Laserfiche WebLink
�� -r <br />� _ � � <br />Request for Councii Action <br />Date: 12/OS/OS <br />Item: 9. <br />City Attorney, City Prosecutor and <br />Recycling Contracts <br />Item Description: <br />consider Approving Contracts for the City Attorney, City <br />Prosecutor, and Recycling Services <br />I. BACKGROUND <br />Pursuant to an RFP process, the City sought proposals for the services named above. <br />On October 24,2005, the City Council authorized and directed staff to negotiate with <br />designated service providers. <br />II. RESULTS OF NEGOTIATION <br />The City Attorney contract attached contains a paragraph indicating the scope of services is <br />intended by the parties to be comprehensive and that services are included unless expressly <br />excluded. Also, some fees have been reduced (e.g., copying charges) and language has been <br />included clarifying opportunities for Councilmembers to contact the City Attorney for City <br />legal advice. <br />The City Prosecutor contract attached reflects a$200 reduction per month in the monthly <br />retainer for services. It also reflects a reduction in some hourly fees charged for appellate work <br />outside the monthly retainer. <br />The Recycling contract attached reflects a guaranteed minimum floor for calculating revenue <br />sharing with the City. It also provides a mechanism for converting from bi-weekly to eve�y- <br />week recycling collection, should the City so desire. And it sets forth a transition process by <br />which the new service provider would initiate recycling service in the City starting December <br />26,2005 and the schedule by which recycling will be provided in the various collection zones. <br />Negotiation did not result in the designated service providers rescinding any material terms of <br />their proposals. Negotiation only resulted in more favorable terms and conditions for the City. <br />��T. RECOMMENDATION AND REOUEST <br />Because some Councilmembers opposed the designated service providers before and are likely <br />to continue to oppose a contract with that provider, staff recommends a separate Council <br />motion to approve and a separate vote on each contract attached. <br />�� � <br />. � <br />