| |
CITY APPOINTS R.V. ANDERSON
TO DO ITS 'RE-EVALUATION'
February 26, 2002: The
results of the City's closed selection process for an evaluator to do
its, estimated, $50,000 re-evaluation, (ordered by the Ontario Municipal
Board (OMB), turns up a former consultant on the Munster
wastewater issue: R.V. Anderson ...for a whopping $162,827.
Environmental Committee Meeting - Feb 26/02
What is the City trying to
buy ...for $162,827?
Definitely
NOT what the OMB asked for:
CLICK HERE
These are the five
essential points in the OMB's instructions to the City of Ottawa:
"1. The City is
advised to consider retaining a qualified person or persons who has or have
not been associated with the project so far to undertake a reevaluation of
the three treatment alternatives."
| |
Observations:
1.The selected firm, R.R.
Anderson, HAS been previously associated with Munster's wastewater
treatment issue, and therefore, does not meet this
first OMB advisory.
2. The City was advised to consider the
top "three treatment alternatives" (Snowfluent, Mechanical Treatment,
and Pipeline). The City is insistent on including all six, from the
previous CRA study, apparently for reasons they would add confusion,
rather than clarify matters.
|
|
"2. The City is
advised to consider instructing the evaluation person/s to critically assess
the Weighted Additive Method and employ it with modifications if necessary
and if found appropriate, and assess the treatment alternatives."
| |
Observations:
The City has elected to duplicate the three
methodologies, used by CRA in the F1-matrix, to yield a pipeline result,
which methodologies were found, by the OMB, to be incapable of producing
the "perfected result". The City's determination to duplicate these
methodologies can only be seen as an attempt to duplicate the pipeline
result. This is NOT adhering to the spirit of the OMB's intent to arrive
at a more perfected evaluation.
|
|
"3. The City is
advised to consider instructing the evaluating person/s to also employ the
standard qualitative assessment of merits and demerits of the alternatives."
| |
Observations:
The OMB was insistent that rationalizations
accompany each evaluation point, similar to what was done by the
Concerned Citizens Group, elsewhere on this website: (To view Evaluation
Matrix rationalizations: CLICK HERE).
It remains to be seen if this will be adhered to.
|
|
"4. The City is
advised to consider instructing the evaluating person/s to seek facts and
opinions from the interested people, the CRA, and the proponents of the
treatment alternatives."
| |
Observations:
So far, the City has ignored all requests by
the OMB Appellants, to be kept informed on developments, and to give
inputs that would insure that the OMB provisions would be followed.
Failure of the City to inform these interested parties, is already
non-compliant with the, above, OMB advisory.
|
|
"5. The City is
advised to consider instructing the evaluating person/s to make a
recommendation based upon both the qualitative and quantitative methods.
| |
Observations:
Remains to be seen.
|
|
|
|