Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance June 26 1990FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE June 26, 1990 The meeting was called to order at 3 p.m. by Committee Chairman Dan Warner with members Marge Laidlaw and Mary Vanderpol present. 1. BID AWARD RECOMMENDATION FOR A 100 -FOOT RADIAL STACKER TO PROVIDE A MORE EFFICIENT CRUSHER OPERATION TO THE LOW BIDDER, ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION CONTROL, INC., FOR AN OMCO HYDA -FOLD RADIAL STACKER, MODEL ELFR30104 -P2, FOR $58,427.60, INCLUDING SALES TAX (AB90 -209) Van Zanten said this was the low bidder. VANDERPOL MOVED THIS ITEM BE RECOMMEND FOR APPROVAL TO COUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously. 2. BID AWARD FOR A BRUSH CHIPPER FOR BRUSH DISPOSAL TO THE LOW BIDDER, UTILITY EQUIPMENT, INC., FOR A BRUSH BANDIT MODEL 100 BRUSH CHIPPER, AT A TOTAL BID OF $14,123,91, INCLUDING SALES TAX (AB90 -210) VANDERPOL MOVED THIS ITEM BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO COUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously. 3. BID AWARD RECOMMENDATION FOR A ONE -TON CREW CAB SERVICE BODY TRUCK TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, DIEHL FORD, INC., FOR $22,978.65 INCLUDING SALES TAX (AB90- 211) Van Zanten said this was the lowest responsive bidder. LAIDLAW MOVED THIS BID AWARD BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO COUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously. 4. BID AWARD RECOMMENDATION FOR A DIGITAL KEY TELEPHONE SYSTEM FOR THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT TO THE HIGHEST RATED PROPOSAL, FROM AT &T, FOR A MERLIN II DIGITAL KEY TELEPHONE SYSTEM (AB90 -212) Finance & Personnel Minutes, 6/26/90, Page 2 Van Zanten explained this item. This has gone out for Request for Proposal (RFP) as it was for a complete system. AT &T was rated as the best response. Dr. James explained how the raters had decided the rating criteria. He, George Reid and Nat Dickinson all rated the bidders the same giving AT &T the edge over Baron. He said they had called references and AT &T was unanimously rated the highest. James said it had to be compatible with the digital centrex system. Van Zanten said there will have to be major changes in the phone systems with the remodel; whatever is done now must have enough flexibility to fit into the new system and this seemed to have the most flexibility. This is entirely different than the current system but seemed to be easier to learn. James said there were demonstrations that showed how easy each system would be to use by the system. Several of the demonstrators had difficulty using their own system and that indicated how new users might find it. Dickinson spoke on the service features each offered. Jim Baron of Toshiba said his concern is that several criteria were listed but the point system did not allow many points for service. He said AT &T was given the greatest chance of merging with other systems and he takes issue with that. He said he feels his company met all the items on the criteria and at a lower price. Rod McNew of AT &T said the Merlin system allows many calls to be on hold and have a visual indication of this. He stated AT &T has the same price as years ago and other companies prices go up. Van Zanten said there is a difference between the bid award and RFP and the later allows a wider area for rating. This procedure goes beyond the exact equipment specification. Laidlaw asked about the point schedule. James said all point systems are arbitrary and all systems have more than will probably ever be used. Warner asked how much time was spent on this issue. James said he put 30 hours and probably Reid and Dickinson did the same. LAIDI.AW MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AT &T SYSTEM AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. Vanderpol asked how long AT &T would take to respond to service calls. Mr. McNew said two hours for most small problems and five hours for major problems. Vanderpol said he brought into this a bias - he has used Barons for 12 years and their response time has always been an hour. He prefers dealing with small business. He said he hopes we don't always go to the big guy and not look out for the local person; he will vote against it. Warner said he would vote for the motion but does find it a difficult decision. AT &T selected Barons to represent them in the Puget County to do their service work. Motion carried 2 -1 with Vanderpol against. 5. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH HLA /HARPER -OWES WHICH WILL PROVIDE FOR DEVELOPING FINAL PLANS FOR BID SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER SERVICES (AB90 -213) Finance & Personnel Minutes, 6/26/90, Page 3 Van Zanten explained this is for the closure contract. This is with the same company and is an extension, so the County does not have to go out to bid again. She said she did an emergency authorization on the $20,000 - she also did 3,4,5, and 6 on emergency situations as well. All but one of the plans have been approved by the Department of Ecology (DOE) before the next phase would be started. This would be for $228,661. There was discussion whether it should read amendment or extension. On January 2, 1990 then abandoned portion of the Cedarville Landfill was added. This will not be a final closure and could be reopened if necessary. Laidlaw asked about the $0.30 per mile since the County and State are $0.21 per mile and IRS allows $0.26. Ron Owes said the Automobile Association said $0.43 is appropriate so they were compromising. VANDERPOL MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM TO COUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously. 6. RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SALARY SCHEDULE FOR THE UN- REPRESENTED WHATCOM COUNTY EMPLOYEES FOR THE YEAR 1990 (AB90 -219) Van Zanten said the unrepresented do not get longevity. Every seven years $5 per year so $100 added for over 20 years. Laidlaw said the Exempts went without increases in bad times when union employees got raises. It takes six and a half years to get to the top step in a category. VANDERPOL MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THIS ITEM TO COUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously. 7. ORDINANCE REVISING THE BUDGET FOR SALARY AND BENEFITS (AB90 -201) Van Zanten explained why this ordinance is necessary and mentioned the changes that had taken place; in the Parks department a person was supervising 50 employees and was a union member. She recommended moving all the deputies to a higher point in their range so the raises would be at the same time for all. The increase includes the 4% from January, the 4% for July 1 and 5% for exempts plus making the changes to bring parity to some positions. VANDERPOL MOVED TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THE SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE TO COUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously. Finance & Personnel Minutes, 6/26/90, Page 4 8. ORDINANCE CREATING TITLE 24.08 TO ADDRESS INERT WASTE AND DEMOLITION WASTE LANDFILL REQUIREMENTS (AB90- 179) Warner explained the problem of plasterboard in inert landfills. WARNER MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF THIS ITEM. Warner said Bob Moore, Joni Hansen, Dave Bader have all worked very hard on this issue. It may well be the most forward, most stringent landfill requirements there is in place anywhere. Laidlaw noted some problems in the text. Motion carried unanimously. 9. ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 24.01 TO REFINE THE DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE HEALTH BOARD AND ITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (RELATED TO AB90 -196, BY -LAWS CHANGES) (AB90- 205) This should be at the end of the agenda so folks would not have to sit through the discussion. On page 129 there are changes: Dr. James said he had put this language in because there are problems because of the super majority issue. He requests information to help him in his relationship with the City; James said the City does not share the view that they have enough input. Warner said he thinks the current system is working well. James said the biggest problem is developing a mechanism for sharing costs that is acceptable. Warner said the City is still upset that the County set up a Health Board. There is no intention on the part of the County Council to do anything but provide the best support that is possible. Laidlaw said the County forgot to have them review the budget for 1990. Warner said the information was available to the city members on the Health Board Advisory Board. LAIDLAW MOVED TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THIS ITEM WITH THE TWO CHANGES NOTED TO THE COUNCIL. Motion carried unanimously. 10. DISCUSSION OF CONTRACT LABELLING AND AMENDMENTS (AB90 -206) (PAPERWORK TO BE DISTRIBUTED PRIOR TO MEETING) Warner explained this item. Van Zanten said she does know what the Council requires; her office does not have the time to deal with another form. Warner spoke about amendments of already existing contracts; the Council would like to be notified of any change. Van Zanten said she does not break the law and this Finance & Personnel Minutes, 6/26/90, Page 5 was an unusual circumstance. She said it was recorded at the first meeting of January. Warner said one of the other issues is if a contract has a budgeted amount it is not a legislative concern if the amounts are moved around within the total amount. Imhof said he feels the Council needs to be informed of the large dollar amounts that are added. He said an $80,000 contract is now $170,000 and we are now informed after asking. Van Zanten said she wished people had come to her when they have questions. Jackson said she did ask in a meeting and was told the auditor had the information and she had to spend many hours digging it out. Laidlaw said she never saw Jackson's information and she and Imhof should have been informed since they were interested. Warner stated the rule is clear the Council needs to approve a $10,000 or more contract addition. Ramona Reeves, Clerk of the Council, said the numbering system would benefit many departments. There may be several contracts with the same person and without a numbering system, it is hard to know which one. Van Zanten said there would have to be other ways to access the information. Reeves said a sequential chronological numbering system would help the Council office determine if it had a copy of all the contracts. Van Zanten said her office will assign a number to every contract and the Council can do what it wants with it. Sutberry said it has never been clear who is the repository of Contracts. Who manages contracts in Whatcom County? The Council is supposed to suggest policy but Sutberry said he thinks the Council office should have directed the Executive office to address this problem rather than try to correct it itself. Jackson asked if future amendments will come to the full Council or the finance committee; Warner said it would be the full Council. Forslof said some things are budgeted restrictively and could not be shifted. Vanderpol said that Sutberry said the Council needs to ask the Executive to work on this indexing /classifying system and develop a recommendation for central filing. VANDERPOL MOVED TO REQUEST ADMINISTRATION TO WORK ON AN INDEXING /CLASSIFYING SYSTEM AND DEVELOP A RECOMMENDATION FOR CENTRAL FILING. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 5:15 p.m. ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Pa ara Maher, Counc C erk Daniel M. Warner, Member