Workshop Procedures Architect and Contractor Selection Workshop Minutes

Tuesday, May 17, 2005 – 9:00 a.m.

School Board Meeting Room

Stuart, FL  34994

 

Members Present

Susan Hershey –Chairman

Lorie Shekailo-Vice-Chair

Dr. David Anderson

Laurie Gaylord

Nancy Kline

Dr. Sara A. Wilcox, Superintendent

Tom Elfers, School Board Attorney

 

Members Absent

Katie Gillen, Student Representative (MCHS)

 

Staff Present

Ruth Pietruszewski, Darla Miloszewski, Rodger Osborne, Cathleen Brennan, Steve Rusnak  

 

Public

 

 

Press               PBPost – Mike Bender                          Stuart News – Kelly Tyko

                       

 

MCEA – No representation                  AFSCME – No representation

 

Call to order by the Chairman and Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States.

 

1.          Professional Services Selection-Statutes and Procedures (COPY ATTACHED)

Rodger Osborne started the workshop by distributing the statutes.  He went over the statutes to show how our procedures ensure compliance.  He stated that 287.055 was the guideline to professional services selection, and explained it was also applicable to the Construction Manager at Risk.  Rodger critiqued the applicable statutes. He discussed competitive negotiations, public announcement, legal advertisement, and qualification procedures. He illustrated how important it was for the proposers to know the process and the procedure, so stakeholders all apply using the same criteria.  He outlined the requirements and criterion.  Board members asked him questions, as he proceeded explaining the process.  He showed how our procedures, such as presentations to the Board, satisfies statute requirements such as, “The public must not be excluded from the proceedings…”   The statutes require choosing qualified firms.  Rodger went over what is involved in determining qualifications. Rodger explained that the Professional Service Advisory Committee (PSAC) was created to implement statute.  Tom Elfers, School Board Attorney, disseminated current rules on PSAC to Board members and staff.  The PSAC includes one School Board Member, one Superintendent’s designee, the Director of Facilities or his designee, one representative from Operation Services, one Program staff member, and additional staff members deemed appropriate by the Superintendent.  The District’s PSAC shall meet to review and analyze the proposals for the purpose of reducing the number of applicants qualifying for interviews.  Roger shared the criteria and point values used by PSAC to determine eligibility.  Rodger explained the professional qualification statement (PQS).  He went over the standards covered and listed on the ranking worksheets.  He discussed the point values and ranking process.  Board members discussed the point spread on the ranking sheets.  They concurred that the worksheets were subject to an individual’s subjectivity, because of the wide point spread.  The consensus was to use the worksheet as an evaluation tool to determine each Board members 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice, instead of adding up all the points.  There was no guide on how many points would be awarded for each level, so someone’s subjectivity could throw off the values.  Board members had a lengthy discussion on scenarios and possibilities that could cause the incorrect proposer to be awarded the job.   Steve Rusnak

 

1.          Professional Services Selection-Statutes and Procedures (Con’t)

displayed an excel spreadsheet to visually portray different point spreads and showed the chances of the second choice coming in first.  Board members changed numbers and rankings, popped different numbers

into the spreadsheet,  trying to determine what was the best way to safeguard and ensure the proposer chosen would be the one of the Board’s will.  Board members discussed PSAC.  PSAC has a procedure in place to do their ranking.  Board members all felt that PSAC should use the evaluation and ranking process that they felt comfortable with and currently had in place.  They discussed whether the Board member chosen to serve on PSAC should vote.  Lorie Shekailo felt that since Board members did not vote on all the other committees; they should not vote on PSAC. She felt that they should serve on the committee as a resource.  After discussion, the Board reached unanimity that the Board member serving on PSAC would be a resource and “ex officio” member.  They concluded that PSAC should include a staff person from Facilities, Finance, Operations, the Assistant Superintendent or Principal, a School Board member, and a community person.  Each person should have an alternate, so that there would be 5 votes and an established quorum at all times. The Board discussed their liability of appointing a community representative and the possibility that the appointee could have a conflict of interest.  The community person will sign a statement of conflict of interest.  A discussion took place on lobbying.  Tom Elfers distributed a survey from other school districts to show Board members their policies regarding CMR.  The problem with lobbying is that when one professional services person lobbies Board members, the other firms feel that they have to do it. Sue Hershey felt that our present system is working well.  The Board is involved in the process every step of the way.  The Board consensus was to continue with our present system. 

 

2.         Open to the Public   

§         No representation

 

3.         Open to the Board

Nancy Kline moved to adjourn the workshop, Lorie Shekailo seconded, and Sue Hershey adjourned the workshop at 11:27 a.m. 

           

 

There being no further business to bring before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:27 p.m.

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________                    

CHAIR (Sue Hershey)                     

 

 

 

_______________________________

SECRETARY (Sara A. Wilcox, Ph.D.)