Laserfiche WebLink
BOOK PAGE 84U <br />During the meeting Mr. Jeff Barton stated he was attending the Court Technology III Seminar in San Diego <br />and would make a trip to Stancil's facility to review their alternative. The minutes dated July 27, reflected <br />Keyword's proposed reduction in pricing to $28,000/room or $196,000 for a "mini -central" to record up to <br />8 participants excluding all transcription equipment and tapes. The minutes reflect that at present the Fourth <br />District of Appeals does not accept audio/video tapes, only transcriptions and a decision would be made after <br />Mr. Barton's return. The minutes also state the County Commission would provide the funding regardless <br />of the system agreed upon. PCS later received a letter from Mr. Dean conflicting the funding for the <br />recording needs but not the systems to be chosen. It was also made clear a bid for these needs would be <br />required before this dollar amount could be expended. <br />Upon Mr. Barton's return, Mr. Barton asked PCS to look into a business entity, Dolman Technologies. PCS <br />again complied and continued our consulting that was outside the scope of our contract. On August 5, PCS <br />wrote Mr. Dean to discuss several issues including a brief mention of our initial contact with Dolman <br />Technologies and reiterating any addition to our contract would be at 10% over outside costs, plus $35/hr <br />for PCS labor and $50/hr for consulting. PCS received a sales brochure from Ms. Deborah Dolman and <br />providing a letter to Mr. Dean on August 16, 1993 recapping 5 alternatives to solve the unfunded recording <br />needs of the new courthouse. PCS's first mention of Dolman systems was a unit COST of $60,000/room. <br />PCS received a letter from Mr. Barton dated Aug. 16, 1993 and was asked by Mr. Dean to attend a <br />demonstration of the Dolman system. Again PCS provided these services without billing to assist the County <br />in an unbiased review of the technology presented. At this meeting PCS witnessed a presentation of a <br />Dolman court reporting system. PCS asked several questions of the Dolman "team" and at the request of <br />the County provided information concerning the facility to Dolman and requested a quotation on the Dolman <br />systems. At this meeting, it was made clear the 4th and 5th VCR's could be added for the Attorney's benefit <br />and the Court Logging system was an extra to the AN system. <br />On Sept. 20, PCS forwarded to Mr. Barton and copied Mr. Dean a Sept. 6 letter penned by Dolman <br />Technologies referencing Dolman's reduction from $60,000/room to $52,895/room and detailing the items <br />to be included which were designed by Dolman after having performed the onsite demonstration. <br />PCS's letter also reiterated our fee of 10% for any addition to our contract desired by the County, the <br />estimated 5% fee to modify the cabling to accommodate the Dolman system and all of the "ars gratis" <br />services provided by PCS to review the various options the County had reviewed to solve the "missing" audio <br />recording needs in the courthouse. <br />After Mr. Dean's review of this letter, a meeting occurred in Mr. Dean's office to place a firm limit of <br />$250,000 on the system. PCS returned to our office and was very frank with Deborah Dolman in that the <br />County wanted the system designed and quoted by Dolman in the Sept. 6 letter; however the price would <br />have to allow for PCS's installation costs, PCS's 10% markup and still be under the $250,000 funding limit. <br />On October 6, 1993, Ms. Dolman revised her pricing structure but not her de igni to reflect "a sole -source, <br />non -bid price through PCS's contract". This document was sent under cover of PCS dated October 6 to Mr. <br />Barton and copied to Mr. Dean reflecting a price of $245,125 for the only system ever discussed for Indian <br />River County by Dolman and only forwarded by PCS to the County *for their review. Along with the only <br />option from Dolman's letter chosen, two transcription units for $4,620, totaling $249,745.00. <br />On Nov 18,1993, PCS and the County amended PCS' contract to increase the funding amount to provide for <br />increases in the fiber count, underground cable placement, a second CCTV station at the Jail, a. matrix switch <br />for the Courthouse -and assistive listening devices for the Courthouse. PCS had continuously been available <br />for any concerns or comments surrounding the A/V recording system BUT WAS NEVER APPROACHED <br />BY ANYONE FROM INDIAN RIVER COUNTY stating the DOLMAN PROPOSAL as being insufficient. <br />PCS was told the County would be forthcoming with a change to our contract for the A/V recording system <br />but the funding issue had to be worked out since it was never allotted for in the construction budget. On <br />February 9, 1994, FOUR months after our last communication on the issue we received a phone call from <br />Mr. Dean's secretary stating they needed "some description" of what the Dolman system was about in <br />order to prepare an agenda item in time for the board meeting agenda cutoff. PCS suggested the letters that <br />had been sent previously; however these letters did not "describe" the system ALTHOUGH THE DOLMAN <br />NOVE MER 22, 1994 24 <br />