Fort Walton Beach Council minutes — 05-28-1991 Regular — reading text

COUNCIL 5- 14- 91 of 5- 14- 91. Motion vas seconded by Mr. deVaux and carried unanimously vith Rosenbaum. deVaux. Wyatt. Haney. Nicholson, and Wyninegar in favor. ( Smith absent) RECESS The meeting recessed at 7: 47 p. m. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7: 58 p. m. NICK NICHOLSON Mr. Nicholson gave the following statement to Mayor. I Council. Ladies and Gentlemen: This statement response to consultant for infiltration/ inflow study the City' s sanitary sewer system and the propriety of my vote on May 14, outraged that 1991. First of all, I am dismayed and my integrity has been questioned. I have is in for always abided by the highest values and principles in private and public life. I received many decorat ions and medals in the Air Force. Some of these decorations read, in part, " By direction of the Secretary of the Air Force", and that my accomplishments reflect credit upon myself and the United States Air Force. Although both the Ethics Commission and the City Attorney found no voting impropriety. I assure the Council that had either found otherwise. I. myself, would have been the first one to bring that back to this Council. My whole life has been built on sound moral principles and I will not accept any challenge tomy honor or allow my integrity to be questioned. I would like to remind everyone the vote on that subject was 7- 0 to accept the recommendations of the City staff. We should not lose sight of the fact that the object is to find the best possible solution to our sewer system problems. Further discussion regarding this issue. in my opinion, is inappropriate. Finally, I would like to state that I have honored every oath that I have ever taken and I am not about to violate the oath I toOk when seated on this Council. now or at any other time. Thank you very much. SELECTION OF Mr. Maney gave the following statement: Whenever ENGINEERING CONSULTANT- Council is called upon to make a decision, especially TOM MANEY when that decision involves the expenditure of public funds, it is my philosophy that to make that decision based on less than all the available facts is irresponsible. There are those on the Council who have stated that we should take the opinion of the Staf f experts relyand on that. I am certainly willing to receive and weigh these opinions but it is the Council member who is responsible to the public for the wise and I prudent expenditure of funds, NOT the staff. is On responsible the issue to efficiently executing the the Council decisions of for made selection by The staff properly Council. and of the consulting contractor as well as on previous major issues. I have asked to have complete staff work made available to the Council prior to voting. This has seldom occurred, probably because the maj ority of the Council does not share this view.  5- 28- 91 0 1 5ENGINEERING CONSULTANT Mr. Maney continued, my view, however, remains the same, CONI'. ) and henceforth. I serve notice on my fellow Council members and the Staff that against every I shall vote proposal amounting to $ 10. 000 or more unless the Staff provides a full and complete cost- benefit rationale for the acquisition or action. But now. I want to comment on the specific issue of the selection of the Engineering Consultant. Mr. Keeler. in his explanation-- copy of which all the Council members a have-- indicated that though all three finalists were qualified, the recommended contractor appeared to offer additional, for example, Mr. Ingram, their local engineer, was quite familiar with the City situation. As far as I am concerned, however, the issue is much more complex than that. I have been a member of Source Selection Boards and Authorities many times over the past thirty years in and each and every case the source selection recommending group provided their best comments on all aspects of the acquisition to the Selection Authority-- technical skill, technical approach, experience, financial strength, available resources, etc. This, I consider to be the correct role for the staff and the Council should then base its decision on these and any other factors deemed appropriate-- for example any possible hint of real or potential political influence. In this case. the political factor is so strong that I plan to change my vote on the issue at the conclusion of these remarks. legal opinion that an attorney may The have regarding potential conflict resulting from mr. the Nicholson' s son being on the payroll of Mr. Ingram, does not satisfy me. After all, according to the official records, Mr. Ingram is not only the employer of young Mr. Nicholson but he is the campaign treasurer for the Nicholson campaign. Even if Nicholson knew nothing about the contract award potential, and I am willing to accept his word for that, certainly Mr. Ingram knew it and as a political officer, I believe he had the obligation to tell the Council of the situation. he was present at the time, and could have done that.