JANUARY 26, 1988

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in special session on Tuesday, January 26, 1988 at 9:00 a.m. in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, Lake County Courthouse, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Glenn C. Burhans, Chairman; Thomas J. Windram; Claude E. Smoak, Jr.; James R. Carson, Jr.; and Don Bailey. Others present were: Christopher C. Ford, County Attorney; James C. Watkins, Clerk; Michael C. Willett, County Administrator: Katherine A. McDonald, County Administrator's Assistant; and Toni M. Austin, Deputy Clerk.

James C. Watkins, Clerk, gave the Invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commr. Bailey.

JAILS - Interviews for Construction Manager

Mr. Chris Ford, County Attorney, made general comments to the Board regarding the presentations to be made by the construction manager firms. Mr. Ford suggested that each firm make a brief presentation and answer any questions that the Board, staff and architects might have regarding the information presented by each project manager and superintendent. Mr. Ford stated that Professor Brisbane Brown, University of Florida, did not want to make comments on the general reputations of the firms, unless the County provided him with an indemnity, but he had no problem with commenting on the written and oral presentations.

Mr. Ford pointed out differences in the written proposals, which he stated should be brought up for discussion during the presentations. Mr. Ford presented a ranking sheet to be used by anyone that felt it would be of assistance. He stated that all three Eirms, to be interviewed, have accepted the standard GSA contract.

Commr. Smoak questioned whether or not an evaluation of all the proposals had been placed into a comparative format, for the Board's review and consideration. At this time it was determined that no actual evaluation had been performed, by any one individual, to be considered. The Board members, Mr. Bob Messmer and Mr. Pete Karamitsanis, Hellmuth, Obata, Kassabaum, Inc., and Prof. Brown compared some of the figures, which had been presented in the proposals.

Prof. Brown recommended that each firm submit, in writing, names of individuals of equivalent experience and education, who would be capable of handling any problems that might arise, should the appointed project manager or superintendent be delayed for any reason. Said individual will need to be approved by the Board, prior to accepting him on the job.

Mr. Bob McKee, Executive Assistant to the Clerk, clarified for the record, that the project manager and superintendent, from each of the construction manager firms, had been requested to appear before the Board today.

Barton Malow

Mr. Michael McCabe, Project Manager, and Mr. Bob Parsons, General Superintendent, appeared before the Board in behalf of Barton Malow.

Mr. McCabe discussed the importance of the project manager working with the architects, during the design phase. At this time Mr. McCabe discussed the Polk County project, in which Barton Malow was involved.

Commr. Burhans presented positive comments regarding the Polk County Jail/Judicial Complex, completed by Barton Malow.

Mr. McCabe discussed the substantial amount of change orders on the Polk County project, and stated that most of them were due to an alternate bid, to complete the fifth and sixth floor.

Mr. McCabe presented his educational background and work experience, and discussed the team that he will be working with, at Barton Malow.

Mr. Parsons, General Superintendent, discussed his responsibilities, in relation to the construction of the Lake County Criminal Justice/Jail Facility. He presented his educational background and work experience.

Mr. McCabe stated that a County work force was employed, for the Polk County project, which gave the County Commissioners an on-site small staff, and actual control of the project.

Mr. McCabe stated that he felt the 24 month period was more than adequate time to complete the construction of the Lake County project.

Mr. McCabe discussed Barton Malow's procedures for selecting sub-contractors, the use of local contractors, and the procedures used for bidding. He stated that he had no problem with spending the money locally, if it was spent wisely. He further stated that the testing of material will be performed by certified superintendents, from Barton Malow.

Mr. John Dickinson, Design and Construction Manager, appeared before the Board to discuss his principal involvement in the design phase. He stated that he works most closely with the architect, which has the biggest impact on the cost of the project. At this time he presented his educational background and work experience, and stated that he would be on this project 25-35% of the time.

Mr. Dickinson stated that all of the dollars relating to Barton Malow are enumerated in the proposal.

Discussion occurred regarding General Condition costs.

Mr. Ford stated that Article 9 fees are not included in any of the three proposals.

Mr. Karamitsanis, HOK, questioned the type of relationship that Mr. McCabe and Mr. Dickinson had with the architects of Polk County, in terms of disagreements in the engineering aspect of the project.

Prof. Brown requested definitions of the reimbursables in the Barton Malow proposal.

Mr. Dickinson stated that the reimbursables included any costs that the construction manager will expend, for the direct benefit of the project. He stated that general conditions would be anything that relates to being directly on that site, for running the construction process. Mr. Dickinson stated that the construction manager is imperatively involved in the shop drawings, and that the County would need 3-5%, in the Contingency Fund, to allow for change orders.

Mr. McCabe strongly suggested that, at the beginning of the job, primarily for the electrical contractor and the mechanical contractor, unit prices be obtained for labor and material.

Mr. Mike Willett, County Administrator, questioned travel and relocation expenses, in relation to what account the costs would be implemented, and the accounting procedures used for purchasing.

Mr. Ford requested Mr. McCabe's and Mr. Dickinson's feelings regarding the quote received from Barton Malow.

Mr. Dickinson stated that he felt the reimbursables were right, regarding the figure, but that the proposal was low. He stated that the decision was made through the corporate office. Mr. Dickinson recommended the expenditure of $130,000.00, for the additional design services.

Mr. Karamitsanis stated that he had analyzed the costs for the design services, for the three firms. He stated that Barton Malow was proposing $130,000.00; Rooney $135,000.00; and Enterprise $240,000.00. Mr. Karamitsanis stated that Barton Malow was closer to the industry standard.


At 11:15 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for five minutes.

Enterprise, Inc.

Mr. Mike Wozney, Project Manager, and Mr. Jim Culvard, Superintendent, appeared before the Board in behalf of Enterprise, Inc.

Mr. Wozney presented his personal qualifications and experience, along with the Enterprise team's experience, stating that the firm has performed $650 million worth of jail construction.

Mr. Wozney presented his personal background, in relation to jail/judicial complex construction, and stated that he is presently working on the Charlotte County facility.

Mr. Culvard presented his personal experience in jail/judicial construction.

Mr. Wozney informed the Board that the construction team with Enterprise, Inc., included Thompson Brothers, from Lake County.

Mr. Wozney discussed the time and costs involved, in the completion of the Criminal Justice/Jail Facility, in Lake County. He discussed the confirmation of the budget, which is then broken down, defining the elements for cost control. Mr. Wozney stated that the team would then proceed through the design phase, schematic design development, and from working drawings into the construction phase.

Mr. Wozney continued to discuss the monthly reports, that would be made before the Board, and tax savings that can be made. At this point, he stated that he was prepared to recommend precast cells, because of the cost factors.

Mr. Wozney informed the Board and staff that the sub-contractors will be qualified on financial stability and performance, and a known track record.

Mr. Wozney stated that 55% of the costs will be for material and components, for construction costs, and discussed the sub-contractors' bond.


At 11:55 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for lunch and reconvene at 2:00 p.m.

Enterprise, Inc. (Cont'd.)

Mr. Wozney continued the discussion, by informing the Board of the team members, which will be involved with the construction. He further discussed additional funds and costs, based on a $34.5-35.5 million complex. Mr. Wozney discussed the design construction schedule, reimbursable costs, fee savings, sub-contractors' overhead, and the bond issue, with the construction manager's fee being 7.8% of the construction cost. He also discussed the Article 9 costs.

Mr. Karamitsanis questioned the use of a project engineer, and a field engineer, and the hourly charges.

Prof. Brown discussed the substitution of staff, with written approval by the Board, and requested an interpretation of the additional costs, and the methodology used for change orders.

Mr. Wozney explained the origin of the change order, and discussed items that would be listed under general conditions.

Mr. Ford questioned the contracting with Brown & Root, Inc., should Enterprise, Inc. be selected to negotiate a contract with Lake County, and estimating accuracy performed by Enterprise, Inc.. Mr. Wozney stated that Enterprise, Inc. would contract with Brown & Root, Inc., who would be willing to sign the negotiated contract.

Discussion occurred regarding on-site personnel: off-site personnel; (in terms of hourly rates and scheduling); training of personnel; and maintenance of equipment.

Mr. Ford explained the effect a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) would have on the project.

It was stated, for the record, that the $34.5 million contract does not include the architect's fee.

Mr. Wozney presented a summary of savings on the job, as developed by Enterprise, Inc., in the amount of approximately $1.5 million.

Discussion occurred regarding inmate labor, and a possible savings of approximately $100,000.00.


At 2:35 p.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for ten minutes.

Rooney Enterprises, Inc.

Mr. John Jeniec, Senior Project Manager, and Mr. Steve Rozansky, General Superintendent, appeared before the Board in behalf of Rooney Enterprises, Inc.

Mr. Jeniec presented his personal background, in relation to construction and education, stating that Rooney Enterprises, Inc. as constructed 22 Florida correctional facilities, with 21 being county jails. He stated that he personally has been involved with seven of the facilities, six being county jails.

Mr. Rozansky presented his personal background, in relation to Rooney Enterprises, Inc., and stated that he is presently working on the Martin County correctional facility.

Mr. Jeniec informed the Board that Mr. Dick Kennard, Superior Equipment Technician, will be the Assistant Project Manager, on the Lake County project. He stated that he, himself, would be on-the-site as much as needed.

Mr. Jeniec discussed the firm's experience, on the Orange County and Seminole County projects. He stated that Rooney Enterprises, Inc. will present a monthly report, and that he will actually sit with the design team and negotiate the contract. Mr. Jeniec further stated that Mr. Fred Williams will be the on-site project manager.

Commr. Smoak questioned the unique techniques and management skills that will be used by Rooney Enterprises, Inc., and how the company can effectuate costs to Lake County.

Mr. Jeniec discussed the management skills; the team that will be involved with the project; the control of the schedule: cost savings through taxes and the bid process; and stated that there will be at least seven on-site people for the project. He also discussed the Guaranteed Letter of Credit, by Centex Corporation, which will cost less than a performance bond ($182,500.00 would be deducted from the owner's budget, if a Guaranteed Letter of Credit can be provided, as stated in the proposal presented by Rooney Enterprises, Inc.).

Discussion occurred regarding an actual pledge of assets with the Guaranteed Letter of Credit.

Mr. Ford stated that this method of credit may not meet State Statutes, and suggested consultation on the issue.

Mr. Jeniec stated that the relocating fees will be included in the construction fees. At this time he discussed reimbursables and Article 9.

Mr. Karamitsanis stated that he felt $130,000.00 is a generous design phase fee.

Discussion occurred regarding the budget and discrepancies in figures between the three proposals.

Mr. Jeniec stated that he could not guarantee a savings with a guaranteed maximum price (GMP). He stated that there is an advantage of putting most of the costs in Article 9.

Mr. Jeniec discussed shop drawings, and recommended a Contingency Fund (approximately 3%), at the time of the GMP, for budgetary purposes. He also discussed the processing of change orders and commented on public disclosure.

Mr. Ford questioned the guarantee for the contract, by Rooney and Centex, which Mr. Jeniec indicated a positive answer. Mr. Ford also questioned estimating accuracy by Rooney Enterprises, Inc. After the conclusion of the Rooney Enterprises, Inc. presentation, the Board and architects discussed issues that they felt should be presented to Barton Malow, in order to obtain figures for an accurate comparison between the three firms.


At 4:20 p.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for five minutes.

Barton Malow

Mr. Dickinson appeared before the Board to answer additional questions that the Board and architects had, regarding the proposal presented by Barton Malow. Mr. Dickinson stated that the proposal was based on 2.5% of the GMP, and based on the perimeters for a $34-40 million complex.

Mr. Dickinson stated that he felt there was adequate staff, from Barton Malow, to complete the proposed project, for Lake County. He stated that the staff would be the same as the staff used for the $57 million complex in Duvall County.

At this time Mr. Dickinson clarified the expenses, the reimbursable costs, and Article 9. He stated that the reimbursables are based on time, and would remain the same for a $34 million dollar complex, or a $40 million complex.

Mr. Karamitsanis presented to the Board and staff a comparison sheet, with the following information, based on a construction cost of $34,500,000:

Barton Malow Enterprise Rooney

Design $130,276 $240,814 $130,000

Percent .38 .70 .37

Construction Overhead

and Profit $862,500 $800,000 $988,250

Percent 2.5 2.3 2.9

Construction Fees $830,832 $1,657,185 $1,633,600

Percent 2.4 4.8 4.7

Total $1,823,608 $2,697,999 $2,751,850

Percent 5.28 7.80 7.97

Prof. Brown stated that, during the presentation by Rooney Enterprises, Inc., they expressed a latitude of delivery to the County, as far as what the County wanted, and felt that they were not clear on their definitions, as requested. Prof. Brown also stated that he thought there may be problems with Barton Malow, due to the amount of on-site staff, to be provided for the construction.

Mr. Karamitsanis and Prof. Brown felt that Enterprise, Inc. and Rooney Enterprises, Inc. have hired the sufficient staff, for the project.

Mr. Ford informed the Board and staff that Prof. Brown had stated earlier that a 6% reimbursable expense would be reasonable.

Mr. Messmer stated that he agreed with Prof. Brown's opinion, regarding Rooney Enterprises, Inc.'s vagueness, and he felt uncomfortable with the information received from them, in the presentation.

Mr. Messmer provided the following summary by saying that he would feel comfortable working with the people who appeared in behalf of Enterprise, Inc. and Barton Malow; the importance of general abilities (financial stability, experience, etc.), which he stated was in closeness with Barton Malow and Enterprise, Inc.; and the fees and costs, with an $800,000.00 fee, presented by Barton Malow.

On a motion by Commr. Smoak, seconded by Commr. Windram and carried unanimously, the Board ranked Barton Malow as number one, in the process, and approved to seek to negotiate and effectuate a contractual agreement, to act as Lake County's construction manager, for the judicial complex.

On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Carson and carried, the Board approved to rank Rooney Enterprises, Inc. as number two, in the process.

Commr. Burhans and Commr. Smoak voted "no".

Enterprise, Inc. would, therefore, be ranked number three.

Mr. Ford recommended that the architects, from HOK, and Prof. Brown meet at their earliest convenience, to review the negotiated contract with the legal department, and the number one selected construction manager firm, Barton Malow, so that the contract can be brought back, as soon as possible, to the Board.


On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Carson and carried unanimously, the Board approved and directed a letter to support the plan of the Lake/Sumter Mental Health Center and Hospital, to relocate their 40 bed psychiatric hospital, from Waterman Medical Center in Eustis, to North Leesburg; and their plan to submit the loan application to the Farmers Home Administration.


Commr. Windram informed the Board of a Lake County Legislative Delegation meeting, to be held January 27, 1988, at 3:30 p.m., at the Leesburg Community Center. At this time he stated that ten to twelve counties, that are involved with waste energy projects at the present time, including Dade and Broward Counties, are proposing legislation, which is already in effect in a number of states, which places avoided cost on electricity. This sets a minimum price, that utility companies have to pay local governmental entities, that are involved in wasted energy.

It was suggested that Commr. Windram and Commr. Bailey attend the meeting.

Commr. Windram discussed a resolution, received from the Industrial Development Commission, in relation to increasing fees for occupational licenses, another issue he would like to be brought before the Legislature.

Commr. Carson stated that he would like the Legislative Delegation to support, or introduce legislation, that would extend the $.50 per month surcharge on telephone service, extending the time that it can be levied, and liberalize, if possible, the uses of the fee.

Commr. Smoak stated that he would like the Legislative Delegation to receive the petition, by majority vote of the Board, to consolidate the fire districts in Lake County.

On a motion by Commr. Smoak, seconded by Commr. Carson and carried unanimously, the Board approved for those four items, that have been brought before the Board, be endorsed by the Board of County Commissioners today, and that Commr. Bailey and Commr. Windram present all four of those issues to the Legislative Delegation, at the scheduled meeting.

Mr. Ford stated that a letter of appreciation should be presented to the Legislative Delegation, for their assistance in protecting the additional one-cent sales tax.


The Board requested Barton Malow to appear before the Board, at this time, in order for the Board to inform them of the ranking of firms, for construction manager.

Discussion occurred regarding the scheduling of a tentative date, for the negotiated contract to be brought back to the Board, for consideration.

On a motion by Commr. Carson, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved to prepare a GSA contract, with modifications and addendums, to be reviewed by the Board, the legal department, the architects, and experts.


Mr. Chris Ford, County Attorney, informed the Board that the NRG contract will expire on January 31, 1988, and recommended that the contract be extended until midnight, February 16, 1988. Mr. Ford stated that Commr. Windram, Mr. Willett, and he are waiting to receive a tax opinion.

On a motion by Commr. Windram, seconded by Commr. Carson and carried unanimously, the Board approved the extension of the NRG contract, until midnight, February 16, 1988, as recommended by Mr. Chris Ford, County Attorney.

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m.