HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-06-04; City Council; Info; Richter Group as Communications Consultantsr/ /
Cir )F CARLSBAD - AGEND/ )ILL
ARtt
MTG b-*^**^
DEPTPOL~
TITLE:
INFORMATIONAL ITEM REGARDING RETAINING RICHTER
GROUP AS COMMUNICATIONS CONSULTANT FOR THE PUBLIC
CflFFTV TFMTFD FflTTI TTVoMrtlY LtlN 1 tK rALiLlll
PFPT HD.^L
CITY ATTY ^
CITY MGR.!2J^L
oI
Ju
ou
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No action required.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
The City has contracted with the Richter Group (July 7, 1984, Resolution NO. 7662)
to provide communications consulting services for the public safety center facility.
Dr. Henry Richter, the primary consultant, completed Phase I and part of Phase II
consisting of a Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) feasibility study, functional
requirements system and dispatch center alternatives when he was named in an
indictment returned by the San Diego County Grand Jury in November 1984. Subsequent
to the indictment work on the contract was suspended and an investigation of the
facts and circumstances surrounding the indictment was conducted. The alternatives
available consisted of:
- continuing with the contract as is;
- terminating the contract and hiring a new consultant; and
- modifying the contract to provide for another consultant to oversee work done
by Dr. Richter.
Predicated on the alternatives available, both the City Manager and Chief of Police
have agreed to go forward with the contract with no changes. Not withstanding the
indictment, Dr. Richter has an outstanding reputation both in terms of his technical
competence and his integrity. He continued to work for several cities after the
indictment including El Segundo, Lodi, Visalia, Ventura, West Covina and Sanger.
The work remaining on the contract consists of finalizing system alternatives and
design recommendations, the specification development (bid process) and implementa-
tion supervision. Quotes to complete the remaining work on Richter's contract
were solicited from other consultants. We obtained quotes from the following sources.
Feiler & Associates $56,000
Warner Group $50,000
Cooper & Lybrand $50,000
The quotes are estimates only and encompass the remaining work to be completed and
the CAD system. Dr. Richter's entire contract totals $24,365. He has agreed that
all the work associated with the anticipated CAD system will be performed as part
of his original contract.
It is imperative that the consultant begin work as soon as possible to assure comple-
tion of the communications center in conjunction with the safety center contruction
schedule. It is anticipated that Dr. Richter will commence work on June 5, 1985.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Dr. Richter's entire contract totals $24,365. To date he has completed Phase I
($4,400) and Phase II ($5,765). If Dr. Richter is retained there would be approxi-
mately $14,200 remaining to complete the communications center and the CAD system.
Should the City opt to obtain services of another consultant the additional cost
would be approximately $35,800 ($50,000 estimated for new consultant minus $14,200,
the remainder of Dr. Richter's contract).
EXHIBITS:
1. Resolution 7662
2. Appraisal of communications consulting work for the City of Carlsbad
3. Letter from Fieler and Associates
7/3/84
POL
TITLE:
;NTRACT FOR COMMUNICATION X>NSULTING
SERVICES FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY FACILIT
DEPT. HD..
CITY ATTY.
CITY MGR..
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution No. 766 3. approving a contract with Richter Group
to provide communications consultant services for the public safety
facility.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
The Richter Group was originally hired by the Wendell Mounce and
Associates architectural firm to provide the necessary communi-
cations expertise in developing the communications center in the
new public safety facility. This contract will continue that
relationship with the new architect, Ruhnau, McGovern, Ruhnau
Associates, in that the same consultant will be involved and
will carry forward the work already completed. The architect
and construction manager have reviewed this contract and concur.
The Consultant will provide services in four phases which include:
1. A computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) feasibility study.
2. System alternatives development and design recommendations
for dispatch center.
3. Specification development (the BID process).
4. Implementation supervision.
In sum, the Consultant will be working with the City, architect
and construction manager from now until completion of the project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
A total of $24,365 will be paid to the Consultant. The City will
pay the Consultant's portion of the total fee upon the completion
of each phase of the project as described in the agreement. The
cost breakdown for each phase is:
Phase 1 - $4,400
Phase 2 - $5,765
Phase 3 - $6,300
Phase 4 - $7,900
The funds will come from the Public Safety Facility Capital
Improvement Project No. 3006, Account No. 30-1810-3006.
EXHIBITS:
Resolution No. *76 6 ^ approving contract with Wendell Mounce
and Associates.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
181!
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 7662
A RESOLUTI . OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF '. CITY
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AGREEMENT
WITH THE RICHTER GROUP FOR COMMUNICATIONS
CONSULTANT SERVICES.
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined the need to have the
services of a communications consultant; and
WHEREAS, the Richter Group has demonstrated competence
necessary for the required services.
WHEREAS, Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.28.150 allows the
purchasing office to waive the requirements for multiple proposals
if only one individual or firm can provide the professional service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Carlsbad as follows:
1. That the above facts are true and correct.
* *
2. That this agreement is approved pursuant to the
provision of Section 3.28.150.
3. That the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to
sign the agreement for communications consultant services which
is attached hereto and made a part hereof, as Exhibit A.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Carlsbad City Council held on the 3rd day of July , 1984,
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Casler, Lewis, Kulchin, Chick and Prescott
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
MARY H./CASLER, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTE
(SEAL)
£L^i
NZ, City Cl^rk
AGREEMENT
This Agreement, made this day of June, 1984, establishes a
contractual relationship between the City of Carlsbad ("City") and the Richter
Group ("Consultant"). Consultant agrees to provide communications consulting
services to City in return for a schedule of fees as set forth in this document.
The services provided in the Statement of Work below were originally the basis of
an agreement with Wendell Mounce and Associates, dated November 22, 1982.
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the City desires to have technical assistance to develop, specify
and supervise the implementation fo communications system and dispatch center for
the new facility; and,
WHEREAS, this assistance should carry the project through to the full acceptance
of the new facility; and,
WHEREAS, the City requires the services of a qualified consulting firm to
provide the required services;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual convenants
and agreements herein contained, it is agreed by and between the City and the
Consultant as follows:
ARTICLE I: GENERAL
The City hereby employs Consultant to perform consulting services set
forth at the .compensation and upon the terms and conditions herein expressed,
and Consultant hereby agrees to perform such services for said compensation and
upon said terms and condtions.
ARTICLE II: OBLIGATIONS, DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF CONSULTANT
Consultant agrees to perform the following statement of work for City:
(Note: Phase 1A was completed under the Wendell Mounce and Associates' Agreement
and is not defined in this contract; it was to gather baseline data on the Carlsbad
Police and Fire Operations.)
PHASE IB — COMPUTER AIDED DISPATCH SYSTEM FEASIBILITY STUDY
- Conduct a feasibility study covering Police and Fire Operations; analyze the
data to establish the cost and operational feasibility of Computer Aided Dispatch
(CAD) system.
- Determine the advantages/disadvantages to the City including dollar savings as
well as increased operational effectiveness.
- If feasible, determine the requirements for a CAD system as related to the new
facility.
- Prepare a general functional system and system recommendation.
- Prepare a report to the City including recommendations.
PHASE 2 — SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN RECOMMENDATION
- Based on the detailed needs statement gathered in Phase 1A, develop several
system and dispatch C2nter alternatives for the new facility.
- Prepare for the City an analysis of the design alternatives identified and the
recommendation, along with justification.
PHASE 3 — SPECIFICATION DEVELOPMENT - THE BID PROCESS
- Prepare a functional specification for the equipment for the dispatch center,
the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and any fixed radio sites involved.
Also prepare specifications for any support systems in the facility such as
~ intercom, closed circuit TV and paging system.
- Integrate the functional specifications with applicable terms and conditions and
develop a request for bid. Assist the City in soliciting vendors for bids,
represent the City at bidders' conference and vendor interaction, evaluate
resulting proposals.
-2-
- Prepare final analysis of bids received and a recommendation to the City as to
vendor selection.
PHASE 4 -- IMPtEMENTATION SUPERVISION
- Assist City in negotiating with chosen vendor.
- Assist in coordination with vendor during equipment ordering and facility
preparation.
- Maintain liaison with vendor to assure suitability of equipment and timeliness
of deliver.
- Perform inspections of installed equipment.
- Perform periodic workmanship inspections.
- Perform acceptance testing of equipment obtained.
- Assist the City in ascertaining that equipment as installed is satisfaction in
operation.
ARTICLE III: WORK PERFORMANCE AND PROGRAM SCHEDULE
The Consultant is authorized to commence the work and to complete the work
on a mutually agreed schedule as determined by the City and the architect.
Phase IB will be conducted in approximately five months time. Phase 2
(may overlap IB to some extent) will require three months. Phase 3 (the bidding
process) will, depending on City requirements, require approximately four months.
Phase 4 (equipment acquisition and implementation) typically runs eight or nine
months and depends on construction schedule.
ARTICLE IV: CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Project Coordinator: The City's Project Coordinator shall be the Chief of
Police or his designee.
B. The City shall provide upon request all information and data which are required
in connection with the study.
C. The City shall provide access to all City facilities as required for the Con-
sultant to perform such work; this request includes installation requirements,
gathering and analysis, equipment survey, inspection and testing* employee
interviews and operational observations.
ARTICLE V: CONSULTANTS . EES AND COMPENSATION
For all consulting work and services pertaining to the project and required
to be furnished by Consultant to City, as set forth in Article II, City agrees to pay
to Consultant, and Consultant agrees to accept and receive as payment in full, the
following fees and compensation which shall be known as the "Fee" to be paid as
hereinafter set forth:
City agrees to pay to Consultant and Consultant agrees to accept as payment
in full a fee of $24,365. The fee shall be paid on the following schedule:
Phase IB $ 4,400
Phase 2 $ 5,765
Phase 3 $ 6,300
Phase 4 $ 7,900
Consultant shall submit an invoice requesting progress payments not to
exceed the above Fee Payment Schedule. The progress payments shall be due and payable
by City to Consultant within thirty (30) days after presentation of invoices to City.
ARTICLE VI: CHANGE IN SCOPE OF PROJECT
In the event it becomes necessary, or the City desires to increase or decrease
the scope of project, the maximum compensation, as set forth in Article V, may be
adjusted to reflect such increases or decreases by mutual agreement between Consultant
and City.
ARTICLE VII: ATTORNEY'S FEES
In the event that any action is brought to enforce the terms of this
Agreement, the party found by the court to be in default agrees to pay reasonable
attorney's fees to the successful party in an amount to be fixed by the Court.
ARTICLE VII: NOTICES
f
Any notices or communications delivered by one party to the other shall
be made as follows.
If to the City:
POLICE CHIEF
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
If to Consultant:
RICHTER GROUP
178 West Longden Avenue
Arcadia, CA 91006
ARTICLE IX: COVENENTS AGAINS CONTINGENT FEES
The Consultant warrants that their firm has not employed or retained any
company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for the Consultant, to
solicit or secure this agreement, and that Consultant has not paid or agreed to
pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission,
percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration contingent upon or
resulting from, the award or making this agreement. For breach or violation of
this warranty, the City shall have the right to annul this agreement without
liability, or in its discretion, to deduct from the agreement price or consideration,
or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage
fee, gift or contingent fee.
ARTICLE X: TERMINATION OF CONTRACT
In the event of the Consultant's failure to prosecute, deliver, or perform
the work as provided for in this contract, the City may terminate this contract
for nonperformance by notifying the Consultant by certified mail of the termination
of the contract. The Consultant, thereupon, has five (5) working days to deliver
said documents owned by the City and all work in progress to the Police Chief. The
Police Chief shall make a determination of fact based upon the documents delivered
to City of the percentage of work which the Consultant has performed which is
usable and of worth to the City in having the contract completed. Based upon that
finding as reported to the City Council, the Council shall determine the final
payment of the contract.
ARTICLE XI;" DISPUTES
If a dispute should arise regarding the performance of work under this
agreement, the following procedure shall be used to resolve any question of fact
or interpretation not otherwise settled by agreement between parties. Such questions
y
if they become identified as a part of a dispute among persons operating under the
provisions of this contract, shall be reduced to writing by the principal of the
Consultant or the Police Chief. A copy of such documented dispute shall be forwarded
to both parties involved along with recommended methods of resolution which would
be of benefit to both parties. The Police Chief or principal receiving the letter
shall reply to the letter along with a recommended method of resolution within
ten (10) days. If the resolution thus obtained is unsatisfactory to the aggrieved
party, a letter outlining the dispute shall be forwarded to the City Council for
their resolution through the Office of the City Manager. The City Council may then
opt to consider the directed solution to the problem. In such cases, the action
of the City Council shall be binding upon the parties involved, although nothing in
this procedure shall prohibit the parties seeking remedies available to them at law.
ARTICLE XII: SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF SERVICES
This agreement may be terminated by either party upon tendering thirty
(30) days written notice to the other party. In the event of such suspension or
termination, upon request of the City, the Consultant shall assemble the work product
and put same in order for proper filing and closing and deliver said product to
City. In the event of termination, the Consultant shall be paid for work performed
to the termination date; however, the total shall not exceed the guaranteed total
maximum. The City shall make the final determination as to the portions of tasks
completed and the compensation to be made.
ARTICLE XIII: STATUS OF THE CONSULTANT
The Consultant shall perform the services provided for herein in Consultant's
own way as an independent contractor and in pursuit of Consultant's Independent
calling, and not as an employee of the City. Consultant shall be under control of
the City only as to the result to be accomplished and the personnel assigned to the
project, but shall consult with the City as provided for in the request for proposal.
ARTICLE XIV: CONFORMITY TO LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
The Consultant shall cause all recommendations and specifications to conform
to all applicable requirements of law: Federal, State and Local. Consultant
shall provide all necessary supporting documents, to be filed with any agencies
whose approval 1s necessary.
ARTICLE XV: OWNERSHIP OF uJCUMENTS
All plans, studies, sketches., drawings, reports and specifications as herein
required are the property of the City, whether the work for which they are made
be executed or not. In the event this contract is terminated, all documents, plans,
specifications, drawings, reprots and studies shall be delivered forthwith to the
City. Consultant shall have the right to make one (1) copy of the plans for his/her
records.
ARTICLE XVI: HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT
The City, it agents, officers and employees shall not be liable for any
claims, liabilities, penalties, fines, or any damage to goods, properties, or effects
of any person whatever, nor for personal injuries or death caused by, or resulting
from, or claimed to have been caused by, or resulting from, any act or omission of
Consultant or Consultant's agents, employees or representatives. Consultant agrees
to defend, indemnify and save free and harmless the City and its authorized agents,
officers, and employees against any of the foregoing liabilities or claims of any
kind and any cost and expense that is incurred by the City on account of any of the
foregoing liabilities, including liabilities or claims by reason of alleged
defects in any plans and specifications, unless the liability or claim is due,"or
arises out of, solely to the City's negligence.
ARTICLE XVII: ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT
The Consultant shall not assign this contract or any part thereof or any
monies due thereunder without the prior written consent of the City.
ARTICLE XVIII: SUBCONTRACTING
The Consultant shall not subcontract any of the work to be performed under
this contract.
ARTICLE XIX; PROHIBITED INTEREST
No official of the City who is authorized in such capacity on behalf of
the City to negotiate, make, accept, or approve, or take part in negotiating, making,
accepting, or approving of any architectural, engineering inspection, construction or
material supply contractor, or any subcontractor in connection with the construction
of the project, shall become directly or indirectly interested personally in this
contract or in~any part thereof. No officer, employee, architect, attorney,
engineer, or inspector of or for the City who is authorized in such capacity and on
behalf of the City to exercise any executive, supervisory, or other similar
functions in connection with the performance of this contract shall beocme directly
or indirectly interested personally in this contract or any part thereof.
ARTICLE XX: VERBAL AGREEMENT OR CONVERSATION
No verbal agreement or conversation with any officer, agent, or employee
of the City, either before, during, or after the execution of this contract, shall
affect or modify any of the terms or obligations herein contained nor such verbal
agreement or conversation entitle the Consultant to any additional payment whatso-
ever under the terms of this contract.
ARTICLE XXI: SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS
Subject to the provisions of Article XVI, Hold Harmless Agreement, all
terms, conditions, and provisions hereof shall insure to and shall bind each of the
parties hereto, and each of their respective heirs, executors, administrators,
successors and assigns.
ARTICLE XXII: EFFECTIVE DATE
This agreement shall be effective on and from the day and year first above
written.
ARTICLE XXIII: CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The consultant shall file a Conflict of Interest Statement with the City
Clerk^|r.iki~City ofc Carlsbad. The Consultant shall report investments or interestsJ^rt^K^ *- ••in real property.
8
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals.
(Consultant's Name)
.va^:^^W~VA tl V\\C LQL
Title
Assistan torney
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Mayor
ATTESTED:
City Clerk
APPRAISAL OF COMMUNICATIONS CONSULTING
WORK FOR THE CITY OF CARLSBAD
PREPARED BY: CAPTAIN ROBERT VALES
LIEUTENANT GEORGE SUTTLE
CARLSBAD POLICE DEPARTMENT
SUBMITTED TO: CHIEF VINCENT D. JIMNO
December 17, 1984
COPY
PROBLEM
During a recent meeting with City Manager Frank Aleshire. Police
Department Staff was asked to conduct an appraisal of Dr. Henrv
Richter. The purpose of the appraisal was determine the fens
and appropriateness of terminating the Richter Group cc-tract
with the City of Carlsbad, or continuing with their services.
This issue came about as a result of the City learning that
Dr. Richter has been indicted by the Grand Jury for conspiracy
and fraud in connection with a communications consulting job he
had done for the County of San Diego.
Since there have been no convictions to date, the matter is
accusatory at this time. Nonetheless, the "Stigma" that attaches
as a result is a politically sensitive issue for the client.
CONCLUSIONS
The appraisal of Dr. Henry Richter was conducted by Captain Robert
Vales and Lieutenant George Suttle. Captain Vales conducted
interviews of past and present clients and Lieutenant Suttle
researched the availability of ether communication specialists
who could perform similar services for the City.
After review of the information developed, both Capt. Vales and
Lt. Suttle reached some conclusions concerning the problem.
These are:
Past and Present clients contacted,unanamousiy
affirmed Dr. Richter's integrity and capabilities.
Dr. Richter's reputation among professionals in both
communciations and law enforcement is extremely high.
Past and present work for the City of Carlsbad has
been exemplary and will withstand scrutiny by any
investigators.
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is the recommendation of Police Department staff that Dr. Richter
be retained to complete the consultation for the -Public Safety
Center. This recommendation is based upon several factors:
These'are:
Staff has developed a working relationship with
Dr. Richter that enhances their ability to develop
this important project.
It is generally recognized that he is one of the "best" •
in the communications business, which provides the
City with the necessary expertise.
j ernmating tne present contract v;ii, siov; t:.c
project while the process of contracting for
another consultant takes place.
The field of communications consultants is narrow,
and finding the firm with the necessary expertise
nay be difficult.
From the standpoint of lob integrity and performance,
there is no reason to change the present c
Police staff has been unable to develop any negative information
concerning Dr. Richter's capabilities or integrityithe indictment
by the Grand Jury notwithstanding. It would therefore appear that
the decision to retain Dr. Richter or terminate him remains a
political question that needs to be addressed by the political
body of the City. The fact that he has been accused of wrong doing
by the Grand Jury in another project does not reflect any wrong
doing to this project. Any work performed by Dr. Richter for the
City of Carlsbad will stand up to scrutiny.
v
l have contacted the following individuals in regard to the list
of references supplied by Dr. Richter. All of the continuing
clients were aware of the indictment and without exception are
supportive of his past or current work in terms of his integrity
in the business. A sampling of comments are listed below: _
CONTINUING CLIENTS
Fred Weiner, Assistant City Manager, £1 Segundo
"Confidence in his abilities, he is continuing to work for us".
Jerry Glenn, Assistant City Manager, Lodi
"Very professional job, no problems. We will continue tc work
with him".
Jack Keating, Director of Communications, West Covina
X
"The City initiated a contract increase, totally above reproach,
highest recommendation".
Lt. Bill West, Vis alia Police Department
"Real pleased with him. He remains on a monthly retainer for any
problems we might have".
Kerry Miller, City Manager, Sanger, Calif.
"We've been happy and impressed with his technical ability.
No reason to doubt his ability. Continuing with him".
Robert Benson, Director, South Bay Communications Authority
"Did a good job. I can't speak too highly of Henry. I still
use him. Indictment makes no difference to me".
CLIENTS FOR WHOM C.A.D. SPECIFICATIONS DONE
-Commander John Gait, San Diego County Sheriff's Department
'"--"- '"Utmost confidence in his work. Did a good job for us, excellenf
-•,-.. •-. . . • ' '.-..-
Deputy Chief Ralph Tribble, Stockton Police Department
"Excellent man, wonderful job, quality work. Can't say anything
bad about the man. I wouldn't recommend him at this time because
of the indictment. The mayor and one councilman are currently
under indictment in Stockton".
OTHER REFERENCES - FAST CLIENTS
Chief Jerry Galvan, Clovis Police Department
"Very happy with his work, upgraded fire frequency, new communication
center".
Chief Don Tutich, San Gabriel Police Department
"Entire new communications system, pleased with end result.
No concerns about the quality of work he did".
Chief Gross, Newport Beach Police Department
"High degree of integrity, great deal of respect for him. I told
him he could use my name for reference".
Jerry Rice, Emergency Services Coordinator, City of Carson
"Worked with him 6 years, because of the indictment the city released
him from the contract against my recommendations. Always gave us
more than the contract called for. I've yet to run into anyone •
who has a bad word to say about the man as a person and a
businessman".
Chief Jon Elder, Monterey Park Police Department
"Absolutely no reason to doubt his integrity, highest regard,
highest recommendation. Everything he did in new police facility
was completely up front. Saved us a lot of money in
negotiations with Motorola, probably in excess of $200,000".
Fire Chief Jerry Gardner, City of Arcadia
"New communications center, satisfactory work, good cooperation
no problems I'm aware of".
I was uanble to immediately contact the other persons on Dr. Richter's
list.; f haVe attache^ a copy to this report.
Robert Vales, Captain
Report of Lieutenant George Suttle
In attempting to determine the availablity of communications
consultants that have both the expertise and credentials to
conduct this type of project, I contacted Mr. Bob Waters of
Motorola, San Diego. Since Motorola is one of the largest
communication equipment vendors in the country, I felt that
they could advise me of communications specialists that could
work on this type of project.
Mr. Waters advised me that Dr. Richter is probably the best in
the field of communications in California. He recommended that
if at all possible we should attempt to retain him.
Mr. Waters gave me the names of three other individuals who
are consultants in the Southern California area who may be
available. They are:
Jerry Campbell, Diversified Communications
Engineering, Calamesa, Ca.
Ken Feiler, Feiler Communications, North
Hollywood, Ca.
Bob Wickert, S.P. Communications, Valley Center
Mr. Waters advised me that Campbell was also involved in the
County communications situation as was Dr. Richter. He also advised
that he had heard that Mr. Feiler had experienced some health
problems that may affect his availability.
I contacted Mr Feiler (previously developed our existing center
as well as Oceanside's) . He advised me that he was available
and that he had had some health problems which since have been
corrected.
I contacted Bob Wickert who advised me that he is not capable of
doing the kind of work we are looking for. He stated that he
is normally subcontracted to consultant to do the installation
and mechanical portion of these projects.
Chief Vince Jimno provided a list of potential specialists from the
Bay area. They are:
Planning and Research Corporation
185 Berry Street Suite 3808
San Francisco, California 94107
(415) 546-1992
Thatcher § Assoc.
564 Market Street Suite 612
San Francisco, Calif. 94104
" (415) 956-6118
Allan Burton Jr.
4266 Dubhe Ct.
Concord, Calif. 94520
(415) 825-2375
Since these consultants are located in the Norther portion of
the State, and may pose a communication and transportation
problem for this project, I did not make contact with them.
With the exception of the Bay area consultants, I was only able
to find Ken Feiler who would be available for this project. I
excluded Campbell because of his similar situation to Dr. Richter.
Mr. Feiler may be available, however, I would be concerned
about his rumored health problems (alledged heart ailment)for
the duration of this project.
I would recommend that if another consultant is considered, that
a complete background history be conducted to ascertain expertise,
and fitness for the job.
At this time, it appears that there are very few available
specialists with the expertise to continue this type of project.
A change to another specialist will set back the timing of this
project to a degree.
cs
George F. Suttle, Lt
I
A
FIELER & ASSOCIATES
PUBLIC SAFETY CONSULTANTS
6319 Coif ax Ave. / North Hollywood. California 91606 / $$) 503-6168
March 19, 1985
Captain George F. Suttle
Carlsbad Police Department
1200 Elm Ave.
Carlsbad, CA S2008-1S89
Dear Captain Suttle:
Thank you for your letter of March 13 requesting confirmation of our
recent telephone conversation concerning your need for consulting
services. Your confidence in us is sincerely appreciated.
It is our understanding that there are two basic tasks wir.ich the City
would like for us to undertake. The first is the development of plans
and specifications for the various electronic communications, control
and security systems which will be part of your new police head-
quarters. The second task will be the development of a Computer-
Assisted Dispatching system. Both of these tasks would be based on
the conceptual design plan developed for your department by your
previous consultant. The services which we would provide would extend
from the specification development stage through_project completion.
Kith reference to costs, we will accomplish the first task described
above for a fee of 10% of the amount of equipment purchased. A fee of
12% would be applicable to the CAD system development. Should the
City prefer a fixed fee arrangement, we will accomplish the work
referenced above for fixed fees of $20,000 and ?36,000 respectively;
We will be pleased to prepare for your review and consideration a
contract describing our services in greater detail. Please advise us
if this would be in order. Also, please call if there are any
additional areas where clarification might be needed.
Very truly yours,
FIELER. «f ASSOCIATES -.
Kenneth E. Fieler
KEF/lt