A part of the OACCT's Public Policy efforts for 2012 is for volunteers from the Public Policy committee attend both City and County meetings and report back on items that are of interest/concern to business.
Anita Benson presented the board with rough numbers associated with reductions to the plan. She made it clear that these reductions were not recommendations. She referred to the spreadsheet for details.
The largest reductions include the elimination of the administration and training areas. There will be an additional reduction in paving requirements because there will be fewer people parking there. Anita said there will need to be some office space for the crews but this space can be outfitted with the furnishings from the temporary location.
The reduction of a wash bay and some of the equipment storage will be partially offset by the additional gravel needed for outside parking.
Anita has a concern that the reduction of the contingency to 1% may be too severe. She said again that the Facility Committee is not recommending these reductions because each has a real operational cost associated with it. She said that they have not taken the time to calculate these costs.
Anita said that spring 2013 is the earliest that any project would start and that they have already contacted the landlord about this.
Anita stated that the committee is looking for direction from the board. FEMA is still an uncertainty but maybe there will be more information available in the fall. She proposed that the same amount of thought needs to go into this revised plan as went into the original plan.
Corky expressed that his opinions are well documented in the minutes. He wants the engineering offices to be part of the plan. Other questions /concerns of the board include:
- Will a change in the roofline impact the construction costs?
- What are the actual costs associated with the reductions? Specifically what is the cost of losing the operational efficiency of the administration office portion of the project?
- What about shortened equipment life…etc. How much of the equipment will be stored outside in the new plan vs. the original plan and what is the value of that equipment?
- How can in-house crews be used to lower construction costs?
- What is CPU’s plan to provide service to the new facility?
- If the plan is to construct the facility in phases, there needs to be a real schedule of these phases and not another “Highway 14” scenario.
The general consensus of the board is that July 10th is an unrealistic time frame. It is agreed that the county needs a building and they want to take the time to “do the homework” on the revised proposal prior to setting a date for a public hearing.
_docs_Site_3_29_12.jpg){kind=spacer}
