Laserfiche WebLink
9 <br />Page 2 <br />Steven sarkoz <br />April 15, 1993 <br />firms did not have in -house 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 be amended to provide changes in <br />the selection and retention process as follows. <br />1. Expand the size of the pool of firm's from three general <br />municipal and one soil geotechnical firm to up to six <br />general municipal, one geotechnical, and one environmental <br />firm. <br />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 />mandatory interview and use a more informal process _to <br />personally meet key personnel D <br />Policy objectivesi These suggested policy amendments are <br />consistent with the prig final intent of the consulting engineer <br />selection process. We believe these amendments will enhance the <br />policy by allowing staff more flexibility in selecting firms from <br />an already established pool for the roquirtd 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 seldct <br />these firMS O <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 e <br />-Staff 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 />ror 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 qualified 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 servicese <br />