My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes 03/27/1990
City-of-Martinsville
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1990
>
Minutes 03/27/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2000 10:00:29 PM
Creation date
6/15/1999 8:08:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Meeting Date
3/27/1990
City Council - Category
Minutes
City Council - Type
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
296 <br /> <br />TUESDAY, MARCH:27,:1990 <br /> <br />· interviews, the City entered negotiations with the firm-pickedas~.firs~ .choice <br /> and was~ able to successfully negotiate a price which is considered fair and <br /> reasonable. Following questions by Councilman McClain, Mr. Brown explained <br /> that two RFPs were actually issued for the project, the first of which asked <br /> for cost of service quotations. Therefore, realizing that the RFP based on <br /> price was in error (price exceeded the $15,000 limit as set forth in the-State <br /> Code), the City returned all proposals receivedin response to its first RFP <br /> and issued a second RFP which did not ask for price quotations. Following <br /> another question by Councilman McClain regarding the timeliness of past audits <br /> performed for the City by Ford, Hogg, & Cobbe., Mr. Brown explained. that the <br /> firm has been granted extensionsinthe past but that, in his opinion,-these <br /> extensions were justified because the failure was on the basis of not being <br /> able to obtain necessary information from the State in a timely manner. Coun- <br /> cilman McClain further stated that from theinformation he had received from <br /> other firms, the procedure which was followed in this .case will "dampen the <br /> interestof other firms in ever putting in a proposal for this again." Mr. Bob <br /> St. Lawrence, representing Ford, Hogg, & Cobbe, appeared before Council and, in <br /> response to questions, explained that the prices in the proposed~audit contract <br /> are higher than the previous three-year contract (which totaled $52,500) be- <br /> cause they more accurately reflect what the audits actually cost his firm to <br /> do. He added that the first year of the proposed contract also would result in <br /> a loss for his firm, but that company officials hoped the work could be done <br /> faster and more efficiently during the second and third years of the proposed <br /> contract, dropping costs to the company, while increasing what it is paid. <br /> Councilman McClain questioned City.Manager Brown m~d City Attorney Worthy as to <br /> whether hourly rates for service could be requested in the RFP, to which both <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.