Laserfiche WebLink
Further discussion included how standards and goals available from the Minnesota Pollution <br />Control Agency (MPCA) were integrated when developing the 2nd Generation Plan to address <br />future concerns, and the desire of previous Boards to maintain a margin of error through <br />management of stringent action levels to ensure water quality protection. <br />Page 1, 1 Bullet Point <br />Member Eckman suggested that the language <br />Chair Ferrington noted that those measurable <br />need not be re- specified in the RFP. <br />include "measurable" management goals. <br />goals were included in the 2" Generation Plan and <br />Page 1, 2 Bullet Point <br />Member Eckman suggested the need to have the RFP include "costs" for storm pond <br />maintenance plans /practices to involve more citizens in property drainage solutions. <br />Mr. Maloney noted that the consultant hired by the Board would need to familiarize themselves <br />with both Cities public works operations. Discussion would involve staff liaisons providing the <br />consultant with detailed cost information; and opined that including that specific information in <br />the RFP was not necessary since it would be part of the plan. <br />Page 3, Item 2 <br />It was suggested to retain this text requiring that proposals demonstrate the consultant's <br />experience in working with Watershed Management Organizations (WMO's) and recognition by <br />consultants of the need to demonstrate knowledge of the nature of WMO's with limited financial <br />resources and their need to leverage multiple and varied types of funding resources, as addressed <br />on Page 3, Items 3 and 4. <br />Chair Ferrington advised that he had already received calls of interest from four (4) firms <br />seeking additional information, based on the GLWMO website and pending RFP. <br />It was the consensus of the Board to not include anything about pond maintenance in the RFP. <br />Page 1, 2 Bullet Point <br />Mr. Petersen sought clarification of the intent of the last sentence related to identifying <br />redevelopment "options." <br />By consensus, Members determined that the word `opportunities" rather than `options" was <br />more appropriate. <br />Member Manzara arrived at this time, approximately 6:05 p.m. <br />Page 2, 1 Bullet Point <br />Mr. Petersen suggested that this item be broken down and/or structured differently to avoid <br />confusion and more clearly define "mechanisms for implementation." <br />4 <br />