Crowd at a Wausau City Council meeting. MWC photo by Mike Leischner
WAUSAU, WI (WSAU) — The Wausau City Council did not consider a proposal to purchase a new front-door security camera for city hall and floodlight for the city’s dropbox.
Alders failed to suspend their rules regarding committee consideration for the item. Such suspension requires a 2/3rds majority vote, which never came. None of the alders made a motion on that item, preventing the council from voting on the suspension, and in turn the proposal itself.
The item was a late addition to Tuesday’s meeting. The agenda originally called for discussion and possible action regarding use of the Dropbox. The agenda was amended on Monday.
Speaking after the meeting, Diny said he feels there was “corruption” or “collusion” among the alders. “I did expect a more robust discussion among Alders. Quite frankly, they were discussing behind the scenes. As evidence shows, not one decided to offer a motion or a second. That indicates to me there was some collusion behind closed doors, and I would call it corruption. I know over half of them had discussed their opinions with the Clerk.
“They want to be able to put their foot on the scale with the Clerk, but they didn’t want to be able to do that in public. They were able to do it privately, but they didn’t do it publicly,” added Diny.
As for bringing the proposal back to the Alders through traditional channels including the Finance Committee, Diny says they could still order and install the items through procurement, given the $3,000 price tag, but he will leave that decision up to Clerk Kaitlyn Bernarde.
“I’ll leave that up to the Clerk. I mean, it is kind of ironic- that I would be in charge of security, when they [the Council] just told me they didn’t want security,” added Diny.
Council President Lisa Rasmussen also noted that procurement policy. In a statement emailed to WSAU News following the meeting, she said Diny could have secured those items weeks ago and noted that his decision to put the purchase on Monday’s agenda felt like a stunt.
The original item that was on the agenda when it was issued was not within the council’s authority. Knowing that, the mayor chose to pull that item because he knew the council had received legal guidance that the item was not within our purview and the recommendation coming from his own staff was that we not consider it.
So, late yesterday, he chose to substitute the item with one about funding $3000 for a security plan but that plan was not the clerk’s work. What he ignored is that HE has the authority at any time to spend up to $5000 for anything he chooses with no approval from council or any committees. He had the funding and staff could have purchased these items weeks ago if it was important to him. It seems the funding item was placed before the council for political purposes. The finance director advised the mayor he did not need council approval, there was funding and no modification to any budget was needed. He knew that BEFORE he changed the items on the agenda in the 11th hour.
Council knew this also. We are not willing to be put in a position to operate beyond our authority, and we should not be asked to decide issues that do not require our approval, just to give him political cover.
Monday’s meeting brought more than 20 individuals for public comment, most regarding the ballot dropbox, and dozens of protesters outside City Hall. Diny said that given the amount of interest, he would have liked to have seen a vote.
“It looked like the majority [was in favor] of the dropbox, or at least the security upgrades. I would say they whiffed on it. We could have taken a vote,” added Diny.
