Laserfiche WebLink
May 11, 2006 <br />Page 4 <br />standardize current technology to industry standards and set up a proactive <br />information technology support structure; and additional phases will include <br />network assessment and standardization, server assessment and <br />standardization, and implementation of improvements identified in earlier <br />phases. <br />In response to Jacobsen's inquiry, Lewanda said that the total cost should not <br />exceed $50,000 and funds are available in the current budget for phase 1, <br />It was moved by Holt, seconded by Jacobsen, and carried 3-0 to <br />authorize Oasis Technology to perform desktop computer assessments, <br />documentation and standardization in an amount not to exceed $15,000. <br />E. Authorization To Award Bid To Pepo In Amount Of $100,672.32; Funding <br />From Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency (COSCA), Weed <br />Abatement Fund No. 10-20-350-2212 <br />Friedl stated that in 2004, the Board authorized staff to award the weed <br />abatement contract to Pepo Weed Abatement, Inc; the contract allows the <br />District to renew the contract annually through fiscal year 2007-2008; staff <br />recommendation is to renew the agreement at $.030 per square foot for <br />approximately 3,265,744 square feet; and the increased cost, which staff <br />believes warrants Board consideration, is a result of increased acreage and <br />shifting more in-house efforts to Pepo. <br />In response to Jacobsen's inquiry, Friedl said that the cost will be a Conejo <br />Open Space Conservation Agency (COSCA) expense. <br />It was moved by Holt, seconded by Jacobsen, and carried 3-0 to <br />authorize General Manager to enter into an agreement with Pepo Weed <br />Abatement, Inc. for $100,672.32 at $.030 per square foot for <br />approximately 3,265,744 square feet of weed abatement area Districtwide <br />with funding from COSCA Weed Abatement Account #10-20-350-2212. <br />9. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION <br />None <br />10. REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS <br />A. Goebel Senior Center Commission — March 22, 2006 — No Comment <br />