1994-03-31-PEDC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

24 Chairman Cecil asked as a matter of clarification whether, in the typical contract the Chamber of Commerce enters into the contract extends over a period of years. Ms. Parkman stated the present contract with Mr. Chamberlain was for three years with annual options, and he is reviewed every year. Ms. Parkman stated they felt with Eric Clifford and T. K. Haynes as attorneys, they could draw up a contract that would be to their satisfaction, so they would not be locked into something that would have to be paid off. Chairman Cecil stated for clarification that the type of Chamber Manager they have had in the past really does not have the expertise in industrial development needed at the present. He also said historically the Chamber would pay and continue to pay that level of compensation. The compensation that the Chamber is asking the Board for is the amount they feel would be required to employ the individual with expertise in industrial development. Board member Bray stated he felt it would be very cost effective to have a joint venture but he would like for the Board to have some protection. Ms. Parkman stated she felt the attorneys would make sure they were covered. Board member Fendley said he felt economically this made sense. Board member Clifford stated in the other corporation that he is aware of they have hired an economic developer, and the amount is approximately $100,000.00 to $125,000.00 by the time you pay the people, and give them an office and staff. Chairman Cecil asked Mr. Haynes whether assuming the Board approves this arrangement, the Board would have a separate contract from the contract established by the Chamber, and would the contract be subject to Council approval. Mr. Haynes agreed. Mr. Haynes said it could be separate and included in the same contract covering the same things that would be covered in two separate contracts. Attorney Haynes said this Corporation would be contracting with the person for the services this Board will be directing. City Attorney Haynes said it could be a separate contract, but the money would be tied to the services. If within the first three months the Corporation was dissatisfied with the service and pulled their support then the Chamber still has a person with two-thirds of a contract still existing. As noted in the proposal of search persons, they sort of give a one year guarantee. He stated he felt with regard to the first year the reviews should be much shorter term than after the first year. Board member Clifford stated he felt the individual that is hired needed some assurances that the contract was going to be tied together to some extent. Mr. Clifford stated he and Mr. Haynes had thought this might be accomplished by one contract specifying the duties and the compensation with both entities signing as the makers of the contract. Chairman Cecil stated he felt the contract needed to be as simple as possible, but our compensation would be for the industrial development duties the individual would be doing. City Attorney Haynes stated the Board would be contracting for services to be rendered, and if those services are not satisfactory to this Board then the payment would cease. With regard to the services this Board's contracting for, that person would be directed by this Board as to those services contracted for, and the rest of his duties he would have to satisfy the Chamber. Board member Clifford stated he would like the contract as simplified as possible in order that the individual they are trying to employ is not scared off, or made to feel they are reporting to, too many people and be hesitant to come onboard. Chairman Cecil said he felt the contract did need to be made as simple as possible. The Board needs to exercise some control over being able to make a judgement regarding the individual's performance since the Board is Duttina money into the deal.