Laserfiche WebLink
t <br /> P <br /> application was complete. Mr. Costello recommended maintaining a level playing field. Mr. <br /> Tilton stated that the Board would send out a request for further information from some of the <br /> proposers and requested that Weston & Sampson develop an evaluation of all of the member <br /> towns, Mr. Scipione confirmed that a certified check was acceptable according to the RFP. <br /> A member of the public inquired if it was possible that the Board would not award a contract if <br /> there was another benefit to the Upper Cape with another viable option. IIS-. Tilton responded <br /> that the Board of Mangers offered them` evaluations rased on what was submitted in the <br /> proposals. Mr. Tilton added that 'if they were not happy with the proposals, they did not have to <br /> award a contract. <br /> Compliance with Public Records Law <br /> Ms. Laurent reported that the issue was based on the last RFP process and recent changes to the <br /> Public Records law. Mr. Costello stated that, under the recent version of the Public Records <br /> Statute,, each government agency needed to identify a Records Access officer to respond to <br /> public records request. <br /> Mr. Barrett made a motion that Catherine Laurent he designated as the RAO,, Mr. Jack <br /> seconded the motion. All voted unanimously,, <br /> Regarding meeting recordings and the record Retentions regulations, recordings did not need to <br /> be maintained indefinitely. once the recordings had been utilized to appear in an official set of <br /> minutes, the recording was no longer required to be rept. <br /> Ms. Laurent requested clarification regarding received proposals being made public and IIS. <br /> Costello confirmed that the proposals were not a matter of public record until the Board <br /> completed its evaluation and made its determination. <br /> MV , Hunt inquired whether the Board had responded to the Cape Cod omission's Feasibility <br /> Study about rail use. Ms. Laurent confirmed that a letter had been sent, Mr. Barrett requested <br /> that the issue be added to the Next meeting's agenda because there were Bourne residents who <br /> wished to address the Board with a presentation about the Shining Sea Bile Path. Ibis. Laurent <br /> distributed additional letters addressing the issue. Mr. Tilton responded that he was not opposed <br /> but that the Board heard a presentation from the Cape Cod Commission and stated theirp osition <br /> to maintain the rail. IVIS. Laurent stated that she had not yet received a response from Glenn <br /> Cannon regarding the next step of their grail study. Ms. Laurent suggested that the Board move <br /> forward in their process. MV . Barrett stated that a number of people were discussing the issue <br /> and referenced a letter from DOT and plans to install a trach, Mr. Tilton stated that it was not the <br /> decision of the Board of Managers what would happen with the rail and the Board would not <br /> need to be concerned about a possible removal of the rail. M-r. Segura agreed that the DOT letter <br /> seemed to indicate the rail was part of a strategic network for military operations and other <br /> reasons. Interested parties were advised to spear to the Cape Cod Commission or the State. IIS-. <br /> Hunt reported that a more detailed study was being pursued to study the elimination of the rail <br /> and rail with trail. Mr. Hunt also submitted a letter supporting rail with trail. <br /> 1I <br />