Laserfiche WebLink
bid price when the purchase vehicles. There is a lot of work to create the bids specifications <br /> especially for vehicles the state bid prices allows us to negotiate options on the products. They <br /> could do something more restrictive but it still comes back to the bidding process and it may <br /> cost more. Purchasing rules keep it honest and a good purchasing manager will get the best <br /> price and they still have to come back to the county board. It just opens it up more so you can <br /> do it locally and the purchasing act allows us to use the bids to negotiate the price with another <br /> vendor. <br /> Lanfear stated he understands the increasing the dollar amounts but it may be a little too high <br /> he would like to try it with the lower number. It may not always be high dollar items it may time <br /> sensitive items. I a server would go down they may need to purchase a new one. He <br /> questioned how they should proceed the statute has changed and the old one is no longer in <br /> affect. <br /> Sarah Carstensen noted that there are some ongoing projects and they need guidance on those <br /> projects and there is the understanding that we were following the new state statute regarding <br /> the dollar limits. <br /> Bredthauer made a motion and Quandt seconded to adopt the old purchasing act rules but to <br /> change it from committee to official and retain the 2003 dollar limits. <br /> Discussion was held to have the County Attorney review this policy. <br /> Bredthauer amended her motion to ask the County Attorney to go over this and bring it back at <br /> the next meeting. <br /> Arnold suggested that this could start in January or make an implementation date. He noted <br /> that sometimes bidding does not always produce the best price. <br /> Richardson stated that she is not in favor of this with the cost of inflation and this adds another <br /> level of bureaucracy to these decisions she believe in streamlining decision. Bredthauer, <br /> Lancaster, Lanfear, Quandt all voted yes and Arnold, Richardson and Schuppan voted no. <br /> Motion carried. <br /> 10:50 a.m. Arnold requested to be excused from the rest of the meeting. <br /> Chair Richardson called for a short break. <br /> 10:55 a.m. Held a Board of Corrections meeting. <br /> 9. FACILITIES AGENDA <br /> A) UPDATE ON JUDGE YOUNG'S COURTROOM IMPROVEMENTS &ASSOCIATED COSTS <br /> - Lancaster requested this to be on the agenda and Mr. Humphrey responded to the board <br /> members with an e mail. He stated that he is scheduling this work around vacations and court <br /> hearings. The week after Thanksgiving they will be able to do the project. The cost should be <br /> around $1,500.00 to $2,000.00. It could cost a little more if they run into issues. <br /> B) DISCUSSION & DIRECTION REGARDING INFORMAL PROPOSAL FOR FRONT STEPS <br /> TO FEDERAL BUILDING - Mr. Humphrey reported that he had 2 possible cost estimates. <br /> Indiana Stone $54,500.00 <br /> Wisconsin Stone $$63,750.00 <br /> 7 <br />