Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance April 11 2006I WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL 2 Finance and Administrative Services Committee 3 4 April 11, 2006 5 6 Committee Chair Sam Crawford called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m. in the 7 Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. 8 9 Present: Absent: 10 L. Ward Nelson None 11 Carl Weimer 12 13 Also Present: 14 None 15 16 17 COUNCIL "CONSENT AGENDA" ITEM 18 19 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #06 -04 20 AND ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH LOW BIDDER WESTERN ROOFING 21 COMPANY, INC., FOR ROOF REPAIRS AT THE COURTHOUSE, HEALTH 22 DEPARTMENT AND THE FOREST STREET ANNEX, IN THE AMOUNT OF 23 $140,724.88 (AB2006 -173) 24 25 Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council. 26 27 Motion carried unanimously. 28 29 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN 30 INTERLOCAL COOPERATIVE ACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY 31 AND THE WASHINGTON STATE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 32 (AOC) TO PROVIDE FOR THE AOC GRANTING FEDERAL FUNDS PROVIDED 33 THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY, TRADE AND ECONOMIC 34 DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE FEDERAL STOP VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN 35 OFFICE GRANT (AB2006 -174) 36 37 Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council. 38 39 Motion carried unanimously. 40 41 3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A SUB - 42 RECIPIENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND DOMESTIC 43 VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT SERVICES TO PROVIDE ON -CALL 44 ADVOCATES FOR ALL VICTIMS APPLYING FOR PROTECTION, IN THE 45 AMOUNT OF $15,750 (FUNDED BY STOP GRANT) (AS2006 -175) 46 47 Weimer moved to recommend approval to the full Council. 48 49 Motion carried unanimously. 50 51 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 52 COOPERATIVE SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE 53 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE TO CONDUCT WILDLIFE DAMAGE 54 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES TO CONTROL STARLING AND PIGEON Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 4/1112006, Page 1 POPULATIONS WITHIN WHATCOM COUNTY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,009 (AB2006 -176) Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. 5. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT AMENDMENT *1 BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND LUMMI COMMERCIAL COMPANY TO EXTEND THE PARKING LOT LEASE TO COINCIDE WITH THE TIDELANDS LEASE AGREEMENT EXPIRATION IN 2009, IN THE AMOUNT OF $36,592 OVER THREE YEARS, AS WELL AS INCLUDING UP TO $50,000 IN ADDITIONAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS AND PLANNING ASSISTANCE AT GOOSEBERRY POINT, IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE LUMMI COMMERCIAL COMPANY (AB2006 -177) Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council. He asked what this does in relationship to the Lummi meeting when the Council talked about the possibility of moving the dock. He asked if that move would not occur until after 2009. Ken Richardson, Accounting Supervisor, stated they are starting feasibility study on whether they should move the existing dock. If the County receives permission, it is ten years away from making it happen. A new dock location is independent from the new ferry. The department is doing the work to the docks to accommodate the new ferry without regard of the possibility of moving the dock. To meet the schedules they are on, the County won't rebuild the dock, but will reinforce the existing dock to accommodate the bigger boat. Motion carried unanimously. 6. RESOLUTION ORDERING THE CANCELLATION OF CHECKS MORE THAN TWO YEARS OLD (AB2006 -179) Weimer moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2006 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, SIXTH REQUEST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,152,377 (AB2006 -169) Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated one key item is the purchase of the animal control facility for the County. He read the list of other items in the request. As they move into project budgeting, another set of projects are proposed in the next agenda item. One major item includes the laser fiche project. The Council appropriated funding last year for this project. The project continues from 2005, which began in Superior Court. Also, there is a request to fund an Economic Development Investment (EDI) loan and grant for a project in Sumas. The County has contracted with Rustand Inc. for a number of years for animal control services. Rustand Inc. provided notice that it is not going to renew its contract, which expires in June. The administration researched the possibilities for continuing the Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 4/11/2006, Page 2 service. No one has a facility to meet the standards. teasing isn't reasonable. Buying the existing facility and finding a provider is the administration's proposal. The County will purchase the facility and all equipment. Over the last few weeks, the administration has sought proposals for qualified firms to provide the service as early as June or July. As a result, the County received one proposal from the Humane Society. The administration is negotiating with the Humane Society now. When negotiation is closed, the administration will bring forward a proposal. Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Nelson asked about the current contract for animal control. Desler stated the amount is about $360,000. In addition, the contractor keeps all the fee revenue that comes from licensing and other fees. Nelson asked the reason the Rustands gave for not continuing the contract. Desler stated the contractor chose not to continue the service. The contractor had some concerns about the County advisory board being too critical. In the past, years ago, the board was critical of the quality of the facility. At the time, the administration engaged an independent consultant to evaluate the facility. The consultant approved the facility with flying colors. The consultant was an expert from the Humane Society of Seattle. He was pleased with the consultant's report. The County's position has never been critical of that operation. The advisory board and its members change. The board is not critical today. Nelson asked if the County is going to purchase a building that had been previously criticized. He asked if the new contract for the service would be in excess of $360,000. Desler stated he hoped it would not cost that much. Nelson asked if the administration talked to the Rustand's about putting in a bid for the contractor service only. Desler stated the administration went through the bid process. The Rustands did not submit a proposal. The administration has had meetings with the Rustands. The business relationship is positive. The Executive talked to Greg Rustand about the purchase price. The administration met with the Rustands about this and how to transition the service to a potential new provider. Nelson stated the whole process smelled from the beginning. Councilmembers jumped on a bandwagon that was malicious and unfounded, in terms of complaints that came forward from the public. The Council has a legitimate contract with a reputable company that has been providing services for ten years. When he first was on the Council, the most frequent phone calls he received were from citizens in the rural areas complaining about animal control problems. Since Security Specialists Plus (SSP) took over from the Humane Society, the County has had perfect service. He has not had one phone call except for one group that worked with the Humane Society to vilify a company that has been doing a good job. The outside consultant found the Rustand's were in compliance with the laws of the State and for the protection of the animals. Crawford stated the contractor met the standards of the American Humane Society. ]Nelson stated it did. To continue the harassment of these people and the administration, including forming an advisory committee to continue the harassment, is a poor precedent for the County Council to allow. It is not a way to do business and provide protection to the citizens. Now, the Rustand's don't want to deal with the County, for which he can't blame them. Now, the County has to buy a building, which may not be appropriate, because there isn't any other facility. The County will own the building and still have to contract for that amount or more for the same service. The Council owes the Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 4/11/2006, Page 3 1 Rustand's an apology for everything they've gone through. He is frustrated with this 2 process. He doesn't blame any contractor not wanting to continue when they have been 3 harassed and harangued. Now, the County will have to spend more taxpayer dollars to get 4 the same service. This process was political from beginning to end. Find better ways to 5 work with contractors positively when the County is trying to provide a service and save 6 taxpayer dollars. His biggest worry is that they are going to put the citizens of the 7 community at risk. 8 9 Crawford asked the number of jobs lost by the ending of the contract. Desler stated 10 there are two animal control officers and about three staff. The administration wants to 11 facilitate that those employees be maintained. 12 13 Crawford stated there has to be a wealth of experience and knowledge by the 14 existing employees. They should be transferred in some way. Desler stated he heard that 15 some have gone to work for the Humane Society already. 16 17 The administration doesn't think this is a political issue. The administration has tried 18 to follow good practice in contracting with private operations. It has tried to resolve 19 problems with the community that feels passionately about animal control issues. That's 20 the reason for the advisory board, which initially included the Rustands, their veterinarian, 21 and their animal control officers, as well as representatives from the Humane Society and 22 community advocates. There was an active dialog and even some arguments. Since, the 23 discussions have become quiet and staid. Now there is a concern about a lack of 24 participation on the board. 25 26 Years ago, the County contracted with the Humane Society for this service. There 27 were problems with the management and operations. The County issued a request for 28 proposals (RFP), and received two proposals. The administration recommended the 29 Humane Society, but the Council decided to use SSP. The administration has had a positive 30 relationship with SSP since. Nothing prevented SSP from submitting a proposal in this 31 round. He asked the contractor to please continue providing the service. The contractor 32 was not interested. At the time, the contractor was not even interested in selling the 33 building. 34 35 Nelson stated he understands the situation the administration was put into. The 36 Council, in a close vote, jumped from one operation, which was not doing a good job, to 37 another operator. The contractor provided the facility and a very good service. He no 38 longer receives any phone calls about animal control services. He is very pleased with the 39 Council's decisions. The Council and administration may have disagreed, but they must 40 make very good, sound decisions to change something that isn't working right. He asked 41 what went on during the advisory process and the contract negotiations. He asked what it 42 would take to negotiate and have someone in there as competition. If there is no 43 competition, he will be back on the phone with angry constituents. He is not happy with 44 having to buy this building and find a new contractor for services. 45 46 Weimer asked if the administration looked into the cost of running this service itself. 47 Desler stated it did not. 48 49 Weimer stated the Humane Society is in the process of Finding a new facility. He 50 asked if this building would be sold to the Humane Society if it takes over the service. 51 Desler stated it would not. This building would give the County the ability to use a private 52 sector operation in a building the County owns. The County would hire the management 53 and service. There are specific requirements for animal control facility siting. It's very Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 4/11/2006, Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 difficult. In the future, if the County has to modify the provider, it would retain the building and go out for the service or make it a County program. In the future, the Humane Society would like to provide service countywide. They are trying to develop a facility to work countywide. They are years from that goal. If that happens, the administration will consider a centralized, countywide service. If that happens, the County can modify or sell the building. Crawford asked how much of the cost is real estate and how much is equipment. Desler stated the cost of the real estate and building is approximately $640,000. Crawford stated he suspects that an animal control facility has some heavy maintenance requirements. He hopes that the new contractor be a good steward in terms of maintenance of the building. Mr. Rustand had a vested interest in making sure the building was well taken care of. Desler stated that is a challenge. The administration must always be mindful of protecting the County's assets. The administration would do that through the contract. Nelson asked why the Humane Society isn't buying the building. Desler stated the administration did not ask for that. No one has the financial capacity to do that. Motion carried unanimously. 2. ORDINANCE REGARDING PROJECT BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 2 OF THE 2006 BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $594,688 (AB2006 -170) (Clerk's Note. See the above item for discussion of this item.) Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 11:33 a.m. r rrrrrl Jill Ni*;0[nL", fV c iption J.• pkATC O •. '•TO coulvnr ; r iA OF • Danftw1j; D *visy. C�ti?licil Clerk �����rrrr r r ut� ►���� WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON 'am Crawford, Coma' tee Chair Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 4/11/2006, Page 5