Travis County Commissioners Court

June 19, 2012 - Item 11
Agenda

View captioned video.

11, consider and take appropriate action regarding process to select vendor to manage county-owned parking spaces during formula one race including, a, amend current parking contract with Parking Systems of America, or b, initiate competitive process to select vendor; c, notify nearby neighbors of county's decision regarding parking; and d, other related issues.

>> Marvin Bryce, assistant purchasing agent.
We currently have a contract now with Parking Systems of America to manage our parking lot at third and Guadalupe.
We have modified that contract a couple of times for special events, south by southwest, then the biker rally event that took place.
I talked with cyd and I think cyd talked to you, judge, in executive session, and one of the options on the agenda was to consider extending this contract for the formula one event that's going to take place, and that would be purchasing's recommendation is that what we do is court authorize our office to negotiate an extension -- modification, rather, modification for that special event.
What we would attempt to do is perhaps maybe negotiate a higher rate than what we're currently receiving.
If we're unsuccessful in that, then we could take a look at maybe perhaps going out for new solicitation.
We had a good working relationship with Parking Systems of America.
To date I think we've received a little over half a million in revenue just from what they've done for us so far.
So what we would recommend -- excuse me -- is sit down and try to negotiate a contract mod and perhaps a higher rate.

>> The current contract, is duration of the current contract is how long?

>> It's a three-year contract.
It's one basic and two option years.
It was awarded may of 2011.
May of last year.

>> I -- I don't have an issue with the proposed strategy with regard to this modification.
I do have a broader policy concern on these contracts that we rebid them competitively on a regular basis.

>> Right.

>> Because we have in the past gotten into professional relationships that lasted decades.
And I don't think they were necessarily to the advantage of the county.

>> And I kind of agree with you.
A lot of those have been our social services-type contracts and one of the things I've tried to do is talk with cyd since I've taken over as her assistant is take a look at those contracts that are kind of renewing in

>> [inaudible] and --

>> I appreciate that.

>> We definitely would do that on this one once the last option is up, we would put it back out for competitive solicitation.

>> Any additional comments?

>> No, sir, I believe marvin has pretty well covered anything.
Any questions, we're here.

>> If we do go with the modification of the current parking contract, how do we determine what the amount will be?

>> Well, currently, judge, the original award the options were personal of -- currently our fixed monthly, facilities management did an analysis.
The fixed monthly rate was 46,000 a month or the 72.5%.
After facilities did analysis they recommended going with the fixed monthly rate.

>> And actually if I could clarify a little bit, just a maximum of 85% are guaranteed at 46,000 per month for the third and Guadalupe lot.

>> So we approved the amount that is charge, Commissioners court does.

>> Yes.

>> I've seen some stories about prices and I guess gouging folk doesn't really set that well with me.

>> I understand.

>> So our parking, I think we ought to charge the market, but I don't know that we really out to gouge people.
Parking will be tough enough and we really ought to try to make parking downtown attractive because I don't know that the roads will handle the numbers that I'm hearing about.

>> Judge, the court doesn't actually have -- didn't actually approve the amount that the operator charges to the public.
It approved the revenue that the court would -- that the county would receive.
So we kind of left that up to the parking operator in terms of conducting its normal business as to how much the market will bear basically.

>> Well, I'm saying my own view is for the formula one race we ought to look at the amount.
I don't know that parking downtown 365 days a year is the same as parking for four or five days for formula one.

>> Would the court like to have -- approve those rates that the vendor intends to charge for that three-day period prior to approving the modification.

>> I think that ought to be part of the modification we review and act on.

>> That could be one that we cover during the negotiations.
Using the current rate or a new rate or higher rate, we can negotiate the charge, the amount that they charge for individuals to park in the lots.

>> Not that our vendor would be greedy or that we would, but at some point fairness has to enter into this.

>> I --

>> With that, a motion to approve a.

>> Second.
I have a question with regard to our ability to take what we are negotiating and what we learn from that and apply it to our boiler plate at our expo center contract.
As far as my understanding is we don't have a floor in our expo center boiler plate, perhaps through a fuller knowledge with the market in negotiations with this contract we might be able to inform our expo center boiler plate.

>> Yeah, that's an option, yes, ma'am.

>> But the expo center deal would have to be brought back separately.

>> That's just a suggestion.

>> All in favor of the motion to approve a?
That passes by unanimous vote.
So what notification do we give our nearby neighbors?
Some of whom use the parking faulty know on Sunday and we approved that.
And I don't know about the other -- I don't know about that Thursday, Friday or Saturday.
But I -- but I think they ought to know because based on what I'm hearing, it would be virtually impossible to conduct business as usual downtown.
So we ought to know in addition to that here's the county's parking arrangements, and I guess when we put them in place, we ought to put together some formal strategy to notify the nearby folk.
Churches, even the businesses.

>> And we may even, judge, want to consider notifying county employees.
We discussed this, that way want to come to work that weekend, perhaps looking at one garage, reserving an amount of space, a portion of that garage for county employees that may want to work -- those dedicated employees that may want to come in on the weekend, judge.

>> Okay.

>> And those discussions can inform scope of service.

>> Get the sheriff's office to notify d.p.s.
Regarding the governor's mansion.
I know they have special concerns whenever there's an event that attracts a lot of people.

>> Exactly.

>> So I guess if what we're saying is we need to give this some thought and formally decide what to do and implement it.

>> Yes, sir.

>> Anything we're leaving out regarding parking during the formula one race?
That's d.
As our lawyers would say, other related issues.
Thank you all much.

>> Thank you, sir.

>> You all report back to us on those negotiations.

>> Yes, sir.

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.