CC_Minutes_2010_0412 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, April 12, 2010 Page 19 Councilmember Ihlan reviewed the Imagine Roseville 2025 and Comprehensive Plan documents (Land Use Section -Policy 1.7) supporting her position; and the rights and objectives of the City as a property owner, and impacts to be analyzed. b. Discuss the Public Works Environment and Transportation (PWET) Com- mission's Role in the Recycling Request for Proposal (RFP) Mayor Klausing noted that the purpose of this discussion was as a follow-up to Councilmember Roe's request for involvement by the PWET Commission in the pending Recycling Provider Request for Proposals process. City Manager Bill Malinen provided staff's perspective with respect to the RFP process and staff's intent to develop that RFP using best value approach methods, with the ultimate goal in recycling to divert materials from landfills and get them into the manufacturing process. Mr. Malinen advised that it was not intended un- der that best value method to provide specifics, but to allow respondents to pro- vide their best value approach for ranking by the evaluation team. Mr. Malinen suggested that commission members could be involved in those panels. Councilmember Roe sought to clarify the actual charge to the PWET Commission from the City Council in the process, not necessarily in writing the RFP itself; and suggested several areas for their involvement, including: 1) PWET having the opportunity to offer their input into generation of the RFP, such as their thoughts about evaluation criteria; and/or 2) What the City Council is looking for, such as a technical review from their areas of expertise; and/or 3) Their voluntary participation in the review process as bidding goes forward. Mayor Klausing questioned how appropriate it was for advisory commissions to be involved in drafting RFP's, suggesting that staff's expertise seemed more ap- propriate. Councilmember Roe suggested that involving commissioners in evaluating the RFP's was appropriate, and clarified that he was not suggesting that the commis- sion be involved in writing the RFP itself, but providing their perspective on the document drafted by staff, allowing for an additional chance for review and comment. Councilmember Pust opined that she didn't see a downside in seeking their in- volvement and their perspective, given their interest in such issues. Discussion ensued regarding involvement of advisory commissions in their tradi- tional roles for professional expertise and citizen input.