My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
MIN CHC PH 1999-07-21
PublicDocuments
>
County Clerk - Council
>
County Clerk
>
Charter Commission
>
2000
>
Minutes
>
Public Hearings
>
MIN CHC PH 1999-07-21
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2018 10:54:39 AM
Creation date
3/6/2018 2:52:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGE/MIN (Charter Comm.)
Agency
Charter Commission
Year
1999
Meeting date
7/21/1999
Type
MIN
Document Relationships
AGE CHC 1999-07-21 SP MTG
(Related To)
Path:
\County Clerk - Council\County Clerk\Charter Commission\2000\Agendas
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
• Finance because everything on CIP is governed by the availability of funding. <br />HIGASHI: Again, can you assist us in - <br />OLESEN: Okay, there Roland, I don't. It is in the Charter. <br />HIGASHI: It is in the Charter? <br />OLESEN: Yes. <br />MARTIN: Chapter 4: Section 5-4.2 (d) I think. Page 10. <br />OLESEN: Okay. Now comes several items that I think should be added to the <br />Charter. Added to it from the standpoint of practically how things are functioning in the <br />County government. <br />The first one, which is extremely inefficient the way it's being done now, is the physical <br />handling of all capital projects. We're going to be faced, within the next 10 to 15 <br />years, with anywhere from $30,000,000 to $50,000,000 on ADA only. That kind of <br />spending is done usually out of the Parks and Recreation Department. They funnel it <br />then over to the Public Works. The Public Works Department then goes to an outside <br />• consultant. The outside consultant then comes back again. It now goes back to the <br />Park and Rec Department. It then goes from there back over to the Public Works to go <br />out to bid. We now have a contractor that is out to bid but we don't have anybody in- <br />house, in-house, effectively with the skills to then handle it in the field. So what we're <br />doing is we're taking - my recommendation is that this be a separate department <br />completely separate, reporting directly to the Mayor. This is not unreasonable and I <br />think that I would recommend that you research the recommendations that were made <br />by Harris in Honolulu. I think he did exactly that. He has established a separate <br />Capital Projects group to administer capital projects so it can be done in a very, very <br />efficient manner. It wouldn't take more than about four or five people. It has a <br />secondary advantage in the fact that their salaries and function and costs would go <br />where it belongs - against the capital - would not go against administrative costs. This <br />is a big mistake we're making right now. All this effort that's being done by the County <br />people actually is going against administrative costs. This legally, and through good <br />financial policy, can go and be tacked right into the cost of a facility. We've done it on <br />some of the most recent ones. On the Kona pool which I handled, all my charges <br />effectively went into the CIP and it makes sense. That's the total cost of a facility. <br />Now, I mention these costs because the way it is currently being handled is (1) it's not <br />efficient, (2) I think that you can do it with about five people, five to six key people. <br />These would be people that are currently in the administration. They're either <br />functioning right now in the Public Works Department or they're functioning in some of <br />the other areas. They would effectively come out of administrative costs for the <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.