2017-03-27-minutes-public-works-study-session

Home Browse Search

sovereignty the AB. The AB will likely provide job performance feedback on the District Administrator to the Board. This system of "checks and balances" provides confidence in rate payers that their rates are being invested by rate payers. The biggest down side to the AB model is the time required developing process and defining the District's first CFP. The makeup of the AB is critical to District success. Representation from upper and lower County is a critical consideration. Placement of special interest on the AB is tricky if the Board desires maintaining a management size for the AB. Solicitation and vetting of possible AB members will require consideration. Drawing from the entire County creates a real opportunity to attract expertise in all areas of District operation. Desired Timeline for Decision Making The District is facing reauthorization in 2019. Getting a CFP in place for 2018 budget implementation is critical. Early fail 2017 should provide sufficient time for District budget inclusion. A draft critical timeline appears below for Board consideration: • Model defined and operational mid-May 2017 • Ranking criteria defined early July 2017 • Project prioritization complete late August 2017 • Rate payer outreach complete early October 2017 • CFP Board adoption mid-November 2017. FISCAL IMPACTS: Minor budget impact is anticipated supporting the AB model. No budget impact is anticipated supporting the "strong board" model. Costs supporting public outreach efforts are not defined at this time. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Resolution Approving the District Ballot Measure Page 3 of 4 PUBLIC WORKS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT