Elk Grove City Council To Hear Pitches on Sports Complex
Will also consider vehicle maintenance contract On Wednesday night the Elk Grove City Council will hear presentations on the much discussed...
https://www.elkgrovenews.net/2012/04/elk-grove-city-council-to-hear-pitches.html
Will also consider vehicle maintenance contract
On Wednesday night the Elk Grove City Council will hear presentations on the much discussed sports park.
The sports park, which is part of the planned Elk Grove Civic Center, is hoped to be an integral part of a complex that city leaders hope will draw visitors to the city and provide local youth with added sports facilities. While the city will own the facility, it has decided to seek an outside operator.
The council will hear presentations from the Cosumnes Community Services District and Big League Dreams.
The council will also consider awarding the city's three-year $396,000 vehicle maintenance contract to Downtown Ford of Sacramento who was the initial low bidder. A Sacramento Superior Court judge ruled the city acted improperly in awarding the contract to Elk Grove Ford who had a higher bid price.
Wednesday night's meeting will start at 6 p.m.
On Wednesday night the Elk Grove City Council will hear presentations on the much discussed sports park.
The sports park, which is part of the planned Elk Grove Civic Center, is hoped to be an integral part of a complex that city leaders hope will draw visitors to the city and provide local youth with added sports facilities. While the city will own the facility, it has decided to seek an outside operator.
The council will hear presentations from the Cosumnes Community Services District and Big League Dreams.
The council will also consider awarding the city's three-year $396,000 vehicle maintenance contract to Downtown Ford of Sacramento who was the initial low bidder. A Sacramento Superior Court judge ruled the city acted improperly in awarding the contract to Elk Grove Ford who had a higher bid price.
Wednesday night's meeting will start at 6 p.m.
Posts
5 comments
Please disregard the comment above. I have asked Dan to pull it down. There was no way to correct the errors and add additional info vital to the public; so I had to repost my comment.
Where on the agenda is there room for the public to ask questions of both the CCSD and BLD? Two competing companies giving presentations on the same night before the city council only and the community has to sit and just listen.
When the Elk Grove Community Connection planned and held the Sports Complex Town Hall meeting on May 4, 2011, and invited Sportsplex USA to give a presentation, we promised more town hall meetings – as did four members of the Elk Grove City Council and staff, meaning City Manager Laura Gill, who were in attendance -- because community members wanted to ask more questions and have more input. It was our goal to give all companies who were interested in applying for the RFP equal opportunity before the public.
Sportsplex USA was given more than two hours with complete access to four council members and the community with no competition, with the ability to sit and listen to comments,concerns, questions, suggestions and more before applying for the RFP. Not so for the CCSD and BLD.
This is furthered by the fact that because there was no other presentations before the city issued the RFP, only data supplied by Sportsplex USA was included in the staff report that went before the city council.
This is not right. This is on the heels of yet another recent RFP process that went awry. We are setting the stage for yet another lawsuit because a good argument can now be made that the city of Elk Grove gave Sportsplex USA preferential treatment in the pre-bidding process.
If we had known that only one town hall meeting was going to occur – the city refused to hold more -- we would have never put on the first one. Then all three companies equally would be on the agenda for their presentation at Wednesday’s Elk Grove City Council meeting with the council and public hearing everyone at the same time with the same amount of time allotted.
That would be fair and equitable not to mention factoring out community input.
Okay, let's see if I got this right...
* Council cooks up a plan to have an aquatic center and sports park, with a weak market study to justify
* Sportsplex makes 2-hour presentation, Council promises more public outreach
* RFPs are sent out to aquatic consultants and sports park consultants
* Assume both proposals were received and ranked internally, but Council only goes public with aquatic proposals. Massive subsidies are required and no mention of competition events--they are all thrown out by Council. Guess that market study was no good after all.
* The sports park proposals which we can assume have been internally ranked, but they are sitting on for the time being, all said more land would be good. Ah, we just happen to have more land available from the aquatic site.
* Assume sports park RFPs will be modified to include additional land (or maybe only the top finalist, who knows?).
* Connie Conley throws monkey wrench into plan, implying Council mind is already made up and Sportsplex had unfair advantage and public locked out of process (familiar theme huh?)
* Assume their hired gun, Hobbs Esquire, advises a token presentation by other two finalists in order to snuff out any potential lawsuits.
* Assume next action will be to award contract to Sportsplex. Any recusals? Will the contract include terms of operation (ie. City share of operating revenues, concession sales, etc.)be a part of contract award or be worked out later?
* Field of Dreams, money, and greed. Hope at least, the hot dogs are good!
If the EGCC wants to do another public forum, why don't they? Who is stopping them? Why all the fuss? It's not like the city ever participated in any of the EGCC functions anyways....if they did, it was only for show. Hey Connie, call the other two companies, invite them for a meeting, see what happens. Problem solved.
Fact: In all of our 15 summit meetings, either one or more of the current Mayors and/or Council members have facilitated and/or actively participated.
In fact, the last four meetings we have put on had to be called as special council meetings because more than three council members "wanted" to be involved. We certainly didn't want them to be special meetings because it is a lot more work. The request came from the council members themselves; so we acquiesced. So is that what you call show?
Fact: Once the RPF went out, the companies involved cannot be involved in any meetings, nor can any council members.
Fact: In all of our 15 summit meetings, either one or more of the current Mayors and/or Council members have facilitated and/or actively participated.
In fact, the last four meetings we have put on had to be called as special council meetings because more than three council members "wanted" to be involved. We certainly didn't want them to be special meetings because it is a lot more work. The request came from the council members themselves; so we acquiesced. So is that what you call show?
Fact: Once the RPF went out, the companies involved cannot be involved in any meetings, nor can any council members.
Post a Comment