The Plainfield Municipal Utilities Authority will hold a special meeting at 4 p.m. Tuesday (Jan. 29) on a matter related to the company that provides disposal of vegetative waste.
The legal notice states the topic as "Settlement Agreement in the Matter of Plainfield Municipal Utilities Authority vs. Britton Industries, Inc."
This company was discussed at the Sept. 12 meeting as being significant to the expansion of PMUA services to other municipalities. The authority had begun to attract outside contracts for drop-off of vegetative waste (leaves, grass, tree debris) and had changed its rate to make its services more competitive. Instead of charging $94.20 per ton, the new rate would reduce the cost per cubic yard from $28.54 to $6.50. The change did not require a rate hearing and would take effect immediately, attorney Leslie London said.
Commissioner Malcolm Dunn asked where the debris would be taken ofter being dropped off at the Rock Avenue transfer station and was told it would be disposed of by "Brighton Industries" in Lawrenceville. To read further details, click here for the Sept. 12 minutes.
Although the contract was described on Sept. 12 as being for three years with another year or year and a half to go, a legal notice from the the Feb. 14, 2012 reorganization characterizes the contract with Britton Industries for disposal of vegetative waste as being for one year, which would put it near expiration.
Given that the drop-off service was expected to attract more outside municipal business and possibly lead to rate reductions, any new arrangements will be of interest to those who try to keep track of PMUA doings.
The authority normally reorganizes in February, selecting a chairman and other officers and making other decisions for the year. The meeting date is listed as Feb. 12. Both the special meeting and regular meeting will be held at PMUA headquarters, 127 Roosevelt Ave.
--Bernice
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Speaking of selecting a new PMUA chairman - Malcolm Dunn now has the three votes he needs to be chairman. The same three votes that gave away the million dollar settlement to the retiring executives. Those being the votes of newly appointed permanent member, Cecil Sanders, sitting member Alex Toliver and Dunn himself.
ReplyDeleteThank you Adrian Mapp for towing the party line with Jerry Green and solidifying Dunn's rise to the top. It is your vote to appoint him that got us here.
And by the way Adrian how is that working out for you, was it worth to sell your sole to the devil? Will it pay off and you will get the party line for Mayor?
I think not Adrian, your favorite mayor Sharon is going to get the line again. It never pays to sell out.
Ega Brag
Wow...careful... the Dem's will accuse you of being me...
DeleteIn order to make any sense at all of what is happening a great deal more information is required. At a monthly meeting some time ago when the prospect of handling other communities vegetative waste was first brought up, Mr Dunn appropriately asked Mr. Young who was at that time Executive Director for a financial analysis of what the revised program would produce. Was this analysis ever performed and if so is it available for public review; or, like the analysis for the apportionment of fee distribution between Household collection and Shared Services a closely guarded secret? The term "Settlement" is troubling. "Settlement" is a word customarily used when accord has been reached in a dispute. Was there a dispute? If so, what was the imbroglio this time?
ReplyDeleteIs the 4pm January 29 meeting open to the public? Bill Kruse
To 10:05am - Dunn would have gotten on eventually. He would have been voted in by the same council who voted in Saunders.
ReplyDeleteSo that makes it okay? I think not.
DeleteMessrs. Dunn and Sanders had a clandestine meeting with Messrs. Ervin and Watson immediately precedent to the monthly meeting of the Commissioners at which the Commissioners voted to award the $1,000,000 settlement. They met with the Plaintiffs without advising their fellow Commissioners, or even more importantly, Ms. Lesli London who was representing the PMUA as the defense attorney in the then on going Arbitration proceeding. What occurred during that meeting? It is obvious that these two men subverted the process which by all reports would have concluded favorably to the Ratepayers and saved the public $1,085,000 in settlement and legal fees. Dunn and Sanders rationalized their conduct by saying that they wanted to get "up to speed" on what was transpiring. The appropriate persons to contact to "get up to sped" were Ms. London, or, their fellow Commissioner Mr. Mitchell, who had taken the time to attend the Arbitration hearings. Mr Mitchell in case you have forgotten, to his credit, voted against the settlement. When Mr. Sanders responded during his recent interval that he felt the Arbitration was inappropriate, two conclusions can be drawn. First and foremost he indicted himself. This unrepentant comment regarding his vote should have been the basis of summary rejection He should have been sent packing. The maxim, "No good deed goes unpunished", is reversed in Plainfield. In this community the maxim goes: "No despicable deed goes without reward". Second, his appointment is a further indictment of those who voted for Mr. Sanders. An affirmative vote for his appointment is a corollary vote for the obscene settlement.
DeleteNow we are looking at another "Settlement". A settlement between Brighton Industries and the PMUA. In addition to the obvious question: What is this all about"?, there is perhaps a larger issue. How does the Brighton contract, if amended, affect the projected costs of the recent contracts between the PMUA and several communities for handling vegetative waste? If any, or or all of these issues disturb you, give vent your frustration by OPTING OUT. Bill Kruse
Stop forgetting that Annie McWilliams VOTED for Dunn also.
ReplyDelete