My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2018-09-10 Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2018
>
AgdaPkt 2018-09-10 Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/11/2018 8:39:31 AM
Creation date
9/6/2018 5:49:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Date
9/10/2018
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
468
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
6.1.13. - Page 2 <br />participants. The report identifies various ways that cities can achieve the cost-saving <br />benefits of centralized purchasing systems, including utilizing piggyback contracts and <br />cooperative purchasing agreements, as well as sharing individual department <br />procurement information between all cities and the County Procurement Division. <br />The City's responses largely agree with the findings outlined in the Grand Jury report; <br />however, implementation of some of the findings and recommendations would involve a <br />significant commitment of staff time and resources, as well as a high degree of frequent <br />regional coordination between San Mateo County and each city. In order to implement <br />the suggested recommendations, time would have to be committed to organizing all <br />agencies in a formalized and systematic manner, training would need to be provided to <br />all staff involved in procurements, and frequent communication would be necessary <br />between all agencies in order to discuss the multitude of procurements underway at any <br />given time. <br />This would be a substantial undertaking, as each city in San Mateo County functions in <br />a decentralized purchasing environment, and there are technology constraints, <br />workload considerations, and staffing levels that are unique to each agency. <br />Successfully addressing the Findings and Recommendations noted in the Grand Jury <br />report will require the participation of all of the cities in the County. <br />City staff currently pursues piggyback contracts and joint procurement agreements <br />when those contracts or agreements are known and available, and is committed to <br />continuing to do so. <br />ALTERNATIVES <br />The City Council may request revisions to the response letter to the Grand Jury report. <br />FISCAL IMPACT <br />There is no anticipated fiscal impact. <br />ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW <br />This activity is not a project under CEQA as defined in CEQA Guidelines, section <br />15378, because it has no potential for resulting in either a direct or a reasonably <br />foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.