HomeMy WebLinkAbout0385.092-
Auqust 6, 1992
THE HONOR}..BLE CITY COUNCIL
Palo Alto, California
W •• d Ab~t.ment Adminilt~at~va Charge
M~~bers of the Council:
This report is i.n response to Council's inquiry at the ,July 27. 1992 City
Council meeting, relati .... e to tr~oJ £5 percent administrative charges added
to the contractor's cost of weed abatement as indicated in CMR 330:92~
This is an informational report and no Council action is required.
As indicated in the staff report, Santa Clara County administers weed
abatement contracts throughout the County~ The Santa Clara County Fire
Harshal's office advised staff the 65 percent ad;ninistrativl:l charge is:
necessary to recover all costs of the program, including salaries,
benefits and equipment maintenance~ Periodic audits are conductE'd by
Santa Clara County, as! well as external agencies~ to guarantee the ...,eed
abatement progra1!l. is fully cost reco'.;ered.
Respectfully sub /ed.
ROBER! R. WALL
Fir<> Cbief
~
A.,i.t&nt City Xan.qer
CI!R 385:92
'.'-
."\~."':"
. -
".
I
l