Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
County staff recommend Paycom as finalist for payroll services, ask board to issue intent‑to‑award
Loading...
Summary
Columbia County staff told commissioners they recommend Paycom to replace ADP after a 16‑response RFP, outlined a June 1 target go‑live and said a setup fee is already budgeted; staff requested board approval to post a notice of award while final contract terms are negotiated.
Terry Garcia, identified in the meeting as the county HR director, told the Board of County Commissioners that an RFP for payroll and human‑resources services drew 16 responses and was winnowed to three finalists, with Paycom recommended as the county’s choice.
Garcia said the county currently uses ADP and has operational inefficiencies that Paycom could consolidate: applicant tracking, scheduling, time and attendance, and payroll would be integrated. "We did get 16 responses to the RFP... we ended up with Paycom as our final, and we would like to award the bid to them," Garcia said, according to the meeting record.
A county staff member involved in contract negotiations told commissioners the county is "really close to a contract" and asked the board to allow the county to issue a notice of award while final terms — particularly confidentiality provisions and a few remaining items — are resolved. "I'm comfortable with you going ahead and issuing the notice of award even though we don't have the final terms all worked out," that staff member said.
Staff gave a June 1 target go‑live so Paycom could complete setup before the fiscal year‑end processing. Commissioners and staff discussed implementation timing, data loading, parallel systems and training. Staff said the one‑time setup fee has already been budgeted for this fiscal year and that monthly vendor charges were discussed in the meeting (figures mentioned during the discussion ranged from about $2,000 to $5,000 monthly depending on services migrated into the new system). Garcia said the first month after go‑live may be slightly higher, but July 1 costs would reflect only the new system once legacy services are retired.
The board gave verbal approval to proceed with the intent to award and for staff to post the notice of award, with staff to return when final contract language is complete. The meeting minutes show no roll‑call vote transcripted for that action; staff said they would post the notice and continue negotiating the final contract terms.
Next steps noted on the record: finalize contract language, complete data loading and training ahead of the June 1 go‑live, and return to the board if outstanding contract terms require approval.
Ending: Staff will continue negotiations and complete implementation work before the requested June 1 go‑live; the county will publish the notice of award and return to the board with the final contract for formal ratification if required.
