Laserfiche WebLink
Board of Managers <br /> Tipper CapeRegional Transfer Station <br /> Meeting Minutes <br /> March 22, 2017 at To a,m+ <br /> Mashpee Town Hall <br /> Mashpee: Catherine Laurent, Chairman <br /> Falmouth; flay Jack <br /> Sandwich: Paul Tilton <br /> Bourne: Dan Barrett,Phil Goddard alt.) <br /> Otis: Chris Segura <br /> Present: Chairman Catherine Laurent, Ray Jack, Paul Tilton, Chris Segura, Dan Barrett, Phil <br /> Goddard <br /> Also Present: Mke Richard& Mire cipione Weston& Sampson, Pat Costello--UCRTS <br /> Counsel; Carter Hunt lassDeveloprnent; John Pearson—Saltine Warrior; Patti Howard---..--- <br /> ovanta SEM-ASS; Michael Mowbray—Recycling Solations; Jennifer Bayu —Carney <br /> Companies; Alice Hoge, Kathleen Regan, John Carroll—Rail Trail; Brittany Feldott <br /> Enterprise Newspapers <br /> CALL To ORDER <br /> The meeting was called to order by Mr. Tilton, on behalf of Chairman Laurent, at 10-06 a,m, <br /> with a quorum. fir. Tilton chaired the meeting. <br /> APPROVAL of MINUTE <br /> January 4, 2017 <br /> Corrections were made in the last paragraph of page I, changing Mr, Richards to Mr. Richard <br /> and Highly Advantageous to Non-Advantageous. <br /> MOTION: Mr. Jack made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Ms. Laurent <br /> seconded the motion. All voted unanimously, <br /> NEW BUSINESS <br /> Review of Proposals Received in Response to RFP for Reuse of the UCRTS <br /> Mr. Tilton reported that four proposals were received in response to the IFP, Ms. Laurent <br /> introduced Counsel, Pat; Costello. Mr. Costello explained the process that should he undertaken <br /> for the Board to review the proposals, inclining deliberation, questions and solicitation of input <br /> from consultants. Overall, W, Costello stated that the Board should be satisfied that they had a <br /> full understanding of the proposals submitted and the terms and conditions of what was being <br /> proposed. Evaluations would hien be completed using score sheets, ranking the proposals most <br /> to least advantageous. once the most advantageous proposal was identified, the Board would <br /> meet with the proposer to discuss final terms, based on the technical submission as well as the <br /> price proposal. If not fully satisfied with the terms and conditions negotiated of the most <br /> advantageous proposer, the Board would he free to move on to the next most advantageous <br /> proposer to initiate negotiations, until the Board reached a consensus that the proposer most <br /> 1 <br />