Item 3: Ratification of Unanimous IGR Actions and Action on Non-Unanimous IGR Actions

Home Browse Search

Comments: I agree with the comments from Paul, Mike and Jenifer. The goals of the bill fit with stated City policy however the bill's lack of specifics regarding the preferences would have serious negative impacts upon City projects. The amount of preference, which is yet undefined, could possibly directly correlate to an increase in costs to the City for projects. Given the atmospheric effects of public improvement projects it seems that these especially would be negatively impacted. Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation Mike Penwell CS-FAC 2/14/2011 -- Monitor Comments: I agree with Babe and Ethan that the purpose of this bill is laudable and supports City of Eugene policy around climate change. I also agree with Paul and Jenifer that this bill needs to be amended to clarify details about the preference system so we can assess the impact on City projects and staff time. Therefore, I think we should monitor this bill to see what changes are proposed as it makes its way through committee. Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation Jenifer Willer PWE 2/14/2011 -- Monitor Comments: This bill states that contracting agencies SHALL give a preference contractors based on greenhouse gas emissions and MAY use model rules developed by DAS/AG. My concerns are that this bill is too vague and does not give direction on how to determine credits for bidders and may impact the City in additional administration costs, raising prices and reducing competition (some contractors will choose not making changes or will not be able to afford making changes to practices) Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation Paul Klope PWE 2/14/2011 -- Monitor Comments: Requires public agencies to give preference in bidding to contractors who will output less greenhouse gases during their work. The bill requires the state to develop model rules that contracting agencies may use to give a preference for bidders who may output less greenhouse gases. Although it appears that the goals of this bill fit with City goals, since there are no details about the preference system in the bill, we have no way of knowing what kind of staffing impacts to administer such a preference system would have, what the added costs to our contracts might be, or what other impacts such rules would have. Because the bill is so open-ended it could have substantial cost and staffing implications which we would have no way of influencing once it became law. It could also reduce competition in bidding because depending on the requirements it could cause smaller contractors with less staff, less sophistication and older equipment to choose to not bid on public projects. I think we should oppose the bill unless language is added to detail what the preference system will be and that staff agrees the preference system will have minimal impacts to project costs and staff time. 8