|
M
<br />Whim, Brown 1k Caldwell
<br />CHARTERED
<br />ATTORNEYS AT LAW
<br />Hon. Richard Bird, Chairman
<br />Board of County Commissioners
<br />1840 25th Street
<br />Vero Beach, Florida 32960
<br />PLEASE REPLY TQ
<br />POST OFFICE BOX 9698
<br />VERO BEACH• FLORIDA 92884
<br />DISTRIBUTION LIST
<br />Commissioners
<br />Administrator
<br />Attorney
<br />Personnel
<br />Public Works
<br />Community Dev. —
<br />Utilities
<br />Finance 77-
<br />Other i,er ifa ,1
<br />Rea Report on Tourism in Indian River County
<br />Dear Commissioner Bird:
<br />kV rI f! 1//1Ar
<br />On September 12, 1991, the Tourist Development Council
<br />approved a performance scope on a tourism study in Indian River
<br />County, and voted to grant the application of Save Our Shores to
<br />award the contract to Regional Research Associates. Every member
<br />of the Tourist Development Council agreed that Regional Research
<br />Associates was absolutely qualified to perform this work, and that
<br />the scope of services submitted by the applicant essentially
<br />included those elements submitted by the county staff. The Council
<br />therefore recommended that the county staff merge the two scopes,
<br />receive input from the Chamber of Commerce, and adopt that product
<br />as the scope of services.
<br />The two issues primarily debated by the Tourist Development
<br />Council involved (1) whether Regional Research Associates could be
<br />awarded the contract without letting the project out to the bidding
<br />process, and (2) whether the resulting study would carry credibil-
<br />ity if Indian River County were not the contracting party.
<br />Regarding the first issue, the Council adopted the position,
<br />after hearing the advice of counsel, that the fund grant could go
<br />to Save Our Shores for the purpose of executing a specific contract
<br />with Regional Research Associates. The contract would control the
<br />study, and the county would control the funds. In this manner, the
<br />RFP process, and its inherent delays and pitfalls, could be
<br />avoided. Also, the study could begin almost immediately, taking
<br />advantage of the 1991-92 tourist season, which most assuredly would
<br />be lost if the -RFP (bidding) process were involved. Finally, this
<br />process would be consistent with the other Tourist Council grants:
<br />they are not required to go to bid,_ either.
<br />On the second issue, the quality and credibility of the study
<br />does not depend on whether Indian River County or the applicant
<br />signs the contract. Regional Research Associates' credentials and
<br />performance standards will be the same, regardless. Certain
<br />members of the Council were concerned that the study itself might
<br />be viewed as less credible in the eyes of the public if the county
<br />were not the contracting party. Certainly that is a concern;
<br />however, history does not support the inference that a study
<br />contracted by the county is held in any higher esteem than one
<br />contracted for by a private entity. The Cubit Engineering study
<br />was not held in any higher esteem merely because the county signed
<br />the contract. A study will stand or fall on its own merits and
<br />quality, regardless of whether the county is the contracting party.
<br />It is submitted that the unique qualifications of Regional
<br />Research Associates warrant approval of the Tourist Development
<br />Council's recommendation. I have enclosed samples of work done by
<br />Regional.Research Associates in the form of the Monthly Report on
<br />Tourism in Palm Beach County for July, 1991, as well as the Annual
<br />Report on Tourism in Palm Beach County, Fiscal Year 1989-1990, for
<br />your review, inspection, and analysis.
<br />Very truly yours,
<br />Bruce Barkett
<br />For the Firm
<br />744 BEACHLAND
<br />` ` (r�,lVERO
<br />BRUCE D. BARKETT
<br />h�`��
<br />BEACH. FLOROIA 332963
<br />DROWN
<br />CALVIN MWILLIAM
<br />SEP 1991 v 407-231 4343
<br />W LOCA WELL
<br />OEOROE a COIAINS..m.•
<br />^ RECEIVED r..� FAX ! 407.234•S213
<br />STEPHMMADLSV W R0LLY
<br />i7RADLEY vet R089WAY
<br />! BOARD COUNTY
<br />/ mmmISSIONERS
<br />OR CCUN EL
<br />46CHAEL A GARAVAOLU
<br />September 19, 1991
<br />•BOARD CERTWMD REAL ESTATE LAW VER
<br />Hon. Richard Bird, Chairman
<br />Board of County Commissioners
<br />1840 25th Street
<br />Vero Beach, Florida 32960
<br />PLEASE REPLY TQ
<br />POST OFFICE BOX 9698
<br />VERO BEACH• FLORIDA 92884
<br />DISTRIBUTION LIST
<br />Commissioners
<br />Administrator
<br />Attorney
<br />Personnel
<br />Public Works
<br />Community Dev. —
<br />Utilities
<br />Finance 77-
<br />Other i,er ifa ,1
<br />Rea Report on Tourism in Indian River County
<br />Dear Commissioner Bird:
<br />kV rI f! 1//1Ar
<br />On September 12, 1991, the Tourist Development Council
<br />approved a performance scope on a tourism study in Indian River
<br />County, and voted to grant the application of Save Our Shores to
<br />award the contract to Regional Research Associates. Every member
<br />of the Tourist Development Council agreed that Regional Research
<br />Associates was absolutely qualified to perform this work, and that
<br />the scope of services submitted by the applicant essentially
<br />included those elements submitted by the county staff. The Council
<br />therefore recommended that the county staff merge the two scopes,
<br />receive input from the Chamber of Commerce, and adopt that product
<br />as the scope of services.
<br />The two issues primarily debated by the Tourist Development
<br />Council involved (1) whether Regional Research Associates could be
<br />awarded the contract without letting the project out to the bidding
<br />process, and (2) whether the resulting study would carry credibil-
<br />ity if Indian River County were not the contracting party.
<br />Regarding the first issue, the Council adopted the position,
<br />after hearing the advice of counsel, that the fund grant could go
<br />to Save Our Shores for the purpose of executing a specific contract
<br />with Regional Research Associates. The contract would control the
<br />study, and the county would control the funds. In this manner, the
<br />RFP process, and its inherent delays and pitfalls, could be
<br />avoided. Also, the study could begin almost immediately, taking
<br />advantage of the 1991-92 tourist season, which most assuredly would
<br />be lost if the -RFP (bidding) process were involved. Finally, this
<br />process would be consistent with the other Tourist Council grants:
<br />they are not required to go to bid,_ either.
<br />On the second issue, the quality and credibility of the study
<br />does not depend on whether Indian River County or the applicant
<br />signs the contract. Regional Research Associates' credentials and
<br />performance standards will be the same, regardless. Certain
<br />members of the Council were concerned that the study itself might
<br />be viewed as less credible in the eyes of the public if the county
<br />were not the contracting party. Certainly that is a concern;
<br />however, history does not support the inference that a study
<br />contracted by the county is held in any higher esteem than one
<br />contracted for by a private entity. The Cubit Engineering study
<br />was not held in any higher esteem merely because the county signed
<br />the contract. A study will stand or fall on its own merits and
<br />quality, regardless of whether the county is the contracting party.
<br />It is submitted that the unique qualifications of Regional
<br />Research Associates warrant approval of the Tourist Development
<br />Council's recommendation. I have enclosed samples of work done by
<br />Regional.Research Associates in the form of the Monthly Report on
<br />Tourism in Palm Beach County for July, 1991, as well as the Annual
<br />Report on Tourism in Palm Beach County, Fiscal Year 1989-1990, for
<br />your review, inspection, and analysis.
<br />Very truly yours,
<br />Bruce Barkett
<br />For the Firm
<br />
|