CC_Minutes_2014_0512 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, May 12, 2014 Page 20 and was also outlined in the pre-proposal meetings; with each of the six criteria and overall methodology defined, as shown on page 1 of the RCA. Specific to concerns in allowing Stantec to submit a proposal, as they had served previously as a consulting contractor for the City, which was perceived to create an advantage for them due to their familiarity with the sites, Mr. Brokke opined that this project didn't require past knowledge of the sites; and since it was a blind process, did not feel required to preclude any bidders. While there was significant snow cover during the proposal time given this past winter's snowfall, Mr. Brokke opined that the best value process allowed proposers to specifically ad- dress risks or address wanting more time or other things of that nature, and were factored into the evaluation. In many cases, Mr. Brokke opined that such infor- mation during their presentation would be advantageous to a bidder and create a potential for them to receive more points since it indicated they were giving con- siderable thought and understanding to the project and therefore increase their score. Related to the grant side of this, Councilmember Willmus advised that he'd first heard something about that at the most recent Parks & Recreation Commission meeting. Mr. Brokke confirmed that that component was a significant piece as a value add- ed item in pursuing grants for additional projects. In the proposal, Mr. Brokke noted that there was a core list of projects given, and other desired types of pro- jects not included, allowing for unit prices from bidders in case bids came in low- er than anticipated, they may be an additional resource for projects. Mr. Brokke noted that took the initiative to provide that information on their own; offering to pursue the grants themselves and write the proposals. Given that added value in- cluded in the Stantec proposal, Mr. Brokke opined that it was highly likely that the City could benefit by roughly $2 million worth or more for $1.5 million in projects. At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Brokke confirmed that grant writing would be done by Stantec staff on their time. At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Brokke expanded on Stantec's proposal to help the City solicit volunteers and orchestrate volunteer efforts under the City's Volunteer Coordinator staff for coordination and awareness, and using Stantec staff to supervise and provide expertise to current and new community volunteers for various natural resource projects. At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Brokke advised that neither of the other two proposers looked at the grant aspect. Councilmember McGehee offered a different take on some of this, namely that it seemed to her that one organization was completely different than the other two proposers: one interested in contract aspects, with the other two actually more in-