220318 2123 Fwd_ Open Letter to the Cypress CouncilFrom:Frances Marquez
To:Michele Magar
Subject:Fwd: Open Letter to the Cypress Council
Date:Friday, March 18, 2022 9:23:15 PM
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Thomas Moore <tomrmoore2@gmail.com>
Date: March 16, 2022 at 11:00:42 AM PDT
To: Frances Marquez <fmarquez@cypressca.org>
Subject: Open Letter to the Cypress Council
Frances:
I don't know if you've read the current edition of the News-Enterprise,
but they published an open letter to you and Councilman Peat
concerning the extension of the sanitation contract. I'm hoping you can
give a comprehensive answer to the questions posed in a Letter to the
Editor of the News-Enterprise. Below is a copy.
Sincerely,
Tom Moore
An Open Letter to Council Members Peat and Marquez
I have been following the controversy regarding the extension of
the Valley Vista sanitation contract. Rather than passing
judgment at this juncture, it seems that there are facts that can
be brought to light by the most vociferous advocate of the
contract Mr. Peat and the the lone opponent Ms. Peat. My
neighbors and I have a number of questions that haven't been
adequately addressed. In the spirit of full TRANSPARENCY, I’m
hoping the two sides can answer them in this public forum. (I
will email you the questions so you are aware.)
1. It has been stated that the contract couldn’t be BID OUT, as
the current contract hasn’t expired (It expires in 2024?). When
is the window that the contract could have been bid out?
2. Considering accepted practice is that governmental agencies
bid out any work to be performed, why wasn’t the contract bid
out at the appropriate time? Despite having to address the new
organics recycling program in order to comply with a new state
law, it appears that a 32% rate increase is steep and that
competitive bidding in our capitalistic system would have
benefited Cypress residents? We certainly wouldn’t have
received a worse contract by waiting.
3. Why wasn’t the company who provides sanitation for the city
of Los Alamitos, who will have an eight dollar ($8) a month less
in trash charges contacted, or was it? Sanitation is not like
construction, where quality is important, trash is either picked
up or not. It has been suggested that Los Al has very high
rates to commercial and multi-family customers to subsidize
single family residential rates. If so, are the citizens of Cypress
subsidizing commercial business in our city?
4. If true, the most baffling/disturbing fact is the idea that Ms.
Marquez was prohibited from communicating with city staff.
Additionally, for full transparency and the fact that the contract
was signed, was there any information that wasn’t allowed to
flow among the council or to the public?
5. It appears that Cypress citizens had a deadline to protest the
contract and a date at a city council meeting to voice opinions
about the contract. Why was deadline and opportunity proffered
AFTER the contract has been signed?
It is apparent that the contract must be more complex than
originally presented, considering we are at a point that the
words “censure” and “transparency” are being spoken. I
guarantee the citizens are way less interested in political
infighting in their city government than having a fair and
comprehensive consideration of any money spent by the city. I
hope your answers will address the contract and not devolve into
further unseemly finger pointing.
Tom Moore
Cypress