Laserfiche WebLink
Member Cihacek asked, if the city took on cart ownership, would they be <br /> amortized for one year or for a longer period. <br /> Mr. Culver responded that it may depend on the fund balance and input from the <br /> City's Finance Director. Mr. Culver agreed that, if the fund balance was <br /> sufficient, there should be no discussion; and to that extent, staff should be able to <br /> perform a pseudo-amortization and rebuilt the fund balance, recognizing that it <br /> may never reach today's high. <br /> Member Wozniak noted that, in the pricing sheet prepared by staff, they did <br /> include a "per pull"price for park collection. <br /> Cart Size <br /> Recognizing the limited space available in some residential garages in Roseville, <br /> Member Wozniak suggested weekly collection would allow some of those units <br /> to move to a smaller cart for storage. <br /> Proposal Review Committee/Interview Panel <br /> Member Wozniak asked who was involved in the RFP review panel and how the <br /> PWETC fit in. <br /> Mr. Johnson advised that those details had yet to be confirmed on the staff and <br /> City Council level; but encouraged comment from the PWETC if they had <br /> recommendations for the interview panel. <br /> Mr. Culver advised that staff generally performed the initial scoring of proposals, <br /> based on their familiarity with the Best Value Process, including the price <br /> component. Mr. Culver noted that this RFP would prove more challenging with <br /> the many options, making it difficult to ensure a blind price comparison. Mr. <br /> Culver noted that the typical process scored each proposal based on the values <br /> and their weight before getting to the price. However, Mr. Culver noted, <br /> depending on which options were selected and their complexities, it would impact <br /> that pricing for overall scoring of proposals. Depending on the timing, Mr. <br /> Culver advised that the intent was for staff to then bring it back to the PWETC for <br /> scoring on each proposal, including staff's recommendation and the PWETC's <br /> subsequent recommendation to the City Council. Mr. Culver advised that the <br /> process would then move into a negotiation period with the contractor, to <br /> ultimately ratify a contract during the summer of 2016. <br /> At the request of Member Cihacek, Mr. Culver proposed that the PWETC would <br /> see all rankings and an explanation of how the end recommendation was arrived <br /> at. <br /> Member Cihacek asked if there was any reason staff would not consider using <br /> someone from the PWETC as part of that evaluation. <br /> Page 14 of 20 <br />