Although Jerome was willing to respond to some other issues he completely ignored my questions related to the way the city manages its contracts and contractors. Here's my questions.
June 2, 2011
Saw your quotes in the UT.
Was the report substantially complete in March 2010, before the Calaware request or not? Did the consultant consider their work complete in March? Why was the [final] report dated March 2010? When were the consultants paid for completed the REPORT? Does the city make it a practice of paying consultants in full (for that portion of a contract) for something that has not been reviewed yet and approved?
From the looks of the closed session packet it sure looks like it was completely complete and NOT DRAFT when the city said the document was still a draft and the city needed to time alone to finish the project.
The city holds no credibility when it says the document was just a draft. It would be an amazing story if the document was actually a draft and it would bring up so many more questions about city management.