ALC-Highway Commission Review and Advisory Subcommittee

So. For. All right looks like we've got enough folks here Glenn get started sure she's a quorum we have some spillover business from the the prior meeting that we need to to work through today as a kind of mentioned I guess you you've got a little bit of a head start on what some of these Recommendations for the a draft report would look like and so with the first order of business would be to take up the a recommendation seven eight five six nineteen in. And eleven. So again they are if you if you look at your draft report can let you work ahead a little bit about exactly at least at this point what those are gonna look lack of course there can be changes and alterations add to those. So the first step would be the recommendation number seven to implement project and portfolio planning frameworks. In in your draft report that's page six. What I'm what I'm talking about the draft for someone's got draft stamped on top of that this is a final report to the Arkansas Legislative Council. This. Three discussion on recommendation number seven. Any questions. You're right you're recognized. Thank you a. Since room so what I'll take time to do pass this We go through these recommendations regarding through the the first six what what is the remaining. on this committee is four hours of what's going to be asked were as if. All recommendation wanna recommendations or adopted are we gonna also vote on a final report is it just automatically when all recommendations are going through is it going to counsel to give us some yes survivors for right now what would be voting on is to Adam to the draft final report and then our next meeting will actually have a vote on the final report enter. the committee is amended to a little bit further and and some of it I stated in the past and just for other members is that repeatedly had sent a I am all for if the efficiencies they can be brought from this study having served on the another task force this is realizes a subcommittee not task force but were were based performance that While I don't have objections to any these and I will the highway department to. Reviewed digest and and. DO as much of the things that feel that they can I will. The committee members to think about. If if if we're gonna. Rubber stamp not that it's not good rubber stamp if we agree on all this what we understand it or not and I don't understand all of it the the written reports are good to follow through and get more out that than I do the verbal presentation. but having served on another task force. when it came time to vote at least two of us maybe three didn't but. And in a two column two paragraph. they'll put at that same day's mention it being unanimous three time. hi I don't know where I will vote on this at the end. But I suppose there is legislation drafted are coming. That will be from this report and nothing wrong with that may supported by may not I would you say she's committed to the fight combat as we go through this Are we gonna leave. Anything to question about yelled we've all study this we all understand it need to grow you're saying since the. chocolate great. Are we going to. The question any of it in and say it may fifth and it may not and again I go back to the larger. how we budgets and other states it's not saying we can adopt their stuff by any means it's what I'm questioning is they have more slack in their budget say can. burn the lawn mower to get some officials say. so again I'm not I'm trying not to be negative I just got questions and I don't know that I'm going to be A positive in the end because I'd I'd adult if I've got questions in this saying I don't want to. To be a unanimous thing without giving some leeway. in the legislation understanding that some thank you for your some things were not pardon me for rambling but that's what minimum my thank you thank you thank senator. Representative Wardlaw you're recognized for a question on recommendation seven. Is there a question of the chair Mister chairman. Are we going to go through each of these in here from the department are we've already done not or where where we at which we've already done that and so today the you know these motions would be to make it part of the draft report which is still going to be up for discussion at our next meeting will be going through again with the the highway department are not what would ever need to call it but anyway we'll be going to that draft report within next meeting. Okay so you're any motions today to whether it is make sure I get all this perfect come kind like Terry I'm a little confused we're any motions today to where they're include each one of these into your final draft so we do need a motion to include or exclude right right okay all hold my objection for later okay. Seat ninety. Thank you Mr chair Representative love I just on the same line. Look let me ask you this when we when we began to talk about implementing these these recommendations what is a time line that we're giving. They are given the department yet there is no hard fast deadline on implementation and part of that was to be able to give you know some leniency inability to make sure that that it works in the process through I mean I I would just say for me personally I'm not gonna speak for the committee's a whole as we're working through these recommendations department is working to the recommendations I think it's important have public involvement one of the things that we will discuss later today is it is how to set up that public involvement and then also to make sure there's just good communication between art Aden legislative body hopefully utilizing this subcommittee to do so but these are very broadly written and that's intentional on that's so that we can have flexibility in implementation including timeline okay in in my follow up to that because I'm looking I'm looking specifically at and the seven eighty three our system of ocean the the the project management office will be bringing in other committees in regards to this framework so that we can make sure that we have everything in line so that if if it needs to be for instance I would think in establishing a project department they may already have the personnel there they may just have to re shifted more is it is it that we're bringing in may be the the person and a piece of this to personnel so that they can talk about Hey they need in a ninety five people instead of they have three people they need five people I mean just kind of core name it so that so that it will all full of that's that's kind of my question to yes processes will and so our process right now would be just provide recommendations those recommendations then would lead to legislation that will go through the normal process including personnel committee or where wherever it may channel you know to to become a reality it that's the other direction Wilton roof and one thing to keep in mind is that these are these are recommendations at this point this is not. Binding legislation these are recommendations you know meet its recommendations that if we approve we hope that there's mutual agreement we can move forward with a you know some In a variation of of what's in this draft report of but again there be certain items that take you know some attend an additional legislation and some that will be really just you know left to the highway department of we we do one I think be a part of that discussion with the highway department as they move forward one example would be and we're not there yet but would be on the That number six amendment implementation of construction contractor performance measurement at that something is going to take awhile in my opinion to work through because you're going to have to have input from contractors a general public other folks that want to be involved in that discussion and so to try to say that we can finish that today we we can't in the in that would you can say that for a number of these items in the in the report. Okay and then my last question to the cheers this is that I notice you start with number seven I know that last meeting we talked to number three the we come is it is this coming I guess in kind of sort of similar to what to represent a word I ask are you are we going to be going back through each of these okay yes all right thank you thank you Mr. Representative Dotson. Thank you Mr chair just looking through this. Is there I see these bill drafts that are in this. Are these corresponding to a particular recommendation number those are actually not so there's been a discussion that we've been trying to have in the committee about how to we you know help facilitate this public discussion and overview review of the implementation of the draft report particularly for those items that do not require legislation that will be you know what I guess carried out by the highway department and so that's what that discussion of that creation oversight body an advisory. Committee which would be us but it that that's what that is okay and at this point that is the only piece of legislation that's been drafted in up for discussion. So do we have a list of I'm sorry that's items that would be re would require legislation in order to implement these these recommendations as we're going through them not not at this point because again some of it can be done directly by the highway department without the need of legislation and so I think that's one thing we work through after the final in after the the report is approved by this committing goes to counsel in that then allows to make the move for. Just just a suggestion Mr chair with. In the past we've had different task force and different things like that that the council has you know approve the report but also kinda had draft a packet address legislation that we we we adopted yes to to recommend go forward and would it be possible to get some draft so that we have something to look at it one one thing I would encourage each member to do if there's a particular section here that you know is a of the interest to you is to get with staff and discuss it there is a need for legislation if it's or if it's something that can be done directly by the hot highway department may not require legislation and let's work through that so that we can have those items repaired. Thank you. Senator Chesterfield. Mister I think you have answered my question and I know we will visit with these proposals here shortly as for the legislation is concerned but I was asked of was there an area of interest for each one of us was asked was there a particular area of interest as we look at the recommendations in my interest is always the employees and that's why I propose this. However I am concerned that we make sure. And I'm going to hold myself accountable as well that what we do. Is not tied the hands of what has been an independent entity I know that we're trying to. Give more legislative oversight or I some that's why we're doing this is that correct I mean I think over this process but would not expand pass that. But if for some reason the department is not able to carry forth all of these recommendations they are not to be punished for that either not. Because I do want them to be able to go for apple one of appreciated the work of. Are not in really glad that thirty is getting up finally and so I just wanna make sure that these are recommendations and if we have legislation it can be voted up or down well we or the other and I for one will not take offensive Maddox voted down so thank you very much. In in that's exactly right these are recommendations some require legislation someone not required you know legislation at the requires legislation is voted down then I mean that that's up to are not on how they would like to proceed with that particular recommendation at this point we generally agreed on most of the recommendations that it been been made with our dot at the at the only additional part would be. Turning off would be a again the implementation side and you'll see one piece of legislation that deals with how we just kind of keep track of the implementation with are not how we ensure that there's public involvement in that sort of thing which again I think. Does a lot as far as how we move forward. C. eighty seven. Thank you chair this is me. The the the project management for memory this is the issue that are not handle that within in house then between the planning department and other departments and didn't have the official or are you know project management team in places some larger larger the hill our. Department transfer stations around the United States is that correct. And generally I think yes okay. And this is just a recommendation for consolidation and and so so we have something that mirrors other department of transportation's great I don't know that it's so that it nears of the department of transportation. Men were were allowing them a lot of flexibility in how they develop that that is something they are actually working on now it's my understanding may paying it had not I think that's something they're working through now imminent in our role may be as simple as just me bring brought aware as they making progress and also ensuring that unit that we understand so we can communicate and the public understands but that's going to look like. second question would be this draft legislation on the would that be a an extension of this subcommittee is that what is requesting yes well I would I would say is the transportation chair. The would pay play the role in the on going of this not continuation of this subcommittee. As a matter of efficiency but because that committee is in place I don't think you need to subcommittee for that in the future I think that the we could have a joint meeting of the transportation committees of of both houses rather than have an oversight committee. I think we are the oversight committee no matter who's on that transportation committee I'm not sure that in this will be a question for staff but I I'm not sure that the transportation committee is authorized to take and maybe would have to be changing that this subcommittee was created based on the improvement of the general revenue transfers that were made you know several sessions ago I mean it wasn't this committee was not originated just for this one study and I'm not sure what the authority that the transportation committees have themselves you know to make for vote because they're not part of legislative counsel and I'm not sure that they could become part Legislative Council so when we're in the interim that I'm not I'm not sure how that would work and it's just a question for staff. Thank you. Yeah and so the transportation committee themselves could not take action in the interim. That. Thank you Sir. C. twenty. Thank you thank you Mr chairman Mister chairman just have a question Sir on seven ninety three that Representative Fred was speaking about a few minutes ago wishes establish a project management office of service do we not have that already I I didn't know exactly where we were it was a it my understanding that something that your working through now maybe was recently established or in the process being Standridge witness the director to to formally answer that question. Yeah and so just repeat that since it was on the Mike they do have a project management division it's something they're you know looking at and working on now they can utilize some the recommendations to help strengthen that office. And that there thank you Sir. Senator Chesterfield you're recognized just a quick question are we saying that instead of going through legislative review. Everything that deals with the state highway commission over dealing with contracts will not go to ALC review it will go through a LCD this committee just specifically contracts that would be related to recommendations made in an adopted in the final report. Six. Thank you in just another quick question since the majority of the action is that we have we begin to review at fifty thousand. In the I guess when I did we're not discussing your bill right now though are no ma'am okay what I was just wondering why it wasn't twenty five instead of the fifty that we normally do as we normally have as that the ratio but we can get to that when it when the time is appropriate and in I'm made this question for staff would be what what is our process right now for reviewing contracts by the department. Do those come before the review committee. Capp. And so they would still go through before the review committee we would just be facilitating that public comment in discussion period. A it depends so you could choose to have this body be a recommendation to the full review subcommittee or you can do like the lottery subcommittee four contracts affecting the lottery on division where they have final authority over those contracts. Thank you. All right I think that's the end of the questions or discussion that we've had so far. Is there any additional discussion or questions on recommendation number seven. Seeing none what is the pleasure of the committee. Motion one. I we have a motion to adopt recommendation number seven I have a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed our recommendations been adopted for the draft report recommendation number eight implement leading practices in contract and construction project design with me questions or discussion on recommendation number eight. Okay if we go to recommendation eight in the draft report at least this is the way that we've got it drawn up at this point. And these again are things that the department is currently working on some of them are in their infancy some of them have our little farther down the road but if you read on page seven in the draft report what we'd be actually voting to put in would be the subcommittee recommend in recommends adopting implementing and documenting best practices in construction project design or dot lacks formal frameworks to ensure the consistent use the best practices in construction design limiting their ability to demonstrate cost savings and strengthening institutional knowledge by adopting and a documenting such practices are not remain reduce project cost improving achieve improve achievement of system targets. So essentially this recommendation is just requiring a framework that's carried out through the departments of there's consistency in understanding I think one of the examples that we understood in this would be that way E. G. G. engineer come to see what another engineers doing and see what successful women not be successful as they move forward as an example. Alright you're recognized thank you of Q. R.. Folks that are doing the report where exactly are some states that are doing this and tell me specifically what are some of the outcomes that they've had. Yes Sir I think the question is for god house about maybe what other states are doing Those were saying this is best practices where is it best practices how many states use it use this as a best practice method. Sure I I think there's a there's a couple specific practices one as it relates to practical design and there's a number of state for example Missouri and also Washington that have formalized their process of practical design work you know they're it it's sort of a forward looking process where they're looking at their design approach so the preconstruction approach to identify way that they could potentially proactively steel achieved the project objectives and hit all of their outcomes but find ways to save some cost and so Missouri for example in Washington for example the state state significant amount of a dollars if you will in terms of the cost of the actual project Missouri for example sick about thirteen percent on average in implementing a formalized practical design program. Washington is also stayed you know based on that a survey of some candy that project as a law making dollars in terms of the actual project costs by implementing this act will up formalized practical design. So one one one type of leading practice from a design standpoint the other practice that we've included as part of our recommendations is by formalizing and potentially expanding their approach to value engineering and this is where you have a quote unquote independent groups within the department or it could be contracted out take a look at the actual project plan designs again to ensure that it achieves its project outcomes and metrics but again tried to find ways in which you could potentially still achieve those outcomes but at a lower cost and that leaves rolled out nationally and and the department in implementing value engineering is falling below. the national averages and and costs that could potentially save. When we talk about best practices it. For me as an educator it means that over several periods of jammer several entities we have looked at these are the best practices one of the other forty we know ark it you're you're alluding that Arkansas does not do it you're saying Missouri in Washington do this and therefore they are the best practices one of the other forty seven states doing. You mean from a practical point you know when we talk about best practices we need to look at the totality of the state we have we have pulled you have pulled out to states that you feel are doing great work Arkansas obviously you don't feel is one of those state so one of the other forty seven states doing. And are they running any fission late in comparison to Missouri and Washington. Well I think at some level and. yeah. Well I don't know that there's necessarily a a comprehensive study that catalogues exactly what each stated during from a leading practices standpoint however from what we've seen and looking at the Federal Highway Administration and some of the guys that they put out and looking at a few states Washington Missouri for example of that are implementing practical design in a formalized approach those were some ones that have risen to the top where we would where there has been you know cost savings and efficiencies generated and and and they have you know made that information publicly available and so drawing upon those sort of left and those leading practices and and comparing that against where Arkansas is where again you know the department is implementing their iteration of practical design however it's not formalized and and so at this point it it's not clear how they could potentially document to the extent that savings are generated through their iteration document those savings and then be able to communicate them and then continue to refine that process to find a way to to continue to get you know just that much further in terms of savings from implementing their iteration or potentially expanding it a little more and if I can just maintenance I need to finish this because. It's confusing you Mr chair and and and you can clarify later if you if you don't mind me finish I'm trying to figure out the best practices best practices to mean means we looked at the fifty states we decided that these two state after visit after a thorough study of those fifty states this is it. But you're not telling me that's what you do yet in state you used. The some a study to provide this study which is troubling to me. Now go ahead yes that that's not with the way that I read it or understand it best practices would be internally what's happening from engineer to engineer project project about what successful what's not successful my understanding that those things are not thoroughly documented so that one engineer working on one project can't learn what the other engineer was utilizing to be successful all this in my opinion is we identify best practices that work for Arkansas based on our projects and this is going to morph and change over time almost as a catalog for folks to be able to rely on to say on this this works well on this this doesn't work well where is right now if there is no database or warehouse of information at that allows them to learn from other people's misstatements dates were achievements. There are study says that the end of it god house says see it these are the best practices I need to know what makes them better than the practice say in Texas or Alabama or Mississippi what are these two the ones that seem to be the best of the rest not saving are they spending more money is it's being spent less efficiently. I want to know what constitutes a best practice and just telling me Missouri in Washington an Arkansas isn't but the other forty seven states are doing something else I need to have some idea of what is going on in the other forty seven states that would preclude them from being call or their operations from being called a best practice and I guess that's where my confusion is so when I read the recommendation what what it it's not saying that we're going to be great if we can look at all the other states and I think our dot that this already and sees what some examples of of places that other states are being successful that's great but I think what this is saying is there is no framework in sight are not right now at least not a formalized one that allows them to identify their own best practices this isn't about other states best practices so much it is it is more about our dots best practices in making sure that those are in a place that other employees in our dot can learn from again the achievements or you know issues that that other employees of had it it is what it what it's saying is Missouri develop that framework so that they could see what worked and what didn't work what we're saying is Arkansas on a dude needs develop its own framework to see what works and what doesn't work in a formalized way that way people can see it. It's not about other states best practices so much as it is. Having some place we can see our own best practices. If I made to the the objective here with that compared and state with respect to Washington and Missouri is really just to provide a little bit of potential cost saving evidence Senate to back up the recommendation not necessarily to say that all states you know experienced the same Number one that they've all implemented or that Arkansas should implement it exactly the way that Washington did not to be able to say you know this here are a couple of states that have implemented it be is initiatives and had it out you know positive outcomes from them and having formal processes and procedures as and senator DISMANG was was discussing is really really the objective of the of the recommendation not to say that are not as an already doing these things but to actually formalize then and put a rigorous process behind them so that they actually can evaluate how they're performing against them right now there's no eight four are not to really measure the outcomes associated with implementing these two initiatives because they're implemented on an ad hoc basis and and not necessarily documented their lead to be able to evaluate out. So really we were looking at Missouri in Washington is as a way of talking through some of the outcomes that these of procedures actually have in place. Why would the you can look at the other states to seek class. Many many states are best practices and we did a in the the original recommendation report we kind of talked about our comparison group and and particularly we were targeting states with a similar environments to Arkansas including Missouri Tennessee Kentucky Kansas Georgia South Carolina North Carolina Virginia and they will be pulled in practices from other leading states as well California of Washington Texas Florida we have a pretty broad spectrum of states that we used for the purposes of comparative analysis and leading practices yes we just just to for example purposes here on this recommendation and if I can I think this may help bring a little clarity I mean it one thing I would just say it's the all these recommendations are not confrontational are not another it's however may be perceived but if you look at our dawn's response for this particular item let me read and I think it summarizes essentially what we've been saying are not will begin to devise a plan to implement a formal framework practice Scientology value engineering and for the evaluation of change orders for costs savings trends and insights the plan will include investigating the leading practices identified by got house and possibly hiring additional employees the plan will be contingent upon funding ability and legislative approval of additional pulley titles within our notes preparation budget request again they are saying themselves they do not have anything formalized in place. A okay. If. Our. You are at. Ask what was going on she may be uncomfortable. These practices involve. Washington we've come. They told me that. Within the state. Okay. C. eighty five. Thank you Mr you just hit on it but I just in watching the meetings and trying to attend the ones I could our daughter is not in opposition and they have voiced or have they not voiced the wisdom in what eight is supposed to bring to the table that's not currently there now that that's my understanding thank you. Representative Wardlaw. Are there any of these recommendations before us this afternoon to be included as report with opposition from the department. Me nothing number six could think we've worked through some of that I think there was you know if you're here at the last meeting there was push it back against evaluating the contractors at any level besides saying that they completed the project you know I mean I think what we settled on and again I don't know that there were there were there trying to work through it to was just for us to be able to start the process so we can evaluate contractors to understand maybe what that should look like but not any type of a Politecnica my guess is what you call it so before we take a motion to include number six I was out that whole week of council of before we take a motion to include number six can we hear from the department to the farming yes that's my request. All right do we have any other questions on recommendation number eight or in discussion recommendation number eight. I'm seeing none was the pleasure of the committee. I have a motion to pass on recommendation number eight we have a second all those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed. Motion carries a recommendation number five implement efficiencies in procurement of purchasing in your draft report. That is going to be page five. Any questions recession on. Recommendation number five. To summarize for you and what it says the draft report subcommittee recommends are not optimized the standard size standardized procurement in purchasing procedures are not may more efficiently you to utilize resources and maximize cost savings department wide including ambience stretching procurement with documented standardized procurement procedures. The questions or discussion. Seeing none what's the will of the committee. With the motion to pass the second or motion to recommend in a second all those in favor signify by saying aye. All the votes. All right motion carries a recommendation number six if we could we go ahead of our document and have we can have discussion on recommendation number six I just a little bit of a recap there was some thought that this included the removal of the bonding requirement I think there was some opposition rightfully so from our dot in relation to that after further clarification that was not the will or the push of the got house or or even of this committee so if you can recommendation six starts on page five of your draft report. And so A go ahead and open that up to see sixty five. Not sure who that is represented Fortner Sir you're recognized chairman these are all just recommendations correct that is correct I'd like I'd like to add one more recommendation to six eighty three if I could as an indicator okay I think that we should consider the local municipalities to local judges the mayor's the people of the directly involved in the community with the contractors I think that you know if I have my driveway paved my neighbors going to ask me if they did a good job. And that that's going to have a bearing so I think that would be a good indicator just as just another recommendation okay thank you. We will work on some language if you don't mind getting the staff after the meeting to make sure that we you know get that written in the way that you'd like to and I think what you're saying I just wanna make sure I understand is. That way you cut it these judges county judges and everyone else can utilize and see how these you know contractors perform on jobs and also that they they are part of that reporting to so with the department can see other performing on county municipality jobs exactly I think they should have a their their input should be valued as a participant in this. Thank you Representative Wardlaw thank you have a question. You're recognized this one here the department's response a number six six U. it said they had some opposition to written where we're at and did all that opposition get worked out. Thank you of Madame director for being here today thank you two you're recognized committee thank you very much on the original recommendations of coke the way we understood it was based on an FHWA study that said that if you we could save money at the department if we put into place a rating mechanism to take away the need to bond contractors either eliminate or reduce funding on some contracts so the whole premise behind this if age to be a steady was. To put in a ratings system so that bonding would be reduced and we could save money we did not want to do that we wanted to keep bonding in place and not be responsible for rating contractors in deciding how much they could bid on other than the administrative pre qualification which is there. it's based on their financials in their quick man it's it's approved by CPA we use that and then we use the bonding okay if they can be bonded in their pre qualified they can bid on projects it's completely objective. Okay this study was going to take away the bonding and and enter just the amount a contractor could be it on based on our rating we did not want to be in that position of rating contractors in determining how much they could be it on a project how many projects they could have it's all we wanted to continue to be a product if they could get bonded in if they were pre qualified. When I brought that up and I said we do not want to implement this the discussion of the committee turned in a. We we I think we all came to the conclusion you don't want that either you don't wanna eliminate bonding you don't want us to reduce the amount of a contractor can bid online their pre qualified amount based on a subjective or a rating system that we put in place because. If we do it right if we really rate contractors to address the amount they can bid on will have to do our in less we want to be in claims all the time we're going to have to put it together very robust system. And I don't think anyone in here thinks that's a good idea that we sit in judgment and decide okay contractor a you can only been on fifteen fifty thousand dollars when you can get bonded for hundred thousand. So. I hope I'm making it clear of where we were coming from we don't want that responsibility we think we would rather pay a bonding company to have that responsibility and I know the cost for the bond is filtered down to us which is to the taxpayer but I think the bond protects the taxpayer. So I think we all came to that conclusion I hope I said that clearly I try to. Now we're at the point where we understand it you still want something I mean we we can put that to the side rights will that's no longer on the table bonding was never on the table. But can you understand our it is but I'm saying like we were. We're good on that. Yes and so we got that cleared up now. We we do understand that lead you want something because some contractors aren't doing a very good job and how do we look at that. So me and senator DISMANG are working through some possible kind of compromise that will help address that. Yes that problem find a solution to that problem. The is is something we can all live with the contracting community that are not in the legislature I understand that we there are some times that a project is a problem and how to how can we. And what's a good word how can we limit the times that we have a problem in the field now I want to say this. One of the biggest problems that you of all and voiced is the Manitoba contractors on the job and it appears like they're not working any no that's been an issue in the past but that's well so I came forward in in trying to explain to you we understood that problem we've put in a lot of different things over the last ten years to try to alleviate that problem and I think we've made great progress in the always there's room for more progress but I think over the last ten years we've really tried to solve that problem. What I really want to ask everybody in this committee is. We need to be realistic and we don't need to put ourselves in a position of possibly doing some type of subject subjective rating that will end up being very very inefficient in the long run because will be and claims will be constantly head bedding with the contractors just whatever we do we just need to make sure we do speak remain in a partnering spirit on this whole thing and just make sure we do the best for the tax. That's right in in in in regards to our discussion just like we talked about earlier I'm not going to be the one at the end all be all that needs that's why I think it's important to have some structure in place as we move forward for that discussion that to a curry and with a broad range membership in the public being involved everything else did it would be you have set up for this exact type of the issue I think one of the things in just to make sure I understand so right now. What is the only it liquidate vacuum member what they have to be in there prevent from bidding on a project what is the term in the okay it's liquidate damages if they're in overtime yes so the the only way at this point right now that it contractors put group click route precluded from participating or beating in another project is if they're liquidated damages if they were six months late if there were any issue after issue after issue it doesn't really matter as long as they're not in liquidated damages we would you know we did a big procurement overhaul in the state and one of the things that we encourage that thing you were part of represent Wardlaw was actually grading these contractors to make sure that you know we had a good understanding of how efficient they were how old timely they were and and everything else is that grading system is in place allowed you know in in every other aspect state government at this point though this would essentially just this is going to be a very in my opinion a process is going to take awhile to work through it's going to require a lot of public involvement and we don't need to jump the gun on trying to get anything out in the short term this needs to be done correctly and something that's understandable not just by the member in our diet but also the public you know on the performance of contractors. Since ninety point. So for me here in this discussion it doesn't sound like we have a lot in this recommendation to include because we we don't have it worked out yet imam missing something here now I mean there's general parameters were just essentially asking that they identify quality indicators amend date they took a look at you know a project in these are the things that go well and that we should be measuring that they develop some type of scoring system that they to track and monitor the performance of each contractor so that that you know it didn't just end on each job and reset as if nothing ever bad happened if something bad happened and also something great didn't happen that is ignored in the next contract over and we're not of fictive really moving the bond program where it is today we were we were never and I mean I I can't I don't know how to me when I read page three this got house and out they came out. If you read the supporting evidence side it talks about how weak the bonds are and how ineffective they are. Recommend no bearing upon bad work they're just completion of the job. So the bill will mean I can see where everybody was worried about the bond issue if you look at. The recommendation in the report bonds are referred to that studies not referred to this is essentially you know just what I read to you it's the you know we want internees B. considerations and how it impacts both small large companies or contractors make sure that it's a quantitative approach that there's ninety subjectivity in the scoring I consider an appeals process for contractors if they disagree with the scoring on a particular project and ensure contractors have a clear path to their own scores we're gonna meet again a week from today right. Of. Can I hold this recommendation until next Monday and then I'll do my homework and be ready to refer it is if if I'm feeling that comfortable or be ready to give a speech on what I feel like it is well so all we're doing right now is making it part of the draft report to be able to have discussion if it should be in the final report which were voting on next week. Okay. So the minute the be addressed the committee I suppose. Our. C. twenty. Thank you Mr chairman Laurie A I have one question of black in center this that is speaking about performers I just Conner wonders that would include engineering also because. Mr Taschen I have a situation going off of the levy and to Marjorie where that was not that job was not done right and and what's happening here there's a build up of water and folks are coming off of that lavey coming into Marjorie or hydroplaning so I mean I just wonder if if inside this performance would that not include engineering also. Engineering is our responsibility at the department so that would have to that doesn't have anything to do with the contractor unless they didn't build the project to spec and then again that would be on us because we're supposed to be inspecting that work in making sure it's bill to spec so if there's a problem out there after a job this built in like what you're describing that would be on our shoulders to correct and find out what went wrong. Follow publisher. Laurie there there's a problem there and and and someone's going to get hurt and I just knew that that would surely be informed with engineering. would thank it's very important in after this meeting if you'll get with me and the staff will get specifics on that will will investigate and see what's going on thank you thank you Mr chairman. Any other questions or discussion on recommendation number six. All right seeing none with will the committee. What a motion to adopt for the draft board we have a second all those in favor signify by saying aye. All those pose. All right. Yes so we'll discuss that is an amendment when we're doing the hopefully draw adopting the final report next week. All right next up is recommendation number nine. Any questions discussion on recommendation number nine. Yeah. All right seeing no questions or discussion what's the will of committee. We have a motion to adopt we have a second all those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed. All right motions been adopted recommendation number ten implement mid term nineteen initiatives that can optimize business operations. Any questions on recommendation number ten. Seeing none was will the committee. A motion to adopt with a second all those in favor signify by saying aye all those post. Motions been adopted a recommendation number eleven develop necessary pillars to establish IT is an effective business partner. Any questions or discussion on recommendation number eleven. Seeing none what's the will of the committee. I have a motion to adopt a and the second all those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed. All right motions been adopted the draft report discussion on or have them with banks is the item number eight discussion creation of oversight advisory body of members a lot of this came from a response that we had from our dot their recommendation was to utilize this subcommittee for this process and so you taking their recommendation what you have in front of you is a piece of legislation and then also what would then I have also had to be a a change for a L. C. rules What's that. Well this not an echo we have people that are on the phone and then some on zoom and so when they vote it kind of comes out just a little bit late delayed. So in general members just to summarize what's in the legislation and the ale see rule change of. You know if you look at me you can pass all the whereas it's on page one and if you get page two of what we're trying to really do is just encourage that further a relationship between legislative body and the public as they move through the implementation of a you know the final draft report again some of that implementation will require legislation which will be working with are not to you know make sure that that's done correctly and in in a way that works for their programs but really just wanna make sure that again for instance I think one of the big items will be how do we carry out this contractor at performance review were scoring at the that's going to require a lot of public input and we would be the vehicle to ensure that that happens what that means is I will we we had some discussion last week with are not our last meeting rather with are not about how as you know that that they're moving forward with some of the recommendations already you know some of that was already in play and some of it they they started trying to move through even you know prior to the adoption of the final report but at this point and you can hot nod your head I mean there's not been any Structured public involvement there may be some behind the scenes public involvement but there's not been hearings and that sort of thing add to allow the the vetting and so we would be the vehicle to allow that betting to occur in relation to question by the chairman transportation of you know we're the committee they can operate in the interim utilizing ale see all of our structure would be review we do not have the ability to you know put something up or down but just review and it just allows us to make sure things are on track to make sure there were on the same page the public's on the same page and has a right for input and FOR everything before. I'll open up to see eighty seven. Chairman and members of as an additional recommendation there's no way. At this time in this current subcommittee there's no. The membership that the transportation committee chairs from either and be on this committee and I think that would be a an appropriate if we're going to continue this continue this no matter what members are should be the transportation chair from both from both houses should be considered in this in men in the membership I would be my I would be my recommendation in in one thing that I think and to to tag along with that was based off your question earlier earlier is there's a lot of overlap in membership between the transportation you may I think we've got other members that you know on both committees and so it exists but what you mean to transportation committee could meet jointly with the with this committee with with this committee because of the way it's structured the one that has the the ride for review but that would allow for the discussion imprinted in and you can see we need more participation but participation of the a broader number of folks that have chosen or would like to be involved in transportation issues they were just amend that my opinion it would just give some consistency and in the in the two if if if that was the imposed chairs were considered in in hello and I think we would achieve that through a a L. C. rules or even just through a motion of this committee. You don't need to council rules I think it could just be an invitation if you were going to have the chairs be on as a member that would require those chairs to be on a LC. so there would be some maneuvering that we try have to try to figure out to confirm that the chair to transportation on a LC in order to be on an ALC subcommittee. Give any other question center. Thank you. Representative Dotson you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair just a question on the the twenty five thousand dollars threshold it's in this can I have house that decide and determined and Off the top of my head I can't remember exactly what the review threshold is I think it's fifty thousand dollars for normal contracts there was no mandates no magic number and and just really a star for the discussion okay so I mean I would suggest that we we just matter whatever that review threshold is because If you these sometimes are very large dollar amounts and if they're just small change orders that are that are part of the we might get into a lot of that needless stuff that we could just have a reporting requirements under that that fifty thousand dollars threshold or something that sounds good will have that adjusted to be reflected next for the next committee meeting thank you thousand. Chesterfield you're off. three with Jim not hold your breath Jim Dotson are in agreement that's why he clicked off one admitted. Understood those rare occasions and. Give these of these we need to continue to look at there's nothing to adopt on these two particular items today but we and again I I feel like it's one of the most important parts of the discussion is how do we how do we move forward is special with items that we're not going to create legislation four minute and direct report I just ask a question yes ma'am of which you with the members of our dot look at my little legislation in it and give me feedback. I'm not talking about today I'm just talking about take a look at it give me some feedback and see. Thank you Mr chair that's that's on the website this point to. Okay Senator chest bill do you want to address or talk about your draft legislation today well I can thank you. We've visited before about some things we were dealing with them maintaining staff. Of that one as we look at the recommendations we were talking about ways to maintain staff and one of the concerns that I had was that. I'm not sure anyone state government we have an objective way of determining who should receive a merit a merit based race being rabies and so I told you that I would be willing to work with the department on that in my legislation merely puts into play that we look at some specific things that our objective rather than all subject if such as punctuality attendance completion of projects or assignments and increased confidence in his or her field are there ways that you can study something you can go to trainings but is not to be the totality of it but that these things would be considered and that they would be objective things that could be considered as we look at the possibility of raising the salaries are providing a merit raise G. R. merit bonus to employees so that's basically what this is and I'd like for them to look at it but out not only wanted for this but this can with this body or for transportation but I think we need to look at it. House the spectrum of state government because you hear from so many people who have been done wrong because they don't get along with somebody and that becomes the basis of whether or not they get a merit based raises instead of it being based totally on something sound and objectives so that's what this is about I'd be happy to take any questions. Any questions. I in just one thing we get one thing clear five. So senator Chesterfield I think this the supplies for both what you're looking at an and what we're looking at as far as the you know expanding with this oversight committees able to do and and how they're going to be engaged in the process I think what we would need today is a vote to put that in the draft report which of course then we can altering change when we you know go to actually adopt the final report in the next meeting but to be able to make the public aware department aware at least with the language as it stands today I we would need to adopt those and then be able to make alterations to that before we adopt final report if needed that makes sense. I would move adoption of is that for all the package in it so the mind on the the legislation regulate this and option with the exception of changing the twenty five thousand for their soul to the fifty thousand for that threshold. Okay. All right everybody clear on the motion. Any discussion or questions on the motion so what you're looking at is the ALC rules the rules related this committee and then the rules related to an employment I mean the the law I'm sorry bill related unemployment be included draft report the only alteration would be to increase the threshold for review from twenty five to fifty which would near the review committee. With any questions. Seeing none we have a motion and second all those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed. All right motions been adopted those items will be included in the draft report at members just to kind of. What the next steps will be meeting next. On the twelfth and that's where would be considering the final report so if you don't mind encourage your colleagues on both sides of the of the capitol to the please being gaze please be want come participate in next our next meeting. At that meeting are dot will be reviving any responses to the head that they may have to the draft report And with that we have any other business. Senator you're recognized. There you go I got I got to ask a question on on Trent and transportation the begat house how much have we saved on this. Communication over over online rather than name I have to have to come in and is set before us I don't know that anyone that has tried to quantify that. We need some go we need some guidelines if if the we're asking the department to do those things we. I just couldn't chair as understood mongering cut you off. When you have a question to the question again please spend some time going through this draft report if you have questions or want to champion wanted particular items in the draft report thank you Tony legislation please discuss that with a staff but with that we. All right in that draft report will be sent out to you to the next few days with all the changes that we've talked about here today. All right with that. Seeing no other business we are adjourned thank you for your time today. Thank.