My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4/16/1996
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1996
>
4/16/1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:05:49 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 3:25:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
04/16/1996
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
BOOK 97 pwq 839:. <br />Director Baird advised that the revenues and expenses are <br />even, and Mr. Heady pointed out that if it is even, it doesn't cost <br />the County a thing. He felt privatization would be a serious <br />mistake and would open a floodgate. Mr. Heady stated that he would <br />be very disappointed with this Board if they were to transfer the <br />care of this treasure of a golf course to a private firm. <br />John Wallen of Buckinghammock Trail felt the union should have <br />been brought into this matter a long time ago. He would like to <br />know what the County has invested in their capital equipment and <br />whether the contractor is going to use that equipment. He asked if <br />the private firm is to be bonded and whether the bond is sufficient <br />to restore the golf course to its initial condition in the event of <br />mismanagement. Mr. Wallen also asked about the continuance of <br />prisoner labor at Sandridge. <br />In conclusion, Mr. Wallen emphasized that "if it isn't broke, <br />don't fix it." <br />In response to Chairman Adams' request, Director Komarinetz <br />addressed the questions posed by Mr. Wallen. He explained that we <br />would continue to own the equipment, but the contractor would <br />repair and maintain it. The reason for that is that in the event <br />the contractor did not perform satisfactorily, the County could <br />resume maintenance. There is a 5 -year capital equipment <br />replacement program and we will work that into our capital <br />equipment budget program. <br />Director Baird explained that the performance bonds are part <br />of the cost and cover 100% of the contract, and Director Komarinetz <br />explained that the agreement states that IGM is responsible for any <br />damage done to the golf course up to $2 -million. With regard to <br />prisoners working at the golf course, that labor is available as <br />long as the County owns the course. In addition, we have the <br />County's weekend work force program where they perform various <br />tasks around the club house. <br />Commissioner Bird felt we could kick the numbers around all <br />day, but we have to rely on staff who diligently worked up these <br />figures and feel comfortable with their recommendation. <br />Commissioner Bird noted that having a great love and pride for <br />Sandridge, the last thing he would ever want to do is hurt it in <br />anyway. He has great compassion for the maintenance workers and <br />hoped that they would be hired by the new company or. get <br />transferred laterally within the County. He has been told by the <br />Personnel Department that we have several openings in the County <br />where they can retain their same pay and benefits. Unfortunately <br />it is that pay and those benefits that is putting Sandridge in a <br />non-competitive situation with the other 17 golf courses in this <br />31 <br />APRIL 16, 1996 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.