Next Up at City Council, 7/18/2007

There is nothing on the Agenda anyone with a job requiring your presence during the day on Wednesday would be interested in. It says so, right at the end:

See? Nothing you might be concerned about. Should I even continue to review what’s on for Wednesday morning? I suppose we should all take a peek, to see what doesn’t matter to us, right?

Well, the two Communications are about “the persistent contrails in the skies over Portland”. As a matter of fact, I’m not worried about them. Should I be?

Here’s something that sounds like a fine idea: 853 TIME CERTAIN: 9:30 AM – Bureau Innovation Project 12, improve maintenance delivery systems. Ditto the other Time Certain, 854 TIME CERTAIN: 10:00 AM – Metro Drive Less/Save More Campaign. Improving systems, saving more – who could be opposed to those concepts? The documents are available on the Agenda link above, so you can see what they really mean if you’re interested. If I get a burst of enthusiasm and chunk of free time this weekend, I may look them up and give you my report.

Naomi Harris and Bradley Perkins are being appointed to to the Housing and Community Development Commission (aka “HCDC”), and Tony Jones is being reappointed. I mention their names to thank them for volunteering considerable amounts of their time.

Yada yada yada, contracts, contracts…. here’s one that piques my interest: 864 Authorize an Intergovernmental Agreement with Metropolitan Water District of Southern California for the evaluation of capital project delivery efficiency (Second Reading Agenda 816) Are we buying something from a government in Southern California, or are they purchasing from us? I think I’ll check….[clicks on “Item 864” on right sidebar of agenda. Thinks, “Wow, this new agenda with easy-to-find links is a huge improvement. Thanks again, Karla Moore-Love. Oh great, it’s one of the City’s gigunda pdf files which takes forever to download. Cue Jeopardy music in head. Tralalalala. Ah, here we go….”]

Turns out we are paying an outfit in Southern California $10,000 to participate in and get the results of their study which “focuses on increasing the number of projects in a performance database, utilizing case studies to pass knowledge from workshop attendees to their own organizations, developing Best Management Practices, evaluating efficiency of project delivery, and encouraging information sharing among the phase three participants.” For the Water Bureau. So now we know. It’s a second reading, so we missed our opportunity to testify about it two weeks ago, before the July 4 break. Moving on….

Wait! The next-but-one item is a similar thing, only with Australia! 866 Authorize a memorandum of agreement with Water Services Association of Australia for the 2007 International Water Association-Water Services Association of Australia Customer Services Process Benchmarking Project (Second Reading Agenda 818). OK, I’ll bite, how much are we paying them? [Repeat process above for Item 866] Wow, this one is for $51,100. “This Agreement will assist in establishing credible cost and service performance indicators and benchmarks, identify cost saving opportunities, understanding best practices and how they relate to improving performance.” Y’know, for that kind of money, I sure hope the information purchased is going to be made available to the public in some way. At the very least, there should be a report to Council (presented at a hearing, on cable so citizens can see and learn) to tell everyone what savings and improved practices were outcomes of the collaboration and expenditure.

One further contract note: both the above contain the standard clause that payment may increase by 25% without further authorization from Council. I sure don’t manage our family budget with 25% contingencies. Do most businesses operate with this kind of built-in inflation in agreed payments?

The Consent Agenda carries about $8m in contracts for affordable housing.

On the Regular Agenda, here’s one my colleagues living near Mount Tabor will doubtless be all over: 884 Authorize a contract with Slayden Construction Group, Inc. for construction services for the Mt.Tabor and Washington Park Interim Security and Deferred Maintenance Project (Purchasing Report – RFP No. 105058)

The report gives the cost as $23,238,377.00. It says, “The purpose of the project is to construct security and deferred maintenance improvements which will enable the Portland Water Bureau to better secure the open reservoirs with cameras and electronic security devices and permit the isolation of the reservoirs with remotely controllable valves and other maintenance items.” I don’t understand it, though. The report says the construction estimate in May 2006 was $9m. Why is the total reimbursible cost now $23m? Oh, wait, the report continues, “The Portland Water Bureau negotiated a Guaranteed Maximum Price with Slayden Construction Group, Inc. The GMP includes the original work, the enhanced security measures for opening Washington Park to pedestrians, relocation of sewer lines affected by the project and possible construction of Green Streets on SE 59th Avenue.” “Possible construction of Green Streets”? Are they in the contract, or not? It seems to me more details are needed, to justify more than doubling the estimated project cost from last year. I sure hope Council members received more information than is in the report linked on the Agenda.

The last item on the Agenda is one for East Portland neighbors to cheer: 889 Authorize a contract with 2KG Contractors for $929,087 for the Combined Pool Improvements to Matt Dishman, Mount Scott and Southwest Community Centers and Pier Pools (Second Reading Agenda 848).

See? The Council is only spending a little over 32 million dollars this Wednesday, just in the items I’ve outlined here (likely much more in the sewer contracts I didn’t highlight). Why would any of that need to be on an evening agenda, so citizens could see and understand where all their tax money goes, and perhaps ask questions if they had concerns?