Venue: Concorde Room, Council Offices, Farnborough
Contact: Chris Todd, Democratic Services on 01252 398825 or e-mail: chris.todd@rushmoor.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC To consider resolving: That, subject to the public interest test, the public be excluded from this meeting during the discussion of the undermentioned item to avoid the disclosure of exempt information within the paragraph of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972 indicated against such item: Item No. Schedule 12A Category Para.
No. 2 3 Information relating to financial or business affairs Minutes: RESOLVED: That, taking into account the public
interest test, the public be excluded from the meeting during the discussion of
the under mentioned item to avoid the disclosure of exempt information within the
paragraph of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972 indicated against
the item: Minute Schedule 12A Category No. Para.
No. 85 3 Information
relating to financial or business affairs |
|
THE FOLLOWING ITEM WAS CONSIDERED |
|
To consider the Head of Community and Environmental Services’ Report No. COMM1704 (copy attached), which seeks approval to award the Council’s contract(s) in respect of waste and recycling collections, street cleansing, grounds maintenance and the cleaning of public toilets. Presented By: Environment and Service Delivery Additional documents:
Minutes: Members were informed of the sensitive nature of the information
contained in the confidential appendix and, subsequently, discussed at the
meeting. It was stressed that the details of the
contractors involved and any financial details could not be disclosed at that
stage, to prevent jeopardising the legally prescribed procurement process. The Cabinet was reminded that bidders had submitted expressions of
interest in respect of three lots: ·
Lot
1 – Waste collection and street cleansing ·
Lot
2 – Grounds maintenance and toilet cleaning ·
Lot
3 – Combination of Lots 1 & 2 Members were informed that some bidders had pulled out of the
process prior to the Competitive Dialogue stage and another had pulled out
afterwards. The bids for the first stage had been received in November, 2015 and had been assessed on quality and price,
with separate evaluation teams considering each element independently. At that
stage, the evaluation had been weighted 60:40 in favour of quality over price.
This had had the effect of identifying and eliminating any poor quality bids at
an early stage. At subsequent stages, the weighting had been equalised. This
process had produced a short list of three bidders for each of the three lots,
including some companies that had been shortlisted for more than one lot. Stage 2 submissions
had been received from the remaining bidders in March,
2016 and, overall, these had been of a better quality than the submissions
received previously. Prices had been keen and had demonstrated potential
savings for the Council. It was felt that this improvement in quality had been brought about, in part, by the use of the
Competitive Dialogue process. At that stage, one further bidder on each lot had been eliminated, leaving two bidders in respect of each
lot. |