My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4/25/1989
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1989
>
4/25/1989
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2023 10:50:18 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 2:48:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
04/25/1989
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
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
At the present time, the Committees are generally comprised of the <br />appropriate staff and the Commissioner whose area of interest or <br />responsibility the particular project falls within. I recognize the positive <br />aspects of this approach and likewise am not aware of any specific past <br />problems. <br />However, I also feel the process can be strengthened by taking full <br />advantage of /the professional staff capabilities and delegating the committee <br />evaluations eintirely to staff. In the short time I have been here, I have <br />found staff to be very competent and professional. By drawing on the <br />individual experience and expertise, I think solid, objective recommendations <br />can be developed for the Commission. Committee composition would vary from <br />project to project depending on the particular project and the expertise <br />required. <br />Regardless of the approach, I believe it would be beneficial for the <br />Commission to affirm a policy that would consistently be followed in upcoming <br />consultant selections, rather than doing so on a project by projsct asis. <br />Commissioner Scurlock listed several things he would like to <br />see take place in this very important process: <br />1) That the County Administrator be totally in charge of <br />appointing the technical staff members of the committee; <br />2) That the Administrator, or his designee, be the actual <br />receiver and disseminator of all material brought to the <br />committee, and <br />3) That it be an open process. <br />With regard to whether a Commissioner should sit on a <br />selection committee, Commissioner Scurlock believed that where <br />there is a particular standing committee where a Commissioner <br />represents that particular interest, i.e. utilities, parks and <br />recreation, transportation, finances, libraries, etc., a <br />Commissioner should sit on the consultant selection committee. <br />He didn't feel that those specific committees should be involved <br />in the actual selection process, however. In the areas where <br />there is no standing committee, he didn't see the need to have a <br />Commissioner involved in selecting a consultant. He pointed out <br />that this county has used a wide variety of consultants, and <br />believed that has been in an effort to get the best price. <br />Commissioner Scurlock just didn't under estimate having a <br />Commissioner involved where he or she has some expertise, and he <br />APR 2b 1989 <br />29 <br />BOOK 76 Fs;E 69 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.