Memorandum

City of Lawrence

TO:	Mayor and City Commissioners
FROM:	David L. Corliss,  Interim City Manager
CC:	Debbie Van Saun, Assistant City Manager Bruce Flanders, Steve Clark, Craig Penzler
Date:	April 13, 2006
RE:	Evaluation Process for Library RFP responses

The RFP deadline for the submission of development proposals for the possible expansion of the Lawrence Public Library is May 4, 2006.   Yesterday I met with Bruce Flanders, Steve Clark and Craig Penzler to discuss the evaluation process after receipt of the proposals.   We recommend that an evaluation team be established to assist the Commission in seeing the pros and cons of the various proposals.  The evaluation team is not viewed as a recommending body instead it will identify issues for each proposal and articulate concerns and merits for each proposal. The intent is a better focused discussion when all of the proposals are viewed by the Commission.  The following process is submitted for Commission consideration and direction:

The suggested composition of the Evaluation team is as follows:

• Library Director Bruce Flanders

• 2 Library Board members, John Nalbandian, Vice Chair and Ron Hurst

• 2 New Directions Task Force members, Craig Penzler, Chair and John Gaunt, KU Dean of Architecture

• Library staff as necessary

• City Commissioner(s) , to be determined

• Interim City Manager David Corliss

• City staff as necessary (including historic preservation, general planning, finance, public works, etc.)

The team’s efforts will be facilitated by the city’s Prime Consultant for the Library, Steve Clark.

This team’s role will be to:

• Create a methodology for evaluation of proposals

• Review and refine the criteria to be considered prior to receipt of proposals.  An example of such a list is as follows:

• Library functionality

• Library quality

• Initial financial costs

• Long term financial implications

• Planning considerations

• Qualifications of development team

• Receive presentations of proposals from submitting teams shortly after May 4

• Subsequently determine the pros and cons of each of the proposals

• Report to the City Commission on findings at a study session on June 1 or alternately May 25 or another date determined by the Commission