The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About751053.tiff OFFICE OF COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER rwc?ila S. LEE SHEHEE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER PHONE (303) 353-2212 EXT.234 11. COUNTY SERVICES BUILDING ® GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 COLORADO DECEMBER 4, 1974 THE HONORABLE ROBERT N. MILLER DISTRICT ATTORNEY NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT. P.O. Box 1167 GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 DEAR MR. MILLER: THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A FORMAL OPINION FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY ON A MATTER CONCERNING ELECTIONS, SPECIFICALLY THE COUNTY HOME RULE CHARTER ELECTION HELD IN WELD COUNTY IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE NOVEMBER 5, 1974 GENERAL ELECTION. PURSUANT TO 36-28-2 (3) (C) COLORADO REVISED STATUTES 1963, AS AMENDED, WELD COUNTY ELECTED A TWENTY ONE MEMBER CHARTER COMMISSION. THE PROBLEM HAS ARISEN BECAUSE ONE OF THE CANDIDATES, MR. FRANK YAMAGUCHI , WAS ELECTED FROM THE WRONG COMMISSIONER DISTRICT. I FEEL THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH LED TO THIS ERROR WARRANT A FORMAL RULING FROM YOU AS TO MR. YAMAGUCHI ' S ELIGIBILITY TO SERVE ON THE CHARTER COMMISSION. MR. YAMAGUCHI 'S PETITION OF NOMINATION WAS CIRCULATED BY MR. VINCENT ERICKSON. WHEN THE PETITION WAS SUBMITTED TO MY OFFICE BY MR. ERICKSON IT INDICATED THAT MR. YAMAGUCHI WAS TO BE A CANDIDATE FROM COMMISSIONER DISTRICT # 3. THE • DEPUTY IN CHARGE OF THE ELECTION DEPARTMENT VERIFIED THAT MR. YAMAGUCHI LIVED IN DISTRICT 3. PURSUANT TO 36-28-2 (4) THE SECOND NOTICE OF ELECTION WAS PUBLISHED. MR. ERICKSON CALLED THIS OFFICE AND INFORMED US THAT A MISTAKE HAD BEEN MADE IN THE PUBLICATION AND MR. YAMAGUCHI DID NOT RESIDE IN DISTRICT 3, BUT INSTEAD IN DISTRICT 2. THE BOUNDARIES WERE EXPLAINED TO HIM AND HE STILL INSISTED MR. YAMAGUCHI LIVED IN DISTRICT 2. THIS OFFICE WAS UNABLE TO CONTACT MR. YAMAGUCHI PRIOR TO SENDING THE BALLOT TO BE PRINTED. MY DECISION TO PLACE MR. YAMAGUCHI ' S NAME ON THE BALLOT AS A CHARTER COMMISSION CANDIDATE FROM COMMISSIONER DISTRICT # 2 WAS BASED ON THE WORD OF HIS PETITION CIRCULATOR, MR. VINCENT ERICKSON. - • % /053 `4 _ PAGE 2 (CONTINUED) DECEMBER 4, 1974 ON FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1974 IT CAME TO MY ATTENTION THROUGH THE CHAIRWOMAN OF THE WELD COUNTY DEMOCRATIC CENTRAL COMMITTEE THAT MR. YAMAGUCHI HAD SOME CCSERVAT IONS CONCERNING HIS ELIGIBILITY TO SERVE SINCE HE THOUGHT HE MIGHT HAVE BEEN ELECTED FROM THE WRONG COMMISSIONER DISTRICT. I CONTACTED MR. YAMAGUCHI AND FOUND THAT , IN FACT, HE DID LIVE IN COMMISSIONER DISTRICT 3 AND WAS NOT PROPERLY ELECTED ACCORDING TO THE STATUTES. HE WAS NOT SWORN IN WITH THE REST OF THE CANDIDATES. I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR OPINION ON TWO POINTS: (1) UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IS MR. FRANK YAMAGUCHI ELIGIBLE TO SERVE ON THE-CHARTER COMMISSION? (2) IF HE IS NOT ELIGIBLE, HOW SHOULD HIS VACANCY BE FILLED - BY APPOINTMENT FROM THE CHARTER COMMISSION OR BY TAKING THE NAME OF THE NEXT CANDIDATE ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER OF VOTES RECEIVED? THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION AND ATTENTION. I WILL AWAIT YOUR OPINION BEFORE PROCEEDING. SINCERELY, • / ( ---/ S. LEE SHEHEE, JR. WELD COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER SLS/MAF _t, • p SHELTON AND KINKADE ATTORNEYS AT LAW THE LAW BUILDING- loll ELEVENTH AVENUE GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 JAMES H. SHELT0N JOHN W. KINKADE 303-352-8673 December 16, 1974 Mr. Glenn K. Billings County Commissioner, Weld County Greeley Colorado 80631 Dear Glenn: You requested that I supply you with my thoughts as to what should be considered by the Board of County Commissioners in determining whether the County Attorney and his staff should be employed full time. The primary decision which I believe the Commissioners must first make is whether they conclude the position should be filled by an attorney who has practiced a considerable period of time in private practice, and who has a broad background of experience, or whether the position can be filled by an attorney with little, if any, experience in private practice. If you choose to go the route of selecting an attorney with extensive experience in private practice, you will need to consider whether you will be prepared to pay the salary which is required to attract the attorney you need if the attorney is to be a full-time employee as County Attorney. I believe you would have to pay $30, 000 per year for an experienced attorney on a full-time basis. You have to consider that the position you are offering is filled at the pleasure of the Board of County Commissioners. Each change in composition of the political control of the Board will undoubtedly result in selection of a new County Attorney. No experienced attorney will terminate a private practice, and accept a position • of full-time employment as County Attorney, with the risk of termination as the political composition of the Board changes, unless paid $30, 000 or more in annual salary. In fact, you may not be able to get an attorney with extensive experience at a salary of $30, 000 per year. You would also need to consider that the full-time County Attorney would need a full-time secretary and office space. This would add an additional $10, 000 yearly to your cost of a full-time County Attorney. Mr. Glenn K. Billings December 16, 1974 O O Page Two If you choose to employ a full-time County Attorney, you would even so need an assistant, or assistants. These could be employed on a part-time basis, or full-time. I am sure you could employ full-time assistants at salaries of one-half that paid the experienced full-time County Attorney. The assistants could be attorneys with little previous experience in private practice. For, they would be supervised by the County Attorney; and, their principal duties would be to attend meetings with various county agencies when the County Attorney could not attend. With the present number of boards and agencies to advise and represent, one attorney (full-time or part-time) cannot do the job, because the attorney simply cannot be in two places at the same time. If you choose to select a County Attorney with an extensive background in private practice, you will find a greater number of attorneys will consider accepting the position if it is a part-time employment. For, this will enable the County Attorney to maintain a base of private practice to which the attorney can return if the political changes on the Board of County Commissioners cause termination as County Attorney. You must be prepared to pay the experienced part-time County Attorney at a rate of not less than $50 hourly. You will avoid the expense of providing the part-time County Attorney with office space and secretarial expense. However, if the burden of paperwork becomes great, you may find that the part-time County Attorney will need an additional secretary, in which event you would have some expenses relating to secretarial duties. If you conclude that the County Attorney does not need extensive experience in private practice, then you can initially employ a young lawyer right out of law school at a starting salary of $12, 000 yearly. You will need to be prepared to increase that yearly if you are to keep the young lawyer. All the other expenses of office space and secretarial expense will be the same regardless of the salary of the full-time County Attorney. x Frankly, I believe that you need the good judgment, which is acquired solely in the school of hard knocks, which the lawyer with extensive experience can provide you. If you visualize the County Attorney as a technician, then the newly licensed lawyer can fulfill the position as well as the lawyer with broad experience. But, if you visualize the County Attorney as a counselor and source of board experience, as well as technical legal knowledge, then you need to plan a program which will attract an experienced lawyer. It has been my observation that when you turn to full-time employment it always costs more money than when part-time. But, that is a policy and judgment decision which you must make, and you have not asked my opinion as to what is most costly or least costly. I wish to emphasize that in describing the criteria for selecting a County Attorney, I A , Mr. Glenn K. Billing° December 16, 1974 Page Three am not endeavoring to establish a basis upon which I would seek the appointment. I am not interested in the position in any circumstances, either part-time or full-time. I have simply attempted to give you my views of what you should consider in determining whether you should have a full-time or part-time County Attorney. Sincerely, ames H. Shelton JHS:ma s s ROBERT N. MILLER 'V Deputies District Attorney WILLIAM G. ARRIES STANLEY C. PEEK ROBERT E. RAY sc r, rr MICHAEL A. VARALLO WILLIAM PHARO As.c t District Attorney yq WILLIAM L CROSIER �� Investigators ROBERT STAGGS Chief Trial Deputy OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY WALTER FRANCIS Nineteenth Judicial District P.O. Box 1167 Telephone (303)353-6415 Juvenile Investigator Greeley, Colorado 80631 BETH GAY January 16, 1975 Safety Committee County Home Rule Commission Greeley, Colorado 80631 • Dear Sirs : This is a letter in response to your request to set down in writing the recommended standards for all potential deputy sheriffs . 1 . All deputies should be a high school graduate or have GED Certificate . 2 . That before any deputy was put on the street , he must first complete the basic training course at ULETA , ( Colorado Law Enforcement Training Academy ) or a certified training academy , such as the Greeley Police Training Academy. 3 . All potential deputy sheriffs should have an F . B . I . check , military records cneck , previous employers and fellow employee check , previous neighbors check , and checks with any schools or colleges . 4. Each prospective employee should have to undergo a polygraph or lie detector test in the areas of honesy , moral integrity, and character. 5 . Each prospective deputy should be administered a basic personality inventory and I . Q . test. In addition , an oral interview should be conducted . Sate;y Uommitzee January en„ 1975 Page 2 '4ini 6 . The Sheriff' s Department should establish and maintain on a cull -time basis , a training program within the department to instruct on police procedures and recent court decisions . 7 . Before any officer is promoted to the rank of Sgt . and above , he should have to complete an advanced course at CLEFA on management , leadership , administration or related areas . 8. Standardized instructional and testing programs should be established for promotions to, the rank of Sgt. or above . 9 . After six months each deputy must begin course work on an A . A . or similar degree in police science which must be completed after serving four years with the department. lu. The department should allow lateral entry of deputies from other jurisdictions and states who have similar standards . Obviously , if these standards are implemented , salaries will have to be substantially increased . Sincerely, 1415/0//1 obert Miller District Attorney RNM: ns O O ANDERSON, HUNTER,THOMTE & KURTZ CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS (3O3) 352-7497 724 8TH STREET GREELEY,COLORADO RUSSELL G.THOMTE,C.P.A. R. O. BOX 31O 8O631 CHARLES M.KURTI.C.P.A. WILLARD W.HUNTER,JR.,C.P.A. DARWIN P.SCHWARTZ.C.P A. WILLIAM J.SIEBERT.C.P.A. WILLIAM G.CHEEDLE.C.P A. JAMES H.UNE,C.P.A. RICHARD N.SMITH,C.P.A. January 24 , 1975 Mr. J. L. Johnson, Chairman Home Rule Charter Commission P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Mr. Johnson: In accordance with the usual practice of our firm, we are sending you • this letter to confirm the terms of our engagement as discussed in your letter of January 17, 1975 to me and in our subsequent meeting. The purpose of this engagement is to examine such records and docu- ments of the various County funds which are under the direct control of the Board of County Commissioners to satisfy ourselves as to the legal expenses incurred by these funds for the calendar year 1974. The funds included in our examination are the General Fund, Road and Bridge Fund, Intragovernmental Agency Fund, Contingent Fund, Social Services Fund, Old Age Pension Fund, Revenue Sharing Trust Fund, Capital Projects Funds and the Health Depart- ment. Our examination will not include expenditures incurred for legal ser- vices by the Weld County General Hospital or the Weld County Municipal Airport. Our examination of the legal expenses incurred for the above mentioned funds will be as detailed as seems necessary in the circumstances . We will inform you as quickly as possible should any unforeseen conditions arise which would prevent us from making the detailed examination as agreed. The results of • our examination will be presented to you in a letter report. Our fee for the services to be rendered will be computed at our standard hourly rates, and will be billed to the Home Rule Charter Commission at the completion of the engagement. On this basis, we estimate our fee will range from $250 to $350. Home Rule Charter Omission " 1 January 24, 1975 Page 2 It is expressly understood that the results of this engagement are to be used by the Home Rule Charter Commission solely for evaluating the feasibility of recomm- ending a legal council position as part of the County Home Rule structure and for no other purpose whatsoever. Additionally, this engagement is subject to the approval of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado. We appreciate the confidence you have shown be retaining us as your inde- pendent accountants in this matter, and assure you that we will provide our best service to help bring this matter to a successful conclusion. If the above terms are acceptable to you and the services are in accordance with your requirements, please sign and return the enclosed copies of this letter. Very truly yours , ANDERSON, HUNTER, THOMTE & KURTZ William J . Siebert, C.P.A. The services described in the foregoing letter are in accordance with our require- ments , the terms described in the letter are acceptable to us and are hereby agreed to. HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION By Title Date Access to the County records and documents required to complete the en- gagement described above by Anderson, Hunter, Thomte & Kurtz and submission of the requested report to the Home Rule Charter Commission is hereby approved. WELD COUNTY, COLORADO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By Title Date OFFICE OF MANAGEME AND BUDGET Title Date /1 — - 7 S cmh 0 O`,1ti � HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION � PHONE (303) 353-2212 EXT. 237 , P. O. BOX 758 GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 COLORADO • January 30, 1975 Mr. Bill Shade President, Weld County Bar Association P. 0. Box 1955 p Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Mr. Shade: The Weld County Home Rule Charter Commission is studying the feasibility of possible changes in County. structure, whereby the position of County Attorney might be made a full time position. We solicit your thoughts and comments and we will be glad to set a , meeting with you or your representatives to discuss the same. For additional information, contact Mr. Edwin Lesh at 834-2213 or 834-2868. Regards, HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION J. L. "Bud" Johnson Chairman pem 1 CHARTER COMMISSIONERS: J. L."Bud"Johnson,Chairman;Edward L.Dunbar,Vice Chairman; Philip G.Bowles,Secretary Donald E.Altergott—Glen R.Anderson—Walter L.Bain—Charley Baumgartner—Glenn K.Billings—George Brooks—Norman Brown—Chuck Carlson— Nancy C.Clark—Harold Fahrenbruch—Edwin Lesh—John T.Martin—Ruben Schlssler—William H.Southard— I .F � • `r I ~ HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION O PHONE (303) 353-2212 EXT. 237 P. O. BOX 758 GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 COLORADO March 4, 1975 Weld County Bar Association Attn: Mr. William Shade, President P. 0. Box 1955 • Greeley, Colorado 80631 Gentlemen: The Weld County Home Rule Charter Commission is seeking information relating to the position of County Attorney, either as a full time County Attorney, or as a part time County Attorney. The Commission also has some questions regarding salaries and fees. We would appreciate a response from your group, to the following questions, as soon as possible: '• 1. What guidelines can you give us to help determine whether a full time or a part time County Attorney would be best for Weld County? 2. With what County legal matters should the County Attorney deal? What legal matters involving the County should be handled by another attorney? 3. Should the County Attorney be involved in policy decisions? 4. What salary structure and amount is appropriate for a full time County Attorney in Weld County? 5. What fee structure is appropriate for a part time County Attorney in Weld County? CHARTER COMMISSIONERS: J.L."Bud"Johnson,Chairman;Edward L.Dunbar,Vice Chairman; Philip G.Bowles,Secretary Donald E.Altergott—Glen R.Anderson—Walter L.Baln—Charley Baumgartner—Glenn K.Billings—George Brooks—Norman Brown—Chuck Carlson— Nancy C.Clark—Harold Fahrenbruch—Edwin Lesh—John T.Martin—Ruben Schissler—William H.Southard— n Weld County Bar Association Attn: Mr. William Shade, President Page 2 March 4, 1975 6. What minimum salary and what maximum salary would be appropriate for a legal secretary in the County Attorneys office? 7. To what extent should the County Attorney advise and counsel all County offices and officers, other than the County Commissioners? _ We appreciate your cooperation in our effort to write a meaningful and effective County Home Rule Charter. Sincerely yours, WELD COUNTY HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION Edwin Lesh, Chairman of County Services Committee pem A 1 HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION O PHONE (303) 353-2212 EXT. 237 P. O. BOX 758 GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 COLORADO March 6, 1975 General Electric Company Pheonix 16 Building 4612 North 16th Street, Suite 201 Pheonix, Arizona 85016 Attention: Mr. Tom W. Garrold Gentlemen: SUBJECT: Weld County Communications System The Weld County Home Rule Charter Commission is seeking information concerning the recent bid on the Weld County Communications system. Specifically, the fact that only one bid was submitted (by the Motorola Company). We would appreciate hearing from your company as to the reason or reasons why your company elected not to bid on this system. Please advise us of your exact reasons and add any comments you might wish to make regarding this matter. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Regards, WELD COUNTY HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION Ed Lesh, { Chairman, County Services Committee pem CHARTER COMMISSIONERS: J.L."Bud"Johnson,Chairman;Edward L.Dunbar,Vice Chairman; Philip G.Bowles,Secretary Donald E.Altergott—Glen R.Anderson—Walter L.Bain—Charley Baumgartner—Glenn K.Billings—George Brooks—Norman Brown—Chuck Carlson— Nancy C.Clark—Harold Fahrenbruch—Edwin Lesh—John T.Martin— Ruben Schissler—William H.Southard— • E 'S;_R, 10 n�.� 1\ rill HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION O PHONE (303) 353-2212 EXT. 237 P. O. BOX 758 lunge GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 COLORADO March 6, 1975 RCA - Mobile Communications 2785 North Speer Boulevard Suite 208 Denver, Colorado 80211 Attention: Mr. Robert L. Sauajian Gentlemen: SUBJECT: Weld County Communications System The Weld County Home Rule Charter Commission is seeking information concerning the recent bid on the Weld County Communications system. Specifically, the fact that only one bid was submitted (by the Motorola Company). We would appreciate hearing from your company as to the reason or reasons why your company elected not to bid on this system. Please advise us of your exact reasons and add any comments you might wish to make regarding this matter. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Regards, WELD COUNTY HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION Ed Lesh, Chairman, County Services Committee pem • CHARTER COMMISSIONERS: J.L."Bud"Johnson,Chairman;Edward L.Dunbar,Vice Chairman; Philip G.Bowles,Secretary Donald E.Altergott—Glen R.Anderson—Walter L.Bain—Charley Baumgartner—Glenn K.Billings—George Brooks—Norman Brown—Chuck Carlson— Nancy C.Clark—Harold Fahrenbruch—Edwin Lesh—John T.Martin— Ruben Schissler—William H.Southard— bra / RECTOR OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET ` ✓' %."................. --___- BARTON A. BUSS CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER d PHONE (303) 353-2212 EXT. 238 P.O. BOX 758 GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 Nue COLORADO March 14, 1975 Mr. Ed Lesh P. O. Box 56 Ault, CO 80610 Dear Mr. Lesh: In accordance with your request, this is to advise you that the Consultant on the original Specifications for the County Wide Communication System was L. John Cramer. The Consultant for the addendum of the Communication System was David N. Corbin, Professional Engineer, Colorado Registration #7246 from Littleton, Colorado. I trust this was the information you needed, however, should you have further questions, please contact me. Sincerely, T 'Barton Buss Director of Management & Budget BB:ar WELD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Victor Jacobuccijax xx:mcxxecaWox GLENN K. BILLINGS ROY MOSER C March 19, 1975 Weld County Bar Association P. O. Box 1955 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Attention : Mr. William Shade, President Gentlemen: As a Bar Association, we have been asked to answer seven ques- tions proposed to un by the Weld County Home Rule Charter Commission which is seeking information relating to the position of County Attorney. As a result of this request, the Bar Association appointed Mr. Walker _miller, Mr,_. Art Roy, Mr. Robert Houtchens and mylelf to serve as a sub-committee to prepare a report concerning answers to • these questions. Mr. Houtchens felt that he was unable to serve. ". 4s(-" - Question #1 : What guidelines can you give us to help determine whether a full time or part time county attorney would be best for Weld County? Answer: You must consider the hours spent , the case load, and the type of hours and case load requested of the county attorney. Question #2: With what county legal matters should the county attorney deal? Answer: All legal matters concerning the county commissioners, the Planning Commission and employees of the county. The question as to whether or not welfare matters and hospital matters should be considered by the county attorney were discussed and the opinion was that , if the welfare was independent of the county commissioners, it should have its own attorney. The same reasoning was applied to the hospital that if the hospital is independent of the county commis- sioners, then it too should have its own attorney. On the other hand, if both welfare and the hospital are dependent upon the county commissioners, then these two agencies would fall under the jurisdiction of the county attorney for advice. Question #3: Should the county attorney be involved in policy decisions? Answer: Only if such decisions involve legal question. There is a danger in the attorney taking over the board with his own Weld County Bar Association -2- March 19, 1975 policies and this should be understood by the attorney. ' This is a • very delicate area and it is most difficult to divorce one's self from policy making and legal opinions. This depends entirely upon whether or not you have a very strong or a weak board of county commissioners. Question #4: What salary structure and amount is appropriate for a full time county attorney in Weld County? Answer: If the county attorne • - ull time, it was recommended that his fee or sal; r be '•25 00. hat there be an assistant who would be pa ,000 to $15,000, nd a secretary that would be paid $650 pes outb., Question #5: What fee structure is appropriate for a part- time county attorney in Weld County? • Answer: This will depend upon the hourly fee and the type of work, or possibly a fixed fee. However, it was felt that the hourly fee should not be as much as a private attorney charges a private cliet inasmuch as the county commissioners or the county is a cap- `'Cured client. Therefore, the hourly fee should be somewhat less tttrirtrargecl to a private client. Question #6: What minimum salary and what maximum salary would be appropriate for a legal secretary in the county attorney's office? Answer: The opinion ranged om $500 per month to $650 perms month. Question #7: • To what extent shou t e county attorney advise and counsel all county offices and employees other than the 0. county commissioners? c; s • 7 Answer: It was felt that the county attorney should advise ,^ the county commissioners and employees only; that he should not be 65 advising other county officers and officials of the county inasmuchgSha as this is the job of the district attorney. ' This report is submitted as sug gestions ggestions t&- answers to ttsc ques- tions proposed to the Weld County Bar Association. This report is subject to debate by the entire Weld County Bar Association and is open to changes by majority rule or vote for these are not proposed to bo the final answers to the questions submitted to the sub- committee. Respectfully submitted, (DO Sew Thomas A. Richardson An'c911 TAR:ds �? <i r O 6 �r4 HOME RULE CHARTER COMMISSION t z ' � PHONE 13031 353-2212 EXT. 237 o'$ P. O. BOX 758 !;i GREECE V, COLORADO 80631 COLORADO March 20, 1975 Mr. John Eilk Division of Criminal Justice State Services Building 1525 Sherman - Room 328 Denver, Colorado 80213 Dear Mr. Eilk: RE: Telephone Conversation regarding Weld County application for Communications Grant through L.E.A.A. Enclosed please find two very poor copies of news articles from the Greeley Tribune and the letter copy from Barton Buss, Weld County Director of Management and Budget, indicating L. John Cramer's, Motorola Representative, participation in the original bid. After complaints were filed with the County, an independent consultant was hired. However, less than 15 days was allowed on bidders to resubmit bids according to the new addendum. Mrs. Kenneth Cooper who holds the paper on Mr. Elmer Reynolds Motorola Service Station, expressed to the best of her knowledge, that as of March 10, 1975, Mr. Reynolds had not relinquished any ownership or management of his firm to that date. As you may know, Elmer Reynolds was originally appointed interium director of communications for Weld County, prior to the bid letting and has since been appointed Director of Communications. • I wish to reaffirm that I am in no way expressing favor for or against the communications system or brand of equipment purchased. I am however, expressing my concern for restrictive bidding and feel that an investi- gation into this matter is warranted. CHARTER COMMISSIONERS: J.L."Bud"Johnson,Chairman;Edward L.Dunbar,Vice Chairman; Philip G.Bowles,Secretary Donald E.Altergott—Glen R.Anderson—Walter L.Bain—Charley Baumgartner—Glenn K.Billings—George Brooks—Norman Brown—Chuck Carlson— Nanry C.Clerk—Il„nin r,hrr„h,nch—Edwin Lech—.lohn T.Martin— nnhen Schlssler—William H.Southard— •` Mr. John Eilk 2 March 20, 1975 Hopefully by now you have received letters from General Electric and RCA, listing their objections "as complaint bidders." If I may be of further assistance to you, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely yours, HOME. RULE CHARTER COMMISSION CC: , Edwin Lesh, Chairman County Services Committee - Business Address: 113 South Highway 85 Ault, Colorado 80610 834-2868 . © a X37` a `,v DIRECTOR OF MANAGEMENT ANC BUDGET amoigxxxKnxiaxxKxxxxxxxxxxxlaa Y o?1 1+,,;,WF 1 ,:r•rv„,m) BARTON A. BUSS I. II�'h` i3�,,11 CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER TI PI PHONE (303135? ', ' .'IA 1 r1L' ,�� GALELLY,CuLOHAUO 80631 ,• a ts. COLORADO March 14, 1975 Mr. Ed Lesh P. O. Box 56 - , Ault, CO 80610 Dear Mr. Lesh: In accordance with your request, this is to advise you that the Consultant on the original Specifications for the County Wide Communication System was L. John Cramer. The Consultant for the addendum of the Communication System was David N. Corkin, Professional Engineer, Colorado Registration 117246 from Littleton, Colorado. I trust this wis the information you needed, however, should you have further questions, please contact me. Sincerely, _--_ • • Barton Buss , Director of Management & Budget BB:ar • WELD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Victor Jacobuccixxwxxxxnaxoaxnc To b p e0 0 J -, Q y s C q S Z 81 _• e T E x a c s o .c a A - L2 c v -0-3t L A g 'Ei a by o f = N - C -m 3 al t c me, o ,�, g� - u A 'G 'O A C _ N < A 'O L X A a p c G --- L = 2 ` c20 L a co N co u m C o p A < � v ❑off .c - ry a E _ W A 3 o E .-: y m A a h d = °' a o E 0 -3_ , E c a ?• ' 3i • o a v CO a $ L, . 4 3 ma w $ 3 O° ' t _y• p�. & `c `o 'a _ L. S to b >`y L V p ›,co = K b E N V V `ti.xcro a .c c a o L. c E O o - u i° .2 2- 0 &' m 8 •m . $ t EP t at c c u o E m v Fc E G.`q U co A u u5 W 0 .C ' G .Q '0 t - N . o L 4 an Ct 0^ c0 8 `o J V7 Q e. � " g A a. R :> n c a �, y o 0. y .... Ln .C P. A VTi K a O a 9 t ca al a a a - E o o _= c s ^° 0 _ .> a os o m c c .>cd .c -E .CJ m 0c . .n '. F in al p' . T L c A O C a T a .a. C h�pM'� > 0 'O ,N Y'= y v E c t W ,N O t c C u A A '? � Lp. = tatpp 0 a: P �' cC „cu La, ry E U 0. 0.le °i 12 T Y 5 U p.c b '0 '6.a. 7 U O V C 6 E v o , A M I. s. W RI u a c g o A m a 0. o o > E ccp S .,E MC y. mLo CJ 'A AOL! °-b.� c '_ c E J " t b •C O -2 $ m V O c E a m 4 L m y c s o c m v o u " pc ;a NA cc, Lyca co A C V m to o s y yro. A b E02 - L�. = A A m U a a O J .� �.p. i o 5i 1° .x S i4 cM � t c w= a 'po'Q" E +° 2- s o 3 " V 0 A qo L in" N O V 0 N 0 to 2 a O [V s o a ` • C a L O W N w VC A +� tin 0.1 L.0 • a b A 3 0 L] Om W Ay ^ C C • G Ln y m S y y> its, m C c ea L A p A '0 y Live L ,...1„ .. N 1] -c m y Z N V a s N L C 0 O G E' a 0 A .G.S :ry�i.. o ` E S c u o 8+ >-. E c g g' E E ;a 5 _a a ` V u 0o.. o ' an a . h c u O a C7 a y a 5. — o Z 3 �iia��n `T. Yl O c -Du A E o >.'•-• T a L ° o s c _u oL u c C p c= = tuba G` .o o ars_ 3 a V W W -.1 — L1. o y L C. °LL V U co a. L. �° g' tV .` L a N a a Q L A r1 ! A a a — N _C 0 CO�'.®7 T d >:W "� Y A _h L a _a al L EC. co cp b ` c sob E 9 u v C1.J N 3 O u a. J y 3 L L" i B w. o N 0 L E m eC°i 0 c c)ii6i/ ` G9 V m o — `p0 App `° z `o .a. 0 d2i E 0 i° w a b >, to A v� �' y O a ]L_ A A a c a t G L t b s d C A a l° . .din m V 6 N .3 0 .C �1� St 'Ln 9 m �n pp o -pi ≤ = '$ >: c c..> g y w o = .0 3 n c • m a C ~ pp 4J :E '$ ..l bg c .c E T a y 'O C c. a+ 'E ® N y °+ V .--a = .„c ^ c N 'O - o U =,2., j C o `° > y `1° ' °E' ®SCSI ` U' ECU a 0 c < ..+ o 6 'o 0 o E . .C try .. ≥; `u' o w u+ " c' E. - a Q 2 3 . .o n 3 9 S = J a' `u = —: „ b Lm c k. 6, Y �, w . 3 o m re,-0= 0 i o T E or= E od m w u a .0 ON• 9 m y T to co v> 261' . 3 y a u u `° a p t t c 6 .C 'Cd e L p, \ 2 '5 '�( 000 g e. uo o A F a L .g' 3 c m �,' E a 3 _ � A A N C >.L O . Q. . — A 0 0 tiali V = L u C 9 >> U v U A C > C m cc yA• 0. 9 �0 •-• 3 I t c u O b w.. a V 0 E a 0 0 _m o N V S p' 0 �' E u U A U [L T 9 u W .T c m m v`°i .� .Q m co U a 1,1 .m y V c u E • � y C1 L a V C J 5 J g � :9 ° v' 3U � tugs. 3 08'' 0 vg b • s, Q. °' c a A 'h -6 w -= c c m' 3E a =° t5, . 2 o u 8, A 0 s o L o a c E A a t a p :o4 o.= i° E v - esO c .E 0 L N N - o a o 9 3 : >. in C-� Y O L 4 c _ A s L E N ' ' E G r v _. ' x r, m a o • • © a • t"I' W k 1 r ; 1„ br „„; i i - s 1 JiøflJ;i9d 1f1 8 h. '..# f r f*.x1 I v' rM1 'gill Fj'ttp��pJJ'qQ• 11 g }S, f a4,I el dbl. Z i a r 5,f 1 ✓ '� y��tfr.yp , 'i i i�.Y 99 li' ? -!g 1 § rh t ,.,.-•,ar 1j ' ,r;�yE' ® 1t1� y�',tfv•iskiµ. fa Ji .ar . j.'� t, kit`i, rill l ��lf y1$p�� , e r . ii + .msµ! e ,8 �Q$jp14dLpA bi grflIhifl a. EU paapp pp„ '.. q 1, 3�3 >aY� .. .;,r,, N X/4 , -9E/17'; , , e'h V•� + v a -� �?:�-j i e. e,i j a g 8 „ ' $ - 1 By RON TEOLLEFFSON later to be ttlrned to micryva •m$ ' 4 s ' ,.3 -13. 1 -2 '' 2 w . s,r_ ,,,..,1-...--...:':' taint Staff Writer uses, at U est o and on t ake. i si ` ;,+ it ta� e j °, 8 .3 11, •4 Wtld County"eunmlasioners Mountain west of Carter take. ,,,,_ 1,,,„,. 8 a: ' Wednada voted to seek 90 � tr� � l -O � s Y P� •Local 'share upder• the 1::::).;.).E.';',)4. 't'4': tA ' �V {y� w i 'Celt federal funding for a proposed 90-10,federal-lral(, Pugg e i ca Y V » t ^� e �� t; ig � �3'.� 8 " >�.. � p84,000 county-wide law en- grant is placed at 638,100,pith f .asr.01:-...‘,;4;._ . g O "a! Jotcemerit radio net. the 19 cities and towns to cover . .. 668 % . .9 � * x y z+ 11r y { At the urging of Fort Collin• half that and the county the F ri based regional criminal justice" other half. ,:,1,-, ' �2"„.00.1.0 0 474-raft t •,:t?-:. a' plantler Bill Maxon, they also The system.Mold Itnk all two 1 r f .A t . p-e .- directed Weld Finance Officer agencies taking part in Weld, v� >� S :: q ' Bu[po Buss to,begia'seeking would tie into the state;6aiteot 9 f. 8 • hitis?ta. the county system- net end be part of the Cdotado f,. ` ti id- ''Y .r'miff, -t e x ty .• immediately to•beat an ex- Law Enforcement Assistance �',i'a'' ').1.0Z4•411, a ,. 'd `�$ l > ted 30 a 1 ,• pee per cent hike in coats Radio network (CLEAR) wild, 1,. t I,, rd .2 „ to, G . ',. r A o a g#.f. '•' _ next year. emphasis on regional tie-Ins i t di" - ri n The grant application-to the with the Brighton area, �k is AP S b e J 3 115. Enforcement Assistance Cheyenne and parts of Boulder u,! ": c 8.s , Administration (LEAA) is for t d1 ;„ o @: 1 2 *,t County. ' ; i : .4 +,7 m. g ail., •B $, �t i •'6315,586,some 90 per cent of the Maxon later said about I y6 Nazi - taint;j' .S$ - si in iC, �ri 'r system's estimated costs. $49,000 of athe amount would I � _ •` .pp z 3° , proposed, the system will cover salaries for a system t + .. 0 g ..1 ._a �'fh 1 •serve the!sheriff's office and .communications director and 1n t, '-'-'•••'''" • a - law officers In 19 of Weld's Sac,six dispatchers. Follow--up '-rtit, e 3 .41 ?7 3 o l ' g g g y g.+.r cities and towns, Including federal money may be J a s•r, Greeley. •available to cover these for two ..• - -7', $ �p!s 1 >. Communications center for more years in s0 per cent and-1 ^ :;;;4• 47:r., 22�tt'1 *' + • •,the system will be housed at the then 30 r� per dent amounts. I -� Greeley center until the new Weld would become the third {� All 14 !3 ri„ •county offices building Is county in the state to con. , Y '�a $ 'fi completed in 19M. The system sliders,following Bo'4det and,, i e 3t. B � � � Q alaowill ituludebooster bison, Adams counties; F O GENERA9L % ELECTRIC MOBILE RADIO PRODUCTS GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, 4621 NORTH 16TH STREET, PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85016 DEPARTMENT Phones: MOBILE RADIO SALES—(602) 279-5527 OR (602) 264-2064 March 21, 1975 cc : V. Anderson Mr. Ed Lesh Weld County Home Rule Charter Commission P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Mr. Lesh: Thank you for your letter of March 6, 1975. We are pleased to supply the information that you requested concerning the reasons why General Electric elected not to bid on the Weld County Communication System December 20, 1974. So as to fully describe our bidding problems, I would like to cover the events in the situation in chronological order. The County issued a set of specifications, which was received by our Denver office about October 25, 1974, requesting that bids be submitted by December 6, 1974. We subsequently re- viewed the specifications and determined that there was no way we could make a compliant response. A portion of the areas that disqualified us were as follows: 1. UHF repeaters, paragraph 1.2 and UHF control stations, paragraph 1.6 required a transmitter power output of 90 watts. A comparable General Electric station has a power output of 70 watts . 2. UHF mobiles, paragraph 1.8 called for a transmitter power output of 100 watts and of solid state design, paragraph 10. 27. A comparable General Electric mobile unit has 40 watts power output. 3. UHF repeater stations require that only a single ceramic tube be employed in the transmitter power amplifier, paragraph 4.20. A comparable General Electric station employs several standard style tubes in the driver/power amplifier stages. 4. UHF portable equipment, paragraph 1.9 require a transmitter power output of 4 watts. A comparable General Electric unit has 1 watt of transmitter power. ©© GENERAL � ELEtIRIC Mr. Ed Lesh -- March 21, 1975 Page 2 As you can see from these examples, we were excluded from entering a competitive, compliant bid. We were advised on December 1, 1974 by a local consultant that new specifications were to be issued and that the bid would be due December 20, 1974. We advised him then that there was no way we could be responsive on a complex system of this nature within the time frame allotted. At this point I would like to explain some of the detail required to respond to a bid of this complexity. 1. Complete review of the terms, technical specifica- tions and installation requirements. This is all done at our headquarters operation in Lynchburg, Va. On those points that are unclear, communication has to be established and resolved. 2. In the case of a turnkey requirement such as this a visitation to base station and control point sites is required to fully understand requirements and interfacing with existing equipment and facilities. 3. For the installation, a local subcontractor has to be fully acquainted with the job requirements, specifications, establish an installation schedule and prepare his quotation to us. 4. After all of the above is done, our headquarter' s operation has to engineer the job, develop a complete material list, develop pricing, then write a formal proposal in response to the bid request. 5. Typically for systems of this size where hardware, installation and system responsibility are involved, forty-five days are required to make a response. The revised specifications arrived in our Denver office on December 3, 1974 and were forwarded internally. A review of the revised specifications indicated many changes which indeed helped in opening the specifications for competitive bidding, but unfortunately, because of the size of the system some areas were still in need of further clarification. O GENERALC ELECTRIC Mr. Ed Lesh -- March 21, 1975 Page 3 Putting all this together provides the logic for our no bid response. 1. The first set of specifications so precluded our making a compliant, competitive bid that any investment on our part to develop a proposal would be a poor business decision since, obviously, by the specifications our equipment was unacceptable. 2 . The second set of specifications, while greatly improved, still left some unresolved technical problems . However, the major problem was that there was insufficient time to make a proper response because of the work effort required as listed above. We regret that the specifications and bid time allotted did not permit our bidding. Apparently, other radio communica- tion equipment manufacturers found themselves in a similar situation since the County received only a single bid. We feel that bidding of this nature should provide an equal opportunity for more than one bidder. If it does not, then . the bidding process has not been met and the buying govern- ment entity has not reaped the benefits that it is entitled to. General Electric is well recognized in the Communication Equipment marketplace and our equipment is known by most users. To illustrate a few of our activities I am enclosing a copy of "GE Communication Systems News Topics" . We sincerely appreciate your interest as we feel that General Electric does have the products and knowledge to meet the system requirements, such as those required by Weld County. We just need the "Equal Opportunity to Bid" . Ver truly urs, . G rr Territo y Sales Manager TWG:jym j ym Enclosure f , nent enri Commercial System, Mobile Communications Systems 2785 North Speer Boulevard Suite 2081 Denver, Colorado 8021 elephone(303)433-8708 • /\ March 24, 1975 RCA Mr. E. Lesh, Chairman Weld County Home Rule Charter Commission P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Sir: In answer to your letter of March 6, 1975, RE: RCA's No Bid and refusal to bid on the Weld County Communications System. In the beginning the system design and specifications were apparently written by one of our competitors, Motorola Communications and Electronics, Inc. , with- out consulting any other manufacturer or communications engineer resulting in a totally restrictive bid specification that only Motorola Communications and Electronics , Inc. could meet. A No Bid was sent in response and a formal com- plaint was lodged with the LEAA by the RCA Denver Office as it was stated that LEAA funds would be used in the purchase of the communications equipment. The complaint was honored by LEAA as this type of bid does not comply with LEAA guide lines. Weld County was instructed to have the bid rewritten by an outside consultant in order to be eligible for LEAA funds. A consultant was hired but given only four days to complete the task. This was insufficent time for him to do any more than just strip the most obvious restrictive specifications from the bid request. The bid addendum was redistributed for soliciation but with a closing date of only 16 days from receipt of the revised specifications. In answer to that soliciation we had to state that again we would have to refrain from submitting a bid as the specifications were still too restrictive and there was not enough time to do the necessary engineering and pricing to even determine if we could bid competitively. p 4 Weld County Home Rule Charter Commission Greeley, Colorado It is Mr. 0. M. Lehman's opinion who has the responsibility of the Weld County account that the County had pre-determined what they would purchase and that the bid recuest was published only to comply with LEAA in order to obtain government funds. When RCA or any other company in this industry feels that they have a 30% chance or better of getting a bid, we will expend our energy to actively secure this bid. Decisions have to be made of whether to go after the bid or not as there is considerable amount of money in engineering to make sure that the equipment fits the system and the system fits the equipment, plus putting the bid together in a presentable form. In your case either the specifications were so restrictive or the timing was so short that the estimated percent of getting this bid would be down to 5%. Pith such a small chance no one wanted to spend money on such a bad sales risk. There are at least two other companies that are as capable as the company that submitted the only bid in both engineering and equipment to satisfy your county's needs and with a competitive bid a substantial savings to your county would be obtained. Under normal bid conditions RCA Corporation would be more than happy to reply to a bid for your county communications system. Very truly yours, % . Robert L. Savajian Regional Sales Manager Authorized Agent RLS/rlc c.c. : 0. M. Lehman Ar } ©r. 1 ti . April 15, 1975 Glenn Billings , Chairman Weld County rd of Commissioners County Courthouse Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Mr. Billings: Pursuant to our meeting on April 11, 1975 I have reviewed Countycuments Communicat onning to the bid Consolidation. process on The original bid specificationi. came under question because it tended to favor a single vendor, that vendor being Motorola. An independent Communications Engineer, David N. Corbin, was hired by Weld dC could uy to be modtify the specifications so the bidding process competitive. Mr. Corbin took the original bid apeci-- ficationa, made acme modifications, and an "Addendum to County Wide Communications System" was submitted to the potential bidders. After d m,reviewing the toimenal thatid thepecifications and specifications the t addendum, it appears still favored one vendor. There is a statement in the addendum which reads '9.1 through 9.102 will remain as previous specifications. " I have no idea why this portion of the original specification was not modified. Some of the specifications not modified clearly single vendor. To cite a few examples: 9.1 The basic unit of this communications center shall be a desk-typo console which shall be of the low profile type and shall conform to the ions.hallo not wexceed 60s inches,Tand the he awidth ll length 30 inches. To provide the best operating con- ditions, consistent with human engineering standards, the work writing surface in front of the turret which contains the control panels, v C C Chairman Billings April 15, 1975 Page 2 • • shall be 15 inches deep. The control panels shall be sloped not in excess of 15° from the vertical to facilitate operations. All control panels shall be 19 inches wide. The work writing surface shall be 29 3/4 inches above the floor (exclusive of any levelling devices) . Electronic equipment and control panels shall be housed in a turret above the desk top. Included with the turret will be three equipment mounting racks des- cribed elsewhere in these specifications. The turret height shall not exceed 12 inches above the writing surface, shall be approiiinately 15 inches deep, and extend the full length of the desk top. Leg levelling devises shall be included with the console for providing a proper installation. It shall be possible by the use of the levelling devices, to provide a complex of several cabinets and yet maintain a continuously level writing surface. 9.2 The writing surface shall be finished with a high pressure bonded plastic laminate with self-edge design. Legs and trim, including drawer handles, shall be finished in satin chrome. 9.3 The console shall be of general office equipment design and construction. Hatching office furniture such as desks , chairs, filing cabinets , etc. shall be available as standard items from a supplier whose regular business is the manufacture of such equipment. 9.4 All cabinetry shall be of sheet metal construction with side panels and exterior surfaces of at least 20 guage cold rolled steel. The supporting legs shall be 1 inch square of 16 gauge cold rolled steal with a satin chrome finish. 9.5 The finish shall be a vinyl Polyester Baking Enamel, and Haze Beige in color. It shall be abrasion resistant, and shall be primed and applied in such a manner as to withstand a 500 hour salt spray test in accordance with Federal Specification TT-P-141, method 606-1b modified as follows: using 5% salt panels exposed 15 from the vertical on an iron phosphate surface treated steel panel. (Method 606-1 has several choices of specimen angles and salt concentrations. 9.6 An equipment housing shall be provided beneath the turret as an integral part of the desk. This unit will he used for mounting additional equipment as required. The C> C) Chairman Billings April 15, 1975 • Page 3 • housing shall be such that the knee hole of the desk extends at least 1811 inches to the rear from the front edge of the desk, leaving 1111 inches for equipment housing. A hinged panel shall be provided in both the knee hole and rear of the console for access to equip- ment mounted therein. The resultant equipment rack apace will be equivalent to one and one-half desk top turrets. 9.76 The swivel armchairs shall be adjustable and styled to match the console. The chair seat and back shall be upholstered with Burnt Orange Bedford Cord fabric. Plastic am rests shall be attached to the arms. Plastic guards shall be attached to the back of the chair in such a position to prevent wear and tear to the chair back from rubbing on the desk front, walls or other surfaces.. On December 6, 1974, George Johnson authorized a pre-agreement between Weld County and The Division of Criminal Justica concerning the Communications Consolidation. Thin agreement is contingent upon expenditures which are in compliance with federal regulations. Federal Procurement Guidelines require ,the following: Adequate Coanotition. All procurement transactions regardless of whether negotiated or advertised and with regard to dollar value shall be conducted in a manner so as to provide maximum open and free competition. The grantee should be alert to organizational conflicts of interest or noncompetitive practices among contractors which may restrict or eliminate competition or otherwise restrain trade. Contractors that. develop or draft specifications, requirements, statements of work and/or RFPs for a proposed procurement shall be excluded from bidding or submitting a proposal to compete for the award of such procurement. Procurement Procedures. The grantee shall establish procurement procedures which provide for, as a minimum, the following pro- cedural requirements: Cl) Pr000sed Procurement Actions shall be reviewed by grantee officials to avoid purcaaiing unnecessary or duplicative items. Where appropriate, an analysis shall be made of lease and purchase alternatives to determine which would be the most economical and practical procurement. © n • " Chairman Billings April 15, 1975 Page 4 (2) Invitations for Bids or Reque9ts for Pr000sals shall be based upon a clear and accurate description of the technical requirements for the material, product, or service to be procured. Such .description snail not, in competitive procurements, contain features which unduly restrict competition. "Brand name or equal" description may be used as a means to define theperformance or other salient requirements of a procurement, and when so used, the specific features of the named brand which must be met by offerors should be clearly specified. (3) Positive Efforts shall be made by the grantees to utilize small business and minority owned business sources of supplies and services. Such efforts should allow these sources the maximum feasible opportunity to cc•.epete for contracts to be performed utilizing LEAH grant funds. Such positive efforts may include small business and minority set-asides; should include, where feasible, the breakout of work that could be readily handled by small business or minority fir e ; and shall include the aggressive rccruittent of small business and minority firms for . bidders list. (4) The Trips of Procuring Instruments used (i.e. , fixed price contracts, cost reimbursable contracts , purchase orders, incentive contracts, etc. ) , shall be appropriate for the particular procurement and for promoting the best interest of the grant program involved. The "cost-plus-a-porcentage- of-coat" method of contracting shall not be used. (5) Formal Advertising. With adequate purchase description, sealed bids, and public Openings shall be the required method of procurement unless negotiation pursuant to paragraph 49f (6) is necessary to accomolish sound procure- ment. however, procurements of $2, 500 or less need not be so advertised unless otherwise required by State or local law or regulations. ;here such advertised bids are obtained the awards shall be made to the responsible bidder whose bid is responsive to the invitation and is most advantageous to the grantee, price and other factors considered. (Factors such as discounts, transportation costs, taxes, may be considered in determining the lowest bid. ) Invitations for bids shall clearly set forth all requirements which the bidder must fulfill in order for his bid to be evaluated by the grantee. Any or all bids O n Chairman Billings April 15, 1975 Page 5 • may be rejected when it is in the grantee's interest to do so, and such rejections are in accordance with applicable State and local law, rules, and regulations. Procurements May be Negotiated if it is impracticable and unfeasible to use formal advertising. Notwithstanding the existence of circumstances justifying negotiation, — competition shall ba obtained to the maximum extent • practicable. Generally, procurements may be negotiated by the grantee if: (a) The public exigency will not permit the delay incident to advertising; (b) The material or service (including personal or pro- fessional servicoa) to be procured is available from only one percon or fir:; (all contemplated sole source procurements wnere the eg.regate e:c7. zciture is e:.pcctc;i to cxceer: $5, 000 ->;;ral be referral to the grantor rrenc_y for prior approval. ) =reposed formal a:vcrtised er competitive negotiated nroc re- mants for which only one bid or proposal is received is deemed to he , for p'urpo:,cs of this parajrash, :1 sole source procurement. Interagency contracts waere the work is performed by a State governmental ugon.:y, including a State university, doss not require approval. (c) The aggregate amount involved 'aces not exceed 52 ,300; (d) The contract is for personal or professional services , or for any service to be rendered by a university, collage, or other educational institutions; (o) No acceptable bids have been received after formal • advertising; It appears that these guidelines have not been followed. Regarding the procurement problems there are three courses of action you might consider: 1. Cancel and void the resolution authorizing the County to award the bid to Motorola and reopen bids to other vendors not allowing Motorola to submit a bid, or • ' Q a Chairman Billings April 154 1975 • Page 6 • 2. void the RFD and associated responses and draft a new RFB compiled by a qualified individual giving adequate assurances of compliance with federal guidelines , or 3. Assume the total project cost from County funds and not apply for federal funds. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely yours, Joseph C. Murdock Acting Director Division of Criminal Justice J C4/vb cc: Barton Buss Victor Jacobucci Roy Moser Ray Rice Bill Maxon Bud Reynolds Motorola • General Electric RCA Hello