Thursday, September 10, 2015

Planning & Zoning Outsourcing RFP Posted

Click on link below to see the document on the city's web site:

RFP for Outsourcing of Planning and Zoning 

 Update: the notice is in the Courier News 9/11/2015
Posted by at

16 comments:

  1. Jim SpearSeptember 11, 2015 at 8:05 AM

    HEAR YE HEAR YE Ladies and Gents all this for a mere 85 thousand dollars a year - should the request not say that?

    The Planning division budget is 360K, they already outsource 75k, that leaves 285k, but the Mayors staff, Dirs. Smiley, Watson and Sanchez claim the City will save $200k - so there it is 85k for all that work. Should they not disclose that to potential bidders?

    R E A L L Y? really guys? really?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousSeptember 11, 2015 at 10:55 AM

      Thanks for the analysis. Plainfield government is less than forthcoming when it comes to crunching numbers and using the honest results to help guide decision making. Why bother when it is the outcome that is wanted and talk of improvement and efficiencies are just political cant.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousSeptember 13, 2015 at 9:37 AM

      The numbers are not totally correct. While Jim is correct in his initial total, remember we are paying pension and benefits to them. While the pension remains, the benefits, which I believe total 26% of salary will be eliminated. In addition, you need to remember that we pay employees for vacation time which means we pay for non-productive time - no argument that employees should take a vacation , just that we are paying with no work being done. To cover for vacations, we now need to pay either comp or overtime to cover for vacation. That same scenario goes for medical leave, and maternity leave. There are also additional liabilities for which the city is responsible.

      So while Jim is right to say that 85k is being saved, it is a simplistic calculation. It is actually much more than that.

      Delete
  2. AnonymousSeptember 11, 2015 at 8:35 AM

    With respect to being able to level set proposals, this is a rather poorly constructed RFP. There is little to nothing about working with the public and there are zero in the way of statistics (number of applications received, hours dedicated to various boards etc.) that would allow a bidder to construct a response that meets the cities needs for effective outsourcing. Additionally, there is no request to provide any information around opportunities for cost savings, examples of how they have achieved them in other engagements or have bidders explain how they may guarantee such savings. Of course it is an RFP and not an RFQ but this document should be much more robust. In order to make a proper decision this would require an RFQ round, level setting and other steps that would easily take another month between the city and the bidders. How the city thinks they are going to have information for the Council in October that is meaningful is beyond me.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousSeptember 11, 2015 at 9:15 AM

    As anyone who has worked in construction and development knows, change orders will eat up any supposed savings. Get real administration. Economic value added (EVA) is inhouse city planning. A better idea is to go back to farmland and green space.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousSeptember 11, 2015 at 11:33 AM

    COME ON CITY COUNCIL - Give the Mayor his Fleet Manager Position so this can be taken off the table.

    ReplyDelete
  5. LaloSeptember 11, 2015 at 12:14 PM

    No doubt there's palms getting greased.

    I'm really disappointed with this administration.

    They've proven to be a quintessential group of political sneaks. Shame on Mapp et al.

    I have had to deal with the outsourced engineering department for permit approvals and it is a very long, drawn out process and replies have been based on when the engineer comes to City Hall.

    This is a very poorly hacked scheme on behalf of this administration.

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousSeptember 11, 2015 at 12:30 PM

    The presentation to Council in October is a must see event - if for no other reason than the entertainment factor of watching them try to make a poorly written RFP into a meaningful presentation to the council. If their comments at this weeks meeting are any indication it should be a real joke.

    ReplyDelete
  7. AnonymousSeptember 11, 2015 at 3:41 PM

    Fleet Manager,Cheif of Staff, how many friends and family jobs does Mr.Mapp want to give job to? Just what outside vender does he want to give a contract to? What will be his financial gain? Why is so desperate to have this city overcrowded with apartments and no parking spaces? I think we all pushed the wrong button on Election Day ...... Soooooo Sad......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousSeptember 11, 2015 at 6:16 PM

      Apartments and parking have nothing to do with this at all.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousSeptember 12, 2015 at 2:05 AM

      yes it does. Frank Cretilla and his business partner Chief of Staff John Stewart wants to build more apartments.but not pay taxes. They want a outside planning dept to be in charge so they can break all the rules and turn Plainfield into the 99 cent store and Apartment Capitol and 99 cent store of Union County. That is the Mayors claim to economic development.

      Delete
    3. AnonymousSeptember 12, 2015 at 9:06 AM

      There was a recent expansion of an industrial property in the west end and Mr. Sanchez was nowhere to be seen at the meeting. The lack of his presence at real economic development says it all. Just to be clear there were no apartments and no PILOT. Just real economic development. Enough said.

      Delete
    4. AnonymousSeptember 12, 2015 at 12:30 PM

      Anon 9:06- At least tell us about this "recent expansion". What industrial property expanded? Without this basic information, who cares what you say.

      Delete
    5. AnonymousSeptember 12, 2015 at 3:53 PM

      Anon 12:30PM - attend a planning board meeting or pull up the agenda's online - its all a matter of public record. But to help you out in this case - it was the National Starch building on Front Street.

      Delete
  8. AnonymousSeptember 11, 2015 at 7:46 PM

    Pretty sloppy job, if you ask me. Thanks, Bernice, for posting it!

    ReplyDelete
  9. jeffSeptember 12, 2015 at 3:04 PM

    To anon at 205, in case you didnt notice, many pf Franks spaces are empty to prevent having the 99 cent stores. His visions are higher than that. Paramount on the other hand, loves them.
    To 906, what property are you referring to? You have not said enough yet. Details?? Have you ever looked at Jersey City?? BILLIONS of dollars in new construction over the last 20 years. Why? PILOTS! They are your friend if you ever want to see a Plainfield with a future outside of Section 8 housing.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)