Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, July 12, 2011 (Agenda)
Item 24
Item no.
24, ms. Grimes, is to receive briefing from purchasing agent on procurement processes for the civil and family law courthouse project.
>> good afternoon, judge, Commissioners.
>> good afternoon.
>> al jackson is -- has got my powerpoint and hopefully he's listening to me and he'll get that up and, al, I don't know if I need to sit at the computer and manipulate it or if you're going to do that for me.
I wanted to make a presentation this morning.
more for the public and the media, just education.
there's been a lot of news articles about our new criminal courthouse and the process and all of the research that we've been doing.
there's some mispower conceptions that we've preselected folks and so I thought it was important and the executive team that you created thought it was a good idea for me to just make a brief presentation to the Commissioners court on our policies, sort of where we're at and what the process will be for some of those procurements.
just sort of to get you back to where we are, we've been in the planning process for over three years now.
is it up?
okay.
here.
if you will remember, as you know, we purchased our lot down the street back in December and we hired broaddus & associates several years ago to do a master plan for us, which is almost complete.
out of the first process will be probably the courthouse.
so just -- just a background, I think that you can see some of this, you've seen some of this before.
we know our courthouse is obsolete and overcrowded.
we've been working, the court has been working since July to begin a capital improvement process, the master plan is almost complete and we should be seeing the results of that very soon.
several months ago the court appointed an executive committee to plan the overall management of the courthouse project.
what I wanted to do was basically talk about the procurement authority in counties.
we're very different than cities and other jurisdictions in that we have a very centralized procurement structure in counties.
and a larger Texas county the statute says that the purchasing agent will supervise all purchases on competitive bid and ensure that we are complying with all of our procurement laws.
the Travis County Commissioners court approved the policies adopted by the purchasing agent years ago, which we updated several years ago and so we have a very robust procurement process.
I've been the purchasing agent now for 18 years, I know that I don't look that old, but I am.
for 18 years we've done -- we have built parks and bridges and roads and skate board parks and firing ranges, we've done all kind of projects.
we've done huge computer systems, things you really can't touch and so we have a lot of experience in the procurement process.
and every procurement is a little bit different and the rules can be different.
so what we're looking at are a combination of professional services, construction services and some services that we have not used before.
we've never done a p-3, that's where we are during the process now is sort of educating ourselves of what that might be and whether that is the best strategy, the best value for the taxpayers.
what we are -- what this slot is trying to show you is sort of where we're at and what we anticipate going forward.
the Commissioners court approved that I authorize or authorized me to issue a request for information back in April.
it was due June the 30th.
as you know we received 21 responses to that request for information.
the Commissioners court asked that we not review those until we have this advisory team on board.
so we have -- all those responses boxed up in my new office, which we got into this weekend and so as soon as we get this person on board, we'll open those because part of the task of of the firm that we're hiring will be to review those.
so the other solicitation that we have on the street right now is the request for services for the advisory team.
that is due tomorrow at 2:00 p.m.
we do not know how many responses we'll get.
but as soon as we get those, we have a team and I'll talk about that in a minute that will start that process.
if you will recall, the way that we set this up is we're going to, in phase 1, we're going to hire an advisory team.
part of their task is to look at the rfi's, also help us come up with projects and
>> [indiscernible] for the project.
at that point we will come back, make a decision if we want to continue to move forward and then we will do a request for services for the phase 2 of that, which is to hire an owner's representative.
that has not been issued.
I anticipate that will take about three to six months from the time we issue it and get a contract back to you to be awarded.
after take phase and we hire the owners representative and have a lot of work after that, we'll make a determination or you'll make a determination if we want to proceed with issuing a request for qualifications to look at potential private partners.
I anticipate that that process will take three to six months once we get it issued.
to get those firms qualified.
then after we qualify a certain amount of -- of teams, we'll issue to those teams that are already qualified a request for proposals for specific and very detailed proposals on what a p-3 would look like.
I anticipate that that process, putting the r.f.p.
out, negotiating and looking at all of those different options will probably be a three to 12 month process because it will be, that will be the phase that's very detailed that gives you the very nuts and bolts of what any kind of a deal would look like from financing to operations to all of those details.
and then finally, the unknown.
are there any other, any other expertise that the court thinks we might need or -- or hire.
just to go over quickly, I know y'all have got a lot going on, but the evaluation process just for the education of the public, so that they feel confident, is the purchasing agent bylaw supervises the process.
purchasing agent will appoint evaluation committee, the Commissioners court has already appointed an executive team, which makes up most of the evaluation committee.
all of the evaluation members are listed as key contracting people on our key list in the solicitation.
all of the evaluation members will sign a confidentiality acknowledgment form along with the statement saying that they've read the purchasing policies and procedures in the code of ethics.
we prefer no more than five to seven members on a committee.
and of -- of utmost important is all offers are accorded fair and equal treatment.
that's one of the reasons that I'm adamant about all communications flowing through the purchasing office when we get into a procurement process.
that way we control what information goes to individuals.
now with our new electronic system we can send that information out very quickly and everyone gets the same information.
the evaluation committee that we discussed in our executive committee would be that would be six offices involved, purchasing, planning and budget, facilities, transportation, natural resources, the auditor and the county attorney's office.
we've been meeting, as you know, weekly, and we decided that these would be the six offices, each office would get a vote.
and like in the auditor's office, for example, I've got susan, susan is probably going to designate diana warner to be the actual person that reads and scores the sheets.
so these folks will name who in their office will be the actual person that votes.
now, we did talk about -- about several people, perhaps like susan and diana, would look and discuss the -- the proposals.
but only one vote from each office.
so we felt like that was -- that was a good way to do it.
the committee roles, once we get the evaluations, what happens is we'll have -- we'll have a big stack of 'em, hopefully not too many and we will prepare those documents and get with the -- with each individual, have them sign the confidentiality forms and then they will go off and read each individual proposal and score it against our evaluation matrix that we have worked on.
each member will keep their working notes, just some other scores and use if necessary to debrief any contractors who are successful.
then we will get together as a committee and talk about our individual scores, sort of compare and look and see.
sometimes someone scores something that looks out of whack and so we kind of talk about maybe why they scored like that and we kind of discuss it.
then after our discussion, everyone finalizes their score.
they turn those over to the purchasing office.
we calculate those scores to get a ranking.
then the committee meets and discusses a short list.
from that short list, we will conduct interviews with the top firms, usually three is a good number.
but there usually is a natural break in the scoring.
somewhere, either the top two, the top three or top four.
so depending on the numbers that we get of proposals and how those numbers, final scores fall out, there's usually a -- a clear break for the top firms. Then we will -- then we will interview those firms and then after the interviews, we will come to Commissioners court with our recommendations and ask you to allow us to begin negotiations with that top firm.
and then we will -- we will negotiate the contract and then bring all of that back to the Commissioners court.
for approval.
the evaluation member rules is that -- and I mentioned this, each member is listed in the key contacting list.
something that is very important in the media tells us they want this information now, but the law is very specific that all of the information in the proposals is confidential until after contract award.
and we need to honor that because it ensures that -- that it's a fair process.
the committee members are not to have discussions with anyone outside of the evaluation group.
any requests for information regarding the proposals or any issues is reported to purchasing.
no individual members should have discussions with team members on their own.
it should all be under the supervision of and knowledge of the purchasing office of what these discussions are, so we ask members to adhere these rules.
I've already mentioned the code of ethics.
any conflicts of interest need to be reported to the purchasing agent immediately.
and we -- we need to be very conscientious that the decisions that we make must be defendable.
we need to be able to justify while we made a determination one way or the other.
and we need to be able to justify our scores.
the next form you can't really see is an evaluation matrix.
this is just how we -- these evaluation criteria, there's four of them, is set out in the solicitation.
it says we're going to evaluate them on demonstrated expertise of the personnel.
demonstrated expertise of the firm.
their fee proposals and then their proposed approach to doing the work.
so this is an evaluation matrix that we use, that's just a sample.
then the contract, we come to court for approval.
we have certain documents that we have to ensure that are signed off on and then we distribute the contract.
after we receive all of the bonds, insurance that's required of the contractor, we issue a notice to proceed for them to start the work.
the next phase is actually getting into the project and the purchasing agent is the overall contract administrator.
by that I mean we issue the contract and we -- any changes to the contract are -- go through us.
any conflict or disputes are gone through by us.
the department of the project manager is what I call the project's last contract manager.
the project manager is a person responsible to -- to manage the project on a daily basis.
they are responsible for ensuring that the county gets us services that we contracted for and they work with the contractor directly to make sure that they understand our policies and our procedures and make sure that they are complying with the -- with the terms of the condition.
they also certify payment of the contractors invoice, they send that to purchasing.
we review it.
then we send it on to the auditor for their audit and recommendation to you for payment.
any changes in the contract must be approved by written contract modification, approved by the contractor, the project manager and the purchasing agent and/or the Commissioners court.
any change orders over $50,000 has to come back to Commissioners court for approval.
any conflicts or disputes that cannot be worked out between the contractor and their project manager will be forwarded to purchasing, hopefully for resolution.
if we can't resolve the conflict, then we come before Commissioners court.
the one thing that we have not decided and the court has not decided is who is going to be our project manager on this project.
that is something that you all do need to think about because we will need to make a decision fairly soon when we get this awarded.
just in summary, I want the public to feel confident that there was some -- some conversations, I've gotten a lot of phone calls, that we had already made up our minds and I assured everyone that, you know, we have -- we have a very ethical, open, transparent procurement process.
we always have.
we have a very good track record of being fair and open and transparent and we will continue that through this process, although I've never done a p-3 procurement process, it's very similar and I feel very confident that we have the ability to make this happen in an integrity way.
the public always needs to know that the Commissioners court and the elected officials in this county all have high ethical standards and we have a good reputation of doing things right and being fair and not doing any political favors or anything such.
>> thank you, ms. Grimes.
>> [laughter]
>> so that is a big deal.
it's always a perception, sometimes it gets entities in trouble, but I want the public to be assured that I'm going to do everything that I can and you are and we all are going to do what we can to make this a fair and successful project.
so that's just sort of a brief overview of where we're at, where we're going.
we get our proposals in tomorrow, so it will be interesting to see.
we did get 21 rfi's, so there's a lot of people interested.
we will see if -- and determine what's the route we want to go.
so I'll answer any questions?
any questions court members?
did we put in the rfs that the due date was July 13th at 2:00 p.m.?
>> yes, sir.
>> okay.
now, I got an email today that I forwarded to you.
>> okay.
>> somebody interested.
and so I -- I may have told them the close of business today.
that's why I asked that question.
>> late, that's good.
>> now on the -- on the -- so did we indicate in the rfs that evaluation criteria were included in it?
>> yes, sir.
it's in the -- it's in the rfs, the evaluation criteria and how we will evaluate them.
>> okay.
we believe that we are limited to those four factors?
>> limited?
>> right.
>> we can consider other things, but those -- that would come -- I mean, we would have to give everybody the opportunity to present new information.
that's what we listed we would evaluate them on.
>> let's check that language.
I just don't remember it.
if it is, that's fine.
>> categories did seem broad.
so probably we could fit almost anything under them.
>> it just struck me that I hadn't given it a whole lot of thought except -- nothing is wrong with it.
but -- purchasing agent takes recommendation to the court.
so your thinking is that the Commissioners court would receive one firm at that point or a short list of three or so?
>> we talked about going ahead and short listing the firms based on the rankings and then come to you with the top ranked firm and then get your approval to begin negotiations with that firm.
>> I guess hitsally my preference has been to see two or three rather than just one.
>> we talked about that, judge.
>> but I don't know.
we need to decide that and now -- now I don't know that the law gives a purchasing agent that authority, right?
what authority?
>> or the committee.
seems to me that that's the Commissioners court decision.
>> what authority?
>> to bring to the Commissioners court one firm that's recommended.
>> well, you've adopted the policies and procedures and they are somewhat flexible.
what we have said is if the court wishes me to bring the list to court before we begin negotiations with the firms, we can do that.
so there's flexibility in the policy.
if you would like for us to bring the -- say okay here's the top ranked firms that we want to start negotiation with, we can do that.
or we can start the interviews with.
the top three firms to do interviews, we can do that.
we thought because of the time lines and all of the other things that we had going on that had would be just a quicker path, but if the court prefers us to bring the top three firms that we want to interview, we can do that.
it was just a -- just -- we've got so many things going on, we thought this would just streamline the process.
>> I have always preferred to see a shorted list of two to -- a short list of two to three.
now, I don't -- I can't speak for the rest of the court, we're not posted for action today.
but I would rather see two or three myself and not just one.
but if you bring, say, three in there ranked and the reasons for -- for the order is clear -- are clearly set out, I don't know that I would disagree with them.
so I'm not looking for a chance to do additional work.
but I would think that the court would want to provide a bit more input than just sitting here and hearing it.
this has a lot of legal conclusions in it.
especially as to the purchasing agent and the purchasing office.
so my question I guess is if -- have we run these by legal to make sure that they are accurate.
>> well, jim collins and mr. Hilly were in our meetings when we discussed --
>> we circulated this document ahead of time.
we have seen it.
none of it is a surprise that she said this morning, this afternoon.
>> all right.
one thing is can the county Commissioner agree to this -- another thing is purchasing is given this authority, when I hear that legal agrees.
what the Commissioners court can grant, the Commissioners court can take back.
>> you see why I like lawyers
>> [laughter] there's a way for you to get your legal opinion and I get mine, too.
>> all right.
>> there's flexibility in the policy on how you want to handle it.
so that's why I'm making this presentation.
if you all want us to do it a little bit differently, now is the time to tell me what you want me to do.
>> because we can make exceptions to the policy because it's our policy.
if we want to do this procurement differently from the standard way we've done it in the past we can.
>> we've done it -- a lot of times we just bring you a contract.
we do all of this work, you never even see it and we bring you a contract for award.
but on these more high visible ones, we've had y'all even interview.
y'all interviewed for the redistricting.
there's a scale there.
whatever y'all would prefer we can could it that way.
we were trying to streamline the process and just that's what we were trying to do.
>> okay.
let me ask this legal question because I know that it will come up.
this has us withholding all of the proposals until after we enter into a contract with one.
right?
>> yes, sir.
>> my guess is toward the end of the process, reporters will ask for the proposals that we -- that are not any longer live.
so are we holding 100% of them until we release one or all?
>> yes.
>> I'm asking for a legal opinion on this.
>> well, the --
>> [laughter] the fact situation that she's saying yes, legally we can do that as part of the purchasing process because you doppler know who you are going to award to until the very end.
and once that award is made --
>> [pull the microphone forward, thank you]
>> [echoing]
>> this is all confidential.
I'm just trying to communicate to the Commissioners court.
>> [laughter] not necessarily -- anyway, yes, you can maintain that confidentiality process through the entire process until the award is made.
>> we are authorized to or we're required to.
>> you're authorized to.
and I think cyd would give an argument that she needs to maintain that in order to maintain that the fairness of the process.
>> well, I can wait until then, but I can almost guarantee you that issue will surface toward the end of the process.
>> it comes up often, judge, the law says shall remain secret.
so -- so to me shall means shall.
and we will not release the information and it's to our advantage not to.
>> well, I'm glad that I raised that issue earlier, so you have a chance to get with our lawyers.
>> we will chat about the ways to describe that.
>> those are my questions.
>> I'm going to go to law school.
>> anything else?
>> cyd, it's better to practice law without a license.
>> okay.
>> [laughter]
>> you have more fun doing that.
>> no liability.
okay.
anything else on this item?
it's all crystal clear now, ms. Grimes.
thank you.
>> judge.
>> thank you.
>> are we going to run any of these just occurred to me because we wanted to educate folks, are we going to run any of these rules or the briefing that you made on like the website for people to read?
>> well, I could put the powerpoint up.
I mean, all of our policies and procedures are already up there.
but I could post this on the website.
we have a central campus website already, I don't know if that would fit in there.
but I can post it on the purchasing site.
>> I've had several news folks and told them that I would forward them the power point if they wanted it.
>> let me indicate my intention to call up 26 and then 14 and then 27.
okay?
a couple of these ought to go pretty fast.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
