Coppergate

As outlined in previous postings I have asked for more details on why the Council should approve an additional $135,000 (in addition to the first $100,000) for asbestos abatement on the Kings Inn. The more layers that unfold only proves that there is a complete disregard for taxpayer money and that the rules only apply to some.

There are bookkeeping guidelines that a municipality must follow in order to be eligible for grants, federal aid, etc. These guidelines include having a central purchasing agent to insure that all expenditures have a layer of oversight. (Remember a former DPW Superintendent who was stockpiling chemicals that the City had no use for?) We have since put in place a “Procurement Policy” that should be followed making sure that all contracts awarded by the City offer a fair opportunity and also insure that the scope of work is clearly defined. This is not to be confused with putting out an RFP for larger contracts, this policy applies to all contracts. Prevailing wages must be offered, the vendor must provide Workman’s Comp, and safety measures met if they are going to work on a City project. The other key component of having this oversight in place will not allow Department Heads to spend as they see fit which is how you control wasteful spending and stay within your budget. This is why we have a procedure in place to insure that we are spending our money wisely and efficiently. (I must add that another GOP opponent has called for the elimination of the Purchasing Department which would send us backwards with his ‘budget plan’)

With the ‘theft’ at the Kings Inn there is more than asbestos being exposed here. As I dig deeper, I’m told there is no contract that anyone can produce between the contractor and the City, at least not yet. Nobody seems to know who awarded the job to Mr. McGowan, there were no specs drawn up (no contract, no specs) and this did not go through the Purchasing Department. The mayor said “I told him not to touch the pipes” so apparently he knew who was awarded this job. Chief Salzmann has been away all week so I am told it will all be explained upon his return. Really? Don’t cell phones work in Florida to ask if he knew the details of this agreement? On top of this mess, apparently there are possible serious Labor violations that come into play. We now have a claim against the City for an injury of a worker who was not covered by any employer insurance, not to mention these workers were told to go in a room with known asbestos without any protection whatsoever exposing them to a known health hazard when it becomes airborne. This is serious stuff. The complete disregard to rules, procedure, and common sense will once again cost you, the taxpayer who is footing the bill.

Now, the Common Council will be voting to approve or reject the extra $135,000 to cover the additional costs that have been incurred from this mess. I will not vote on any additional funding for this fiasco until I know who is responsible for acting is such an irresponsible manner and if we will be able to recoup this loss. At this point, each room has been sealed again so the asbestos is not an immediate threat to anyone’s safety. What we need to do is take stock of what we have here. The City of Kingston was owed $130,000 in back taxes, we have already committed to $100,000, now another $135,000, and perhaps another $50,000 for tipping fees and it is no longer on the tax roll. We are on the hook for over $400,000 and we will have a vacant parcel that will need even more money invested just to pave it for a parking lot. You have to wonder if the term “cost benefit analysis” has come up……probably not.