Laserfiche WebLink
APR 4 1984 <br />BOOK 56' FAGE616 <br />during the schematic design phase, they also did a court <br />feasibility study with the thought that this study would <br />lead to other business and enhance their position. <br />Administrator Wright recommended that we pay Frizzell <br />Architects $41,500 based on schematic design of the <br />$4 -million jail, plus half of the $13,000 additional costs, <br />with the understanding that there would be no -charge for the <br />schematic plan that was presented at the last meeting. He <br />advised that we are going to be credited on a pro -rated <br />basis for the $40,000 spent on the court feasibility study. <br />Commissioner Wodtke asked if we have a contract with <br />Frizzell re fees for the rest of the project, and <br />Administrator Wright confirmed that the contract sets the <br />fees on a sliding scale based on constructions costs. <br />The remainder of the cost will be paid on the scale of <br />approximately 6.7%. <br />Administrator Wright pointed out that the contract <br />states that the County owns the jail plans; Mr. Pinkerton, <br />however, wants the ability to sell this jail to somebody <br />else. He felt there is nothing to prohibit anyone from <br />coming in and reviewing the plans, but they cannot build <br />from the plan without paying an architect for certification. <br />Frizzell is asking for the ability to market the plan to <br />other counties. Administrator Wright believed that if Mr. <br />Pinkerton found out that he could not sell the jail plan to <br />other counties, then he might not want to do business here. <br />Commissioner Bird suggested joint ownership of the <br />plans whereby the County could give them to someone else and <br />Frizzell could sell them. Commissioner Lyons suggested that <br />Attorney Brandenburg determine the necessary wording so that <br />we are not prevented from giving the plans to another <br />county. <br />68 <br />