Highlights
Madison's Common Council is set to pass a resolution tonight increasing the threshold for no-bid service contracts from $50,000 to $75,000—without providing any data to justify the change.
City officials claim the amendment will save staff time and improve efficiency, but no analysis or financial data has been shared to support this assertion.
This decision runs counter to the city's stated commitment to data-driven decision-making, transparency, and financial accountability.

Where’s the Data?
The Madison Common Council is poised to pass a resolution tonight, Legistar ID no. 86652, that would increase the threshold for requiring competitive selection of service contracts from $50,000 to $75,000. The rationale? City officials claim it will “create operational efficiencies that will save staff time.”
That sounds reasonable—except there’s no actual data or analysis to support this claim.
How many contracts will this affect? How much staff time will this save? What are the actual financial benefits? The fiscal note attached to this resolution provides zero answers. The $50,000 limit was originally put in place to ensure oversight and accountability, especially for no-bid contracts. Raising that threshold without data-backed justification undermines these safeguards and public trust.
Madison Claims to Use Data—So Why Isn’t It?
Madison has been recognized nationally for its commitment to data-driven governance. In 2021, the city received Silver Certification from What Works Cities, an initiative backed by Bloomberg Philanthropies that, "recognizes and celebrates local governments for their exceptional use of data to inform policy decisions, allocate funding, equitably improve services, evaluate the effectiveness of programs, and engage residents." At the time, Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway stated:
“I am proud of Madison’s recognition as a ‘What Works Certified City,’ as it shows that our work to make data-driven decisions is effective.”
That commitment is why this resolution is so frustrating. The city publicly claims it values data, yet here we are—about to approve a major change to procurement oversight without any supporting analysis.
A Pattern of Decision-Making Without Accountability
Unfortunately, this isn’t an isolated case. It reflects a recurring issue in how the Council makes financial decisions—often citing vague efficiency claims without providing the data to back them up.
This is especially concerning given that the City of Madison repeatedly touts its commitment to data-driven decision-making. The Finance Department's website states:
“We are a central City resource aiming to further data-informed decisions by helping partners take full advantage of a top strategic asset — data.”
Similarly, the city's Administrative Procedure Memorandum 3-21 explicitly states:
“We gather data in public trust – both in the quality of data we gather and the integrity of the processes in which we use this data. We must ensure high-quality information exists to inform analysis and decision-making by the Mayor, Council, and city leadership on behalf of our community, our partners, and all City of Madison employees.”
Yet, in practice, the Council is set to approve this resolution without requiring any of the data necessary to justify the change.
What Should Have Happened Instead?
Before passing a measure like this, the Council should have ensured:
A report on how many contracts this would impact annually.
An estimate of staff hours saved by raising the threshold.
A financial analysis quantifying the expected cost savings.
A review of how this aligns with the city’s commitments to transparency and accountability.
Administration Procedure Memorandum 1-3 and Madison General Ordinance 2.05(b) already require a fiscal note for legislation, but there are no standards on what must be included. As a result, the fiscal note attached to this resolution is a simplistic summary with unsubstantiated claims rather than a meaningful analysis that includes the data necessary to make an informed decision. A proper fiscal note—similar to the more robust requirements at the state level—would have answered these key questions.
Instead, the public is being asked to trust that this change is worth it—without evidence. That’s not how responsible governance should work.
What Can Madison Residents Do?
This resolution will likely pass tonight. But if residents want real accountability in city government, the best opportunity for change comes in the Spring 2025 alder elections. Voters should:
Learn where candidates stand on transparency and financial oversight before you vote this spring.
Elect independent, critical thinkers to the Council who will demand data before making financial decisions.
Madison residents deserve better than rubber-stamped policies based on vague claims. It’s time to start electing leaders who will hold the city accountable to its own standards of transparency and data-driven governance.
If you enjoy this content, please like and share. For questions and media inquiries, email asaloutos@tds.net or call (608) 345-9009.
© Alex Saloutos 2025.
I find my self in total agreement with this piece. Having spent almost 40 years in a public bureaucracy (MATC) I have seen the profound damage that sweetheart deals and cronyism can create. Keep punching.