Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutComprehensive Water Planning -- 2009-10-20 Minutes\\o~~:~QtE WS~~~~i/ r ~~~ 3~ m^~ iiiii~iidrt~t ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ utttu~~~~~~~~ Town Of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, Massachusetts 02631-1898 (508) 896-3701 ext. 133 FAX (508) 896-8089 Date Approved as written: January 11, 2010; Vote: All Aye. TOWN OF BREWSTER MINUTES OF COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLANNING COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, October 20, 2009 at 4:00 P.M. Brewster Town Office Building Comprehensive Water Planning Committee Dave Michniewicz convened the Comprehensive Water Planning Committee meeting at 4:10 pm in the Brewster Town Office Building with members Joanne Hughes, Dave Bennett, Elizabeth Taylor. Pat Hughes arrived at 4:15 pm Also Present: Sue Leven, Jim Gallagher. Chris Miller arrived at 4:30 pm. Review and discuss Integrated Water Resource Management Plan proposals: Michniewicz lead the discussion Leven distributed a spreadsheet with the findings of the members. Ms. Leven explained what the sheet showed. Hughes: Confused by the scoring sheet and how she ranked the companies. Michniewicz: As long as the way you ranked them was consistent across the board then the outcome should be accurate. How does the group feel about how the top 4/5 are ranked and are we satisfied that these are the companies we should consider? P. Hughes: She really liked Stone and may be disappointed that they would not be on the interview list. She provided her reasoning; they would be collaborating with the committee, the staff assigned seemed appropriate. Their proposal was really different. Bennett: Thought some of the companies that generated some high rankings might be considered. Perhaps they could narrow down and decide who they do not want to consider. What is the objective at the end of the day/how many do we want to interview? Michniewicz: Would like to get it down to 3 but no more than 4 Bennett: Has anyone checked the references? Leven: Would like to check the references once the list had been narrowed down. 10-13-09 www.TOWN.BREWSTER.MA.US Page 1 of3 Michniewicz: So, we have 3 that we would like to eliminate. Bennett: Motioned that based on the preliminary ranking the bottom 3; Lombardo Associates, Fay Spofford and Thorndike, Maguire Group would be eliminated from further review. Seconded by P. Hughes. Michniewicz: Thought there was some information missing from Stone's proposal. Leven: She let Michniewicz know that the information was in fact there and she pointed out where it was in the proposal. J. Hughes: The public participation phase seemed to be somewhat weak. Leven: Everyone probably knows the top 3 and they may have had some bias in their ranking. We may want to broaden the review. Also, we know the top 3 and their history with the towns. Bennett: Actually wanted to think outside the box and look at companies that we may not be as familiar with. Leven: The issues Brewster is having are different than the surrounding towns and need to make sure that if a company is working with the towns that they keep each town separate. Michniewicz: Really tried to look at each proposal objectively. Miller: Agreed with everyone that this needs to be separate but he is not ready to rule out a consultant working with a neighboring town because this is a fact gathering phase. J. Hughes: Assumed we would be interviewing the top 3 and we need to decide the others. It seems P. Hughes would like to have Stone considered. Leven: Actually you don't have to pick the top 3 as long as you can justify your actions. A discussion regarding Fuss &O'Neill occurred. It was discussed that because they were ranked 5th they may be eliminated. A discussion regarding Camp Dresser & McKee occurred. The positives: public participation component, small town experience, willing to work with town departments. Ms. Leven provided her experience working with CDM in Harwich. A discussion regarding Stearns & Wheler occurred. Ms. Leven provided her experience in working with them in Harwich and Provincetown. Taylor wants to make sure that the first option coming in is not a sewer system. S&W is working in Eastham and needs to be looking at alternative solutions. S&W is also reviewing the Tri-Town treatment facility. Bennett: Motion to support the top 3 and bring S&W, CDM and Horsley Witten Group in for interviews. Seconded by Taylor. All Aye. Stone's time frame for the first phase seemed to be rather long. Leven: Provided the findings she received from Town Counsel regarding missing information If something was not included then the committee could eliminate the proposal. But if the committee felt strongly that they wanted to consider a proposal then the Town Administrator 10-13-09 www.TOWN.BREWSTER.MA.US Page 2 of3 could override and could ask for that information. AECOM was reluctant to provide information regarding litigation. A further discussion regarding AECOM occurred. The timeframe of 6 months was noted. The fact that they declared'/2 of the Town as in the Pleasant Bay Resource area -this was incorrect. Several other points were addressed. In general, how does the committee weigh some of the negatives and is the committee only looking for 1 more consultant to interview. Ms. Leven felt if the proposal was strong and if there was a weak area then you may want to have the consultant in to clarify the weak area. Is there enough positive to bring the consultants back for an interview? Bennett: A lot of what a consultant finds is going to be based on computer modeling - projections. That is important for him. Leven: noted that the top 4 are all Cape consultants and Stone is looking at it from a different perspective and she liked their proposal. A discussion regarding Stone vs AECOM occurred. It was difficult for the committee to decide and therefore it was agreed that the committee would rather include instead of exclude for the interview. It would just be one extra hour and then the committee could make the best decision for the Town. It was discussed that F&O is a fresh face/name and warrants an interview. It was looking like there would be 6 consultants to interview; with 3 at a time. Timeframe: Monday the 26~h 3-6 pm and Tuesday 1-4. Reference check and questions to be asked. Ms. Leven would put together a list and get feedback from the committee. Ms. Leven would send out an email to the top 6 and let them know that they would be invited back for an interview. The Interview process: 15 minutes for the consultant to provide an overview; 30 minutes for questions and then 15 minutes between interviews for the committee to digest the information. Short presentation followed by questions no longer than 45 minutes. Taylor motioned to interview the 4th, 5th and 6~h ranked consultants; AECOM, F&O, Stone, Seconded by P. Hughes. All Aye. Bennett: Motioned to adjourn. Seconded by J. Hughes. All Aye. R p u ubmitted, av a nne ci/Administrative Clerk c, ~' 10-13-09 www.TOWN.BREWSTER.MA.US Page 3 of3