Exhibit CC 02-07-2012 Item No. 25 Online Permit Tracking Software c.c. 2 _ _ -� 'L-�e'^^ 'tit
ZS
Kirsten Squarcia
From: Chris Wuerz[chris @crw.com]
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 11:53 AM
To: Cupertino City Manager's Office; Cily Clerk
Cc: Jennifer Lewis
Subject: Feb 7 2012 Council Agenda Item#26
Attachments: Cupertino letter Feb 6 2012.pdf
Dear Mr. Knapp and Ms. Smith—
Attached please find a letter from CRW Systems, in regards to the City's request to award a contract for Online Permit
Tracking Software at the Feb 7 City Council Meeting.
We respectfully request that this recommendation be re-evaluated, as described in our letter. Please let mw know if
you have any questions or if I can provide any further information.
Sincerely,
Christopher R. Wuerz
President and CEO
CRWYSTEMS
www.crw.com
2036 Corte Del Nogal, Ste 200
Carlsbad, CA 92011
Office: 858-451-3030 x1111
Cell: 858-682-3030
1
C , .. SYSTEMS INNOVATIVE GOVERNMENT TECHNOLOGY
February 6, 2012
Mr. David W. Knapp
City Manager
Ms. Kimberly Smith
City Clerk
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino,CA 95014
RE:Online Permit Tracking Software System(Feb 7,2012 City Council Agenda Item)
Dear Mr. Knapp and Ms.Smith:
This letter is in regards to an Agenda Item scheduled for the February 7,2012 City Council Meeting.This
action item concerns the award of a contract for implementation of an Online Permit Tracking Software
System.We respectfully request that this action be reconsidered and re-evaluated.
As you may know,CRW Systems responded to the City's RFP for this project, and CRW was one of two
finalists that were qualified for this project following two interviews, several phone conversations,and
local reference verifications.Although the selection committee has recommended award to another
firm,we believe that it is important to highlight our rights as a fully-qualified,thoroughly vetted and
equally capable vendor for this project.And most notably, CRW's proposal is significantly lower in both
initial and long-term costs to the City.
Some of our specific concerns are listed below:
1. Lowest Priced Qualified Proposal: We responded to an open RFP issued by the City in August
2011.The City received numerous proposals,and invited several firms for an on-site interview.
Following that initial interview,the City further short-listed the two(2)most qualified firms,and
invited us both for further on-site interviews and discussions.The City then requested and
received additional cost proposal revisions from both finalists.We believe that CRW's proposal
each time was lower in cost than the other finalist firm. In fact,our proposal is nearly$200,000
lower in the first year,and nearly$300,000 in total over 5 years.
2. Experience,Locality and Technology:CRW is headquartered in California,and has exclusively
served the community development interests of local government for more than 20 years. Our
longevity and successful experience in this specific field far exceeds that of the other vendor. For
this project,we have proposed the same software functions,the same interfaces,the same
implementation services, and the same mobile technology as the other vendor.
2036 Corte Del Nogal,Suite 200 Carlsbad,CA 92011 P: (858)451-3030 WWW.CRW.COM
3. Local References: CRW has more than 20 completed implementations in the Bay Area alone,
and some of those public agencies have been clients of ours for more than 15 years. In contrast,
it is our understanding that the other firm has not completed a single implementation in
California (although they have a few projects recently started). As a result,the reference
verification done by the selection committee for this project could only include phone
interviews with distant clients for that vendor, while the City could personally visit any one of
our numerous clients in your local area.
We appreciate being part of this process to select an Online Permit Tracking Software System,and we
recognize that the City must ultimately choose only one final vendor for this project. However,given all
the factors that influence the outcome of an open, public and competitive bid process, it would seem
that common practice—as well as established public policy—typically favors that proposal that would
have the least impact on public budgets when all other factors are equivalent.
We encourage you to re-consider the committee's selection in light of our concerns raised in this letter.
Please let me know if I can answer any further questions or provide any additional information.
Sincerely
Christopher R.Wuerz, P.E.
President,CRW Systems, Inc.
chris@crw.com
Cc: Albert Salvador,CBO
Aarti Shrivastave,CDD