Travis County Commissioners Court
July 15, 2008
Item 12
Number 12 is to authorize the purchasing agent to commence negotiations with the most qualified firm for real estate brokerage services for the county central campus.
>> good morning, judge, Commissioners. Travis County purchasing agent. I just want to give a brief background on this project. We have been talking for overa year now about redeveloping the downtown area and the campus and the discussion of hiring a broker came up and of course discussed it several times over time. Back in '05, we did a pool of sending out an rfq to hire a firm, a pool of brokers. In April of '08 this year, we came to Commissioner's court and made recommendation that we send more specific questions regarding this project to these five firms in our pool that had been competitively precured previously. The court approved us to do that. At that time, I submitted to you two sets of work for you all to look at. The action from the court that day, April 1, was you directed staff to go ahead and work together. Myself, miss poppy and miss strict land who is here, to finalize that scope and go forward with additional questions. We did that. I also felt that we needed, because this is such an important project that we need a little bit move direction so I requested a meeting with judge business bisco and Commissioner eckhardt before the final documents and we issued that and received those responses April 23. Belinda myself and leslie evaluated those proposals and ranked those firms. We came up with two top-ranked firms and we invited those two firms to come in for interviewed. After the interviews with the two firms it was unanimous among the three of us that equus corporation was the best to do this for us, based on evaluation, criteria and competence in this area. So we're here today to move forward with hiring and negotiating with the broker. I did this morning, as you all know, I've had some family emergencies to take care of, but did get the judges memo this morning and we're ready to, I'm ready to answer those questions for you. And part of the things that you ask in the e-mail are things that will be negotiated with the firm when we begin that process. So we're here to move forward and get authority to negotiate. I see the the attorney walked in, she will help to draft the legal contracts, and so we're here to move forward and answer questions.
>> a ballpark time frame when you probably tell me approximately how long this will takes a far as what we do here today and also would the county attorney involved with the contract, all these other moving parts, how long would it take before it comes back with the end of that process as far as what we're doing here today, about how long.
>> we have so many projects going on Commissioner, you all know that, you all the are overwhelmed, staff are overwhelmed. I haven't point about her, I know my office has contacted her about starting that. I imagine within a month, if you all authorize me today to start negotiations, I believe within a month.
>> yeah, I think that is reasonable.
>> that we could have a contract hopefully negotiated. That is my time estimate. Don't hold me to a month, give me two, but we'll try our best.
>> did say ballpark. I didn't go outside of the ballpark.
>> I have to, it is a moving part and we've got a lot of people involved and so a month or two.
>> okay, thank you.
>> it is still legal's position this is not an appropriate executive discussion item.
>> I think if the court has specific legal questions related to this item, I can answer that.
>> I had in mind real estate negotiations and brokerage services, basically. The initial response from mr. Hilly was no. And I tried to state my question more precisely.
>> I think the issue was whether there were sufficient specifics of your questions to warrant a discussion in executive session under the real estate exception.
>> okay, so the purchasing agent will work with whom, now in at the county.
>> belinda and leslie strickland and myself and probably tinnily would be the people that would negotiate and anyone else at the court would appoint that negotiation committee.
>> I guess it is not necessarily the negotiations that I have in mind, it is information that you should get to facilitate negotiations and those two individuals, those three individuals sign fine to me. What if we broaden it and said planning and budget and facilities and county attorney.
>> when you say pbo, facilities management, I need --
>> that's fine, but she is with the planning and budget office. I'm recalling several general discussions that we had in court but they were general discussions. And I'm thinking that facilityis would know a little bit more about specific real property interest that we have. I have three or four in mind, myself, that in the broad geographic area that we generally discussed previously. If you throw them out specifically, though, then I think that it really compromises the county's bargaining position. But this is information that we should get to you at some point.
>> well, just for clarification, judge, I mean, the scope of work talked about our primary and our secondary parameter. Your question was what, what is our geographic parameters, we've been discussing that over several months now, and I thought, I mean there has been drawings and all kind of things.
>> they've been very, very general. There are several specific pieces of property that I have in mind so I'm --
>> right, I understand.
>> at some point we would expect the broker to go from general geographic parameters to real specific pieces of property.
>> correct.
>> to find out available, affordability, information like that, and I would think that this is the kind of stuff you would chat with the broker about, either immediately or at some point in the future, right?
>> and there were some, I think there was at least one property in this area had a had already been identified. So maybe several of them. And in regards to, you know, a facilities management and process, one of the things that we need is a project point person, we need one person that deals directly with the contractser, broker, whoever it is, we need a single point of contact and then once, you know, once you approve an agreement then roger who I thought is who we agreed to would be the project person over this, would come to the court when he been notified by the broker of a specific property in that area for you all to then discuss the specifics anthem to start actively -- and them to start actively, giving them a notice to proceed and pursue work on that specific piece of property. Am I making myself clear?
>> excuse me, go ahead. Finish it.
>> I'm trying to make myself clear, we want to get a contract with a broker and then once we have that contract, then specific properties will be thoroughly discussed with the Commissioner's court. And they would take that lead and --
>> what I'm hearing, though, and judge, I see what you're saying also, I guess, and judge if I'm incorrect, just correct me on what I'm understanding on what you're saying. I think on the offset from the beginning of this as we're dealing with this right now, there may be opportunities or there may be avenues that are unforeseen at this time that whoever is selected in this process, the negotiation, the person that you're going to negotiate in this process may, may now, I don't know, but may find themselves where they may need to talk to a pbo person or facilities person. So I think what the judge is if I'm understanding him correctly and reading him correctly, is suggesting that the expansion of this committee that's here that we're mentioning today, the county attorneys, you all and all that, be expanded on the possibility of specifics that may be revealed within this process. So maybe looking at it up front at the beginning point instead of maybe farther down the road, these persons will be available up front as well as farther down the road. And I think that's what the judge may specifically be saying, I don't know.
>> if I'm understanding.
>> judge, correct me.
>> there has been a lot of decisions about committees and --
>> I understand.
>> that haven't been made so right now I have to focus on what the court asked me to do and that is to bring forward to you the most qualified brokerage in that can do this specific work for us. Once we have a contract with that firm, then my suggestion is the point of contact with the county be roger l cory andrager l cory be responsible to either go through his executive manager or her and come directly to the court and let you know about all those properties and whether you want to proceed with having that contractor do the work and whether you're going to consider buying a specific piece of property.
>> my motion is that we authorize the Travis County purchasing agent to begin negotiations with the one firm that we have short listed to.
>> I second that.
>> with the input and assistance from planning and budget office facilities and the county attorney and that in that contract roger l cory be appointed contact person for specific real estate recommendations.
>> I second that. Judge, you also mentioned pbo, do you want them as part of that?
>> planning and budget.
>> okay.
>> and just again, for clarity, once we get that contract and we start talking about buying prompts, we have to have facilities and planning and budget and the county attorney, we work with these groups on everything.
>> that's fine. That motion if it passes today. Any discussion of the motion? Yes, sir.
>> I guess I should have asked, maybe should have started before you made your motion because I really want to know the week to look at this, because there are some questions. I don't know how the interview process took place, the questions that were asked, but I am being asked that and I said I would ask those kind of questions. He haven't had enough time to said down with syd or the committee to find out exactly what the questions were. But back to what we're talking about now, I don't even know how we can discuss this. I mean, this, how we can discuss what we were discussing before we started talking about the item which is, we have no idea. This needs assessment process that we're going to go through is going to drive everything.
>> [one moment please for change in captioners] ...with us. There's a broad geographic area with multiple specific sites. We landed on that. I thought we voted to get somebody who really would be on the lookout for us. So if an opportunity becomes available, then we would act.
>> I agree, and I was part of that vote and I still concur with that, that that's what we were doing. Although --
>> because recall we had a physician to do that for us and that position went away so this was sort of a compromise, and plus it being such a big prong.
>> it's more like here are the possibilities. And we'll let you know, I mean after this needs assessment deal gets done as to which direction we are going to head. But I mean I think that the needs assessment, you know, could very well be, you know, six to 12 months away, easy, right, belinda?
>> and one of the other things we talked about was making sure that this team could act as kind of our fly on the wall, if you will, in part of those discussions to be better informed about what properties they should really be investigating for you. So they are intended to be an adjunct, if you will, to that other planning group with a specialization -- their particular real estate expertise and so that is part of the reason, yes, it would be great if we were doing all this concurrently, but this one is ready earlier and they can have their eyes and ears open for you now.
>> judge, where do you think we are -- I mean am I too late to ask for a week with your motion and your second or -- I mean we may do it next week.
>> well, if you were a brokerage firm interested and not selected, you are not happy. That happens every week. Not necessarily on brokerage firms.
>> my favorite part of the job.
>> if you are not selected, it is not a good day for you. But we do have a one-week courtesy extension policy so if you want another week, I think we should honor it.
>> I'd like to have it.
>> then I withdraw the motion.
>> and if this is appropriate for me to request, and you can advise me, if you all have specific concerns or things that you want to be included or discussions, if y'all -- I could meet with y'all or you could e-mail me their concerns individually for us to take into consideration while we're negotiating. I mean you give me -- tell me what you expect. You know, one of the issues with compensation, right now we'reco not expecting to pay any compensation right now. And we did talk to them about working with when we get through working on the needs assessment working with our other consultants. So we tried to be as open and honest and practical about our situation as we could be. So we're ready to move whenever the court is.
>> we'll have it back on next week.
>> judge, let me show that I withdrew my second on this.
>> thank you.
>> we have a policy that if a member of the court is not ready and there is not an emergency, we grant a one-week extension and Commissioner Daugherty has just requested it.
>> I won't be here next week and that's the only reason I'm throwing this in at this point. In our discussion previously, part of our rationale was that ourco needs -- wheel we have not done the needs assessment, we all know broadly speaking that we have need for square footage and airspace in the central business district. And that we don't -- and it was part of the discussion and I'd have to go back to pull the exact quotes, that while the needs assessment is absolutely necessary, that it would be to our advantage to be nimble and prepared for the moment that needs assessment comes down to already know the real estate terrain and what our options are so that we could strike quickly and most effectively and efficiently for the taxpayer. And part of that strategy would be the vetting and hiring or negotiating with a brokerage firm in advance of the needs assessment being available.
>> I'll look forward to being nimble. I mean, I'll be all over it.
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.
Last Modified:
Tuesday, July 15, 2008 1:51 PM