The following equipment will be considered as trade-in equipment and the quotation price allowed for this equipment must be included by the bidding party in the total system cost. Equipment model numbers are Motorola Communications and Electronics as follows: 5 U71LHT1400-B-Mobile. 1 H21BAC1100-AM-Portable. 1 D31AAN1100-A-Portable. 2 H21DCN1100-A-Portable. Total trade in price: $3030.00. Delivery on complete system 10 weeks after receipt of order. Terms Net 30 days. Contract maintenance price: Complete system $160.00 per month. For further information concerning this inquiry, contact Sheriff Roy Simonson at: (715) 273-5051. The Meeting was called to order at 8:10 P.M. by Chairman, Tom Tyler, Law Enforcement Committee Members, Donald Collett, Neil Werner, Lawrence Weber, Chairman of the Pierce County Board and of Supervisors, Sheriff, Roy H. Simenson were in attendance. . . Earl Clausen of Milltown Electronics, Gary Clausen, William Kenyon, Mr. Tate of Motorola Communications and Electronics, Inc., Kent Carlson and Ed Fina of General Electric were present when the bids were opened. A motion was made by Neil Werner and seconded by Donald Collet that the Motorola bid be accepted. The motion carried. A motion was made by Donald Collet and seconded by Neil Werner that the meeting be adjourned at 11:45 P.M. PIERCE COUNTY, WIS., June 26, 1970. MOTOROLA COMMUNICATIONS & ELECTRONICS INC., Eau Claire, Wis. To whom it may concern: This letter authorizes purchase of a two-way communications system by Pierce County per bid quotation awarded to Motorola C & E, Inc., on June 25, 1970, at the purchase price of $26,584.71. Stipulations concerning equipment ordered and other specifications must be ordered per specifications described in the bid quotations. Pierce County Law Enforcement Committee, Ellsworth, Wis.: I agree to purchase the following listed equipment for the sum of two thousand six hundred thirty three dollars and eighty eight cents ($2,633.88) at the time the equipment is replaced with the new system: 1-U41HHT-1400C to include: U41HHT-1400C.. H21DCN-1100A.. A06624 from car 503 102895 from car 70 D48705 from car 72 D48704 from car 73 A97964 from car 78 107048 from car 77 B47431 from car 504 C21222 Pierce co. portable J03778 from Port 505 Units to be complete with accessory kits, antennas, speakers, batteries, and chargers in the case of portable equipment. Sincerely, EARL A. CLAUSEN. Payment rec'd on June 4th, 1971, by check #7100 in the amount two-thousand, six hundred, thirty-three dollars and eighty-eight cents as full payment for the above equipment. ORIGINAL ORIGINAL FOR RECEIVED OF IP PAYMENT 18 MADE BY CHECK, THIS RECEIPT IS NOT VALID UNTIL CHECK HAS CLEARED ALL BANKS TWENTY SIX HUNDRED THIRTY THREE AND 88/100 2,633.8 DOLI ARS RECEIVED OF COUNTY OF PIERCE STATE OF WISCONSIN ELLSWORTH, WIS. State of Wisconsin No 5086 March 24, 1971 915,951.00 19 PAYMENT 10 HANE DY ORDER, THIS RECEIPT IS NOT VALID URIN, SHOCK HAD CLOADED ALS BARCA, ISTEEN TICUSAND NINF HUNDRED IFTI ONE AND a0/1 DOLLARS Sate Aid' for Police Radio Outlay Grant #? -0-01-08 FOR : TREASURER Mr. KELLY. The original grant application? Mr. INTRIAGO. There were two. Why don't we go to the second one? Mr. KELLY. The actual amount of the award was $20,938.42. Mr. INTRIAGO. That was the Federal share only; wasn't it? Mr. KELLY. That is correct. Mr. INTRIAGO. On what did the subgrantee rely to prepare this grant application? În other words, what price data and equipment requirements specifications did he use ? Mr. KELLY. I believe a proposal prepared for him by the Motorola field representative in that area. I believe that proposal was drawn in accordance with what the Motorola representative's understanding of the guidelines prepared by the communications task force. Mr. INTRIAGO. The grant application contained a trade-in allowance. Mr. KELLY. I believe it does, yes. Mr. INTRIAGO. In what amount? Mr. KELLY. I have $4,500. Mr. INTRIAGO. Were competitive bids taken in Pierce County? Mr. INTRIAGO. Two bids were taken. Would you state what the amount of the first bids were? P.C. CHICAS Mr. KELLY. I think you may have the data I brought today. Mr. INTRIAGO. Is it correct that the first bids were as follows: Motorola bid $32,109, GE bid $25,034. Mr. KELLY. I don't know that. If you have those papers I would like to look at them. (Document handed to witness.) Mr. KELLY. Mr. Intriago, I notice on here there is a note that these were to be supplied by me. I think we should make clear that these documents are kept at the local level and are not records of the State council. These are not the documents I gave you. These are other documents. Is that correct? Mr. INTRIAGO. Are the documents you prepared for Pierce County? Mr. KELLY. That is right. What I am saying in effect is that if you have been to the localities and discussed this matter with them and you have these figures, I will not dispute the figures with you. I will simply state that I cannot take a position of certitude on them until I have seen them myself and reviewed them thoroughly. Mr. INTRIAGO. Very well. Do you know whether in this county the low bid was accepted? Mr. KELLY. I do not know. Mr. INTRIAGO. Do you know what the amounts of the second bids were? Mr. KELLY. No. Mr. INTRIAGO. Do you know what the amount of the contract award was? In other words, what the county paid to the firm whose bid was accepted, that being Motorola. Mr. KELLY. What I have for our records is the amount by which the grant award has been drawn down, and that is $15,951, and the statement from the quarterly report that the equipment has been installed and paid for. If that statement be wholly accurate, then the total expenditure of Federal dollars in that particular grant is $15,951. Mr. INTRIAGO. That would be 60 percent of the contract award. Mr. KELLY. Yes. This is a 1970 grant, so it would be 60 percent of the contract award, I believe. Mr. INTRIAGO. Do you know what amount was paid to the supplier? Mr. KELLY. No, I do not. Mr. INTRIAGO. Have you inspected the installation invoices and compared the model numbers listed there with those in the bid documents? Mr. KELLY. No, I have not. Mr. INTRIAGO. On the bid document, Mr. Kelly, a specific model number for a mobile unit is specified, and it varies from the model number which is listed as having been installed. I was wondering if your council collects such documentation and whether you or anyone in your office inspects equipment to assure compatibility with the equipment which is bid. Mr. KELLY. To date there has been no such inspection. In fact, it was the position of the former executive director that there ought to be no audits other than a very simple audit of hardware equipment. I can state that there is some difference of opinion amongst staff members of the council as to what is the appropriate method of treating hardware grants. |