An ordinance that would have increased the Haines Borough manager’s emergency spending limit to $50,000 was dead on arrival last week when an assembly vote failed to introduce the legislation.
A motion to introduce the ordinance failed 3-2, with members Tresham Gregg and George Campbell opposed. Assembly member Mike Case was absent. Motions need at least four votes to pass.
The ordinance, recommended by interim manager Brad Ryan, would have allowed the manager to enter into contracts up to $50,000 in emergencies or “extenuating circumstances” without following customary competitive bidding procedures if the manager determined it was in the public interest.
“The existing code already allows this for emergencies, but there are sometimes exceptional occasions that are not true emergencies when the manager could save the borough considerable resources by ‘striking while the iron is hot,’” Ryan wrote in the ordinance’s summary statement.
The manager’s current spending limit without assembly approval is $25,000, raised from $10,000 in 2014.
The ordinance was set for introduction on the consent agenda at the assembly’s April 26 meeting, but member Gregg pulled it off for discussion. Gregg balked at the ordinance’s vagueness and failure to define key terms like “extenuating circumstances.”
“It just seems to me that it gives the manager a lot of leeway that is unclear,” he said.
Assembly member Campbell agreed, and said he was concerned about the ordinance’s impact on transparency and the public’s ability to weigh in on the municipality’s spending decisions. Campbell also thought it would encourage less proactive decision-making.
“Essentially, we’re giving them a ‘Get Out of Jail Free’ card. ‘Oh, I didn’t plan right, I didn’t look ahead, I’m not taking care of business as a manager and actually planning ahead, therefore I’m going to save myself because now I can spend $50,000,’” Campbell said.
Interim manager Ryan said in his eight months with the borough, he’s encountered two situations where having the ordinance on the books would have been beneficial. One scenario was when he was working as public facilities director on the Picture Point grant project, the grant’s progress was lacking, and the borough was denied an extension.
The project committee initially planned for two pavilion/gazebo structures, one on the north lot and one on the south. The borough ended up building one pavilion because it was under the $25,000 mark, though two would have exceeded that limit.
“We did not build a second one because it was going to be over the $25,000 mark and I was going to have to come back to the assembly and go out for bid, and so we didn’t have time to put it on the ground, so we essentially lost a $25,000 gazebo in the other parking lot,” Ryan said.
Ryan said he understood the concerns that the concept of “extenuating” was loose.
“I understand the worry that it can get a little gray, but I also think hopefully you have a manager that you trust, and if ever there was an indiscretion you’d quickly be on top of it,” he said.
“It’s not trying to get more power,” he added. “It won’t even be me (in the manager position). I go back to public facilities and I’ll have a $5,000 spending limit. It won’t mean much to me. But it will to the new manager.”