CC_Minutes_2011_0926 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, September 26, 2011 Page 30 Chief O'Neill advised that in the two (2)processes he'd used to-date: construction manager and architectural services, there was an evaluation guide for the team to use if they felt proposals were strong or weak, with the guide used from informa- tion provided by ASU. Chief O'Neill reviewed the preparation for the interview portion of the process upon receipt of the proposals; and redaction of information to remove any references to the firm or its principles to ensure a blind process. On a personal note, Chief O'Neill advised that during his review of the proposal, he noted his questions throughout each proposal in just about every category; and advised that the interview allowed him an opportunity to sit down with the entire architectural team to specifically discuss the Roseville project, as well as other projects they've done; and opined that this interview process was the most impor- tant part and allowed him to gain the most information on who would be best for a particular project. Councilmember Pust questioned if they should be called interviews since scoring was not based on interview skills or personalities, but the additional information made available in evaluating their proposal. Chief O'Neill opined that the interview included perceptions on whether they would be able to complete a project on time; their background with geothermal systems; and included each member of the evaluation team asking standard, as well as specific questions, based on the proposals; while being aware of various nuances they bring to the table. Further discussion ensued regarding the highest possible scores in the various cat- egories (fees, past performance, background, risk assessment) with seven evalua- tors involved in the interviews, two of whom consisted of representatives from the construction management team; series of questions based on evaluator notes from each proposal, with additional questions varying based on specific proposals. Councilmember McGehee brought to the attention of Councilmember Pust the spread from the previous proposals and the spread between the top•two firms. Councilmember Pust opined that this didn't matter to her as much as if potential points were different than other categories; and asked that Mayor Roe, from his engineering expertise, provide a mathematical analysis of the categories for com- parison; and with how close two of the firms were, if it was prudent to standardize the weighting. Councilmember Johnson opined, from a business perspective on interviews and form a managerial point of view, the interview phase should be a key aspect, since the project manager needed a relationship with City staff as well as the construe- , tion management team and the full architectural team. While recognizing that cost was an issue, Councilmember Johnson opined that if there was no artistry, chemistry, or camaraderie, it would not be as effective of a relationship. Coun-