Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Mr. Price stated he was a little hazy on the scope of work and if you give the job to <br />one vendor, will they render an unbiased assessment and how can the same <br />individual craft the document going forward. <br /> <br />Mr. Riganti stated the scope of work would conclude with the delivery of the <br />petitions and related documents. She said it was envisioned that there will be an <br />aggressive significant public engagement at which time the input would be used to <br />guide the crafting of this legislation, if it moves forward. <br /> <br />Mr. Price stated he would like to wait and see how much does it cost to give an <br />assessment which should be less than $40,000. <br /> <br />Mr. Riganti stated tentative schedule and scope of work was in the Council packet <br />that broke down the legal fees for the proposed legal team to do, as part of the <br />contract. She noted there was a clause to allow the City or Council to sever the <br />relationship, if they determine it was not worth pursuing. <br /> <br />Mr. Price stated that was why he wanted to wait for two weeks before voting. He <br />asked Ms. Riganti if according to the memorandum, the tasks one through nine <br />listed an allocation of $15,000. <br /> <br />Ms. Riganti replied that was correct, essentially the legal team would issue a <br />memorandum of their findings covering items one through nine for a cost of <br />$15,000. All of the input has been gathered and its feedback refined providing a <br />way to move forward <br /> <br />Mr. Price said just because an item was budgeted it did not mean that it was <br />accurate and it may not cost all of $40,000. <br />Ms. Riganti replied it perhaps may cost $15,000 rather than the total of $40,000. <br />Mr. Price stated when one through nine came back with their findings, the people <br />can determine whether it was feasible to move forward and the allocation of the <br />difference goes forward. He stated if the end result was predetermined, then you <br />allocate $40,000. What he was saying is that it was not predetermine. It was his <br />understanding this should be looked at to determine whether it was feasible or <br />not. <br />Ms. Riganti said that was part of the task but in the RFP process the City did ask <br />respondents to develop a scope of work with a tentative schedule and a cost <br />assigned to that, which would take us through to the end. Ms. Riganti noted that <br />was what the City was seeking approval for and if there needed to be additional <br />refinements, the City can discuss that with the legal firm. <br />Mr. Price stated to the chair, tasks one through nine were premature because we <br />cannot go past nine until Council sees what the findings were. He noted that <br />otherwise Council would be allocating funds for something that is not known, if it <br />9 <br /> <br /> <br />