Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Richard Burt questions $85,822 snowcat purchase, urges procurement review
Summary
Resident Richard Burt used public comment to thank volunteers, offer to pay for a missing flag at the city flagpole and to question a prior $85,822 purchase of a snowcat, asking the council to confirm whether state cooperative discounts were used and asking staff to review the procurement.
Richard Burt, a resident of 1120 Dayton Avenue, told the City of St. Paul Park council during public comment on June 15 that he would pay for a replacement flag at a local flagpole and urged the council to review an equipment purchase.
Burt began by thanking Total Mechanical and the Lions Club for their maintenance of the flagpole and said, "there's no flag, so I would like to pay for the flag." He added that "if it needs a light to shine on it, anyone that wants to put up the Marine Corps flag, or even the American flag would be okay with me, but I'm willing to pay for it." The chair responded that staff would look into the matter.
Burt then raised concerns about a recent equipment purchase he said the council approved last month. "Last month, you voted 4 to 1 in favor of purchasing a $85,822 snowcat snow cart," he said, adding that he was skeptical about the need for the vehicle and that it seemed like "just an oversized pickup truck with a little dump on the back." Burt said the city should confirm whether it purchased the machine through a state cooperative that, he said, could provide discounts on the base machine and attachments.
Burt named no specific staff or procurement official during his remarks. The council did not act on Burt’s comments during the meeting; the chair said staff would look into his concerns and follow up. The purchase Burt referenced was described as a prior decision; no new motion or vote on the equipment occurred at the June 15 meeting.
Why it matters: Burt’s comments raise procurement transparency questions for a small city using taxpayer funds for equipment. If purchasing through a cooperative or state contract was possible, it could affect total cost; if not, the city may need to clarify its process and exceptions.
Next steps: The chair said staff would review Burt’s questions about the flag and the prior equipment purchase and report back to the council.
