2006-05-04 Cost of Government Commission Minutes

Home

seconded the amended motion. All members voted to file the letter away and to make a note that there is a discrepancy in the date of the letter and to request clarification on the date. Communication No. 2006 -31: Letter to Demetra Reynolds from Milton Pavao. Motion: Mr. Joseph moved to accept and file the letter, and Ms. Stremski seconded. Discussion: Mr. Sakaguchi stated that he was not satisfied with Mr. Pavao's response to the letter, as he, too, has automatic bill payment and receives an unnecessary return envelope. Though it would cost the department money to reprogram its computer system here, he still felt it would ultimately save money. He felt the response was flippant. Vote: After further discussion, and it being determined that the issue of return envelopes was already on the COGC's running tally of recommendations for its report, the Chair called for a vote. All members voted to accept and file away the letter. 4. APPROVAL OF ADDENDUM AND /OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA There was no addendum or supplemental agenda. 5. PRESENTATION AND QUESTION /ANSWER SESSION WITH THE SOLID WASTE AND WASTEWATER DIVISIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Dora Beck was present to represent the Wastewater Division of the Department of Environmental Management ( "DEM "). She explained that Michael Dworsky, who was to represent the Solid Waste Division, was unable to attend due to another commitment. Ms. Beck introduced herself and explained that she is the chief of the Technical Services Section of the DEM. Technical Services is involved in the planning, design, and budgeting of capital improvement projects with the Wastewater Division. Ms. Beck had with her a letter she'd written to answer the questions the COGC posed to the DEM and said she would basically read through her responses. She explained that she addressed each question from the viewpoint of the Wastewater Division and that the Solid Waste Division may have different answers. 1. Do you have any ideas about what your department can do to save money while not compromising essential services? • She would like to increase the engineering staff so that more projects could be done in- house, thereby saving money. For the next fiscal year, they are requesting $1.7 million in consulting services for capital improvement projects, which are needed due to the large- capacity cesspool mandate, equipment repairs, and long -run cost - savings tactics. The cost is for a consultant and does not include the time put in by the County staff engineer. Based on an average of four design projects per year, she estimates they 2