2026): chair announced approval after a motion and second (no roll‑call tallies provided in transcript excerpt). - Signing of vouchers/approval of claims (03/02/2026): chair announced approval after motion and second (no roll‑call tallies provided in transcript excerpt). - Tabling of new‑business items 1, 3 and 4: chair stated the vote to table was 7 in favor and 1 opposed. - Appointment to Utility Service Board (Greg Wright): chair announced confirmation by an 8–0 vote.
Why this matters: The councilor’s questions touch on internal city controls for contracting and whether administrative approvals through the Board of Works complied with a locally adopted ordinance that places certain review requirements with the council. If council review is required but not performed, that raises procedural and legal questions that the city attorney should clarify.
Next steps: Councilor Dunning asked for written clarification from the city attorney; no further action or staff directive is recorded in the excerpt.
