The duties of liaisons are laid out in the Rules of Order instituted by Council President Ray Blanco in 2006 before his untimely death. The council adopted the 2011 Rules of Order in January with some modifications, such as naming this year's standing committee members and liaisons.
From the Rules of Order:
Liaisons’ Duties and Reporting
A. Every council liaison should attend the meetings of their assigned commission, board, committee or body and take notation of said body’s matters under consideration.
B. Every liaison shall report back to the Council on a regular schedule to be formulated by the President and provided to the committee chairs at the reorganization meeting.
C. In the event that the liaison’s committee is reviewing a proposed ordinance or resolution, the liaison shall notify the President so the full Council can be kept abreast of the matter.
A. Every council liaison should attend the meetings of their assigned commission, board, committee or body and take notation of said body’s matters under consideration.
B. Every liaison shall report back to the Council on a regular schedule to be formulated by the President and provided to the committee chairs at the reorganization meeting.
C. In the event that the liaison’s committee is reviewing a proposed ordinance or resolution, the liaison shall notify the President so the full Council can be kept abreast of the matter.
Reports of Liaisons
Council Liaisons shall provide the entire Council with its findings. The liaison will provide the Council with both the majority and minority opinions of their respective body as well as the Council Liaison’s view on the matter.
Role of Council Liaisons
Council Liaisons may not interfere with the day-to-day operations of their respective body on which they serve. They do not speak with the approval of the full Council unless the full Council has previously voted on any given issue.
No Meetings During Council Meetings
No Council Liaison may attend their respective body’s meeting when the Council is meeting without notifying the President.
This formula projects an objective gathering of information, at meetings, to be shared with the council at large on a regular basis. This exactly what Councilman Cory Storch has done as liaison to the Planning Board over the past several years. Of course, the Planning Board is not at the middle of a controversy as the Plainfield Municipal Utilities Authority has been for some time now, and perhaps that is why PMUA liaisons last year almost sounded like apologists for the beleaguered authority. One, Councilman William Reid, actually served on the PMUA before being appointed to the City Council, so may not only have had insight into its operations, but maybe a bit more sympathy than objectivity in his role as liaison.
Councilwoman Bridget Rivers was liaison to the PMUA last year and is again its primary liaison, with Councilwoman Rebecca Williams as this year's alternate. In remarks about a business lunch the two attended with top PMUA officials, Rivers appeared to be defending the PMUA, while Williams raised questions about the efficacy of meeting at a restaurant rather than at PMUA offices. After reviewing the Rules of Order, Plaintalker wondered how the contact became a lunch meeting anyway, as opposed to a regular meeting of the PMUA board of commissioners where there were official "matters under consideration."
The whole PMUA controversy has had a polarizing effect on the community, as was evident Monday when speakers voiced radically different views on the authority's worth as an organization. None of the other nine boards and commissions with assigned liaisons has become such a lightning rod for dissension as the PMUA. In light of that fact, maybe all liaisons should review the Rules of Order section on their duties, responsibilities and role regarding the bodies they serve.
--Bernice
What do you expect from the most corrupt county in NJ?
ReplyDeleteI think we're working on the most corrupt city in Plainfield with this mayor and some of here City Council supporters.
ReplyDeleteFrom the 60's we learned to "Follow the Money"
ReplyDeleteThe Plainfield Action Services Board is scheduled to meet on Tuesday, Feb. 15, at 7:30PM in the City Hall Library. Minutes of the ten meetings scheduled between Sept. 2009 and Sept. 2010 show that five were canceled due to the lack of a quorom, and of the five remaining, only Councilman Reid attended on one occasion.
ReplyDeletePAS manages the Community Services Block Grant Program, and to be eligible for CSBG funding is theoretically to have a Tri-Partite Board on which not fewer than 1/3 of its members are to be representative of low-income individuals and families, and "are able to participate actively in the development, planning, implementation, and evaluation of programs funded..."
See http://www.state.nj.us/dca/divisions/dhcr/offices/docs/csbg/csbgsec676b.pdf for more information on tri-partite boards.
Reading over the minutes suggests the Board is not active in program development, that Council participation is limited at best, and decision making, as well as the power of the purse, resides exclusively with the Administration.
I will be attending Tuesday's meeting, and I invite all Council members who are on the PAS Board, along with the Plainfield community generally, to come out too.
Many of the grants received by the City are to be managed with clear and defined community representation. It is uncertain that this has been the case, or that the resources have been utilized in the manner intended or in the best interest of our City.
OMG, forget the stupid lunch already! It's 1/125,000 of their budget. Who cares? Only those who need the actuality of a gothca moment to order their thinking. You, blog lady, are better than that.
ReplyDeleteLet's keep the focus on the big issue: whether the religiously-minded matriarchal leadership in Plainfield is delivering fair value to all of the citizens and not just to their chosen flocks.
To Alan: Even worse is the CAC, which is supposed to have broad representation for the purpose of ranking Community Development Block Grant applications. Sometimes it has had only a handful of City Hall folks making the decisions.
ReplyDeleteI must disagree with @1:19 pm these lunches paid for by the PMUA are relevant.
ReplyDeleteThe Authority may be autonomous, but no doubt about it they are not a private agency. We the residents of Plainfield are taxed by the Authority. They tax us for shared services and they tax us to maintain the City's sewer infrastructure. And we the taxpayers are responsible for their long term bonds (debt). They may act like a private company but they are not one.
The PMUA should not be paying for lunches for Politicians. If Annie McWilliams, Bridgette Rivers or Rebecca Williams have had lunches paid for them pay the PMUA they should come forward and then they should reimburse us taxpayers.
EGA BRAG
To 9:42 AM: Let me remind everybody once again, you are ratepayers to an authority, meaning they figure out their budget and set rates to cover it. Municipal budgets cannot exceed revenues.
ReplyDeleteAs for the lunches, most likely all elected officials paid their own way. But how would you like it if you didn't know a meeting was going to turn into a pricey lunch, putting you on the hook for your tab? That might put a crimp in your personal budget (spoken from the perspective of a senior on fixed income).
Bernice, thank you for your comments. I am perplexed as to what point you are attempting to make as it relates to my post. The point I was attempting to make was that this Public Agency is acting as if it is a private hauler, a private company, which it is not. It's questionable expenditures warrants this conclusion.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the lunches, now, and previously you have made mention that these 'elected officials' paid their own way. How do you know this? Please present your facts? You viewed the receipts from the PMUA that showed that the lunch was paid for Ms. McWilliams. And Rebecca Williams admitted (sort of) to the pricey lunch. She was smart to admit to this before an OPRA request uncovered it. I commend her for speaking out on the issue. She is in a delicate position in her role with the PMUA. Her transparency is appreciated.
As to your statement that they 'didn't know a meeting was going to turn into a pricey lunch'. . . .order a glass of water!
If these lunches were not paid for by the PMUA lets hear from the 'elected officials'. Their silence on this matter is proof enough for me.
EGA BRAG
PS. . .it was not my intention to make the comment section of your blog entry about the PMUA. The subject matter was Council Liaisons which I found to be informative. I was only responding to @1:19
Whle the elected officials may have paid their own way, the PMUA executves have expensed many many lunches/dinners over the past few years. They have dined with local officials, the Mayor, corporation counsel, Assm Green, housing authority, orange boe, various consultants, themselves. Most of these are not one time events. They often include high priced items and quite frankly have not done anything to benefit the general public.
ReplyDeleteRather than go to surrounding cities to see how they handle "training" they pay training consultants upwards of $4,000 per day. In one instance, Garnell Bailey was paid for training "street sweepers"
The time for the council to act is PAST due. After all the excess that is paid to the PMUA could better be used to offset the $3.4 million shortfall to the city budget. There is no reason the PMUA should remain an untouchable!
Prior to Jan, the liaisons to the PMUA always had some connection with the board. They either previously sat on the board or went on trips sponsored by the PMUA. Don't believe it, just check the books.
To "EGA BRAG" and the other commenters,
ReplyDeleteFor the record, on 1/31/11, at approximately 1:15 pm, Councilor Rivers and I met with Eric Watson and David Ervin at the Stone Grill in Scotch Plains (Rte. 22 West). I had a glass of ginger ale and an appetizer. I paid for my own food and left a tip. Mr. Watson assured me that he was paying for the others. I took him at his word--if anyone wants to OPRA the expenses for that day, he/she should certainly do so.
Also,I wouldn't characterize what I said as something I "admitted, (sort of)" which implies that I did something wrong.
I do not begrudge anyone lunch--I was on my own time and paid for my own meal. My point was that I think elected officials should meet at the PMUA offices for business meetings and, had I known sooner that the venue had changed, I would have suggested that. In the future, I will.
Rebecca
I don't think anyone is going to frown upon an occasional meal on public funds wen necessary. The problem as I see it is this is the normal lifestyle for PMUA executives. The board says nothing to them and in fact is complicit with their wasteful spending. Case in point is the recent approvals by the board for training and survey services. In total, it's nearly $30k for nothing new.
ReplyDeleteThese are the same board members who approved a 61% rate hike. Despite their ramblings to the contrary its more of the same. We can only hope that their conscience directs them to do otherwise in 2011. Time will tell.
The problem is that the PMUA actions are the normal lifestyle for PMUA.
ReplyDelete