Laserfiche WebLink
;~ 4~ l r~~~ L1 ; UL Q•~us 5na a4yJ IlUA1N1V K~JUUKI:~J ~ 002 <br />' ' . , <br />~ EXHIBIT 3 <br />' Courthouse Square Project <br />Interview Panel Planning Session <br />- - - ~ May 29,1996 <br />' ~ <br />PRESENT: RG Andersen Wyckoff, Transit District; Luis Caraballo, Transit District; Randy Franke, <br />' Marion County; Randy C~artis, Marion County; David Glennie, YMCA; Ann Gavin <br />Sample, City of Salem; Gary Denn.ison, Chamber of Commerce; Dick Ha.yden, City of <br />' Salem; Bob Speclanan, Salem Downtown Association; Ed Martin, Commercial Bank <br />' Randy opened the meeting by explaining that it was important for everyone to meet and determine objectives <br />prior to interviewing the developers. Introductions were made. <br />' Randy stated that, by way of introduction, ceatain inforniational issues relating to t~e cost and budget needed <br />to be relayed to the panel. This is information that only staff has had. It was purposely withheld from the <br />developers because it is constantly changing and they did not want to confuse the developers by having them <br />' try to deal with those changes. <br />The selection criteria is outlined in the RFP that was sent out, on pages 8& 9. This infoanation will be the <br />' primary criteria for selection of the developer in next week's interviews. The other thing that has been <br />determined is that some of the members have a conflict of interest or a perceived conflict of interest Ran.dy <br />stated that he and RG are comfortable with everyone on the panel. Any relationships should be brought to <br />, their attention before the interviews next week. , ~ <br />`~ Randy asked Randy Franke to set the stage from the County's point of view, aad define the importance of <br />' the project. . <br />Randy Franke explained that the original decision that allows the County to be in the position to discuss this <br />' kind of project was made when the couaty acquired the property on the block. The intent was for future <br />development by the County. A similar proposal was discussed in the mid~ighties. Unfortunately, because <br />of a host of reasons, the concept did not pencil ouk He related that a good e~campie of par4oershipping is <br />, the relationship that the County used for the recovery facility in Brooks. Two issues are still there, bottom <br />line cost and the cost to the rate payers. The County wants a project that will meet the needs of the County, <br />, will look good, will not be an embarrassment, and the keep the cost of services down. In terms of services, <br />the Courthouse security is a good example. The Courthouse has ceased to be an easily accessible and an <br />open and friendly place for people to come and do business. The Board of Co m~Q~oners are extremely <br />' fivstrated by that They want a rea.sonably accessible, open friendly environment for citizens to come do <br />their business. There is also the need to consolidate services to one location for the public. 'fhe Board <br />believes this project is exciting and will meet more than just the County's interests. It will-meet TransiYs <br />' interests and provide positive benefits to the downtown area. It may be a tall order. The panel should not <br />a~ecessarily be looking at the low bidder - Thev should be ]ooldng at the back~muad and qualific,ations of <br />the developer, does that team have a vision, does thaf team have the experience and flexibilit~r to come up <br />' with innovative ideas. Randy stated he wished he could be part of that selection process. <br />Ann asked Randy Franke if there doesn't need to be some strategy to mazket a new office building and if <br />~ in the fact public perception needs to be addressed. <br />~ <br />