Laserfiche WebLink
Member Felice advised that she thought the "reduced carbon footprint" remained <br /> of vital importance since that was the overall reason for recycling. Member <br /> Felice suggested that the "EPP" item would be a way for a vendor to show if they <br /> believed in it, what they were doing to accomplish it, and if and how they made <br /> use of those end product materials. Member Felice also supported the "local <br /> vendor..." as an important component, since it spoke to a vendor's green <br /> footprint. Regarding "zero waste events," Member Felice noted that she had put a <br /> fair amount of emphasis on it, as it provided a great opportunity for the City to let <br /> people know how they too could reduce waste. <br /> Member Gjerdingen concurred with other members. <br /> At this time, averages were totaled from all four (4) Members present for each <br /> major and subcategory. Individual members negotiated with other members on <br /> the categories they personally though of higher value in the weighting. <br /> Mr. Schwartz reviewed some questions posed by the City Council in January of <br /> 2013 as they charged the PWETC with this review: <br /> • Whether to do additional research on the single-sort option; <br /> • Whether to decrease frequency of service; <br /> • Whether the current system is adequate and how to develop a residential fee <br /> from that perspective; <br /> • Comparison costs/options of other communities in providing recycling <br /> services; <br /> • And any other information desired in the PWETC recommendation for an <br /> RFP. <br /> Chair Vanderwall opined that it would be a good idea at some point to have that <br /> comparison information before the RFP was finalized; suggesting that Mr. Pratt <br /> provide that comparison information when the actual pricing discussion was done. <br /> Chair Vanderwall suggested that"frequency of service" be included as a <br /> requirement in the RFP, rather than selection criteria, opining that there was no <br /> rationale for reducing frequency and going backward. <br /> Member DeBenedet concurred with Chair Vanderwall on that point. However, <br /> Member DeBenedet opined that some things sorted themselves out during <br /> evaluation of a proposal, bringing him back to his previous question as to whether <br /> there were too many criteria that would muddle the process and provide an <br /> unintended outcome. <br /> Chair Vanderwall and members all concurred. <br /> Further individual negotiations and subsequent averaging of weighting <br /> percentages ensued. <br /> Page 10 of 14 <br />