Mr Grabek is the person who spoke at the meeting. Commissioner and Chair Jon Olson declared himself "miffed" that Grabek raised these questions publically after Olson had answered them privately.
Eva Young Minneapolis
http://www.mplsparkwatch.org
February 5, 2004
Commissioners Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board 2117 West River Road North Minneapolis, MN 55411
Dear Commissioners:
As per your request, I have attached questions regarding the RFP process for Excursion Boat and Charter Operators. The MPRB being a taxing organization and user of tax dollars should be held to the highest standard of procuring RFPs as are all other publicly-funded organizations.
I believe a review of your process and your most recent negotiations with Skipper Liner should be initiated to assure that proper standards and procedures are followed. I also request that a full accounting and comparison of contracts, services, fees and due diligence of your past client, Padelford, and Skipper Liner, be made before any contract is negotiated further or concluded. I have reviewed your staff's analysis of the financials and they are flawed. The Padelford's food and beverage revenue for 2003 is less than $350,000. The revenues suggested for Skipper Liner are overstated and are predicated on major increases in pricing. The MPRP must be certain that big marketing dollars will be spent otherwise this venture will fail to generate the cash you project. Please take your time in making this long-term commitment.
Please help me, Minneapolis tax payers and park users understand the workings, process and financial dealings of the MPRB by responding (in a public forum) to the questions you requested.
Respectfully yours,
James R. Grabek Chair/NLNA
Attachments
cc: Mayor R.T. Rybak
Jon R. Gurban, MPRB
Brian Rice, MPRB Counsel
Karl Karlson, Pioneer Press
Joe Kimball, Star Tribune
Scott Russell, Skyway News
Minneapolis Councilperson, Natalie Johnson Lee
Minneapolis Councilperson, Lisa GoodmanQuestions requested by the MPRB on February 4, 2004 regarding MPRBs excursion boat RFB procedure.
Submitted by <http://www.mplsparkwatch.org/?q=user/view/5>lloydletta on Friday, 2004, February 6 - 3:06pm
Questions requested by the MPRB on February 4, 2004 regarding MPRBs excursion boat RFB procedure.
James R. Grabek, February 5, 2004
Has the MPRB really investigated the financial viability of the Padelfords Boom Island operation to assure that profits/losses warranted an increase in fees?
Why was a contract not negotiated and concluded after the Padelfords August 4, 2003 letter (see attached)?
Why was an RFP issued without the criteria for excursion boat and charter operationsof the MPRBs policy Park Board Ordnance PB-4-92 (see attached) which was required of your previous client for 14 years?
Why was an RFP issued with stipulations of November 2003 to March 2004 bidding process when the MPRB had knowledge of this being detrimental to the Padelford client method of securing next years business?
Why did the RFP require a restricted discussions/submissionssection and then the MPRB complain that they were no communications between the MPRB and the Padelford client?
Why were the two proposals received in response to the MPRBs RFP proposals for the Bohemian Flats area of the Mississippi River and not the Boom Island proposal?
What are the specifics of the SkipperLiners proposal for Boom Island?
What will be the costs incurred by the MPRB with the SkipperLiner dockage proposals for Boom Island and Bohemian Flats?
What are the comparisons, side by side, of the Padelford contract and services for 14 years compared to the SkipperLiner proposal?
Why is this just a 2-year contract with options instead of a longer term contract?
Has a thorough investigation of the previous business experiences of the SkipperLiner company been accomplished and has a report on such due diligence been made public?
Why were there so many references of perksby MPRB staff of promises of the SkipperLiner proposal but specifically clarified that this will not be in the contract?(Example: promises of boat features, advertising, house boats, water taxis, etc.)
Why is there such a rushto negotiate a contract with SkipperLiner when there seemed to be no rush to conclude the RFP until March 2004.
Why is the RFP timeline now being altered? Is it for the convenience of timing to allow SkipperLiner to meet seasonal needs? If so, why didnt the original RFP show consideration to a 14-year client with good performance not given the same consideration?
Eva Young Near North Minneapolis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog is up: http://lloydletta.blogspot.com
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
