Laserfiche WebLink
JAN 25 1994 1 <br />ALTERNATIVES AMID ANALYSIS <br />The alternatives are as follows: <br />Alternative No. 1 <br />n,q <br />BOOK 91 PACE 594 <br />Approve the prioritized firm ranking for each project and authorize <br />staff to begin contract negotiations. <br />Alternative No. 2 <br />Direct staff to revise rankings. <br />RECOWEENMTIONS AND FUNDING <br />Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 whereby the staff ranking is approved <br />and contract negotiations authorized. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Eggert, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Adams, to approve the prioritized firm <br />ranking for each project set forth in staff's <br />memorandum and authorize staff to begin contract <br />negotiations, as recommended by staff. <br />Under discussion, Commissioner Macht noticed that the <br />different firms were top-ranked on each project, and he asked <br />whether staff did that intentionally. He wondered why only 2 firms <br />were listed on the Gibson Street Paving and Drainage project. <br />Public Works Director Jim Davis explained that only 2 firms <br />submitted proposals for that project. He indicated that staff <br />tries to rotate projects whenever possible, but in this particular <br />instance staff did not deliberately rotate the consultants. They <br />were rated on a point system to determine which consultant best <br />addressed the scope of work on each project. <br />THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. <br />It was voted on and carried unanimously. <br />28 <br />