2002 10 10 WS MinutesMINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN
October 10, 2002
The City Council of the City of Baytown, Texas, met in work session on October 10, 2002,
at 5:30 p.m. in the Hullum Conference Room of Baytown City Hall, 2401 Market Street,
Baytown, Texas, with the following in attendance:
Ronnie Anderson
Coleman Godwin
Calvin Mundinger
Don Murray
Scott Sheley
Pete C. Alfaro
Gary M. Jackson
Ignacio Ramirez, Sr.
Gary W. Smith
Council Member
Council Member
Council Member
Council Member
Council Member
Mayor
Interim City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
The meeting was opened with a quorum present after which the following business was
conducted:
Discuss City Manager interview process.
City Council must decide the procedure to employ for the interview process for the city
manager candidates. In most other cities, the process would be conducted in an executive
or closed session. Our Charter prohibits such a session. Mayor Alfaro reviewed the
options as follows:
Option 1—City Council will interview the candidates in open session.
Pro —City Council will be able to interact with each candidate.
Con —It will be in open session. Conducting the interview publicly is not a
generally accepted practice and may limit our potential candidates.
Option 2 —Video interview that would be presented to each Council Member for
review.
Pro —Each City Council Member will be able to spend as much time as they
would like reviewing the videotapes.
Con —No interaction with the candidates.
Option 3 —Have the final candidates respond to a select questionnaire in order to
provide City Council with more information.
Pro —The detailed answers to the questions will provide City Council with
more information on the candidates.
Con —No interaction with the candidates.
Page 2 of 4
Minutes of the Work Session — October 10, 2002
Option 4—No interview. City Council will select the final candidate from the three
finalists.
Pro — Reduces timeframe to select a City Manager.
Con —No interaction with the external candidates.
Council must determine the number of candidates to be interviewed from the three
finalists.
In response to a question from Council Member Anderson, Mayor Alfaro noted that the
Municipal Judge candidates were interviewed in open session.
Alison Smith, Director of Human Resources, informed Council that the top three
candidates ranked as follows:
Jackson
237.5 points
Bonczek
231 points
Grindstaff
118.5 points.
Mayor Alfaro and Ms. Smith responded to questions concerning Mr. Bonczek. Mr.
Bonczek left his position with the City of Beaumont in July and has not joined a city staff
since that time. Conversations with officials in Beaumont indicated that Mr. Bonczek and
the Council had a difference in philosophy and issues in budget development.
Council Member Sheley expressed concern that the background of the other candidates had
not been checked as thoroughly. Ms. Smith assured him that she had done a thorough
background check on Mr. Jackson before he was hired as Assistant City Manager.
Discuss retaining legal services for Municipal Court/Jail Project.
Interim City Manager Gary Jackson related that pursuant to Council direction, staff has
studied the options available for an analysis of the Municipal Court and Jail Project. Staff
recommends that Council consider engaging Coats, Rose, Yale, Ryman & Lee, P.C.
( "Coats/Rose "), to perform legal services in connection with the analysis of the Municipal
Court and Jail Project. Specifically, Coats /Rose will conduct an investigation of the delays
and workmanship issues associated with the court and jail facilities and present options as
to how the City might best correct the outstanding issues. The investigation will entail:
a review of the following:
o the contract documents;
o the correspondence between and among the City, architect, and construction
contractor; and,
o the remaining punch list items;
a physical examination of the facilities;
interviews with persons involved with the project; and
➢ assistance in working with the insurance and bonding companies.
Page 3 of 4
Minutes of the Work Session — October 10, 2002
Coats/Rose estimates their fees for the initial audit activities as described in their proposal
to be $7,500 to $10,000. Preparation and filing of a lawsuit against the construction
company surety is estimated to cost $3,000 to $5,000. If litigation activities beyond the
mere filing of a lawsuit are required, additional fees can be expected. Texas law provides
for recovery of attorney's fees and related expenses against the surety in the event the City
were to prevail in its legal claim. Payment for these initial services will be on an hourly
basis and will not exceed $15,000 without additional authorization. Randall B. Strong will
provide local counsel to the City under this agreement.
In response to a question from Council Member Murray concerning the technical expertise
of the law firm, Val Perkins reported that one partner is an engineer and another has only
done legal work related to construction. If it is necessary, engineering consultants will be
retained. Mr. Perkins informed Council that an issue with limitations exists and that
limitations may run in January, 2003.
Discuss Architect/Engineer selection process.
Bill Pedersen, Director of Engineering, reminded Council that professional services,
including architecture or engineering, must be selected in accordance with the Professional
Services Procurement Act. (Texas Government Code, Section 2254.001 et seq.) Section
2254.003 prohibits the selection of a provider of professional services on the basis of
competitive bids.
To procure architectural, engineering service, or land surveying, the City must first select
the most highly qualified provider on the basis of demonstrated competence and
qualifications; and then attempt to negotiate a contract for a fair and reasonable price. If
negotiations for the first choice candidate fail, the City must formally end negotiations and
begin negotiating with its next choice. The process continues until a contract is entered
into, Section 2254.004. An agreement for professional services entered into in violation of
the Professional Services Procurement Act is void, Section 2254.005.
The procedure employed by the City minors that recommended by the Texas Council of
Engineering Companies. Staff advertises for qualification statements from engineers and
architects and compares the statements to the upcoming projects and attempts to match the
firms' qualifications with the projects. The Architect/Engineer Committee interviews the
companies and selects the top firm and the runner -up. Staff then negotiates with the first
firm. If no agreement is reached, then the runner -up is contacted for negotiations.
The fees paid by the City match the fees paid by other local cities. The City of Houston's
fee curves are used to negotiate fees. The fee curves are developed from historical data
and adjusted with anticipated overhead. The fee is then negotiated on a basis of "not to
exceed" a determined amount. Previously the City had used a percentage of construction
cost to set the professional fee. This procedure provides no incentive for value
engineering.
Page 4 of 4
Minutes of the Work Session — October 10, 2002
0' Council Member Renteria arrived at 6:08 p.m.
Setting fees by the "not to exceed' method is an attempt to control costs. The fees
generally range from 7% to 10% of the construction costs. The complexity of the project
and environmental factors cause the fees to be higher.
Adjourn.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:26 p.m.
Gify W. Smith
City Clerk