My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Finance Highlights 2007 0207
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Committees
>
Finance Committee
>
Finance Highlights 2007 0207
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/6/2007 4:02:35 PM
Creation date
3/1/2007 9:35:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Committee Highlights
Document Date (6)
2/7/2007
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
_CC Agenda 2007 0305
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2007\Packet 2007 0305
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />LIVING WAGE QUESTIONS <br />(FINANCE COMMITTEE - JANUARY 3, 2007) <br /> <br />1. Name and position of respondent? <br /> <br />B - Sharon Thygesen, General Services Mgr <br /> <br />H - Dolores Meermans, Purchasing and Services Mgr <br /> <br />o - Deborah Barnes, Contract, Compliance, and Employment Services Manager <br /> <br />R - Sal Vaca, Director of Employment and Training <br /> <br />2. Your experience working with the city's living wage ordinance - Any regrets - pros <br />and cons? <br /> <br />B - No major issues - perhaps some bidders not bidding due to the wage, but nothing <br />she could pin down. <br /> <br />H - Not written very clearly, ambiguous. Recommends be very clear and specific, also <br />recommends in house auditor/compliance person. <br /> <br />o - First 2 years lots of challenges in implementation, making sure contracts boilerplate <br />all updated to include ordinance. Training of city personnel. Averaged 3% higher costs <br />on contracts at beginning, now probably down to 2 or 2-1/2 %. Termed the ordinance <br />very aggressive and that they required lots of self reporting by the contractors such as <br />wage statements etc. <br /> <br />R - No regrets, feels they set the example for other cities, it did raise the salaries in the <br />city and they did that first to set the bar. <br /> <br />3. Was there a need for additional staff to administer program either in <br />finance/purchasing or a compliance officer with city manager/mayor - FTE's? <br /> <br />B - As part of an overall streamlining effort, the city hired a contract administrator with <br />oversight over all the contracts the city enters into. The person administers all service <br />contracts for the city. This position was not hired specifically for the living wage, but at <br />the same time as the living wage was adopted <br /> <br />H - None were hired, feels that there should have been some type - too much to hand <br />off to person already working there. <br /> <br />o -Added 1 FT and 1 PT to staff for the first 2 years. Since then the FT has taken on <br />some other tasks and projects and is probably spending ~ to 1/3 of their time on living <br />wage, the PT person has been reassigned to another dept. <br /> <br />R - No budget for one in the beginning, now there is a FT person working on the <br />compliance issues for the city, including living wage and contractors <br /> <br />B - City of Berkeley; H - City of Hayward; 0 - City of Oakland; R - City of <br />Richmond <br /> <br />1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.