Post a comment about the budget cuts at your school on our interactive comment map. more »
After the first meeting of the citywide school board packed Tweed last month, it was a return to normal last night, as the board unanimously approved all of the contracts up for discussion before a thinly-populated crowd.
The main items of interest for the panel were the new contracts for the city schools’ vending machine suppliers. The vending contracts have received much attention in recent days because they are part of the education department’s initiative to get healthier foods into the schools, efforts that have also included restrictions on school bake sales. The contracts are also being closely scrutinized because they replace the city’s controversial no-bid contract with Snapple, which expired in August.
The panel approved the vending contracts as part of an omnibus vote that also included approval of more than 30 contracts in all, including agreements with a number of special education service and teacher professional development service providers, as well as a centralized source for schools to purchase discounted performing arts event tickets.
The contracts were widely expected to be approved, but the meeting did offer a few interesting tidbits:
Wish I coulda been there to deliver…
“Thank you for two minutes of your time. I hope that is less than the time you will spend deliberating the contracts before you tonite. Can I see a show of hands from any of you who still don’t know how you’ll vote? Not seeing any, I’ll be even more brief.
I understand that panel members received more extensive briefing materials than were made available to the public. But some of us have been given a look-see at what you were provided, so I believe we’re on the same page, even if singing a different tune.
It is stupefying that the Board of Education, under the revised Mayoral Control law nominally giving you significant fiduciary oversight powers, could vote on contract awards without such basic information at hand as:
a) The DOE’s cost estimate for the fair value of each contract type; and
b) The dollar amount budgeted against which these monies will be spent, and whether those budget lines are Tweed’s or schools’ budgets.
In short, an analysis that any given vendor was “best of show” is not enough to bark over. Fair awarding of contracts is but one element of financial prudence.
Last, we note that the $100k cap for exceptions to the bid process does not seem to be a rule consistently applied, let alone highlighted on the pdf provided to the public. In this one kit alone, of such contracts per the file you were provided, the first five on both lists, there is a contract that exceeds that amount in one year, and another that greatly exceeds it in total. It seems there exceptions to the exceptions rule, that DOE is using to push the envelope so as to award more no-bid contracts.
On behalf of a number of parent leaders, and in the independent and clear-thinking spirit of Patrick Sullivan who cannot be here tonite, I urge you to vote to TABLE this package until the above information can be provided to you and the public, and the exceptions rule clarified.”
Note that there were 32 contract types, some with NUMEROUS vendors within type.
And not one member complained of being SANDBAGGED?
it is one step ahead but it will increase the junk food selling in schools
2 Comments
Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack