Walker vetoed $150,000 in county building inspection funding
A couple points about the MJS story:
1.) Walker is quibbling about terminology. The amendment clearly states the $150,000 was for “contractual services,” which is the hiring of a contractor, consultant, or whatever you want to call it. Either way, it was for the hiring of a body, or bodies, to digitize building plans and building systems inventory and assess county buildings.
2.) The amendment clearly states that the 2008 work would concentrate on the remaining Parks Department buildings, in addition to Fleet Maintenance and the Public Museum. A December 2009 county audit found the Parks needing over $200 million in deferred maintenance, and the Graef-USA investigations uncovered over 26 buildings needing repair. If the Public Works department had conducted assessments of county buildings back in 2008, why weren’t these issues addressed?
3.) If as Walker claims, that the Public Works Department was able to conduct the assessments using their existing staff, then we request evidence of the “digitization” of the building plans and building systems inventory, along with all documentation of the assessment of each building system and equipment discovered during the investigations.
The bottom line is Walker cut $150,000 for county building inspections. Cut and dry. Few inspectors means fewer inspections or less frequent inspections. He shortchanged public safety by vetoing this money.