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 5 <br />for all purchasing functions. Due to centralized purchasing authority, purchasing agents are <br />better able to identify goods and services with a high potential for savings and then leverage their <br />experience, greater knowledge of markets, and their municipality's market power to negotiate <br />better terms, including lower prices, with vendors. <br />This report identifies ways the Cities can attain the cost-saving benefits of centralized purchasing <br />systems while retaining the benefits of a decentralized purchasing system. <br />Three approaches can improve decentralized purchasing systems without increasing staffing and <br />operations costs: <br />(1) Increase the use of "piggybacking" to access beneficial terms of contracts previously entered <br />by public entities. <br />(2) Utilize cooperative purchasing agreements to allow Cities to obtain volume discounts among <br />themselves, even without County participation. <br />(3) Collaborate with the County's Procurement Division to negotiate lower prices for common <br />goods and services. <br />If these changes resulted in even a conservative five percent average savings on procurements, <br />the County could save more than $15 million and the Cities collectively could save more than <br />$21.25 million per year. <br />GLOSSARY and ABBREVIATIONS <br />California Association of Public Procurement Officials (the CAPPO): The CAPPO is a <br />nonprofit organization dedicated to maintaining the highest standards of professional behavior <br />and ethical conduct in public purchasing. As the oldest public procurement association in the <br />United States, CAPPO works to provide tools to buyers in the public sector that will help them <br />develop their professional skills for their benefit and the benefit of their agencies. <br />California Department of General Services (the DGS or General Services?): The DGS <br />serves as business manager for the state of California. The DGS provides a variety of services to <br />state agencies, including procurement and acquisition solutions. <br />Centralized Procurement: Centralized procurement means that a single department controls <br />and manages the purchasing for the whole organization. Ideally a manager oversees the <br />purchasing department regarding what materials need to be purchased and in what quantity.5 <br />City -County Procurement Cooperation (C -CPC): C -CPC is a term for practices, if adopted, <br />that will allow Cities and the County to save millions of dollars on procurement each year. <br />Cooperative Purchasing Agreements: A type of procurement in which multiple purchasing entities <br />collaborate in purchasing to increase their market power, thereby gaining access to lower prices. <br />5 Effia Soft, "Centralized vs. Decentralized Purchasing" Effiasoft.com Accessed on May 20, 2018 <br />https: //effiasoft. com/centralized-vs-decentralized-purchasing. <br />2017-2018 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.