Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Council Minutes <br />October 2, 2006 <br /> <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />Councilmember Dietz questioned if City Attorney Peter Beck's firm would be required to <br />bid for services. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />It was the consensus of the Council that he wouldn't. <br /> <br />Ms. Johnson stated the reason the city is considering this RFP is not due to the quality of <br />service but due to staffing and funding issues of the department. <br /> <br />Mayor Klinzing stated the timeline lists a date for selection of a firm and the Council is not <br />sure if it is going to select a firm because it will depend on the proposals received. She stated <br />the timeline does not allow for City Council review of the proposals. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dietz suggested the timeline be flexible. He questioned if the contract term <br />could be left up to the legal firms that would be completing the RFP's. He further <br />questioned if it is advantageous for the city to handle its own fine revenue. <br /> <br />Mr. Chris Johnson stated the city has not had any case backlog since the department was <br />established. He stated the collection rate has increased and officer time in court has been <br />reduced. <br /> <br />Mayor Klinzing stated the prosecuting attorney's office may have to be subsidized by the <br />city similar to other departments in the city. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dietz concurred. <br /> <br />Councilmember Farber stated that very few cities have their own prosecutors. He stated it <br />doesn't make financial sense for Elk River to have its own prosecuting attorney. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Chris Johnson stated communities such as Anoka County have their own prosecuting <br />attorneys and have been able to work out coverage issues and court calendaring but that all <br />the cities in Sherburne County are handled by the county. <br /> <br />MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER FARBER AND SECONDED BY <br />COUNCILMEMBER MOTIN TO AUTHORIZE THE ADVERTISEMENT OF <br />THE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS AND PROPOSALS FOR LEGAL <br />SERVICES WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: <br /> <br />1. THE ANTICIPATED TIMELINE REMAIN FLEXIBLE. <br /> <br />2. THE FIRM COMPLETING THE RFP CAN PROPOSE THE MINIMUM <br />TERM OF THE INITIAL CONTRACT. <br /> <br />MOTION CARRIED 5-0. <br /> <br />Councilmember Motin questioned where the RFP would be distributed. He stated he would <br />like it distributed to the Bar Association. <br /> <br />Ms. Johnson stated it would be on the LMC web site and in the Star News. Ms. Johnson <br />stated it would be distributed to the Bar Association but depending on when the Bar <br />Association publishes such ads, the schedule may need to change. <br /> <br />. <br />