Saying no may be the best answer

Guest Column by Robert W. Wilford, Alachua City Commissioner

I would like to set the record straight regarding the “no” vote which was cast by me at the city commission meeting on Aug. 23 in regard to the Alachua City Commission entering into a new two-year contract with its current city attorney.

You indicated in an article on Aug. 26 that: "Wilford was the dissenting vote, stating he wanted to have more time to perform his own research on the costs for a fulltime city attorney.".

Although employing a fulltime city attorney was briefly mentioned at the city commission meeting conducted on Aug. 23, since it was my intention to make a motion at this meeting to extend the existing city attorney contract through Dec. 31, 2010, I clearly indicated that I was caught by complete surprise with an agenda item offering the current city attorney a new two-year contract. 

In addition, I succinctly stated that I had personally started researching financial arrangements other municipalities followed in obtaining legal services. This research was/is being done in Alachua County and with a number of municipalities around the state having similar populations to Alachua.

The primary purpose of my research, as articulated in the city commission meeting, was to ensure that Alachua receives the “biggest bang for its buck” in acquiring legal services whether it is on a contractual basis or as a result of employing a fulltime city attorney on staff.

It is my firm belief that, as an elected public servant serving as a member of the Alachua City Commission, I have both an awesome and a gratifying fiduciary responsibility in efficiently managing and frugally spending the tax dollars placed in my trust by the fine folks who call Alachua home.

Therefore, just because it “appears” the costs for legal services may be reduced in a new contract, in rendering my vote, I did not have sufficient research data and empirical documentation substantiating this less costly premise nor to evaluate whether the city had been receiving the most cost effective legal services over the past six to seven years. Consequently, in following my conscience, I had no other choice than to vote “no” on the motion to enter into a new two-year contract with the current city attorney.

Since I truly hold my colleagues serving with me on the Alachua City Commission in very high regard as well as being an adherent to time-honored parliamentary procedures and in keeping with the guidelines specified in Robert’s Rules of Order, Revised, I do respect their decision. American democracy through majority rule was most definitely on display in these city commission proceedings.

However, I rendered a ""no" vote, exercising my right to offer a minority opinion, to enter into a new two-year contract with our current city attorney since my research was not complete. It should be finalized within the next two to three weeks.

It is important to note that my “no” vote was not a pronouncement meant to impugn the integrity nor question the knowledge, abilities, and expertise of our current city attorney. Quite simply, I passionately believe it is an “ethical principle of competitive fairness” to seek bids and/or Request for Qualifications (RFQ’s)/Request for Proposals (RFP’s) for contractual professionals on a periodic basis.

In my opinion, a competitive bidding, RFQ, or RFP, process should be conducted on a predetermined schedule in acquiring the services of city attorneys, auditors, insurance agents of record, banking institutions, and investment firms, as well as, when applicable, other contractual entities.

As an Alachua City Commissioner, I am unwavering in my commitment to: (1) performing my duties and responsibilities to the very best of my abilities, (2) accepting without hesitation personal accountability for my actions on behalf of the citizens of Alachua, and (3) being “transparent, transparent, and even more transparent” in everything I do on behalf of “The Good Life Community.”

On occasion it may take a “no” vote for me to be true to these three very personal commitments.