Browse
Search
Agenda - 09-10-2009 - 2
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2009
>
Agenda - 09-10-2009
>
Agenda - 09-10-2009 - 2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/9/2009 9:08:12 AM
Creation date
9/9/2009 9:06:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
9/10/2009
Meeting Type
Work Session
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
2
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20090910
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
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
29 <br />P'URC~IIASII~TG <br />One: <br />The County Engineer function is assigned to this division. I do <br />have questions why the need and why here? Further study is <br />needed to validate the move. Why not the Planning Department <br />or elsewhere? <br />Two: <br />As part of a county-wide need, there may be reason to study the <br />concept of constructing a central storage and distribution facility <br />(possibly near the county garage). The concept envisioned <br />would encompass a centralized depository where historic county <br />files could be securely stored. Items like the BOE voting <br />machines could be housed there. It could be a location where <br />such activities as scanning and shredding of documents could be <br />centralized in a secured area. Doing so helps address record <br />storage and space issues impacting all departments. <br />Three: <br />In an effort to control county purchasing activities a policy <br />of requiring a "purchase order" for all purchases of $100 or <br />more and also treating every equipment related purchase of <br />$500 or more as a capital item is in place. An analysis of these <br />two policies might make it difficult to justify their existence. <br />Without verification, it may be that we are spending dollars to <br />save dimes. Requiring a PO for every $100 purchase means an <br />added paper trail is being created and that requires someone to <br />handle, track and audit. I have not yet verified how many PO <br />actions exist in total or the range of dollars involved. But <br />without doing so, I know that excess staff time in Purchasing <br />and at the operating department level is being spent tracking <br />low value actions at a per hour cost that probably exceeds any <br />savings in purchase coordination or incidental improper <br />purchases made. We can research what baseline other counties <br />2s <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.