Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Consultant Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resiliency committee votes to forward $75,000 GMB consultant scope to town council
Summary
The Resiliency and Sustainability Committee recommended the draft scope of work from GMB — priced at $75,000 for an estimated 10-month project — be presented to the town council for consideration at the March meeting; committee members said the infrastructure committee and a public hearing may be required before final council approval.
The Resiliency and Sustainability Committee voted to recommend that the town council consider a draft consultant scope of work prepared with input from GMB, a consultant firm, with an estimated contract cost of $75,000 and an anticipated project duration of about 10 months.
Gary, a staff member who reviewed the draft, told the committee that he, Kelly and Liam had discussed the scope with Brent Jett of GMB and that GMB returned only modest, non‑substantive edits. "The cost is still $75,000. We're talking about 10 months," Gary said, summarizing the firm’s proposed timeline and tasks. He added that he had redrafted some wording so the document reflected GMB's approach rather than earlier language from other parties.
Committee members discussed next steps for council consideration and funding. Gary proposed asking the council to refer the item to the town’s infrastructure committee to review the funding request from the infrastructure account; he said the infrastructure committee normally expects a presentation from staff or the contractor before making a recommendation. The committee noted that if the infrastructure committee cannot meet before March 20, the council’s final vote might be deferred to April after a public hearing and infrastructure review.
A motion "as described" — that the committee submit the drafted scope to the town for consideration at the March meeting — was moved, seconded and approved by voice vote. The committee adopted the document and asked Gary to bring it to the town council.
Members also discussed stakeholder engagement included in the scope; one member recommended a clearer first task to identify community stakeholders (government officials, community members and board representatives) and said the draft’s engagement approach appeared consistent with standard practice.
The committee’s direction is procedural: it recommended the scope and asked staff to advance it to the infrastructure committee and council. No contract award or final funding decision was made at the committee meeting; the council must conduct any required public hearing and take the final vote.
Next steps: Gary will present the drafted scope to the infrastructure committee (if scheduled) and then to the town council; a public hearing is required before final council approval, and final contract dates and amounts may change during procurement.
