Laserfiche WebLink
E <br />Shooting Range. He questioned why staff did not go out for bid comparisons on the shooting <br />range expansion project, despite some of the work being accomplished in-house. <br />Administrator Baird explained that staff was used for engineering and surveying services <br />at the shooting Range to save tax dollars, and was paid from the Transportation Fund utilizing <br />gas tax, which now needs to be reimbursed by using impact fees since the task is relating to a <br />Parks and Recreation project. He also disclosed that staff would be going out for bids for the <br />majority of the expansion project. <br />Discussion ensued between the Board and staff regarding the policy of whether to <br />accomplish projects in-house or obtain bids from an outside source. <br />County Attorney Alan S. Polackwich, Sr. said he had made sure that the services being <br />reimbursed were a proper expenditure of impact fees. <br />Charlie Wilson, 1017 6th Street, questioned why this item was listed under the Consent <br />Agenda, and whether the expansion project would be accomplished utilizing in-house staff or <br />outside privatization. He also voiced concerns over policy and the use of impact fee monies. <br />Administrator Baird explained why he chose to put this item under the Consent Agenda, <br />and reiterated that the remainder of the project would go out for bids. <br />Discussion continued regarding transparency, privatization, there being no change in <br />policy procedures, and why other options cannot be used to pay for staff costs. <br />Commissioner Davis suggested that in the future, staff estimates how much an in-house <br />project will cost to perform the scope of service, and before the work is completed, bring the <br />expenditure (with an allocation amount from a particular fund) to the Board for approval. <br />March 20, 2012 9 <br />BK 142PG231 <br />