Laserfiche WebLink
Page 2 <br />Steven Sarkozy <br />April 14, 1993 <br />firms did not have in�hourse expertise and had contracted with <br />outside firms. We were not comfortable with these outside firms <br />and as a result were limited in who we might select for the work. <br />It is suggested that the policy he amended to provide changes in <br />the selection and retention process as follows <br />le Expand the size of the pool of firms from three general <br />municipal and one soil geotechnical firm to up to six <br />general municipal, two geotechnical, and two environmental <br />firms. <br />2. Remove the criteria that a firm automatically be dropped out <br />of the pool after two three -year periods. <br />3. Eliminate the requirement that each firm be part of a <br />mandat intervi <br />. ew and use a more informal_ process to <br />personally meet key personnel,, <br />Policy objectives: These suggested policy amendments are <br />consistent with the original - intent of the consulting engineer <br />selection process. We believe these amendments will enhance the <br />policy by allowing staff more flexibility in selecting fins from <br />an already established pool for the required technical services. <br />Each firm would be required to sign an _engineering services <br />contract with the city and provide an established fee schedule, <br />This will allow more freedom of choice in -looking at a variety of <br />firms but yet using an established process to originally select <br />these firms. <br />Financial implications: This process should have. -no impact on <br />engineering service fees* The new policy may provide more <br />competitive pricing since fee schedules will be required from all <br />firms in the pool. currently, fee schedules were not requested <br />from sub - consultant firms retained by the original three master <br />firms who are in our current pool. <br />.6taf f recommendation: Staff recommends that the council <br />implement the amended process for selecting and retaining <br />consulting engineers at the -next council meeting on April 26, <br />1993* If the council concurs with the suggested changes, we will <br />implement a new process according to the. - attached schedule,, <br />For council information we have also included a proposed <br />consultant experience evaluation form and a list of required <br />engineering services. we propose that this form be sent out to <br />,.each consultant that we have determined to be pre�qual i f ied and a <br />response solicited from them regarding their areas of technical <br />expertise. This information will be used to determine which <br />firms will be evaluated for specific services* <br />