Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Finance And Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission OKs budgeted contracts but commissioners press staff on wide disparities in supervisory course costs
Summary
The Commission approved contract packages but commissioners criticized a single supervisory presentation that cost far more than comparable presenters; staff said presenter models and in‑kind instructor costs explain much of the variance and pledged follow‑up.
The Commission approved contract authority across bureaus but a substantive exchange focused on the supervisory course presenter contract: commissioners noted large disparities in per‑presentation costs and asked staff to pursue lower‑cost, high‑quality presenters.
Staff summary and actions approved: - POST staff reported they met required state vacancy and control‑section reductions and had found ways to absorb a January 10 proposed cut for fiscal 2025–26 through reimbursement adjustments and operational savings. - The Commission approved a slate of contracts (training presenters, EVOC, platform maintenance, state‑controller audits, Mark43) and staff confirmed flexibility to move funds between presenters inside a program if no new program authority is required; they will notify the commission of reallocations.
Nut graf: While commissioners approved the contracts on the consent calendar, the supervisory-course presenters drew sustained scrutiny. Presentation costs ranged from about $8,000 (some large agencies delivering in‑house) to over $50,000 for one regional presenter; commissioners saw the variance as a procurement and optics risk and requested staff follow up with cost breakdowns and potential alternative presenters or college campus hosting to reduce hotel and travel expenditures.
Discussion highlights: - POST identified three drivers of cost variance: (1) some agencies present courses using in‑kind instructor time and existing facilities (low incremental POST cost), (2) other presenters use hotel venues and fly instructors in (higher direct costs), and (3) scope differences (breakout rooms, materials, multi‑instructor formats) change price. - Staff is seeking additional local presenter capacity (community colleges such as Hartnell and CSU/CalState partners) and will add course‑fill minimums (staff said an 80% fill threshold would be requested for some contracts, while recognizing the need for flexibility for cancellations due to wildfires and other events). - Commission direction: gather more granular cost breakdowns for the supervisory presentations; explore using local community college venues to cut hotel costs; continue to recruit presenters to create competition.
Ending: Contracts approved as presented, but commissioners asked staff to return in June with a clearer cost/comparability matrix for the supervisory and high‑cost presenter packages.
