Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Councilmember Olson concurred. She stated this type of move is very time intensive, and it is <br />very likely for files to be misplaced with too much handling. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cook expressed his preference not to re-use the files from a maintenance <br />standpoint. He indicated there will likely be money spent repairing files after the expense of <br />repainting them. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jeffrey stated the bigger question is the existing furniture, and whether the <br />existing panels are re-used. He agrees with re-using when it is possible, but the down time with <br />this will cost too much money and staff time. He has moved many divisions, and staff time is <br />critical. He expressed his preference in trading in the existing furniture. He suggested the <br />possibility of a used furniture vendor that may purchase the whole lot for much more than the <br />$9,000 buy-back quote. He requested verification that the purchase of new furniture with union <br />labor will be under the $700,000 included in the budget. <br /> <br />Assistant City Administrator Nelson responded in the affirmative. She indicated the ancillary <br />package is currently being refined, as it was a bit high the last time it was reviewed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jeffrey questioned if the construction budget is currently within budget and the <br />contingency funds have not all been used up. <br /> <br />Assistant City Administrator Nelson indicated the budget is on track, and they are doing well on <br />the contingency fund. The big contingency numbers are in the past, although there are still items <br />that may come in. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jeffrey stated if the FFE package is kept under $700,000 with all new furniture <br />it is worth not having the disruption of staff and work time. He noted the estimates to re-use the <br />furniture do not include costs such as reprogramming panels and purchasing needed bits and <br />pieces. He recently worked through a reconfigure that included $22,000 on parts. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stressed that staff needs to be ready to respond when the new building opens. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated the difference between re-using the old furniture and purchasing <br />new furniture is $157,000. He somewhat disagrees with the notion that staff cannot be moved <br />over to the new building right away; the fabric on the panels can be replaced ahead of time. He <br />is not necessarily advocating re-using the furniture, but it should be noted that staff could be <br />moved over the course of 3 to 4 days with little down time. He supports purchasing new <br />furniture, not necessarily for the reason of money or down time, but for continuity. There is the <br />point of the likely need to purchase extra parts and pieces, and the new building will include <br />glass panels, which are not included in the current building. He noted there is a lot of money that <br />could be saved by re-using the furniture, but he does not know that it would be saved for the <br />right reasons. The new furniture would include a more efficient layout, which can continue to be <br />added onto. He stressed the need to be certain the furniture that is purchased will have a shelf <br />life, and suggested purchasing some extra fabric of the color that is being used or of a contrasting <br />complimentary color. <br /> <br />City Council Work Session / May 23, 2006 <br />Page 3 of 6 <br />