HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupplemental Information - Questions from GoldbergQuestions & Comments for 7/10/17
Item B: Demands on Treasury
Page 7• bottom third: Check #1880 to Townsend Public Affairs for $2400 for "Coastal
Communities Coalition." The $600 /month lobbying support was approved by Council in early
2017.
Where is this $7200 1year expenditure found in the FY 17 -18 Budget?
Item C: Purchasing System Ordinance
3.20.030 (D). The last two sentences in this section discuss the City Managers authority to
approve contracts.
Comment: This topic has nothing to do with the title of this section "Exemptions from
Bidding Requirements ", and therefore should be deleted.
3.20.070 (A) Sale of Surplus Property. Subsection (1) says that we will use competitive bidding,
but (2) says that we might use negotiated sale. These sections appear to conflict with one
another.
Did staff mean to include both?
Item D: Laserfiche Upgrade
Page 2 states that the $19,522 "cost of the upgrade was approved in the FY 17 -18 Budget, Acct
03- 0202 - 44000." This Contract Professional account on page 70 lists a number of contracts
including Laserfiche. However, there is no mention of any upgrade or the word "Avante."
Similarly, there was no discussion of this upgrade during the May 24`" budget workshop.
On what basis does staff assert that the Council has already approved the funding for
this upgrade?
Item F: ABC Police Grant
The proposed budget amendment puts all of the grant money into account 075- 473 -40700
used for the purchase of equipment and materials. However, according to Exhibit B in the grant
proposal, almost $40,000 of the $45,400 grant will be used to pay for police overtime.
Why doesn't the budget amendment place $40,000 of the grant money into the Police
Grant Over -Time Salary account 075- 460 - 40003?
Item G: Sand Berm Contract
The proposed contract amendment not only extends the contract for two additional years as
described in the staff report, but also authorizes $19,950 for "Excess Sand Removal Work." This
supplemental project is not described in the staff report, and raises the total cost of the
contract amendment from the stated $275,366 to $295,316. However, Resolution 6749 only
authorizes the expenditure of $275,366.
What is the supplemental sand removal work?
Has this work already been completed?
Why is the cost of this supplemental work not included in Resolution 67497
Item H: Special Taxes for Pacific Gateway CFD
Page 2 states that the total expenditures for Landscape Maintenance for FY 17 -18 is estimated
at $61,800. However, page 229 of the budget shows Total Expenditures for Landscape at
$249,300. Even excluding the one -time CIP transfer of $122,000, the landscaping expenditures
In the budget are still $127,300, twice the estimate in Monday's staff report.
Why is there such a large discrepancy in landscaping costs between the budget and
Monday's staff report?