CCMIN070996 - Laserfiche WebLink

the City of Livermore on a non-exclusive contract and would be willing to work with the City of Pleasanton on a non-exclusive contract. Ms. Michelotti referred to the cost of the sample public hearing notice and the fact that the Tim¢~ was $10.78 and The Independent was $15.59. Mr. Lowell indicated his paper typeset the ad at 5-114. The Times set its ad at two inches. Ms. Acosta indicated there is no bid for the six column format from The Independent. Mr. Lowell felt that was contained elsewhere in the bid documents. Ms. Acosta indicated staff cannot accept an oral comment about how much it would cost. She has no issue that The Ind_ependent ten column price is lower than the Valley Times' ten column price. This issue came up several years ago, which is why both ten column and six column prices are requested. We have to compare apples to apples.- Mr. Bocian elaborated that the varying column format used by each paper is why the sample ad was included. Mr. Lowell wanted to show the City what The Independent could do for City advertising. He felt he was reaching the majority market and a different market than either of the daily papers. Ms. Acosta indicated that is not an issue; staff could use all papers for wider general notices. Mr. Tarver asked how much was spent on each paper. Ms. Ezidro did not have a breakdown available, but the information could be presented to Council later. Ms. Mohr felt that if there were a non-exclusive contract, these prices would not be valid. Ms. Acosta indicated we currently have a non-exclusive contract, because we use all the papers for the general notices. Ms. Molar asked staff whether the reduced price of display ads given by the Valley Times would compensate for the savings on legal ads in The In{lependent? Mr. Bocian stated there were two issues: based on the costs submittexl for the sample legal notice, the V~ley Times was less even its ten column format per inch price was higher; 07/09/96 -15-