Loading...
BCC Minutes 09/06/2002 W (GIS Project Overview)September 6, 2002 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, FL, September 6, 2002 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:15am, in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Chairman: Jim Coletta James D. Carter Donna Fiala Fred Coyle Tom Henning Also Present: Jim Mudd, Leo E. Ochs Jr., Joe Schmitt, Will Walter, Ron Hovell, Trevor Trinkaus, Peter Hayden, Jennifer Moser, Richard Zyvoloski, Ed Kant, Ray Anderson, Joanne Leamer, Don Blaloch, Jim Deloney, Steve Carnell, David Weigel, Robert Wiley, Jim Mitchell Page 1 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CONTRACTS ADMINISTRA'I'~.ON AND 6,IS PRO3'ECT WORKSHOP 9:00-Noon FRIDAY SEPTEMBER 6, 2002 1. GIS Project Overview and Status Update 2. Question/Answer Period 3. Break 4. Overview of Current Contract Administration Practices and Controls 5. Future Contract Administration Initiatives 6. Question/Answer Period September 6, 2002 The Board of County Commissioners Contracts Administration & GIS Task Force Workshops County Commission Boardroom Building "F", 3rd Floor 3301 Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34104 9:lSAM Minutes September 6, 2002 Tom Henning called the meeting to order at 9:15am. I) II) ATTENDANCE Members: Jim Coletta, James D. Carter, Donna Fiala, Fred Coyle, Tom Henning Collier County: Jim Mudd, Leo E. Ochs Jr., Joe Schmitt, Will Walter, Ron Hovell, Trevor Trinkaus, Peter Hayden, Jennifer Moser, Richard. Zyvoloski, Ed Kant, Ray Anderson, Joanne Learner, Don Blaloch, Jim Deloney, Steve Carnell, David Weigel, Robert Wiley, Jim Mitchell -Mr. Carter wanted to state, on the record, that in the commissioner's race for District 2 he has not endorsed Frank Allis for commissioner in District 2, he stated that he has not endorsed anyone for this seat nor will he endorse anyone for the commission seat. GIS PROJECT OVERVIEW & STATUS UPDATE (Geographic Information System) Mr. Schmitt, Community Development & Environmental Services Administrator and the Task Force Chairman, explained that they were going to give an update on GIS, which he refers to as a spatial data retrieval system. Today's purpose is to inform the commission where they are headed in this county with the GIS system, where the money is going, & the benefits of this program. GIS Task Force Team Joe Schmitt - Task Force Chairman, Will Walter - From Wilson Miller, under contract to assist in this program, Ron Hovell - Project Manager, Trevor Trinkaus - Analyst from Utilities, Peter Hayden - Transportation, Jen Moser - CDES - GIS Analyst, Richard Zyvoloski - Emergency Management Page 2 September 6, 2002 Will Walter, reviewed some of the concepts of GIS. He stated it is a system for managing data with spatial components. For example, if you had data with address elements or latitude and longitude, you could place them on a map and analyze them spatially rather than having to do the normal graphs and reports. GIS is more than just software, it is made up of five different components: 1) People - the staffthat it takes to get the data into the system, to analyze data, pull queries, generate maps and reports. 2) Software 3) Data 4) Hardware 5) Policies & Procedures. GIS is more than just maps, it's the logic to disseminate your information throughout the organization, the ability to make data available to the outside via the internet. GIS basically tells you where things are, for instance where the clusters of codes in a specific district. GIS takes data elements and ties them back to a spatial representation on a map, then you can click on them to query the information related to them. You can view information spatially, classify data, intersect graphic features, buffer around other features, generate reports (tabular, charts, maps, etc...), and it also provides county with one base map. -Some of the benefits of having a GIS system are: 1) Accurate measurements in the office - + or - 2 feet in accuracy, ability to find information on the screen without having to research it in the field 2) Model of the real world - ability to find solutions by basically having the community in a computer 3) Integration of information - can pull information from internet, CAT files, data bases - these can then be pulled together to see how they all relate 4) Advanced analytical procedures 5) Easy access to concise data 6) Improved accuracy 7) Faster solutions 8) Improved data security 9) Improved assets facility management 10) Accurate cost assessments 11) Time saving maps 12) Standardized Reports - generated on an annual or quarterly report to help answer some of the public's requests Jim Mudd - explained that during the 9-11 incident the county went through a drill to find out all the resources, info structures, water, and other issues they had in the county. They had a good handle on what they had in the county in the unincorporated parts only. Page 3 September 6, 2002 They then had to call all other areas for information and coordinate it all together. He explained that this took them almost 2 V2 days to do this. With GIS all they would have to do is pull a screen up on the computer. This is one instance where this system would have served a great purpose to us. -Donna Fiala asked what good the system is if it can't work during an electrical storm, since this is one of the times we need it. Mr. Coletta informed her that it would because FL Power & Light has their own system established for the government system, so they would be fully operational, the only problems may be phones. -Will Walter added that there are servers throughout the county and they all have redundant information on them, in the event that something would happen at the Government Center, the information is available in other places. Ron ltovell, Public Utilities & GIS Project Manager, reviewed the implementation status of GIS. He stated that in FY01 Wilson Miller was hired and a implementation plan was delivered. They currently have CDES layers delivered, some utility layers, addressing point files will be entered soon, the overall county surveys need to be done before it can all be tied together. Most of the hardware and software was purchased in January of this year and most of the information has been installed, in this area they are -90% complete. They are working with application development, mapcity has been set up and complaint tracking is scheduled to be on line in FY03. The training programs have begun, this is an ongoing process. Referring to the five components of GIS he informed the commission that the Software has been 90% purchased. The hardware has all its initial phases in place, they are now "heavy" into the data acquisition and they are working on setting up the various procedures. They have hired a number of people, especially in the IT core group area, and there are only two more positions to fill in FY03. He stated that on the procedures side he wanted to point out that when the task force was set up, it also includes representatives from the property appraisers office the supervisor of elections, the sheriff, the tax collector, and the BCC divisions. They have been working with the policies and procedures. Two of the most important applications that make this system work are the addressing (which ties info to specific postal addresses) and the public access issues (determining what goes out to county and what stays in). Future land use plan, zoning data, existing land use, and utilities maps books are all to be completed by contracted companies and should be coming in the next few months. Trevor Trinkaus, explained that the framework of the system is developed. He used public utilities as an example, stating that the framework of all the piping and the major Page 4 September 6, 2002 artifacts are already in the system. In terms of the water system there are 675miles of piping in with -5,000 hydrants already placed. With regards to the waste water system they have -450 gravity main miles in and -290 force main miles in the system. All of this is being entered from the old as built drawings, which is being adjusted to the background aerial, which has a 2ft accuracy. Crews are being established to GPS the actual locations, this will provide an accuracy of-6". -Mr. Coletta stated he had concerns of some of the information being accessible to the general public and the dangers it could pose to homeland security. Mr. Trinkaus stated that the task force is currently discussing polices and procedures of what information will be released to the actual public. In the decision process they will be governed by certain guidelines that FEMA is establishing. Mr. Coletta stated he hopes they will stay on top of this and referenced the availability of information available through the Sunshine Laws. Mr. Coyle added that this may be the subject of another workshop and this is a policy decision the BCC should vote on. Mr. Mudd explained that there is internet and intranet, some of the information will be accessible to the public on a filtered level and then other information is only available to specific departments. He added they will stay within the laws and make sure that the citizens of the county are protected. Mr. Coletta stated that Mr. Henning and his task force may be able to look into this in a little more detail. Trevor Trinkaus, stated that the benefits to the public utilities for using GIS are: it provides a wide array of information that is tied together, essentially they are dealing with items in the real world. It eases compliance with GASBY 34, they can have a full record of all equipment, they can show maintenance schedules, improved routing of maintenance, and they can develop information for modeling work on water and waste water to see the impacts of development. He informed the commission that they are using GIS in finance, operations, customer service, and engineering. They will have the ability to do mailings and phone notifications to a specific region by circling it on a map. If a water main breaks they can see where it would affect or during a flood they have a accurate way of finding valves, etc... Peter Hayden, Storm Water Management, stated that they have 80 sheets of mapping that is converted into GIS, which makes it easily accessible and connected. They can now look at their system as a whole. They can now overlay there maps with the updating aerial maps and they have been able to gain an accuracy they did not have previously. They use this in master planning to identify base and boundaries accurately, inventory Page 5 September 6, 2002 their structures, maintenance scheduling. He stated that his employees eventually will have laptops in the field to access the information from their site. Some other uses they will have for GIS are PDS reporting will be filed in March, Alpha management, complaint tracking, pollution monitoring, watershed planning, and cost management. In an entire view they will be able to get a better handle on the drainage systems in Collier County. Jen Moser, CDES, stated that one of the first layers they identified for the division was zoning, they don't only have the zoning information but zoning notes, developer notes, designations, and all they have to do is click on it to retrieve their information. They have also been using the parcel layer. Both layers have already been used to notify property owners, it has taken a job that previously took a week to do now takes 10minutes. Eventually they will use GIS for reviewing plans. She added one of the advantages of GIS is the ability to do spatial analysis, for an example she showed how simple it was to find the data on panther tracking points, and frequency, by clicking on a computer. The Rural Fringe and Eastern Lands Assessment have already been using this. Richard Zyvoloski, Emergency Management, stated that GIS has been a "God-sent". This system saves so much time. With this tool, pre-planning, helps with determining disaster needs, sheltering availability, locating pre-disposition spots, debris sites, and assists in mitigation. In post disaster, by being able to get the information readily, they can better get the emergency services information to the people. The program helps with the entire range of emergency services from preparedness, mitigation, response recovery, and taps into everything. During storm season they can do hazard analysis of specific areas and then during briefings they are more specific and targeted to the interests and needs of their audience. He showed the commissioners how they would use the system if them was a chlorine spill on 1-75 and explained all the facets of emergency maintenance they could handle in a short period of time by using this system. The example showed that they will have the ability to handle phone contacts, mailings, demographics coordinating agencies, identification of specific dangers, and time saving efforts. He stated this is an exciting tool that allows them to bring live saving information and assistance to people in a timely fashion. Ron Hovell, stated in summary that everything used in examples are in existing county data, they are still completing accuracy investigations, but data is able to be shared for multiple uses. Every department in the county will have their piece, but any department that has needs to have access to information, will have the access without having to Page 6 September 6, 2002 scramble around for it. They were currently budgeted for $2.1million in the current year and $1.8million next year, this will get them to the point that they can say they are in initial operating abilities. Upcoming activities for FY03 they have to complete facilities management system for water and wastewater, stormwater, they are scanning and linking all the easements and rights of ways, complete surveys, focus on transportation's, applications development, software upgrades, test initial implementation, and see where they stand. -Mr. Carter asked, as a user, what type of hardware and software does he need to access the system. Mr. Hovell informed him, that what is accessible today, is accessed through the county web-page for the public. Joe Schmitt, further explained that the staff will have information that the general public will not, some staff will have the ability to do data manipulation and other will only be able to use it in an exploratory manner. He showed a summary of the benefits of GIS. The tasks done at a technical level are now being done with the assistance of the computer, they are now done faster and more efficient. He wanted to stress that they are in the initial stages of they system. He added that the task force has been around for 1 ½ yr. He stressed the team is made of the county staff, experts who can put out what the demands are and what are the cost/benefit ratios for each departments. He added that they are within the budget and within FY04 they will be integrated into each departments budget. Understand that much of the work done to this point is labor intensive: entering data and developing links. Commissioner Questions and Comments Commissioner Coyle - asked about the relationship that the county's GIS system and the sheriff's department's system. Mr. Waiter explained that each of the agencies has developed their own software and hardware, they are developing there own systems. The county is developing there own as well, the information will all be linked, but it will be set up so only the people who need access will have access. Mr. Mudd added that all the data is being shared. He explained that the proper appraiser started the entire process, did all the maps and the aerials, and then shared those things so the county did not have to re- do this and spend extra money. They then went in and overlaid on this system, they are being very diligent with the taxpayers money and by sharing necessary information between departments they are avoided redundancy and avoiding spending extra dollars. -Mr. Coyle then asked if the software was owned or leased? Mr. Walter explained that all the county's software is owned but they pay an annual updating fee. Page 7 September 6, 2002 -Mr. Coyle asked, once you use the satellite imagery for updating your database levels, to what extent do you continue to be dependent on satellite imagery? Mr. Walter informed him that the imagery is nice for seeing changes and currently the property appraiser has been provided access free of charge. -Mr. Coyle asked essentially when they would be complete with the implementation? Mr. Walter replied the bulk of the implementation should be complete by the end of the year and following this year you will still have maintenance, which is an ongoing process. -Mr. Coyle asked if the City of Naples water and sewer facilities locations, that are outside the city's boundary's, are being established in our data layering. Mr. Walter said yes, it is in as a background layer. -Mr. Coyle stated that it would be good to show a cost/benefit analysis with this at some time. Commissioner Fiala - stated that we are only as good as the information that is given to us and asked who feeds the information for us to load into the files? Mr. Walter stated currently the property owner information comes from the record of the property appraiser, addressing comes from community development and permitting information. Commissioner Fiala asked if with births and deaths we are hoping someone feeds the information to us? Mr. Hovell further explained that utilities records has their own databases that have information that is current, it will be a managing challenge and they may not be able to give specifics but they can give demographic back-grounding in general. Mr. Walter stated he doesn't believe the county will ever need every residents name, address, age, etc ....merely they will need is the property owners name and the billing information, which will be tied into this. Commissioner Carter - stated that when they began this in 1999 close to $900,000 was in the budget for this process, through the efforts of the property appraiser that budget was removed in that year, because Dave Skinner's office was the one who initiated and carried the ball. Mr. Carter stated he deserves a lot of credit for moving this process on and coordinating the agencies without duplication of information, so that tax dollars were spent well. He commends all the agencies working on this and their cost/benefits efficiency. Commissioner Coletta - stated he was glad to hear credit given to Dave Skinner. He added he was very impressed with the presentation. His one concern is personal privacy. He is concerned about access to the system to do mass mailings, etc.., and wanted to Page 8 September 6, 2002 know if there would be any type of policy for this. Mr. Walter informed him there would be a policy on this and it will be determined by the county. Mr. Coletta would like to be updated on current policy and may want it brought back to the commission for further discussion. Mr. Walter stated there is another workshop that would discuss policies. Mr. Mudd stated that public policy access is going to be discussed in 2003 and that the public has very limited access. They have to come back to the board with legally reviewed policies and the BCC will have to vote on this, they will also have to discuss charges for the public accessing information. PUBLIC SPEAKERS 1) Mr. Dennis P. Vasey, stated this is great in the aftermath of9-11. He added that the New York GIS system helped. He stated there are many reason to expand GIS outside county limits, he feels we should include: Red cross, FEMA, homeland security, FBI, chambers of commerce, surrounding areas, universities, resident associations, agricultural interests, medical facilities, special interests (fire, water), superintendent of schools, core of engineers, and the coast guard, just to name a few. He feels they need to use "data-warehousing" of every county, city, and law enforcement socket and they all need to be accessible in an emergency. He also believes we need to form a county steering committee. This committee would guarantee efficiency and what kind of efficiencies they need. He used palm pilots vs. laptops as a cost effective change. He added that we need to get GIS to work and do SO now. A fifteen minute recess was taken. III) Contracts Administration Workshop Steve Carnell, Purchasing General Services Director, stated in a typical fiscal year, historically, the county spends $150-$170million on goods and services, this year they anticipate closer to $250million, a large portion of the increase is due to road construction programs. Many of the transactions are processed by purchase orders only, today they will focus on formal contracts between vendors and the county. The most significant purchases include construction services and consulting services. For construction projects three main headers capture the bulk of the activity: transportation (roads, sidewalk, intersection, drainage-related), water/wastewater (plants, lift stations, force mains), vertical construction (buildings, parking and other attendant features for public facilities). Consulting services are made up of two broad categories: CCNA services (Section 287.055 F.S.) and Everything Else. At least half of the county's consulting activities fall under the umbrella of the CCNA (FL law dictates how they make the acquisition of Page 9 September 6, 2002 these services) includes engineering, architectural, surveying, landscape architecture. Some of the other services include rate studies, impact fee analysis, legal services, and management services. During the meeting they focused on the CCNA consulting services. He stated that it was important to understand that as they enter into contracts and administer them they go in with some paradigms, starting points, of what in a general way they are trying to achieve. He stated they want to be results-oriented (effective), to accomplish what it set out to accomplish. They also want it to be cost sensitive, when they enter into a contract they want it to be efficient, clarify expectations and foster predictability, they are looking for relationships that have clear expectation so they can proceed through the contract with the best possible relationship and understanding of the vendor/county relationship. He added that all contracts, in some way shape or form, distribute risk and they look to manage this risk and determine the "acceptable risk", which changes continually over time. Their goal is to establish a "win-win" relationship with the contractors and vendors. Moving into the contracting process he described that they are going to view this in four phases: source selection(choosing who does the work), contract formulation (how they put the contract together), contract performance monitoring, and contract performance evaluation (assessing their performance). The contract performance evaluation will then help to determine who they will use in the upcoming years. He stated he would briefly cover the acquisition for the source selection process. As a staff, they utilize mainly three forms of selection methods: competitive sealed bidding, competitive proposals, and competitive selection and negotiation. He added it was helpful to consider them on a continuum with bidding on one end, selection and negotiation on the other, and sealed proposals in the middle. Competitive sealed bidding is the one most people are familiar with and it characterizes the government in the 21st century. It came about as a way of combating political patronage and it is very desirable in a government setting because it is very objective. They put the requirements out, they focus the competitors on price, and all the participation bidders see the results for themselves. It is also a more expedient process due to the straightforwardness of the process. The downside is due to the growth of the community because as they grow, they have to consider things other than just price. This process limits discretion because its driven on the bidding. In reality it may be better to spend more for a better qualified vendor, but with this process you have to take the lowest bid. It may also de-emphasize quality and it doesn't work without clear specifications and a clear scope. This means you can't be ambiguous at all otherwise the bids are not fair and people don't understand the work. The sealed proposal process awards to the best overall proposal, weighing both price and qualifications. The bidding then works better because there is more discretion and the county is in a position to promote innovative responses. For example: If we had a pocket of Page 10 September 6, 2002 the county where we want to do some form of economic development, we can look for a firm who can provide the county with a solution, the firm's answers and proposals then can be greatly varied and wide, in terms of strategies and proposals they can come back with. This allows vendors to be respond to a scope that may be varied and wide open. The disadvantages are that it takes more time and effort due to more evaluation of the firms and aspects of their proposals. It becomes more subjective because there is more judgement involved in making an award. Then there is also selection and negotiation, this is primarily used to hire the CCNA consultants. The advantages are the "most qualified firm or firms within budget", this is the exact opposite of "sealed bids". This process is split into two phases. In the first phase, selection, is people compete on their qualifications, a committee ranks them based on qualifications, and they create a short list that includes 3-4 firms for negotiations. Then they negotiate with the firms in sequence starting with the highest ranked firm. The problem is they can't consider or discuss cost until second phase, they are prohibited by the statue. The second phase is negotiations. They go out and negotiate with the top ranked firm and hold two other firrns in rank. If they cannot reach agreement with the first firm they can then discontinue negotiations and move on to the second firm. The upside of this process is it points to selecting the most qualified firm and it encourages competitive bids, while discouraging low-bailing, it is also attractive to the consulting community. The consulting community is the most competitive area of acquisition in the area. The downside to this process is that because the price is not considered during the selection phase, they county is going in somewhat blind and then has reduced leverage in the negotiations phase. After the second phase of negotiation you can't go back to phase one. Also if you stop negotiations with the first firm, you cannot go back to that form, you must proceed with the ranking. He added that another important concept is scope and to consider it in two ways: project specific and term specific. He explained that in project specific they have one scope, one schedule, and one price. The way they know their done is when the project is complete. They also use term specific contracts which have a much more general scope, where the thrust of the scope is on the availability of the services themselves on an "as needed basis". These do not contain a total specific contract price, whereas the project specific typically do. They typically are created through competition, then they negotiate for hourly rate or other types of fee schedules, and then as they need the services they will issue a work order on that contract. The advantage is that if they have a small project then they can turn to one of these contracts and then within a matter of a few days put out a work order on the contract. Without term projects, to complete a smaller common project could take weeks due to the contracting process itself. When speaking of CCNA agreements, they use the set up that when they engage consults on these work Page 11 September 6, 2002 orders the limit the work orders to $90,000 as a rule. As well they limit the engaging of that firm, under that contract to $500,000/year. The idea is to not have people writing $2million work orders against a term contract, this keeps the larger contracts out for competition and spreads the money through the community rather than one specific firm. He added that they have term specific contracts outside the CCNA as well, such as construction services agreements for minor construction and repair work. In these contracts they set the threshold in the bidding process and at the time they bring it to award they set the thresholds. -Mr. I-Ienning asked that if a contractor has a client who would be benefited or negatively affected by the contract, would this have to be disclosed. Mr. Carnell stated that it would have to be disclosed and they address it in the questioning of the contractor. If there is a disclosure then it is taken into consideration before a decision to or not to contract is made. -Mr. Carter asked if we require contractors to establish a firewall between their public/private workloads or if the contractor is required to have a separate division for both. Mr. Camell informed him that they are not strictly requiring it at this time, they are looking at it and attempting to develop it at this time. -Donna Fiala asked if in sealed bidding you have to take the lowest bidder, even if they don't reside in the local area. Mr. Camell stated no, that there is no preference for local vicinity, but when the developer bids, they are bidding that they can meet the requirement set forth and if the contract requires the issue of close proximity, they can reject the bid based on the fact it would be unqualified to carry out the contract. Typically when this type of situation arises, they consult the firm to see if they have some means of overcoming the hardship, rather than just rejected. Donna Fiala asked how they make the decision as to what type of bid it is going to be. Mr. Carnell explained it is based on what they are trying to accomplish with that particular project; time saving, dollar saving, qualitative issues, etc... Jim Mudd added that project complexity and end product quality has a large part to do with which process would be used. Steve Carneil discussed standard contracts with the commission. He explained that currently they have five types of contracts they have a standard document, approved by the county attorney, tried and tested. They take these and apply them to their competitive processes in order to get a contract. They have a standard construction services agreement that is used with the general contractors, a professional services agreement used to negotiate with all consultants, the short form services agreement which is more of a "generic" contract "kind of for everything else" in the way of services, a leasing agreement for leasing or lease-purchasing equipment, and a inter- local agreement that is used when they enter into agreements with other local governments. These standard contracts serve to expedite the process. Also they are a control device, since they Page 12 September 6, 2002 are tried and true, received past input, and have been reviewed by the county attorney. In addition to the standard contracts they also have contract tools that they used to manage time and money. They have the ability in purchasing policies and in contracting documents to extend contracts. These are typically given without remuneration adjustment, but there are times that they may need to give a contract additional time for legitimate reasons. At staff level they have the ability to grant extensions up to 6 months, anything beyond that is brought back to the BCC for approval. He added that they also have a device to renew projects, where at the end of the year they can opt to renew. These are time saving devices since you do not have to re-bid every year. The third tool is contracting modifications. There are three types: change orders, amendments, and supplemental agreements. He added that throughout agencies and departments these terms have become somewhat interchangeable. In his department, change order typically refers to changes of the scope of the contract. Amendments are cardinal changes to the base amendment of the contract beyond the scope. Supplemental agreements are creating separate free standing agreements to deal with some unforeseen event. These are almost strictly limited to the transportation department. Mr. Camell went on to discuss change orders in more depth. He began by explaining change authority, and what the BCC has authorized the staff to do in this respect. He reminded the commission that these limits apply to all three types of contract previously discussed. For project specific contracts the dollar amount can be changed provided the change is less or equal to10%, or 10% of $10,000 of the BCC approved amount; whichever is greater is the ultimate authorization that staff has. It is set up in this manner to scale itself to the types and costs of contracts held, and be able to still deal with the lower cost contracts. If the 10% amount is $100,000 or less, then the department director responsible for the project can sign of on the change order. If the 10% amount exceed $100,000 then the division administrator has approval to change. Anything that exceeds the previously listed thresholds then they must be approved by the BCC. Donna Fiala - asked if they have contractors that win the lowest bid and then habitually ask for a change order, and if so what can be done to prevent that from happening. Mr. Camell stated that it happens from time to time. He added the way to handle it is go on the premise of "saying no" if it is not legitimate or if it is something the project manager should have foreseen. He added they have a checklist for change orders to make sure it is legitimate. Mr. Coyle - stated he had some concerns that there are no maximums applied to staff's approval except the 10% and the budget restrictions. Mr. Mudd - added that in most cases in the county, you have a contingency fund and if you put this on the budget line, all the contractors know this and they bid high. So what the county has done to solve this is they have put the contingency's in Page 13 September 6, 2002 reserve funds and this is a little control. Mr. Coyle stated that lots of things drop into reserves and if they are going to use reserves as a "slush fund" then he has concerns, he understands that this is not what they mean, but he believes that to prevent this there should be some fairly concrete limits on what can or cannot be approved without BCC approval. He added he has concerns with the annual limitation of $500,000, he believes this is an excessive amount to be determined administratively. He stated if the BCC is to follow their fiscal requirements, then they should know that these things are occurring and why. He explained that one way to do this is by forcing it to come before the BCC for discussion and approval. He added that in the overall contract process he believes what would work best is a sealed bid request for proposal with a fixed price or rate, with a specification of cost and a schedule, and a requirement of specification of experience of the project team. He then believes that the team evaluates and rates this information and places each bidder onto a point system, whoever has the highest points gets the contract. He stated that it is complex, but once it is established it could be of a great benefit. His overall concern is that if there are major changes occurring in the contract he wants a report on the situation that is signed and evaluated by someone in the management who can know that these things are valid. He wants the administrator to have something from the project manager that certifies it is being done at the lowest possible account and then the administrative level still has approval. Mr. Mitchell stated that in the clerks office they have concerns about the change order process. Primarily they want to know it complies with the doctrine, that the county administrator is strictly ministerial in nature. They have begun discussion with Mr. Camell's department. They are going to further address this topic and come up with some standards to avoid the problems Mr. Coyle was noting. Mr. Coletta asked that staff bring back some alternatives to this for a future meeting where they can consider some policies. Mr. Carter agrees that there needs to be a limit, but there are times when the system encumbers the process. He added that a commissioner needs to know that it was justifiable to do, the county manager is accountable, and when it gets up to certain numbers the county manager signs off, who then has a requirement to come before the BCC and justify the expenditures. He would also like staff with the cooperation of the clerks to find the mechanisms that would make this possible to do without encumbering projects. Mr. Coyle agreed that staff should discuss the issues and come back with the further ideas to control the situation. Mr. Mitchell informed them that they are going to involve the front audit department in the process, which could help to people stay informed and on tract. Page 14 September 6, 2002 Mr. Coletta - Stated staff formally has direction to go and research this situation and possible options and return before the BCC with this, he stated he hopes Mr. Mitchell will be a part of that. Mr. Coyle - added he would like them to take a look at the maximum amounts that can be administratively approved and give some consideration to the different possibilities. He does not believe the annual limitation is not appropriate, that it should be an amount. He also wants to see somebody certify that these are proper expenses. Steve Carnell - stated that in June the BCC had raised some specific issues that overlap with some of today's concerns and they have begun on this. They have developed a change order checklist that is currently being used, but has not been standardized. They are in the process of doing so now. They used the input of the project managers and they are ready to implement it, they just need to get it out now to the departments. He handed a copy to the Commissioners for review. There were 9 steps for approval and a form that requires verification and clarification by the project manager. Mr. Coyle - stated there are circumstances when the county manager has to make emergency actions and we need to make provisions for this. Mr. Coletta - asked if they could include some language that referenced whoever is the sitting chair, is also brought into this approval if available, but in emergency situations revert to the county administrator. Mr. Carnell - yes we can look at adding the chairman. He addressed Mr. Coyle to let him know that it is current practice to require prior written approval before moving forward on change orders. He added that they have limited discretion to administrators and directors at this point. Dwight E. Brock - clerk of courts, stated that we need to be careful of: discretion rests with the BCC statutorily and this cannot be delegated, so they need to incorporate a form that doesn't require discretion otherwise it has to go to the board. They are working with the county attorney's office to define, understand, and stay within these statutes. On major contracts, it behooves the county for the clerks office to become involved in the beginning stages to help get of things and resolve issues before the fact. Mr. Coyle reviewed what the committee had been discussing, what they have requested staff to work with, and what they are looking for to verify that they were on the right tract. Mr. Coletta - suggested the directions given to staff could be further considered, and requested a summary of what the clerk of courts evaluation of the suggested policies and actions. Mr. Brock stated that it he doesn't see any problems posed with the document and if there ever is a question of the discretion they will return before the BCC for approval. He added that the clerk's office Page 15 September 6, 2002 was requested to show up at the budget meeting of the executive staff of the county administrators of to cover the agenda, the feedback he received after was that it was helpful and efficient. He is comfortable working with the county manager and that departments are beginning to combine there efforts up front and the lines of communication are beginning to open. Mr. Carnell - stated they are also working on enhancing their evaluation performance systems in order to use for future vendor choices. He added in the last year have enhanced their negotiations support with the addition of a contracts agent position. There are a number of training opportunities being provided to staff now, that assist with relations with contractors. They have also added a conflict of disclosure provision to all of their bidding documents. And they are strongly reiterating their zero-gift policy to staff and vendors. They will continue to enhance their administrative procedures, they are working with a consultant pre-qualification process up front. They are looking at the feasibility of a project manager training program and new contract agreements will be reviewed in the following year as well. Mr. Carter- stated he applauds them in the project manager training, because if everything is taken care of up front and everyone understands what they have to do, then things will run smoothly. He encourages looking at standardization in involving the clerks office in that process so that everyone understands, with no excuses for not understanding. Mr. Coyle - stated in the contract itself, it would be good to specify these procedure changes, this way the contractor would understand himself what is necessary and takes the proper steps to ensure the procedure is followed. Mr. Carter - agreed with Mr. Coyle, stating that everyone clearly understand the procedures and signs to it when they sign the contract with the county. Mr. Coyle - added then when you have these provisions in the contract it reduces the possibility for someone to habitually request illegitimate change orders. III) ADJOURNMENT -the meeting adjoumed at 12pm. Page 16 September 6, 2002 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:00 P.M. ~ese minutes approved by the Board on presented / BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEAL/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL or as corrected Page 17