CC_Minutes_2016_0725 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, July 25, 2016 Page 32 Councilmember Laliberte noted her interest in getting the RFP in a timely man- ner, but knowing specifically what any extra work for Thrive MSP 2040 would involve cost-wise. While understanding it wasn't part of the City Council's pre- vious discussion, Councilmember Laliberte stressed her concern that those costs and time commitments were called out. Motion to Amend Etten moved, McGehee seconded, amending the motion to include all changes outlined by Mayor Roe, but striking the initial Laliberte language as follows: . . , , ; �ren-� Mayor Roe suggested removing that from the original motion and make that com- ponent a separate element. Councilmember Etten stated he wasn't sure that component would involve any significant extra work, of necessitated pulling it out for a cost element, if it was intended as a guide and lens. Councilmember Etten noted that during tonight's discussion he had spoken of pulling out the "Public Safety" component as a sepa- rate item (Section C.1, page 5), Councilmember McGehee agreed with Councilmember Etten's preferred use of the Thrive MSP 2040 as a guide and lens as an important component to the city's overall vision, and therefore was not supportive of removing it or separating it out. Councilmember Willmus stated he had no problem removing that element; but ei- ther way had no issue with it remaining in or pulled out. While interested in see- ing what the cost of that section may run, Councilmember Willmus stated he had no issue separating it. Councilmember Laliberte clarified that her intent was for the City Council to get more information rather than less, thus her proposal to separate that item. Mayor Roe clarified that the intent was that the Thrive MSP2040 component be broken out, not pulled out completely. Councilmember Laliberte confirmed that intent to call it out to determine the ac- tual cost for that specific provision. From her perspective, Councilmember Laliberte noted it was a matter of having more versus less information; and while she may not be opposed to it remaining in the RFP, she wanted to know its actual cost, thus her request that it be included as an option or add on.