Remarks by Craig Berenstein
326 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 7 of 14
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
So let me ask you a question. All of the boards and commissions that we have, we'd like to make sure that there's at least an interest, if not sort of an education background. If you apply to the Environmental Services Board, what's your interest in environmental affairs, right?
The question that I've got is, can you hear me now? Yeah. Typically when we get individuals that apply for boards and commissions, we look to see what their background is. If you apply for the Environmental Services Board, you generally have an interest in environmental services or the environment, right? Recycling or otherwise. Civil Service Commission is a very engaged, very complicated board with very difficult substance. What's your background to understand the civil service process?
So let me ask either Heidi or Nicole, With many of the boards and commissions, they're required to take a couple of ethics classes, right? They have to sign on and take an ethic. With civil service, is there a training session beyond just the ethics that we all take when we go on a board or commission?
It's a class that you take. I think there's two of them. They're two-hour classes. For the Civil Service Commission, is there more training, Janelle?
Certainly. And this position is to fill Cindy Hansen's, is that correct? Yes. Is that correct? Yes.
Can we go back to item five on the human rights? Nicole, when we're approving on the consent agenda a motion to accept annual evaluation, we're not acknowledging the substance. We're only accepting the human rights commission's actions. Correct. Okay.
So Brent, I'm going to ask you the same question that I asked. Maybe Mark's already gone. With the boards and commissions we generally interview for, there's usually an interest in the fundamental of that board or commission. What's your background to understand the civil service process? Because it is very complicated.
So right now you're on the effective fiscal management committee. Yes, sir. Our typical policy is that you can only serve on one board or commission at a time. We have waived that rule in the past, but typically we waive it when we have seats, spots that we don't, where we have a number of spots that we're trying to fill. If you were to get appointed, would you resign from the effective fiscal management committee?
I know why you're extending it, and I know that we're starting to look at the new contracts and the new process. Do you think it makes sense to only extend this to December 31st of this year, or should we extend it for another year?
Well, understanding what the process typically looks like, and I realize that we have three, three and a half months, but my sense is that we should extend it for maybe another three or four months to maybe March 31st of 27 or April 30th.
That is the goal. I'm going to move that we amend. How do you want me to do this, Nicole, in the consent agenda? Just a normal amendment?
I'm going to move to amend item 6B to extend the term of the committee.
6C. I don't think. We're just trying to be safe so that we don't, on December 31st, Tom's not coming back saying we need a little bit more time. If they're done on December 30th, we can terminate the committee at that time. I just don't.
You think there's an issue with them serving extra three months if we extend it to the 31st of March?
And if we have to dissolve the committee at the end of December or go all the way to March, it really... Well, I'm going to move that we amend item 6C to extend the term of the committee to March 31st, 2027. If it fails for lack of a second or on the vote, that's fine, but... I think it makes sense to extend it for three extra months. Second.
Is Chief here? Or is anybody here on this project? Only question I've got, Mike, maybe you can just follow up. When we looked at this project during the budget process, I thought it was just an addition or modification for a women's locker room. I didn't think it included a men's locker room. So is this a bigger project or a different project?
All right. So, Teresa, does this change the budget item at all then? Do you know?
Even with the addition of the additional work in the mid. Okay. Thank you.
Does this item fit within the 2% rule? And do we have that latitude with this contract?
8A on the proposal to Holstein. The bid summary is that the Holstein bid was $88,230. The second bid was Thompson Electric of $88,624, so the difference was $394. Do we have the latitude under the 2% rule? Spiro?
So we have the latitude beyond just the underlying price or we don't? You do not on this type of agreement. Okay.
I think the question I've got, which I think is consistent with the question that Ike is asking, I get that there's mobilization. I get that they're on site. I get that this is something that they can do. But it's about a $1.1 million contract. In addition, this is the third change order. This is significantly more than the other two. For $164,000, I know what your answer is going to be, but I wonder why wouldn't we look at rebidding this?
So you're confident that the 164 would be more than competitive with other bidders?
I don't have any issues with the project or approving the contract. Jill, what I am curious about is how are you going to... utilize this $4.5 million in this project to create revitalization in the neighborhood to support not only this project, but projects to the east, west, north, and south.