Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables zoning-ordinance vendor choice, asks staff for apples-to-apples bids
Summary
The council reviewed two zoning-ordinance proposals — WSB ($30,000, longer schedule) and collaborative planner Cindy Nash ($20,000, faster schedule) — and directed staff to obtain clarified, comparable scopes and costs before selecting a consultant.
Nowthen councilors on July 8 discussed two competing bids to update the city’s zoning ordinance and voted to table the decision until staff returns with clarified, directly comparable proposals.
Attorney Rupy and several council members walked through differences between WSB’s proposal (about $30,000 and a 10–12 month schedule) and a collaborative-planning proposal from Cindy Nash (about $20,000 and a six-month first-draft schedule). Councilors and the attorney highlighted differences in deliverables: WSB’s proposal included a community open house and appeared to quote a total not-to-exceed amount, whereas Cindy Nash’s proposal was presented as a fixed fee through a first draft with subsequent work on an hourly basis.
Councilors asked staff to seek an "apples-to-apples" comparison that would list the same meetings (for example, two planning commission meetings and two council meetings), define whether the consultant will deliver a final ordinance or only a first draft, and clarify the number of steering‑committee or public meetings included. Several councilors said they favored Cindy Nash because of her familiarity with the city’s existing ordinance and the lower cost, but they also asked that the collaborative-planning bid be amended to include a clear final-product cost and the option for a public open house if desired.
Because of those scope differences, the council tabled the decision and directed staff to return with clarified proposals and cost comparisons at a future meeting.
