City Manager’s Memo to Council


Scroll Window  4 Pages [google-drive-embed url=”” title=”Weekly update.pdf” icon=”” width=”100%” height=”900″ style=”embed”] Weekly Letter to Council

8 Opinions on “City Manager’s Memo to Council

  1. Wow..sounds like someone either on or off council hit the manager in the head with a 2X4 and finally got his attention.


  2. Big; big; big mistake for Port Orange to be re-paving city streets in cold weather. Our City contractor must have been busy for the past 10 months in other municipalities that know something about the proper application of asphalt.

    How come Port Orange was on the bottom of the contractors schedule?

    • The contract gave till March I think to do the work, budget year ended last October. I would also bet without looking that the cost was set at the higher 2014 petroleum and fuel prices and bet we are paying way more than the current cost, the contractor was smart to wait with falling costs in there favor.

  3. Incoming–For as long as I can remember, the activists have been asking “who is negotiating on behalf of the City of Port Orange” in these various contract negotiations. (Anybody remember the “dirt deals” with Halifax Paving.) All too often the contracts seem to be written for the convenience of the contractor (developer, etc) and all we can do is cry over spilt milk when the deal goes south. Even if this contractor was not required to pave until the last minute, he should have been made very aware of the prospects of cancellation and/or nonrenewal if a reasonable schedule was not maintained.

    The last time I heard the “who is negotiating…” question answered, it was by Mayor Green and he said “we are,” meaning the Council as a whole. I’m pretty sure he was referring to the specific problem at hand but whatever the problem may be it is always management’s fault. The buck stops with Council–always.

  4. Newton, speaking of energy surcharges, it appears that we are still paying the same energy surcharge for our contractors garbage trucks that we had paid in 2012 when fuel prices were over $4 gallon. Another example were someone in Public Works is asleep at the switch

    • Don’t forget the energy charge was separated on our water sewer to allow for upward or downward adjustment. The recent change took that out. Now seeing FPL has had rate decreases and planning another, we are not seeing anything but a rate increase. Fuel cost, electric cost, asphalt cost all down price to taxpayer looks to be going up. Must me the common core math,

      • The recent 3% rate increase in water did not generate any revenue increase. (As the finance director points out “it’s complicated.”) Wonder if it would have amounted to a revenue DECREASE if fuel had not gone down?

        • As Einstein is often quoted as saying
          ” If you can not explain something :in simple enough terms for it to understood it is because you do not understand it well enough yourself ”
          Wake up Council. You are being had

Comments are closed.

1,092 v