Councilwomen Stacy Head and Diana Bajoie pressed Thomas and Bascos about illegal construction and other code violations that occur on weekends, when no inspectors are working. Head asked for a number to call — though no one would be available to answer on the weekend anyway. There was a prolonged silence until Thomas told Head she would get her the number. This is at least the third time Head has made the request.
Also
Discussion moved to the New Orleans Police Department's consent decree, specifically the process for identifying a federal monitor. The point here: Council members wanted Hutson to have a greater part of that process, rather than virtually none, which has been the case. Some even wondered if she might put in a bid on the RFP.No matter. If the consent decree comes up again.. maybe when the DA's office is on the agenda next week.. look for Councilmembers to once again ask why the city-led search hasn't considered Ms. Hutson as the federal monitor.
(Note: There's various reasons that would be unlikely. 1. Perhaps the most important is the consent decree itself identifies the monitor and the IPM as two distinct entities. 2. Hutson also referenced some "legal issues" that she believes would bar IPM from contracting with the city. 3. The consent decree says the monitor is to be identified through the city's purchasing process. 4. The document says the monitor is not a public agency or an agent of one.)
Apparently, and I missed this, Councilmembers erroneously referred to that process as a city-led search, which brought a breathless Ryan Berni — the mayor's chief spokesman — running into the room to clarify. It's a joint process between the US Department of Justice and the city. Absolutely, but again the real point of the conversation was whether Hutson should have a greater involvement.
No comments:
Post a Comment