My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
O-1988-1599
LaPorte
>
Legislative Records
>
Ordinances - GR1000-05 Ordinances & Resolutions
>
1980's
>
1988
>
O-1988-1599
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2016 3:38:46 PM
Creation date
10/24/2006 4:01:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Legislative Records
Legislative Type
Ordinance
Date
9/12/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
45
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />~. <br /> <br />... <br /> <br />EXHIBIT I <br />e <br /> <br />F~lE <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />THE CITY OF LA PORTE <br /> <br />lUTER-OFFICE NE~mRANDUH <br /> <br />JUNE 28, 1988 <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />ROBERT T. HERRERA, CITY MAUAGER <br />JOHN JOERNS, ASST. CITY MANAGER <br /> <br />SUBJECT: <br /> <br />REVIEW ON INITIAL EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS' <br />FOR AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE <br />CITY OF LA PORTE .. <br /> <br />An Initial Evaluation Committee composed of Joel H. Albrecht, Steve <br />Gillet t and J an ie Ba is was appo inted to make the in it ia 1 rev iew and <br />evaluation of the eight (8) proposals received for the writing of an <br />EconoQic Development Plan. <br /> <br />The Coromi ttee met on June 23, 1988, to agree on the proc edure for <br />evaluating the proposals and adopted the procedure used for the <br />evaluation of the LPAWA Civil Engineering proposals. During the <br />ensuing weekend each of the Committee members independently reviewed <br />the eight (8)" proposals. The Committee then met June 27, 1988 to <br />compile and revie'tl the results of the individual evaluations and to <br />establish weighting factors for the three (3) principal categories <br />used in th~ evaluation. <br /> <br />The results of the combined evaluations are shown on Exhibit "A", "B", <br />"C~ and "0", copies of which are attached. <br /> <br />Exhib it "A" shows the rat ings by ind i v idua1 committee members, the <br />average rating, the agreed weighting and "Final Rating" Cor the <br />category "Personnel Qualifications." <br /> <br />Exhibit "B" and "C" show the same items as Exhibit "A" for the <br />category "Experience of Firm" and category "Hethodology." <br /> <br />Exhib it "0" summa r izes the "F ina1 Rat ings" from the eight (8) firms <br />based on the total of the "Final Ratings". <br /> <br />The ratings by the individuals whj.ch results in the ultimate "Total <br />Ratings" are based on the guidelines shown on Exhibit "E" and titled <br />"Basis of Rating Categories." <br /> <br />The Committee has not had any contact with persons representing any of <br />the firms submitt ing proposals nor have they contacted any of the <br />references, due to the caliber of the firms. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.