My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006_0508_Packet_a
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2006
>
2006_0508_Packet_a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 2:35:36 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:34:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
301
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
City Council Regular Meeting— 04/24/06 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 35 <br />Councilmember Pust reviewed the other two proposals, their <br />respective costs and the advantages and disadvantages of each <br />proposal. Councilmember Pust noted that Mr. Neu brought <br />historical expertise to the table, given his work with the Vista <br />2000 program, and noted that his proposal was the lowest cost. <br />Councilmember Pust did note the apparent �ac1� of detail <br />regarding the use of technology in involving more citizenry, and <br />lack of cost for use of that technology; as well as the need for <br />more clarity of items that may be above his fixed price. <br />Councilmember Pust clarified in an effort for transparency and <br />for the record, that one of the subcontractors, Lynn Vandervort, <br />with Carroll, Franck and Associates, was a former co-worker and <br />they still both had memberships in several organizations. <br />Councilmember Pust advised that she had no involvement with <br />preparation of the proposal, but wanted to make sure she was <br />clear regarding her knowledge of one of the company's <br />subcontractors. Councilmember Pust spoke to the positives of <br />the "all call" approach of the brainstorming sessions and ideas to <br />attract more citizen involvement of those not currently <br />represented; the need for more detail and cost breakdowns; and <br />discussion of electronic means to involve more citizens. <br />Councilmember Pust concluded her analysis by recommending <br />that the City Council ask the City Manager, herself, and anyone <br />else on the City Council interested in doing so, to conduct a <br />phone conference to further define the proposals, with <br />information provided to the City Council for a decision at their <br />May 8,2006 meeting. <br />Councilmember Ihlan pointed out that the City Council still <br />hadn't identified an appropriate funding source beyond the HRA <br />transfer, to which she was opposed and found inappropriate <br />when it was taxed for other purposes; expressed her concern with <br />the steering committee including the � Chair, Bill Ma,je�us; <br />and her concern about keeping the visioning process community- <br />based and open, and with tonight's actions, opined that this had <br />been seriously curtailed. Councilmember Ihlan spoke in <br />opposition to any motion without maintaining an open forum. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.