In what I think is a brilliantly perceptive commentary about the stone Arch Bridge proposal by Shawne FitzGerald, I would add - Why did staff recommend a no bid process for the selection of caterers for Stone Arch rental events?
I have worked on two recent projects related to the MPRB bid process. On Oct. 6th we had a final meeting to approve the $1.6 million construction plans for Edgewater Park. According to the Lead staff. " The park Board is obligated to send all contracts out to bid and has no choice but to pick the lowest bidder if they have met all the requirements." In the Seward neighborhood the neighborhood group wanted to donate a $ 20,000 solar power installation to be put on the park Building at Matthews Park. Even though this was a gift, the Park Board informed us that we needed to go through a bid process. What this meant was that although Innovative Power systems had worked with us for many years and had no competition for this kind of work- we could not hire them without a required bid process. Unfortunately the $10,000 Xcel grant would expire before the end of the year. The RFP (request for proposal) probably would have come up with only one qualified vendor but taken so much time, I would have lost the Xcel grant. Negotiating with Superintendent Gurban and Judd Rietkerk, we ended up not giving the Solar Power system to the park Board, but instead rented the roof, installed the Seward Neighborhood Group Solar panels on the Matthews Park Building and are donating the generated power to the park Board. This is the first and only installation of solar panels on a park building. This was a bureaucratic nightmare that took over 10 years to accomplish. I would also note that the incredibly bungled "Fort extreme sports complex" project was a no bid process. According to Southwest Journal's Scott Russell-the Park Board is now in court being sued for $1.8 Million in mechanics liens for the failed extreme sports complex. (They knew they needed insurance against this type of claim, but somehow forgot to include this in the no bid contract.) So can someone tell me how to explain Park Policy concerning bid requirements? Thanks, Scott Vreeland Seward Shawn FitzGerald wrote: "Staff should be submitting standard business proposals to the Commissioners. At minimum, these would include the 5W's: who, what, when, why and where. These would include How - a description of how the policy or program would work. And these should include a 1-5 year budget, a projected income statement. Because the MPRB is a public agency, staff proposals should include a need statement that details a) who wants the action, b) an analysis of who will benefit and who will not, and c) a description of community notice and feedback. Finally, staff recommendations should include a brief analysis about how the proposed action supports the MPRB mission. The written proposal on the closing of the SAB/Plank Road only stated the What and the Where. So, the Commissioners were pressed to make a decision on short notice with inadequate information. This immediately set up a conflict between the Board and staff ". REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact 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 Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
