July 10, 2006
Special Meeting
Present: Ed Melanson, Chairman, Harvey Nasuti, Vice Chairman; Ellen Friedman, Member; and Dan Winslow, Member. Absent: Vida Holmes, Member
Ed Melanson called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. at the Town Hall in Room 214.
Mr. Melanson opened the meeting announcing to those in attendance that this meeting was designated for the purpose of interviewing candidates proposing to perform a water rate study for the Town of Norfolk.
The first scheduled candidate to be interviewed was David Russell of Russell Consulting located in Newburyport Massachusetts. Mr. Russell informed the Board that he was the owner and founder of his own consulting business with services that include; management and financial consulting, utility economics and rates; system costs and rate revenues; cost of service studies; evaluation of customer impacts and mitigation measures; utility contracts and negotiations; energy conservation and utilization options; feasibility studies; system appraisals; and related regulatory/institutional studies. He elaborated noting that his client focus included publicly owned utilities, municipalities and related government agencies. Mr. Russell distributed a summary of information to each Board member which outlined the
project approach, project team experience, qualifications and a project schedule. The cost for services would range from $15,000.00 to $25,000.00. Two hundred (200) hours of service would cost $20,000.00.
The second candidate was Patrick Hughes of Camp Dresser & McKee (CDM) of Cambridge Massachusetts and Providence Rhode Island locally. Mr. Hughes began by informing the Board that CDM was a full-service consulting, engineering, construction and operations firm skilled with helping clients meet infrastructure and environmental project needs. He also noted that all aspects of municipal water and wastewater infrastructure have long been a core focus of the company’s business and that CDM’s expertise in this field extends from cost-of-service/rate-study analysis to the functional analysis and overall reengineering of a utility’s business practices. Mr. Hughes presented each Board member with a summary of information which outlined the project approach, project team experience, qualifications
and a project schedule. The cost for services for 285 hours of service would be $29,966.00.
The third candidate was Omer Dumais of Tighe & Bond Consulting Engineers of Westfield Massachusetts. Mr. Dumais introduced himself to the Board as the project director and introduce his associate, Tom LeCourt, as the data collection and analysis project manager. Mr. Dumais began by informing the Board that Tighe & Bond has evolved to specialize in environmental engineering and consulting, focusing on water, wastewater, solid waste and hazardous waste while continuing to provide expert civil engineering services. He elaborated noting that his firm assesses existing water supplies with hydro-geologic and hydrologic studies and rate and cost of service studies. Mr. Dumais then presented each Board member with a summary of information which outlined the project approach, project team experience,
qualifications and a project schedule. The candidates continued with a PowerPoint presentation, which displayed a sample financial spreadsheet. The cost for services would range between $15,000.00 and $17,000.00 for 150 to 200 hours of service.
Mr. Meanson directed questions to each of the candidates which were addressed during each presentation and in the information submitted to each Board member.
Once the initial interviews were completed, the Board continued with a review of each candidate.
After a brief discussion the Board agreed that the finalists would be CDM and Tighe & Bond. Mr. Melanson requested that Mr. Winslow check references for CDM and Ms. Friedman check the references for Tighe & Bond and report back to the Board for the next Special Meeting.
Mr. Melanson also noted that a definitive scope of service would need to be defined at the next meeting.
At 9:50 p.m. being no further business Mr. Melanson made a motion to adjourn the meeting; Ms. Friedman seconded and it was so voted.
| 
