Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br /> <br />Document Introduction <br /> <br />This document was prepared to demonstrate in further detail the currently recommended <br />expenses related to your system. While this document is modular, the system is not. <br />Removing one of the budget figures will have drastic effects on the total system design as <br />all of these components work together schematically for a complete and operational <br />system. Value engineering can be accomplished using this document as a general guide <br />for the cost of each major component. Eliminating any component within this document <br />will require additional design work for a complete and operational system. We have <br />suggested that the quality of the equipment purchased should not be compromised. We <br />reco=end that the City purchase less equipment (eliminating features) rather than <br />sacrificing quality in order to obtain more features <br /> <br />Project History <br /> <br />We began this project with input form the Council Subcommittee and Brian Fritsinger <br />and from this input we created the Electronic Media Technology Upgrade <br />Recommendations & Planning Report dated November 12, 1998. This was based on <br />several meetings and a tour of other facilities in town. The report included a Preliminary <br />Budget Estimate section where the estimated budget was broken into several system <br />sections and totaled $234,550. This is an average cost that cities have spent. <br /> <br />We understood that this estimate was higher than the City would like to see and without <br />negotiating system performance too much (luxury items only) we were able to reduce the <br />cost to the $180,00 ball park. This was accomplished by actually designing the system in <br />order to define all of the individual components that are needed. After this effort, the <br />City gave us new direction to budget between $90,000 and $120,000. At this point, we <br />began cutting system performance quality, and user-friendly items, without cutting <br />features desired in the original design. We arrived at $119,000 and Dickson Stewart then <br />presented to the Council the document explaining the cuts and how we reduced the <br />system. <br /> <br />We understand that the City Council would like for us to start over with the budget and <br />design, adding components from scratch and building the system up from "nothing" <br />adding only the components needed to make a decent quality system that is functional <br />and usable. The following is an assemblage of the individual sub-system costs with brief <br />explanations of each. <br /> <br />Electronic Interiors, Inc <br /> <br />May 5, 1999 <br /> <br />2 <br />DRAFT <br /> <br />OIIE . d <br /> <br />LZOO'ON <br /> <br />S~O[~31NI JINO~lJ3l3 <br /> <br />~\lE9:[1 666l 'OI'Ae~ <br />