Travis County Commissioners Court
February 28, 2012 (Agenda)
Item 20
Do we have everybody here on number 20?
20 is consider and take appropriate action regarding procurement objectives and constraints for the civil and family courthouse.
>> good morning.
roger jennings, I'm here with belinda powell.
we're here with our consultants from ernst and young, mark gibson and gordon.
and in the work session they presented the constraints and objectives for the civil and family courthouse feasibility study, and we discussed those and today we're back to ask for a vote to approve or not approve those objectives and constraints.
I'll turn it to bart -- I'm sorry, and you all had asked for some revision which were incorporated into your latest draft and I think we're going to go over those for you.
>> good morning, judge, Commissioners.
it's good to be here with you again.
there were many ways we could do that presentation this morning.
we could run back through what we did last Thursday.
we could simply point out the amendments we made after your direction and input.
thank you for that.
or we could just ask for questions, judge, whichever way you would like to do it.
>> do we want to see the amendments or -- okay.
maybe the changes that we discussed last week that were made.
>> sure.
so if we look at the reports, that's the word document, they are scattered throughout, but really section 4 you can treat as a summary to everything else so what you see in section 4 you will see in the earlier sections.
if you look at page 10 of that report, about halfway down you'll see a little suffix 2 on integration with the community and maximizing site development.
that shows that we took the input you gave us last Thursday and we amended those two items and the descriptions that go with them.
>> I should add it's also reflected in section 2.1, which is part of the section that you will be voting on.
>> that's correct.
that's on page 6.
>> I saw an email with the revisions, but I didn't see -- did we not get a revised backup?
>> I should have gotten a revised backup early on Monday morning.
it was an email that went out on Friday describing the change, and then it was incorporated into the document we got from ernst and young on Monday morning.
>> I got the Friday email.
>> and if you have page 6, it's actually it includes -- it was breaking out the site development and it reads integration with the community.
it went through language as project objectives to provide courthouses that enhances the community with a high important.
and then the second part of the breakout was maximizing site development with the two bullets that were in there previously.
>> you're looking at -- you're looking at the high pointed backup?
>> I'm sorry, sir?
>> you are looking at the i-20 backup?
page 6?
>> yes, on page 10, yes.
>> 6 and 10.
>> at the very back is the
>> [inaudible] and then also page 10 is in that same format.
the front part of the presentation, we do not have that.
>> we did not update this, that is correct.
>> any questions or comments?
excuse me.
>> one question and one comment.
>> all right.
>> in your
>> [inaudible] for money assessment, and I'm not sure if this is something we will be voting on today from a standpoint of what will be included, but will you be including a tax exempt design bid build component in the evaluation for that?
>> yes.
>> okay.
>> is that in here somewhere?
>> I'm sorry?
>> is that in here somewhere?
>> no, that will be
>> [inaudible] developing now are the options as we call them.
option a is what we would call the traditional method.
that's what we use to compare to it the baseline and that would be designed to build the Texas exempt bond for the Texas courthouse.
that will be our baseline assumption.
then all the other options will be measured against that baseline.
>> and the one comment I have, I looked at this last week, and I just want to say we're spending an awful lot of money on this consulting contract and I thought that was a pretty pedestrian presentation last week.
very, very basic, not very much a step forward.
I would like to see more meat, I hope, in the next go round.
>> yes.
this is an input into that.
I appreciate your frustration, absolutely, Commissioner Huber.
many of our clients feel that same sense of frustration.
we're baking a cookie here, okay?
and what you are seeing is all the ingredients on the table now, but you don't have a cookie and it's very frustrating because you want the cookie and I get it completely.
what tends to happen a lot happens in the next three weeks.
we've been come I'lling and growing the wheat for the cookie and how it's ready to be made.
it's important for us as consultants and for you as Commissioners to understand that gathering the ingredients is by far the hardest part of this.
baking the cookie is the easy part.
so what's very frustrating is you see us gathering ingredients and that's very frustrating because I want my cookie.
but now we have the ingredients.
now we're ready to do this.
so in the next three to four weeks you will see a very major step forward.
you will see a tremendous amount of information coming forward.
and we'll have the cookie and we'll get to hand it over.
just as we're bakers, we want to give you the cookie, not the ingredients.
>> I look forward to that.
>> so basically what's before us are recommended objectives, constraints and evaluation criteria.
>> correct.
>> remind me what steps we will take after today.
>> that's a great question.
thee are inputs into a number of aspects.
>> [inaudible] for instance, some of the ingredients such as design, such as local participation, such as maximizing competition, such as the development criteria, all lead us into the pricing element of how much we believe this will cost.
these are important pieces of information
>> [inaudible].
then other pieces of information here are important input into the solution that we will come up.
for instance, the whole concept of
>> [inaudible] is derived from the right-hand side of this document.
so with with that, the next step is to take these ingredients, take these elements and feed them into two primary reports that we'll be be doing.
the first is
>> [inaudible] for money report which is really a spread sheet number, spread sheet exercise.
and then the second aspect is to bring a greater report, a wider report that looks at all the nonofficial aspects.
talks about timing, execution methodology, risks.
all of those things come in a wider report.
this document will come to you as one document.
but it's got two primary components.
one financial, one nonfinancial.
and these are all input into that.
so the next four weeks we are producing those two primary documents.
another input which is not shown here and one we're working on right as we speak is the market assessment.
so that is nearing completion.
and that's a major input into this.
so you've heard me talk about concept of absorption many times.
that is basically deriving how big a building you can put on the site.
the noncourthouse building if you chose to go that way.
that's a very major component of this.
we're working on that ingredient as we speak.
that hopefully will be finished next week.
so we take all these ingredients and all these input and we bake our cookie and that will be presented to you in about four weeks time.
>> but the value for money analysis and the broader report, you hope to get done in about -- in four weeks or less?
>> roughly.
roughly.
we have a detailed calendar.
I don't have it at hand, unfortunately.
I just don't have them at hand.
I'm sorry.
>> okay.
any other questions, comments, court members?
>> judge, I would just like to say this.
I really appreciate what you are doing.
the work session was very helpful to me.
I think we asked a lot of good questions, this court did, and, of course, I even opened my mouth a few times.
but I just want to thank you for what you've brought to the table.
judge, let me thank you for scheduling the work session, let me put it like that, because it was very informative and kind of laid a lot of things on the table as guy suggested about with a cookie.
all the ingredients laid out on the table, the cookie hasn't been formed, but at least the ingredients are on the table.
this is basically what this is.
again, I want to thank each and every one of you for what you are doing and for the services you are bringing to Travis County.
thank you.
you don't have to comment on that.
>> mr. Reeferseed.
>> yes, sir, I'm sorry I disagree with you, Commissioner Davis.
>> well, that's fine, mr. Reeferseed.
that's just fine.
>> I was almost insulted by that cookie thing analogy.
it's so much more -- as we all know, I mean there's so much more going on here than just one little
>> [inaudible].
and I'm wondering, coke he go what my Commissioner asked about -- ms. Huber asked about -- I'm sorry, the phrase you used was the value -- there's a value analysis of the project or something, but I'm wondering is there a value analysis of the dollars spent for the benefits gain.
I know you all do hard work and you really sort the numbers and everything, but there's a whole lot of money in a short period of time from my viewpoint of your job.
like you were saying, it will be a certain number of weeks and all this kind of stuff.
and I just, again, I'm wondering has there been a value analysis of your own plan, of your own contribution to this whole process and the money involved.
I know they make deals and they arrive at these somehow, but do you have that kind of analysis for citizens like me who are just curious where all the money goes?
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> yes, consulting.
>> we went through an extensive bidding process.
in my 32 years doing this, about as extensive as any I've been through.
>> that's great.
>> extremely competitive, and I can assure you the price offered to you for this work is about as low as it's ever been done by this firm.
I would argue you are getting tremendous value.
>> and we can thank the Commissioners court for that oversight?
>> the people on my right who ran an extremely competitive process that I would rather not go through again, thank you very much.
>> that's great.
good to hear.
glad I asked.
>> you had several public hearings, public meetings on this to get input from the community which I really do applaud you because I am a type of person to make sure -- not make sure, but advocate to make sure we have input from the public.
I'm a big advocate of that and, of course, that's one of the things I think you did very, very well.
I guess a lot of things laid out as far as public hearings or public meetings, persons had an opportunity to hear and ask a lot of pertinent questions which you thoroughly exhausted, in my opinion.
so thank you.
>> that's been a tremendous part of this.
I was going to thank the public and we have a list from the downtown association, the bar.
their input has been tremendously informative.
there's a few words on this right-hand side, there's a lot of
>> [inaudible].
and we're factoring all that into our analysis.
that's been a tremendously important part of this analysis.
>> and I think -- and I want to compliment you on that as well.
along with that, though, is on the restrictions and qualifications, the 1.1 on page 4, it says that this report is confidential.
however, as of today after the vote is taken, it is a public document.
correct?
>> if our client wanted to keep a document private, we would make an effort to do that, but I will tell you that we're not aware of any exceptions to the open records act that would protect this particular document now.
>> just want to make sure.
just try and make sure I do the right thing, and so because there's other communities outside of the downtown area who also need to get some of the information.
and so that will complete the effort we make in Travis County to be real open to everyone.
thank you.
>> so we are asked today to approve section 2.1, 2.2, and 4.
>> yes, sir.
>> okay.
I looked at 4 and it's got 14 specific criteria, and I couldn't think of one that I would like to add.
any court member have any -- any additional criteria to add to the 14 listed under section 4 on page 10?
I make a motion to approve 2.1, 2.2 and 4.
>> second.
>> 2.1, 2.2 and 4.
seconded by Commissioner Davis.
discussion on the motion?
all in favor?
show Commissioners Davis, Eckhardt and yours truly voting in favor.
voting against Commissioner Huber and Gomez.
thank you all very much.
>> thank you.
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.
Subscribe for updates