Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 12-14 PreMeridian City Pre -Council Meeting December 14k 20 The Meridian City Pre -Council meeting was called to order at 5:30 P.M. on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Shaun Wardle and Charlie Rountree. Staff Present: Bill Nary and Will Berg. Item 1. Roll -call Attendance: X Shaun Wardle X Christine Donnell X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird _X Mayor Tammy de Weerd Item 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Bird: We need a motion to adopt the agenda if it's an approval. Donnell: So moved. Rountree: Second. Bird: Okay, it's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. Item & Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(b) and (f): Bird: I would entertain a motion. Donnell: So moved. Rountree: Second. Bird: Its been moved and seconded. Mr. Clerk, roll call. Berg: Thank you Mr. President. Roll call: Donnell, aye; Rountree, aye; Wardle, aye; Bind, aye; All ayes. Bird: I would entertain a motion to come out of Executive Session. Rountree: So moved. Meridian City Pre -Council Meeting December 14, 2004 Page 2 of B Wardle: Second. Bird: Okay, its been moved and seconded. All in favor say aye. ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. Bird: Let it be noted that no decisions were made. Item 4. Discussion and Review of Draft Inspection Services Contracts: Freckleton: Thank you Madam Mayor, members of the Council. I bring before you for some discussion tonight the contracts for inspection services for mechanical, plumbing, electrical and building. Basically I have put together some talking points; you should have those in front of you on some items that these contractors have brought back to me. I transmitted to them the same time I transmitted over to City Hall draft copies of the contracts, so we could just step through these if you would like and have a little discussion. The first item is Item 9-F and this is a general that you will find on all of the contracts. This is in regards to if a determination is made by some governmental agency that our contractors are city employees instead of contractors, the provision in the contract stipulates that the contractor would agree to reimburse the city for all employment costs that results from that determination and examples of those would be things such as employee share of PERSI and employee share of health insurance, things like that. In my discussions with them they asked that if that is the case then would that mean that the city would be reimbursing them for costs that they have incurred, such as their vehicle insurance and health insurance and those sort of things. Their basic recommendation was couldn't this just be struck from the contracts and so that's the one item for discussion and I know Mr. Nary in our discussions this afternoon, he had some thoughts on that and maybe he can help us out here. Nary: Mr. President, members of the Council I think what the concern that they are talking about here, I mean it's probably a good discussion point, but the circumstances that the contract was contemplating was that if for some reason at some point in the future was the (inaudible) that these folks were employees and not independent (inaudible) through the city. The city would be on the hook for past wages and in certain circumstances even triple damages and wages for not paying them properly. I think the intent of that provision, it was an existing provision, this wasn't written by Mr. Watson or myself, this was already in the existing contracts we have had in the past. I am assuming the intent was to put them on notice that if that were to occur, there may be some other expenses that were employee related that they would also be responsible for. The law is going to dictate what the city has to pay. So, I don't — I understand where the contractors are coming from and the concern of making sure the city would be paying their fair share, they would be. The Department of Labor would make sure that the city would be paying their wages and all of that. Would they be Meridian City Pre -Council Meeting December 14, 2004 Page 3 of 6 paying the other ancillary things as their insurance and those types of things? Probably not. Not by the Department of Labor standards anyway, but they may certainly be other issues there. Do you want to make this a mutual provision? I think that's your call. I think the intent was simply to put them on notice that if a decision of that magnitude or that type was made that they have responsibilities to employees then for the same time period. Freckleton: If you'd like I can go on to the next item or we can have some discussion. Bird: That would be fine. Freckleton: Okay. Second talking point is Item No. 11, which is general in all contracts. That is in regards to transition. Just kind of in summary in the even the contract is terminated or not renewed, the contractors agreed that they would basically stay on for a period — the way the contract is currently written is 90 days to aid in the transition and I know Gary Smith prior to his retirement had had some discussions with Harold Hudson regarding that 90 day period and the appropriateness of it and he agreed that it was more appropriate that it should be like 30 -day period and that's something that Brad and I have talked about and we agree that 30 days is probably adequate and appropriate. Item No. 3. This was a question on the RIMI, that's the plumbing contractors or excuse me the mechanical contractors' contract and it's in regard to the — in the percentage section on the fee structure — the way it currently reads is that notwithstanding the foregoing, whenever the contractor's percentage of a permit fee has a value of $1,000 or more the inspection fee shall be negotiated between the city and the contractor. Mr. Medley has told me that historically that that's not how the contract has been administered. The contract has been administered — basically that any fee over the $1,000 or more has been paid at that percentages, which gets him to the 40 percent annual number quicker. So, I didn't really have a problem with that. He has recommended that the provision for negotiation of those larger permit fees be struck The fourth talking point is on Item 12b of our electrical contractors contracts and it is in regard to automobile liability insurance. In summary, the contract currently reads that the contractor shall obtain and maintain collision an comprehensive insurance coverage on all vehicles owned or leased by the contractor. Harold maintains that full collision and comprehensive insurance should not be required or should only be required if the vehicle that he is using is under contracts, such as being financed. Whenever it's being financed, the bank or the financer will require full comprehensive. This is something; I guess as far as a recommendation that we would recommend that we just get our insurance camel's opinion on this. Harold's proposal is to just carry liability only per the law. Maybe Bill has more he can — Nary: Mr. President, Madam Mayor, and members of Council I think the contractors at least raise a valid concern. It's his own vehicle. He is independent. Its already paid for, so carving full coverage we are concerned Meridian City Pre -Council Meeting December 14, 2004 Page 4 of 6 about the liability. Maybe the issue that would probably be best and wouldn't be very onerous for him either was simply to provide the city with a certificate of insurance — that the city is an additional insurer so that if in the course of him doing business for the city, he were to get into an accident, it was clear that his insurance was supposed to cover the city as well. That might be the easiest thing to do and I don't know that that would be significant for any of the contracts to be able to do that. Freckleton: Okay and there is just one final item that I did not get in my talking points, but its in all the contracts and that is on the Exhibit A, Item No. 11 under reporting the contracts state that the contractor shall provide on a monthly basis certain reports and we have city staff that maintains those records and we maintain our own databases, so we never have had the contractor submit those reports, we have always been able to do them ourselves, so I would propose we just strike that section out of the exhibit. That is basically it. Bird: Thank you very much, Bruce. Council any questions for Bruce or the attorney on any of these? Rountree: Mr. President Bird: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I have a question on the item under 12b. Is the half a million dollars liability coverage sufficient? Should we be looking at something more? Nary: Mr. President, members of the Council, Councilman Rountree under the items tort claims act, the city's limitation on most circumstances for liability is going to be at the half a million dollar range, so I think we should be fine. Rountree: Okay, thank you. Bird: Any more questions? Okay, Council we need to get these going so we have got a good red line copy of each one of them. Read them over. If you see anything that disturbs you, let the Mayor know and if not let's let the Mayor get on with it and get it before us and get this taken care of. Thank you Bruce. We appreciate your work. Freckleton: Mr. President we were anticipating or hoping that we could get the final draft in front of you next Tuesday. If we can do that. Item 5, Discussion of Prosecution Contract; Nary: Mr. President, members of the Council this will be very brief. I had a conversation last week with the Boise City Attorney. As all of you know, the City of Boise handles all of our misdemeanor prosecution for the City of Meridian. We Meridian City Pre -Council Meeting December 14, 2004 Page 5 of 6 have had a contract with them in the past for the last two years, two budget years. We forgot to have a contract for this budget year. They forgot as well, so they were equally apologetic that we did give them the numbers or they did give us the numbers from the City of Boise so that we have them in the budget. They have been getting paid, so it's all been good. We just don't actually have a current contract. Mr. Coliani, the Boise City Attorney did raise a couple of concerns that he would like us to look at. He was going to transmit those to me. He had an issue about the indemnification clause, but he wasn't very specific. So, I called over there today and talked to one of their chief deputies and he was going to get the specifics and get those to me and so what their concerns were we have had a couple of instances in the past with other contracts that there was an issue about what level of indemnification we are seeking from another party in prosecution. It may not be as critical. The other was that there are no cancellation provisions; we can cancel the contracts on one days' notice. Their concern was that they have two employees that are being paid out of the proceeds of the contract and one day's notice probably wouldn't be very adequate for them from a management standpoint. They would like at least 30 days notice, I don't see that as a significant problem either. We certainly would provide more notice than that. So, I think we should be able to work those out, so I should have a contract back in front of you, probably not next week because they haven't told me what the provisions are that they want to change, but probably within the next couple of meetings we should have that back. Again, nothing has happened. We have been paying them. Mr. President, Item 6, 1 can go into that if you want. Bird: Yeah, sure. Item 6. Discussion of Amendment to the Police Building: Nary: The last item is the amendment to the police building and lease agreement. We should have all the documentation in front of you next Tuesday that our bond Council has prepared for us to amend our lease agreement. We did have an agreement from the bank and from the bond company to amend the lease agreement. The intent is to amend it to a similar situation as the Boise Airport was upheld as a non -taxed building that won't affect the current tax year. So, if you were thinking we were going to get a break on the 2004, that's not likely. The intent is to have it before you so that it can be at the end of this fiscal year or at the end of this calendar year to be on the tax rolls. We will then file an exemption in January for the year 2005 and we are hopeful that the county will agree since it should be the exact same provisions that the City of Boise prevailed on. So, it isn't for the past tax year, so if you are wondering about that one, we are still going to have to pay that one. We are hoping going forward that we won't have to continue paying the taxes on that building. That's all I have. Bird: Council any questions for Mr. Nary? Meridian City Pre -Council Meeting December 14, 2004 Page 6 of 6 Rountree: No, thank you. Bird: With that, we end our agenda for the Pre -Council meeting of December 14, 2004. 1 would entertain a motion to adjournment. Rountree: So moved. Wardle: Second. Bird: Its been moved and seconded. All those in favor? Opposed? ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:53 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: ( / G( /1967 TAMMY DkWFkRD. MAYOR DATE APPROVED • �--- — - ._ - . T. WILLIAM G. BER , JR., CI _ R �V %r15�!1