Will County Capital Improvements Committee Met March 2.
Here is the minutes provided by the committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Ms. Mueller led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. ROLL CALL
Chair Herbert Brooks Jr. called the meeting to order at 10:00 AM
| Attendee Name | Title | Status | Arrived |
| Herbert Brooks Jr. | Chair | Present | |
| Joe VanDuyne | Vice Chair | Present | |
| Julie Berkowicz | Member | Present | |
| Natalie Coleman | Member | Present | |
| Gretchen Fritz | Member | Present | |
| Donald Gould | Member | Present | |
| Meta Mueller | Member | Present | |
| Annette Parker | Member | Present | |
| Jacqueline Traynere | Member | Present |
Also Present: N. Palmer, M. Fricilone, J. Ogalla and Executive Bertino-Tarrant
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Capital Improvements Committee - Regular Meeting - Feb 2, 2021 10:00 AM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Meta Mueller, Member SECONDER: Jacqueline Traynere, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
1. Morgue Project Update
(County Executive's Office)
Mr. Tkac stated I am very excited and have had the chance to begin working on the RFQ; the solicitation document necessary for the design build project delivery method and approach for the new Morgue Project. I hope to have the draft finalized and ready for review by the State’s Attorney, the Administration, and by our Purchasing Director. This should be complete by Friday or Monday of next week; we would like to get this rolling. I have a question for this committee. Do we want to do a short list where we put out the solicitation; get the responses in typical fashion; develop a short list for interviews; and then we conduct interviews. My need for direction is; do we want to ask those who made the cut to submit a guaranteed maximum price. Then essentially make a decision on who to select from there; that’s where I need your help.
Mr. Brooks asked Mr. Tkac if he wanted a short list as opposed to a long list. Wouldn’t a long list add longevity to the project with the interviews and etc.? Will the short list find our goal quicker?
Mr. Tkac stated yes absolutely; and the other advantage is these interviews take time. If there is a selection committee that is formed; presumably it will be the makeup of some members of this Capital Improvements Committee; and others. In the interest of time for those decision makers you will want to limit the number of interviews.
Ms. Parker asked what the number difference between a short list and a long list is typically.
Mr. Tkac replied it depends on the number of responses that we get. I think on something like this we could get a range anywhere from 8 to 15 responses. The selection committee would then review the responses and try to make a determination on who they wanted to present. Typically I have seen short lists from 3 up to 5; in terms of who the selection committee is interested in speaking to or hearing from.
Ms. Parker replied okay; obviously it depends on how many people submit.
Mr. Tkac stated those are the average; I think on a minimum we could probably expect 12 responses. Where you want to short list from there is really a function of the committee.
Ms. Mueller said I definitely am interested in trying to keeping this process as tidy and short as we can since it is such a need. Will changing the number what we are discussing here will that effect minority participation in this project if we go with this decision?
Mr. Tkac stated it doesn’t in my mind; I think that as the responses are submitted and whomever they are in the universe of qualified and experienced construction managers and architects and those industry professionals. I think that it would behoove them to figure out how they want to present that; and who they want to include as part of their team makeup. I do not think it will hurt the process.
Ms. Mueller stated that is something that I am considering along the way.
Ms. Berkowicz said I am not sure if the County as a practice ever invites companies to submit a proposal; but I know that there has been some discussion about issues with the project at the Will County Health Department; little things that they are trying to correct and tweak. What I am wondering is some of the other Counties have had new morgues built with a lot of success. I just was wondering if we could make sure that we invite them to submit a proposal. Given the fact if they had done a good job and they have the experience that can also be something to our advantage to consider. I think we want to have a good pool to be able to take a look at and consider and evaluate. I know that experience with construction is always a positive. What are your thoughts about that?
Mr. Tkac stated I think the more information that we can get; the broader net that we can cast in terms of notifying talent out there within the industry. It is to our benefit as a county; I am all for it and will do my very best to get the word out.
Mr. Moustis said back in 1995 we went out for a design build project delivery method for our Juvenile Detention Center; which later we decided not to do. I think it is a little bit different; typically we would go out for design services with a RFQ. Pricing isn’t considered the best qualified; you can always negotiate the pricing for the design portion. Now we have this build component which I believe is a little bit different; I’m thinking the approach should be a little bit different too. First off you want the best qualified design folks; Even though it is design build; they give us a guaranteed price but the firm is required to still do public bidding; and bid packages. I don’t know if it could be two phases. Mr. Tkac how much design build have you done as far as going out for proposals; and how is it done. There is a design portion and there is a build portion; you don’t want to make a decision on the cost on the build when you may not have the design firm; I see it to be a little problematic. The other thing I would mention as far as minority firms; you could instruct Mr. Tkac to bring every qualified minority firm to be interviewed; you may get a couple; and we should interview them. Then you are going to have firms that are going to partner; and that should be encouraged on the building side. This is why the process needs to be done a little bit differently. I like the process where we just talk about qualifications; bring them in and then negotiate the other part; if that is appropriate to do it under our purchasing ordinance. To bring in a design company and encourage them also to bring in a minority partner. Which I think you will get a better result as far as minority participation. I am throwing this out that maybe it is more of an RFQ process; and negotiate (inaudible) later like we do it on our professional contracts. I think it can be quicker and believe you will get a better result. You won’t be restricted by the cost that may or may not be valid.
Mr. Tkac stated thank you for your insight. I have had experience in design build project delivery method before. You are absolutely right we have not done one during my tenure with the County. My experience in the realm has come before joining the Will County Executive’s Office. However, my sense is we wanted to try to expedite the project schedule here. This is an ideal way to do that; that is with a design build project delivery method. The reason for this; and I think we talked about this the last time was that with the right selection here the design doesn’t need to be 100% before you put a shovel in the ground to start the work on the building. There are number of different ways to do this; I would prefer that if we are to go this route; we do put out the initial solicitation just for not thinking pricing at that point. Then to narrow down the list of firms that we wanted to talk to; and bringing them in for an interview. If there is a further discussion about even asking TMP from even fewer firms; so be it. That’s a decision for the selection committee to undertake. I do believe that in the case of this project it is the right sized for this; I think it would probably work well for this application. I do believe because we have the site selected; we have an initial floorplan developed. We know it is a one story building that is approximately about 10,000 square feet. We have identified with the end user the requirements and the workflow that would go into this building. It would become a fitting new home with plenty of room. Both the morgue and the administrative functions of the Coroner’s Office. I am comfortable in going forward either way; I think that we do have a time advantage here in terms of the approach. What sort of time advantage do we have here; I don’t know probably 90 days or more. We could probably end up with a completed project 90 days earlier than if we go more with a conventional design bid build approach. Either way is fine with me; I think this offers a distinctive advantage of an earlier completion.
Mr. Moustis stated I favor design build here; I am talking more about the selection process; and how you make a determination on selection. For example you have to give them a basic design. You are going to get somebody to design to cost; which may not be in our best interest. I am talking about selection if we approach it more as an RFQ with professional service we negotiate cost and there will be more than one company selected; we usually select three. I do favor design build.
Speaker Cowan said Mr. Moustis touched on this a little bit; but I wanted to specify and clarify. Mr. Tkac could we in the bid documents highlight that we would like to see plans for minority participation; minority women and veteran participation. So that we get that in the bids and we can consider that in our decision. I want to give the companies a heads up so that we are not asking them that on the fly; but they have the ability to present that.
Mr. Brooks said I like that idea.
Mr. Tkac stated I do believe that we can put a statement in those documents to strongly encourage the MWBE (The Minority- and Women- Owned Business Enterprise Program) participation. My experience in the past with this at the County level; this is something really for the State’s Attorney’s Office to talk about as opposed to me. In the past they have always defined what the goals are; in an ordinance absents.
Speaker Cowan stated I am not asking for goals; I’m just asking for them to outline their plan for participation; that has nothing to do with a goal. I would like to see the methods by which they plan to include minority women and veterans.
Mr. Tkac said I am sorry I misunderstood you; I was talking about in our solicitation document we could strongly encourage MWBE participation. I believe your saying you want to see a section; and we need to be specific about their need to include a section of their team make up and who they are going to bring to the project.
Speaker Cowan said I think both would be great; but the latter is what I was going for. Mr. Tkac state and we can do both.
Mr. Moustis added we did this with Harbor on the Animal Control building. We not only told Harbor they are going to have a 10% partner; we told them who it was going to be. We can actually say here are these firms you are going to partner with them and they will get 10% of the job. We can be very aggressive.
Mr. Van Duyne stated I don’t want to get off track but we did circle back and start talking about design build. I know the majority of the committee is in favor of the design and build. But one of my fears and maybe Mr. Tkac can help me out with this. Contractors love to do extra work; if it’s not in the bid package they have to come in and do extra work. It seems to me that is how they make most of money on projects. With design and build my fear is that we get too far ahead of the work being done and the design might miss a couple of items with all of the contractors and have to come in and preform this extra work. Is that any concern of yours?
Mr. Tkac replied absolutely a concern; and not unique to the design build project delivery method. One of the biggest causes for these sorts of things are typically items that were not contemplated during the design. Items required by the owner; in the way of equipment or other new technology; for example always seems to be a big issue along these lines. We would work very closely with the end user and the design build entity to minimize these sorts of things. I would recommend to include an allowance line item in addition to the contingency line item in the project budget. That in the guaranteed maximum price that in the event new equipment or something that was missed; or maybe there is a new code compliance issue that was overlooked; all of these sorts of things could then be accounted for in a modest way. Not in a blank check type of scenario to be able to include those in the guaranteed maximum price so that way we are not coming back to the Capital Improvements Committee and say we need more money.
Ms. Berkowicz stated I have a question about the Coroner’s Office on Scott St. Are we going to be consolidating these so that we can eliminate that office and all of the functions are together?
Mr. Tkac replied yes; in consultation with Coroner Summers that is her desire and end result. We would like to put the administrative arm together with the operational are so to speak; all under one roof.
Ms. Berkowicz asked how many square feet did you say the building is. Mr. Brooks replied 10,000 square feet.
Ms. Berkowicz asked is that a sufficient amount of space. Will the administration side of the office have a separate entrance form the Coroner’s facility?
Mr. Tkac yes as currently detailed. There isn’t a great deal of detail but there is enough to say this; about 2/3rds of the plans; or about 7,000 square feet is for the morgue itself. It will include three stations for autopsies and all of the preservation equipment, refrigerators, freezers, laundry etc. Roughly three thousand square feet on the west end of the building; with its own entrance would be the Coroners administration function. In both cases Coroner Summers and her senior staff have also taken a look and worked with the concept design firm. That is how we derived the floorplan that we are going to include in the RFQ. To say this is our starting point and this is what we want to see or a facsimile there in. Maybe the design building contractor comes up with a plan that is more efficient and better suited for the operations and project.
Ms. Berkowicz said one quick question. For the staff that are working at the Coroner’s Office I know sometimes they are there overnight or late in the evening. Are there adequate and safe and clean accommodations for those staff members that might wind up having to sleep there for the night? Just to make sure that our employees are in a safe and comfortable environment. Do we have that?
Mr. Tkac state yes we do; that is currently been talked about a great deal.
Ms. Berkowicz stated one other thing I wanted to mention; I know they will be close to the Sherriff’s Department what type of system or alert will they have if they wanted to alert the Sherriff that they had a situation that they needed assistance with.
Mr. Tkac asked some sort of panic device in case things got out of hand; that is an excellent suggestion. We are not that far along with this respect to detail.
Ms. Traynere said I appreciate the work that former Chair Tuminello did to bring in as many minority contractors as possible. I want to see us do better if possible with this project. I just want to confirm and maybe the State’s Attorney needs to check; can we put a percentage of the project. I know Mr. Moustis said we could make a request I am not certain the legality of that; because we have talked about this before right. That quotas are not something people are interested in; or at least some people were not interested in; let me be more specific. I want to continue to push now that I’m back on the Capital Improvements Committee; for that large minority participation; if for no other reason but to make up for the lack of minority participation that we were able to get on the Courthouse; since this is a much smaller project. But again this is a different project because we are looking at design build. Of course I want the best quality for our money as well. I am sure Mr. Tkac is looking into everybody that is in the Midwest that has built a new morgue in the last 10 years; and is already trying to find the right companies to reach out to. But again that minority participation; whether it is people of color or women or veterans I am okay with all of the above. But it is super important to me and I just wanted to stress that; and look forward to all of the other Board Members comments and I look forward to getting down to look at those companies that are interested.
Mr. Fricilone stated I just want to make a comment; first we are not building the Courthouse. This is not a major $175 million project; that is the first thing. Secondly we probably should have done this several years ago but the past Coroner never brought it to our attention that there was a greater need as there is. I think that those of you that have gone over to the Coroner’s Office realize this is a critical mass need. We need this right now; that is why design build I think is the best way to go. If this was a $200 million project design build might not be something to consider. At the size of this project and at the speed we want to get this done there are very many well qualified design build firms for us to choose from. We know that everybody is aware of the minority participation; and they will do everything that they can. We would also like to have Will County participation; so that is important as well. I just wanted to bring up those points.
Mr. Moustis said maybe I wasn’t as direct enough on process. We should be selecting a design firm. The build portion; you can’t really get the pricing on that. They have to go out to the market they have to talk to different contractors. There is no way you can get a real pricing. I don’t think any firm is going to put that effort into it; they don’t know until they know the design for sure. I guess what I would say that this should be an approach as an RFQ; and you are selecting a design firm that will also do the building. You are not going to get pricing; that’s negotiated because it takes a little bit of time; I think that Mr. Tkac could explain. I would suggest the process be an RFQ; and then you select like any other RFQ what firm you think is best to meet our goals and needs. Because the pricing comes a little bit later. I think that Mr. Tkac will agree with that.
Mr. Tkac replied I would say what you just described in my mind is a model that really includes an architect lead design build project delivery method; or team. It depends on how far along you are with the design. If you are further along with your design; with a level of detail. Sometimes the CM will take the lead role and the architect will not be as prominent; but in this case I do agree that given the level of detail we need and where we are at. It probably does make since to have an architect lead project team.
Mr. Moustis stated Mr. Brooks I don’t know if the committee would agree with that; but I do think it would get a better result. It doesn’t slow anything down because you’re simultaneously doing design and getting costs; getting that guarantee pretty much up front. Mr. Tkac can confirm what I’m saying is probably the case.
Mr. Tkac stated if you feel that the timing is right; I would like to recommend that this committee determine the selection committee today. So that way we can get rolling on this; and the selection committee will already be seated or at least identified. That way when the responses do come in we can distribute them and stay on track on terms of our review and selection process.
Mr. Brooks said so the selection committee will come out of the Capital Improvements Committee; is that something that the Speaker would have to do. Or is that something we do right here on this level.
Mr. Tkac said I’m not sure I think in the past it was derived from the Capital Improvements Committee or is it the Speaker.
Mr. Moustis said the Speaker actually is on the selection committee; I think in the past if we had committees of seven; four of them came off of the Capital Improvements Committee. Not everybody was a voting member; we would have somebody from the Executive Office; someone from the Coroner’s Office. They are not voiting members but they are part of the committee; I am just saying that is how it has been done in the past.
Ms. Mueller said we could ask her she; is on the call.
Speaker Cowan stated I hear that you request that we do it right away; so I’ll work on that this afternoon Mr. Brooks. I will meet with Mr. Fricilone and we’ll get it to you ASAP.
Mr. Van Duyne stated I would like to go on record to state I would be willing to participate in that group to let the Speaker know.
Mr. Brooks asked Mr. Tkac does that answer your question as far as direction. Mr. Tkac answered yes; I have the direction that I need.
Mr. Brooks stated I see no other hands. Thank you so much Mr. Tkac for that.
2. Air Quality Projects Update
(County Executive's Office)
Mr. Tkac stated a couple of months ago the Ad-Hoc CARES Committee initiated and directed an Air Quality Assessment for four County owned buildings. Including the County Office Building, the EMCO Building, the Department of Transportation Building, and River Valley. What we have come up with is recommendations mainly for the utilizations of MERV 13 Air Filtering in all of our properties. In some cases we were utilizing those more substantial filters; in certain cases we weren’t. Currently in all four of our buildings that were assessed; we are using the MERV 13 Air Filters. The DOT Administration Building on Laraway Rd. is a unique animal in that it was built quite a long time ago. The system that exists and that operated in that building really have no outside air to introduce into the work environment to the interior space. We took a much closer look at that and we put together; we have the same consultant at no additional cost to the County engineered a bid documents for what is called an ERV (Energy Recovery Ventilation Unit). Essentially this piece of equipment which is installed on the exterior of that building will make it possible to introduce fresh air; or outside air into the interior space at DOT. We have the documents we’ve put together an invitation for bid. The cost of this work is estimated at approximately $30,000. We put together the documents; they were reviewed by the State’s Attorney’s Office and I think that they are ready to go out for bid. That review that I spoke of with the State’s Attorney I think just was completed late yesterday. We are ready to hit the street with at one. I think it is going to be a big improvement to their air quality and workspace.
Mr. Brooks asked if there were any questions. Thank you Mr. Tkac for that update.
VI. OTHER OLD BUSINESS
VII. NEW BUSINESS
1. Authorizing Payment to Amazon for the Will County Courthouse
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Meta Mueller, Member SECONDER: Gretchen Fritz, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jacqueline Traynere, Member SECONDER: Julie Berkowicz, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Gretchen Fritz, Member SECONDER: Annette Parker, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Julie Berkowicz, Member SECONDER: Jacqueline Traynere, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jacqueline Traynere, Member SECONDER: Annette Parker, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Vice Chair SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Gretchen Fritz, Member SECONDER: Julie Berkowicz, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jacqueline Traynere, Member SECONDER: Julie Berkowicz, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Vice Chair SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Gretchen Fritz, Member SECONDER: Meta Mueller, Member AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Julie Berkowicz, Member SECONDER: Joe VanDuyne, Vice Chair AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
IX. PUBLIC COMMENT
X. ANNOUNCEMENTS/REPORTS BY CHAIR
XI. EXECUTIVE SESSION
XII. ADJOURNMENT
1. Motion to Adjourn @ 10:53 PM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Meta Mueller, Member SECONDER: Joe VanDuyne, Vice Chair AYES: Brooks Jr., VanDuyne, Berkowicz, Coleman, Fritz, Gould, Mueller, Parker, Traynere |
Alerts Sign-up