My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 3A - Minutes Approval
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2005
>
CC Agenda - 04/11/05 Mtg
>
Item 3A - Minutes Approval
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:07:31 PM
Creation date
4/7/2005 8:39:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
4/11/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
128
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Carol Pomes, Purchasing Manager, added that the DOJ purposefully allowed a long time because the <br />undertaking was a major rewrite. She noted that all public agencies were facing the same deadline <br />challenge. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly asked if there were places where the City could deviate from the State code, or if the <br />proposed ordinance closely followed the State code. Ms. Pomes replied the language in the ordinance was <br />what was required by State law. In addition to the State code, new public contracting rules and procedures <br />that comprised the details of public contracting were also being drafted. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly asked what the practical effect on staff and council's involvement was compared to the <br />old code. Ms. Pomes responded that the new code would provide the following: updated procurement <br />terminology and procurement methods; greater ability to do alternative contracting methods; <br />reorganization of the code to facilitate determination of which portions of the code applied to goods and <br />services, and definition of which portions of the code applied to public contracting and public <br />improvement contracting. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman asked if the ordinance reflected only the State mandates and nothing else, noting that <br />the findings on page 121, Exhibit A, included a list of provisions that did not require findings. She <br />assumed that the remainder of the provisions for which there were findings above and beyond statutory <br />requirements. Ms. Pomes confirmed Councilor Bettman's observation, adding that State statute required <br />local governments to enact their own exemptions, while others reestablished previous exemptions that had <br />been repealed by the legislation. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman asked, out of the nine pages of findings, how much was above and beyond the existing <br />code that would expire on March 1, and what exceeded the State requirements as new code language. Ms. <br />Pomes replied that the new code included an exemption for privately engineered public improvements <br />(PEPIS), allowing the City to participate as an exemption in those projects. She said the second <br />exemption provided for use of alternative contracting methods for some public improvement projects such <br />as the contractor/architect/design/built projects. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman asked for a memo from the City Manager with the new provisions and a little more of <br />an explanation on the findings. She added that she wanted to know what the checks and balances were, <br />and how the new language related to privatization of services currently provided by the City. <br /> <br />Referring to his earlier declaration of a potential conflict of interest, Councilor Pap6 asked for a ruling <br />from the City Attorney. City Attorney Glenn Klein stated if Councilor Pap6 had a conflict, at most it was <br />a potential conflict rather than an actual conflict of interest, and that Councilor Pap6 was free to <br />participate in the discussion and vote on the ordinance. <br /> <br /> Referring to page 2 of the ordinance, Section 2.1415 (2)(b), Councilor Pap6 asked if alternative <br /> contracting methods would allow for a greater use of life cycle costing rather than straight low bid. Ms. <br /> Pomes replied that the City had had the ability and had used life cycle costing routinely, and would <br /> continue to do so under the new ordinance. <br /> <br /> The council took a break from 8:55 p.m. to 9:02 p.m. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 14, 2005 Page 10 <br /> Regular Session <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.