Delivered to 15,000 Plainfield "doorsteps" Monday, Wednesday, Friday & Sunday

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Was Dan unfair to Burney and Carter over Mayor's vetoes?

Several Plainfield Today readers have taken me to task for the portrayal of Monday night's Council votes that resulted in the failure of the Council to override Mayor Sharon Robinson-Briggs' vetoes of two ordinances aimed at transparency and improved fiscal oversight (see original post here).

It was pointed out that I did not recap the votes in August by Councilors on the ORIGINAL ORDINANCES that Mayor Robinson-Briggs vetoed, thus giving the impact of Burney and Carter's votes more weight than they really deserved.

Point well-taken.

Here are the votes on the ORIGINAL ORDINANCES, taken at the Council's August business meeting --

ORDINANCE (MC 2010-22) - The 'Bills List'
This ordinance was passed 6-1. Councilors Burney, Carter, Mapp, McWilliams, Rivers and Storch voted yes; Councilor Reid voted no.
ORDINANCE (MC 2010-23) - Lowered Bid Threshold
This ordinance passed 5-2. Councilors Burney, Mapp, McWilliams, Rivers and Storch voted yes; Councilors Carter and Reid voted no.
In the vote to override Mayor Robinson-Briggs' vetoes, Councilor CARTER stuck to her guns in SUPPORTING the Bills List, and was also consistent with her August vote in OPPOSING the Bid Threshold lowering ordinance. No surprise here.

Councilor BURNEY, on the other hand, DROPPED his support of the Bills List, though he MAINTAINED his support of the Bid Threshold lowering. Though surprising, his change of mind was not fatal to the override.

The Robinson-Briggs vetoes would have been overturned had Councilor RIVERS not bolted her prior commitment to Council President McWilliams' legislative agenda by SWITCHING HER VOTE on BOTH resolutions.

Truth to tell, the failure of Councilor RIVERS to maintain her support for McWilliams' F.A.I.R. legislation was fatal to the overturn and gave aid and comfort to Mayor Robinson-Briggs in her hour of peril.

By themselves, the votes of CARTER and BURNEY (even with his shift on one item) did not prevent the overturn of the vetoes.

While the unpredictability evidenced on this vote makes it more difficult for Council President McWilliams to craft a veto-proof majority, that is not the only avenue open to her.

The question that remains now is whether Councilor BURNEY will bring to the table his proposed ordinance to require the Administration's divulging of purchase orders to the Council before funds are encumbered. This would be the ordinance that would supply what Burney characterized as 'transparency with teeth'.

Stay tuned.

-- Dan Damon [follow]

View today's CLIPS here. Not getting your own CLIPS email daily? Click here to subscribe.


Rob said...

Dan, I think this says it all:
" fatal to the overturn and gave aid and comfort to Mayor Robinson-Briggs in her hour of peril."

--- Burney, Reid, Carter and Rivers are working for SHARON AND JERRY..not the citizens of Plainfield.

- We also keep hearing Jerry's puppet Assistant Mayor Sharon talking about $15,000 having been donated by a sponsor. Where's that proof of payment and what about the remaining money that wasn't given by "said sponsor"?? She is quite good at steering the issue where she wants it to go and with a city council that refuses to cross some politically correct line and straight up call out her COMPLETE INCOMPETANCE she will continue to run the show. I am so pleased McWilliams, Storch and Mapp are trying look out for the city of Plainfield, but they will get no where with her or Jerry until they play hard ball. That poltically correct line is reserved for individuals who you are extending courtesy to because you are unsure of them or their motives. Throw polite out the door and beat that woman down with her own incompetence. I too have written to the Governor's office begging him to send investigators into Plainfield ( city and school ) to expose the waste & incompetence of both.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know the Attorney General Phone number? We all need to call for help!!!!

Anonymous said...

This was a sloppy response from the Council to a sloppy mess made by administration. Both the administration, the council, the cheerleaders like you Dan and YOUR cheerleaders like Rob are the reason Plainfield is in such a pathetic situation.

Poor, pathetic, wretched, sad, dismal Plainfield.