Recommendation 1.1: The county should undertake a program to inform all eligible entities about the system, of their option to use the system, and of the prices available to users.

RESPONSE: Agree. On July 6, 2000, the Grand Jury sent 37 letters to various cities and school districts to inform them of the County's vendor agreement purchasing program, seven (7) agencies responded and to date six (6) are using the County's vendor agreement program.

We propose the following actions to inform all eligible entities about the system:

1. Attend a meeting of the City/County Managers and Financial Officers Group

2. Meet with the County Superintendent of Schools to decide the best way to disseminate information to school districts in the County.

3. Send information to special districts.

STATUS: EPS Director Mary Welch attended a meeting of the City/County Managers on March 16, 2001 and described the Vendor Agreement Purchasing Program. Various information was distributed, including: cost comparison of selected commodities, list of vendors and commodities that are included in this program, two sample vendor agreements (Office Depot and Sierra Springs Water) and application form to join the program

At the meeting it was agreed that information would be sent to the City Finance Directors, which was done in August 2001. To date, the following cities have enrolled in the Vendor Agreement Purchasing Program: Belmont, Brisbane, San Bruno, Redwood City, South San Francisco, Daly City, Atherton, Hillsborough and Millbrae.

Superintendent of Schools Dr. Floyd Gonella suggested that information on the Vendor Agreement Purchasing Program be sent to him for distribution by him to the 24 superintendents of schools in the County. Information on the Vendor Agreement Purchasing Program was sent to Dr. Gonella on August 30 and included the following: cost comparison of selected commodities, list of vendors and commodities that are included in this program, two sample vendor agreements (Office Depot and Sierra Springs Water) and an application form to join the program.

To date, the following school districts have enrolled: San Mateo Union High School District and San Mateo-Foster City School District.

Information on the Vendor Agreement Purchasing Program was sent to 28 special districts on September 5, 2001, which included: cost comparison of selected commodities, list of vendors and commodities that are included in this program, two sample vendor agreements (Office Depot and Sierra Springs Water) and an application form to join the program.

Four special districts have enrolled as follows: West Bay Sanitary District; Montara Sanitary District; Sam Trans and Highlands Recreation District.

Recommendation 1.2: The County should review its procurement of those items that others local governmental bodies are buying at prices lower than the master contract prices.

RESPONSE: Agree. However, when the County contacted the Grand Jury to identify those agencies which indicated lower pricing on selected commodities than the County's pricing, the Grand Jury stated that the they were unable to release this information as they promised confidentiality to the agencies that responded to the survey. We will explore the feasibility of establishing an e-mail group with cities and interested school districts to share and ensure the best pricing on commodities.

Quarterly updates will continue to be provided.

STATUS: All cities, school districts, and special districts have been notified in writing that the County wants to know if any agency has obtained better pricing on any commodities than we have in our Vendor Agreement Purchasing Program. To date, we have not learned of any instance in which another agency has secured lower pricing. An e-mail group will be established if we are contacted by any agency.

Recommendation 1.3: The Board of Supervisors should revise its procedures to assure that documentation relevant to procurement items submitted for its approval are complete and correct and to ensure that any request to waive the use of an RFP is justified in order for the public to be assured of the best possible contract conditions.

RESPONSE: Concur. The Board of Supervisors directs the County Manager and his staff to review current procurement procedures and practices to ensure that future contract submissions contain the required documentation and that future RFP requests are adequately justified.

There will be no further report back.

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES / ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES

San Mateo County Pet Overpopulation Program

RECOMMENDATION 3.6: The Board of Supervisors should direct the Director of Animal Control Services to develop a program encouraging adoption of the San Mateo County Pet Overpopulation Program Ordinance, in its entirety, by cities which have not already done so. In addition, information regarding the ordinance should be provided to the public.

RESPONSE: Concur. The Director of Animal Control Services will develop a program encouraging adoption of the ordinance by the cities which have not already done so. This will be accomplished primarily through discussion and distribution of literature to the Animal Control Task Force, a quarterly meeting of representatives from each city. In order to inform the public about the ordinance, literature will be distributed primarily though the Peninsula Humane Society shelter, and field officers will educate citizens in the field. The Animal Services Guide, a handbook of San Mateo County animal related laws and educational articles, will be distributed to the public. In order to represent the opinions of all animal related groups which actively work to improve the situations of companion animals in San Mateo County, an invitation to apply for a position on the Animal Population Trust Fund Committee will be extended. The Committee oversees the Animal Population Trust Fund, which was established by the Pet Overpopulation Ordinance and is used for spay/neuter education and assistance.

Status of the County's response to this Grand Jury recommendation will be reported in the next quarterly report to the Board.

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT / PUBLIC WORKS

Hall of Justice Seismic Retrofit

RECOMMENDATION 33: The San Mateo County 1999 Grand Jury recommends that the County Board of Supervisors direct the Director of Public Works to prepare a comprehensive time-phased plan for completion of the seismic retrofit and lead/asbestos abatement of the County Hall of Justice. Urgency should be placed on the development and implementation of the plan, including a detailed time-phased series of actions and the designation of personnel responsible for each action and associated deadlines. The plan should include details on office and employee relocation. The County Board of Supervisors should give high priority to implementation and funding of this program.

RESPONSE: Concur. The Director of Public Works will work with the Court on developing a tentative phasing plan that allows for the work to go forward on the 7^th and 8^th floors. A similar approach will be undertaken with the Probation Department for the 5^th Floor. However, a key aspect of this plan will be to identify additional funding sources. An additional $2.2 million will be required to complete the project. To date, the County has spent approximately $1.6 million in the design of the seismic retrofit plan, the remediation work that was done immediately after the Loma Prieta Earthquake, and for the work completed or under construction on the 4^th and 6^th floors. Public Works estimates that it will take approximately two years to complete the work once funding is identified and agreement with the Court and Probation is obtained.

Abatement work is generally done in conjunction with other work on the structure, as encapsulated lead and asbestos in the building will remain in place and does not present a threat to either the citizens visiting the Hall of Justice or employees.

Status of the County's response to this Grand Jury recommendation will be reported in the next quarterly report to the Board.

STATUS:

On June 5, 2001 under resolution #64501, a contract was awarded to Gonsalves and Stronck for seismic retrofit work on the 7^th and 8^th floors of the Hall of Justice. The contract bid was for the amount of $2,125,000.

Work on the 7^th floor began July 9, 2001 and all work is confined to the 7^th floor. Construction operations take place between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Work is done Sunday through Thursday with an option to deliver heavy materials on weekends and holidays.

As of August 28, 2001 the contractor has mobilized and demolished portions of walls and ceilings to expose structural steel. Asbestos fireproofing and lead based paint has been abated and toilet accessories and plumbing fixtures have been removed. Welders will mobilize next week to begin welding panel connections along the north end of the building. The project is progressing according to schedule. December 2001 continues to be the target finish date for the 7^th floor and start date for the 8^th floor with an expected completion date of June 2002. The start of the bid process for the 5^th floor seismic retrofit is anticipated for June 2002. The Recommended FY 2001-02 budget includes $1,200,000 for the 5^th floor.