"II'S ONLY WORDS" bee gee's
It's only words , and words are all I have
Chosen excerpts from the current Refuse Contract;
LEGAL CONSTRUCTION
If one or more of the provisions contained in this Contract are held to be invalid,, illegal or unenforceable, the invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision and this Contract shall be construed as if the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never been contained in it.
Seems they might have known something?
ANNUAL FEE
Contractor shall pay the City Forty-Eight Thousand Dollars ($48,000) annually for each year of this agreement extension. The first year payment of Forty-eight Thousand Dollars ($48,000) shall be due on or before December 20, 2014. The second year payment of Forty-Eight Thousand Dollars ($48,000) shall be de on or before December 20, 2015.
Odd no mention of a delinquent collection fee, a Franchise fee nothing about roads either? Just maybe a gift? And for what?
PAST DUE RECYCLING SUBSIDY CLAIM
Contractor claim for past due subsidy payments from the City shall be fully satisfied after Contractor has collected a total of $20,000 pursuant in Section 1 and 2 of the Agreement, as amended.
Not even a clue? Best guess, The City agreed to subsidize recycling for City residents. They are past due to the amount of $20,000? What would the amount be? All will be forgiven if this Addendment is signed. Another windfall for the administration! Remember back in the day they promised to subsidize recycling and well they didn't.
The amount's of the subsidizes per month:
2011-12 $1.16 per home
2012-13 $.68 per home
2013-14 $.44 per home
2014-15 $.23 per home
2014-15 $.00 per home
So did the City ever pay the subsidy? * Please see year 2014-15
RECYCLING SUBSIDY
The City shall provide no per month subsidy during option year four (4) and five (5), to-wit: the entire two (2) year term of the extension.
This Contract...well stinks like Garbage!
posted by terminator1 @ 10:37 AM
4 Comments
4 Comments:
Along with everything else our rates went up both in 2014 and 2015? But the City got forgiveness and $96,000? NICE
I watched law director Gurley scorn you on channel 12. His comment "Your off hand comments cast dispersions on this administration" Gurley should read the contract. If your assessment is true the administration is criminal!
Now who works in the prosecutors office? They can find a reason to take an individual to court over a stolen item, but no interest in a city robbing it's citizens?
(;59 I don't speak ill of our law director because I have been around many institution have Yes people, who don't want their attorney's advice but only to get involved after the deed. Remember if it was the former CM as well as the current CM the law director serves at their wishes. That said I can't agree with you more but until the time comes that most around here get fed-up with what goes on here, their really might not even be a need for a law director.
When I questioned the CM about the leaf issue, all Gurley responded with was I agree with the CM? No statute or something written in the ordinance for that explanation. Although the Ordinance and the contract both state when the word City is used it means the City. Not the resident's of the city.
-the law director serves at their wishes- As do the department heads, so many have been dismissed just for that reason, and how many more? Most for no good reason other than the man doesn't like you? How wrong is that? This needs to be changed, no one should be let go on account of just because. Old administration was Never like this one.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home