RDA Min 1988-02-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Item No. 1 (continued) With regard to monitoring the prevailing wage policy, Mr. Church said that if it is adopted policy, monitoring cannot be abrogated to anyone else and the Agency has the obligation to do it in some regular reasonable manner or could expect to incur liability. Mr. Church suggested random or "complaint basisll monitoring can become more time-consuming than regular routine monitoring, since experience danonstrates that when violations are found, it is necessary to go back to possibly IIstaleB information and also that more violations are likely to be discovered. He said that his staff is not adequate to handle proper monitoring and the cost of such service W)uld have to be added to project costs. City Attorney Schricker said that if the policy is adopted as a legal requirement, there is likelihood of liability unless the policy is monitored, noting that the offer of an interested party, such as the Building Trades Council, to do the monitoring is not appropriate. Housing Coordinator Jones-Thomas reported that she has monitored several contracts recently and experience sugggests it cannot be done on a random or complaint basis. She pointed out that the Building Trades Council (BTC) is requesting the policy apply to all construction, not just where the Agency has a significant involvement, and that BTC wants a $50,000 threshold rather than the staff recommended $100,000, so that the number of projects to be monitored may be great. Tom Adams, attorney representing the Building Trades Council, distributed his own "Paragraph (b) Projects Subject to Prevailing Wage Policyll and asked that the Agency substitute it for the paragraph in the proposed Policy. Mr. Adams said that the BTC paragraph would cause the policy to be put into effect for all projects whether or not there is public involvement, with a $50,000 threshold except for single-family home rehabilitation. Mr. Adams said the BTC will expect to monitor compliance, but does not expect the Agency to delegate its responsibility in that regard. He suggested that monitoring the pol icy should not be burdensome and recommended that it be done on a random or complaint basis. Bob Gilmore, Representati ve, Buil di ng Trades Council, confi rmed that BTC favors application of prevailing wage policy in the Redeve10fJT1ent area whether or not the public agency is involved. Mr. Gilmore said BTC ~u1d accept the $100,000 threshold, but does not want the policy limited to those projects where there is public involvement. He said payroll records should be required, but he does not request regular monitoring by the Agency. In response to question, City Attorney Schricker said that an Owner Participatioo Agreement (OPA) would be required in every instance, if the BTC proposal is adopted. Special Counsel Hildebrand advised that many Redeve10fJT1ent Agencies require only certificates of clearance, but that under the BTC proposal, the Agency could be requiring an OPA solely because of the prevailing wage policy. Mr. Schri cker poi nted out that there is no express 1 ega 1 authority where there is non-Agency economic involvement, noting that Agency involvement is more defensible and that a significant policy issue is involved. MINUTE BOOK NO. 47 Page NO. 493 Red ev . Agen cy 2/8/88 Page 2 --- - .. ----