1

DALLAS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURTBRIEFING AGENDA

March 21, 2006

REPORTSJRECOMMENDATIONSJREQUESTS

1) HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES

PAGE NOS.

a) FY 2006-2007 Ryan White C.A.R.E. Act Title II Grant Award Insert

b) FY 2006-2007 Ryan White C.A.R.E. Act Title I and Title IMinority AIDS Initiative Contract Awards Insert

(COURT ORDER ON FORMAL AGENDA)

c) Dallas County Health and Human Services/Older Adult ServicesProgram Transportation Agreement Amendments 4-7

2) PURCHASING

a) RFP 2004-092-1515, RFP for Property, Inland Marine andBoiler and Machinery Insurance Policies - Modifications ~ . . 8-9

. b) Bid No. 2003-162-1415, Contract for Builders RiskInsurance - Modification 10-11

c) Bid No. 2006-040-1798, Annual Contract for Vehicle ReplacementGlass and Repair Services :. 12-19

d) Election Voting Booths 20-21

3) TAX OFFICE

Property Tax Collection Fee Per Parcel 22

4) IT SERVICES

a) Amendment No. 15 to the JIS/AIS Development Contract 23-28

b) Staff Augmentation for Support of AIS '.' 29-30

2

5) PUBLIC WORKS

Rescind Loop 9 Amendment No.5 - Fatal Flaw Analysis Contractand Amendment No.2 - Texas Department of TransportationLocal Participation Advanced Funding Agreement, Approve separateLoop 9 Fatal Flaw Analysis Contract and revised LPAFA 31-52

(COURT ORDER ON FORMAL AGENDA)

6) PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Tax Abatement Request from Essilor 53-55

7) OFFICE OF BUDGET & EVALUATION

DIVERT Grant Application 56-57

8) ENGINEERING AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT

George L. Allen Sr. Civil Courts Building Addition and RenovationProposed Change Order No. 16 58-60

9) ITEMS OF DISCUSSION

a) fuformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. N/A• Jail Population Report• Budget-Reserve Balance Report-March 15,2006• County Auditor-Costs Related to Texas Online• Planning & Development-EEO-l fuformation Essilor• Constable, Precinct No.4 - TCLOSE Monies for Law

Enforcement Training• Staff-Window of Opportunity for NorthSTAR Consumers• Purchasing-Annual Contract Extensions• Health & Human Services:

• HHS Updates• Pandemic fufluenza Response Plan Update

b) Status of Jail Inspection Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. N/A

c) Jail Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. N/A

d) George Allen, Sr. Courts Building Expansion Project N/A

3

e) IT Steering Committee:l) AIS Support Organization2) Civil/JP Court System - Data Conversion Resources3) CrrS/Criminal Courts - Project Manager and Business Analyst4) JCMS - Technical Analyst and Business Analyst5) DAAnalysis of AIS GoLive6) Review of projects

f) DA Investigation and prosecution of Billing and Fraud at PMH N/A

10) Miscellaneous, Travel Requests, Miscellaneous Equipment,and Telecommunications Requests .

11) PUBLIC COMMENTS

Speakers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. N/A

12) futerviews with Strategic Planning Firms 1:00 p.m.

FIVE SIGNATURE DOCUMENT(s) FOR CONSIDERATION

Minister's Letter of Appreciation

DATE(s) TO REMEMBER

Dallas County Commissioners Courtand the

Ruthe Jackson Keep Dallas County BeautifulCommittee Celebration ofKeep America Beautiful

andKeep Dallas County Clean and Beautiful

Months

Tuesday, March 28, 2006Administration Building

411 Elm Street, First Floor, Dallas

Reception - 8:30 a.m.

Commissioners Court Resolutionand

Acknowledgment Ceremony - 9:00 a.m.

BACKGROUND

OPERATIONAL/FISCAL IMPACT

Office: (214) 819-1860Fax: (214) 819-1866

Dallas, Texas 75207-2710

DALLAS COUNTYDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESOLDER ADULT SERVICES PROGRAMr, ", --, ,"; :3: DB

...... , I:';

DATE: March 21, 2006

It is necessary to make adjustments to these agreements each year in order to reflect theexact cost of operating the vans. For FY' 2006, adjustments need to be made to thefollowing site sponsors: Crest Moore King UMC, Elmwood UMC, Salvation Army PleasantGrove, Umphress Road UMC and Mountain View College.

Dallas County Department of Health and Human Services/OlderAdult Services Program hastransportation agreements with site sponsors of 14 senior centers. The agreementsreimburse site sponsors for providing transportation services to senior citizens attendingprogram senior centers. The site sponsors are reimbursed for actual expenses each month.

FROM: Zachary S. Thompson, Director of Health and Human Services

4

TO: COMMISSIONERS COURT

SUBJECT: Dallas County Health and Human Services/Older Adult Services ProgramTransportation Agreement Amendments

Zachary S. ThompsonDIRECTOR

The contract amounts originally approved and the recommended changes are listed inAttachment A. The agreement amendments will be effective March 1, 2006 throughSeptember 30,2006.

Transportation agreement amendments require the signature of the site sponsor and theCounty Judge. The District Attorney's Office, Civil Section has reviewed the transportationagreement amendment and the amendment has been approved as to form.

LEGAL INFORMATION

2377 North Stemmons FreewaySuite 200 - LB 16

5

Commissioners CourtMarch 21, 2006Page 2

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that Commissioner's Court approve the FY'2006 TransportationAgreement Amendments with Crest Moore King UMC, Elmwood UMC, Mountain ViewCollege, Salvation Army Pleasant Grove, and Umphress Road UMC and that the CountyJudge be authorized to sign the amendments on behalf of Dallas County.

Recommended by: ~~~~?ZaChal)lS:hOmpson, 9frector

attachments

c: Allen Clemson, Court AdministratorVirginia Porter, County AuditorDianne Rucker, Assistant Director

2377 North Stemmons FreewaySuite 200 - LB 16

Dallas, Texas 75207-2710 Office: (214) 819-1860Fax: (214) 819-1866

ATTACHMENT A

6

FY 2006 REVISED TRANSPORTATION BUDGET

CONTRACT SITES Original Revised Comments

Transportation Provider Budget Budget

1 City of Grand Prairie $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 No Change

2 Concord MBC $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 No Change

3 Crest Moore King UMC $ 15,000.00 $ 25,000.00 Increase amount by $10,000.00

4 ElmwoodUMC $ 15,000.00 $ 25,000.00 Increase amount by $10,000.00

5 Greater Mt. Pleasant $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 No Change

6 Kerala Association of Dallas $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 No Change

7 Mountain View College $ 5,000.00 $ . Decrease amount by $5,000.00

8 Salvation Army Pleasant Grove $ 7,000.00 $ . Decrease amount by $7,000.00

9 Sunray Community $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 No Change

10 Umphress Road UMC $ 20,000.00 $ 25,000.00 Increase amount by $5,000.00

Subtotal $ 172,000.00 $ 185,000.00

Additional Expenses $ 150,241.00 $ 137,241.00 Decrease amount by $13,000.00

[Driver Salary, Fringes, Van Rental, Major Repairs,County Auto, Paratransit, Automobile Insurance andOther Expenses]

TOTAL $ 322,241.00 $ 322,241.00

FUNDING SOURCE

Title III $ 247,000.00 $ 247,000.00 No change

Local Cash· County Match $ 75,241.00 $ 75,241.00 No change

TOTAL $ 322,241.00 $ 322,241.00

7

Amendment No. 1 ("Amendment 1") to DallasCoun Department of Health and HumanServ~c~s: 61~erAdult Services Program Trans ortati9n Service Agreement

'e~Agreemenf'),which was effective October 1, 200 , by and between Dallas County,Texas ('"County") and ("'Transportation Provider")

1. All pro~isions of the Agreement shall remain in fu I force and effect throughout the Termof the Agreement except

.,",

Section V. "Fundin .Oblimodified to, read as follows:

bursement ~ Para ra h F. shall be

The total amount reimbursed· to the T sportation Provider under thisAgreement shall be $25,000.00. or les5, d specifically shall not exceed

. and 1100 ollars ($ . .00).

0' ~

2. This Amendment 1 shall be effective on the date

Executed this day of -+ 2006.

COUNTY:

BY: MargaretKeliherDallas County,Judge

Recommended:

BY: zachary ThompsonDirector, DCHHS

'itApproved as to Form:

,.'

TRA SPORTATJONPROVlDER,=

BY:

"'By law, the Distri~t AttC?mey's Office may only advise or appr e contracts Of' legal documents on. benalfof Its clients. It may'not advise or approve a contract.ot' legal document en behalf of other parties. Ourreview df th is document was conducted solely from the legal pe spective of our client. OUf approval of thisdocument was Offered solely for the benefit of our client Oth r parties should not rely on this approval,.and should seel< review and approval by their own respective a orney(s).

8

DALLAS COUNTYPURCHASING DEPARTMENT

March 21, 2006

TO: Commissioners Court

THROUGH: Shannon BrownPurchasing Agent

FROM: Linda BolesPurchasing Supervisor

SUBJECT: RFP No. 2004-092-1515 Request for Proposal for Property, Inland Marineand Boiler and Machinery Insurance Policies - Modification

Background

On Jime 14,2005, the Commissioners Court authorized a twelve month extension to RFPNo. 2004-092-1515 Request for Proposal for Property, Inland Marine and Boiler andMachinery Insurance Policies as awarded to Upshaw Insurance Agency, Inc., for the periodof June 15,2005 through June 14,2006. The purpose of this briefing is to request that thecontract be modified to include a Builders Risk Insurance policy forthe Old Red CourthouseClock Tower construction project.

Operational Impact

The contract provides insurance coverage for various buildings, boiler and machinery,and electronic equipment (elections/radio) located throughout Dallas County based on a$1,000,000 property deductible and $100,000 boiler and machinery deductible. Thecontract also includes $200)000,000 in certified and non-certified terrorist coverage.

In accordance with Local Government Code Section 262.031 (a), Court Orders 2004-2109and 2005-970 modified the contract to include policy coverage for the new addition andrenovations perforn1ed at the Henry Wade facility and builders risk coverage for the RecordsComplex Underground Parking Garage and the Old Red Courthouse construction project.

As a result ofthe renovation work that is being performed on the Old Red Courthouse ClockTower, staff requested that the Risk Manager add the Clock Tower project to the buildersrisk coverage in this policy. That request was made to the insurance company in September2005 and the project has been covered since that time. However, the coverage was not

509 Main Street, Suite 623, Dallas Texas 75202-3340(214) 653-7431 e Fax (214) 653-7449 elboles@dallascounty.org

i~--- ____________L ~_____ 1,1

9

forn1aIly added to the contract. In order to pay the premium for this coverage, it is necessaryto modify the contract under RFP No. 2004-092-1515 to include this project. The currentcontract has one remaining extension option available.

Financial Impact

Upshaw has quoted a premium rate of$1,289.00 to modify the contract to include a BuildersRisk Insurance Policy for the Old Red Courthouse Tower based on a coverage period ofSeptember 1~ 2005 through June 15,2006.

Legal Impact

In accordance with Local Government Code 262.031, "Changes in Plans andSpecifications", the Commissioners Court may make changes to a contract if it becomesnecessary after a contract is made as long as the change does not exceed 25% ofthe originalcontract award. The contract was initially valued at approximately $179,484.99. Priorchanges to the contract (Henry Wade and Parking Garage) resulted in an increase ofapproximately 8.3%. Amending the contract to include builders risk coverage for the OldRed Courthouse Clock Tower represents an additional .0076% increase. Upshaw InsuranceAgency has agreed to provide builders risk coverage for the Old Red Courthouse ClockTower project and the coverage has been made effective retroactively to September 1, 2005.

Recommendation

The Purchasing Department, in conjunction with Project Engineering & Management andthe County's Risk Manager, recommends modifying RFP No. 2004-092-1515 Request forProposal for Property, Inland Marine and Boiler and Machinery Insurance Policies to includebuilders risk insurance coverage for the Old Red Courthouse Clock Tower renovation projectat a cost of$I,289.00 for the period of September 1,2005 through June 15,2006.

1 0

DALLAS COUNTYPURCHASING DEPARTMENT

March 21, 2006

TO: Commissioners Court

THROUGH: Shannon BrownPurchasing Agent

FROM: Linda BolesPurchasing Supervisor

SUBJECT: Bid No. 2003-162-1415 Contract for Builders Risk Insurance - Modification

Background

On September 30, 2003, the Commissioners Court awarded Bid No. 2003-162-1415 Contractfor Builders Risk Insurance to Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. - Dallas. The policy covers theconstruction and renovation work performed at the George L. Allen, Sr. Courts Buildingbased on a 720 calendar day period. The purpose of this briefing is to request that thecontract be modified to extend the policy coverage period.

Operational Impact

The contract provides 720 calendar days (October 15,2003 through October 14,2005) ofBuilders Risk insurance coverage for the construction and renovation work being performedat the George L. Allen, Sr. Courts Building based on premium rate of $74,538.00 with a$25,000 deductible. Dallas County intentionally omitted the builders risk policy from therenovation contract as originally awarded to Hawes and Tingle since Dallas County couldobtain the policy at a lower cost.

Due to complications associated with the construction and renovation work at the building,delays have resulted in the project's completion timeline. Due to the delays, staffrequestedin September 2005 that the coverage be extended through February 2006. The Risk Managercontacted Arthur Gallagher at that time and requested the extension. Arthur Gallagherindicated that the extension would be granted and that the underwriter would begin working

509 Main Street, Suite 623, Dallas Texas 75202-3340(214) 653-7431 e Fax (214) 653-7449 elboles@dallascounty.org

1 1

on the policy. Arthur Gallagher provided the estimate for the coverage in late Febmary2006. In order to extend this coverage period, the Risk Manager is requesting that Bid No.2003-162-1415 be amended to include the builders risk policy coverage through Febmary28,2006.

As a further complication, the completion deadline for the addition and renovationconstruction project is now anticipated to be September 19,2006. Consequently, ArthurGallagher was asked to quote a price to provide builders risk coverage for this period. Afinal price for this time period is being developed. Staff attempted to secure competitivequotes for builders risk coverage from other insurance agencies in accordance with CountyPurchasing policies and procedures. Due to the short time span and the complications thathave affected the constmction/renovation project, only Arthur Gallagher was willing toprovide a quote for the builders risk insurance.

Financial Impact

Arthur Gallagher has quoted a premium rate of $18,634.00 for builders risk coverage fromOctober 15, 2005 through Febmary 28, 2006.

Legal Impact

In accordance with Local Government Code 262.031, "Changes in Plans andSpecifications", the Commissioners Court may make changes to a contract if it becomesnecessary after a contract is made as long as the change does not exceed 25% ofthe originalcontract award. Amending the contract to include builders risk coverage for the requestedtime period represents a 25% increase. Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. has agreed to extend thepolicy for Builders Risk coverage for the George L. Allen, Sr. Courts Building constmctionproject and the coverage has been made effective retroactively to October 15, 2005.

Recommendation

The Purchasing Department, in conjunction with Project Engineering & Management andthe County's Risk Manager, recommends amending Bid No. 2003-162-1415 Contract forBuilders Risk Insurance as awarded to Arthur 1. Gallagher & Co. at a cost of$18,634.00 forthe period of October 15,2005 through Febmary 28,2006.

1 2

DALLAS COUNTYPURCHASING DEPARTMENT

!, ~ ,.! ~:

_' r:-~ '.

March 21,2006

TO:

THROUGH:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

Background

Commissioners Court

Shannon S. Brown#IfPurchasing Agent

Gloria McCulloch WebbPurchasing Contract Supervisor

Bid No. 2006-040-1798 Annual Contract for Vehicle Replacement Glass and RepairServices

Dallas County Commissioners Court authorized the Purchasing Agent to open Bid No. 2006­040-1798 Annual Contract for Vehicle Replacement Glass and Repair Services on January 23,2006. The Purchasing Department received eight (8) bids for the requested services from thefollowing firms: Accent Autoglass District, Ace Tinting & Glass, Inc., Detail Auto Glass, FortWorth Auto Glass Center, Ltd., Richardson Detail & Auto Glass, Safelite Fulfillment, Inc.,Triulllp Auto, and VVP America, Inc. The purpose ofthis briefing is to make a recommendationof award to the lowest compliant bidder.

Operational Impact

The bid specifications were developedjointly by the Purchasing Department and the AutomotiveService Center in accordance with the Automotive Glass Replacement Safety Standardrequirements. The specifications required bidders to state a percentage (%) off the NationalAuto Glass Specifications (NAGS) catalog and price calculator. The NAGS calculator indicatesthe exact price of the glass and labor hours required to install the replacement glass. It should benoted that NAGS is the standard utilized by both the insurance and automotive industry forreplacement glass.

Dallas County bid specifications required all bidders to state the effective date of the NAGScalculator, provide the names of the certified technicians and years of experience, and provideevidence of at least two (2) years experience in the auto glass replacement field. Of the eight (8)

509 Main Street, Suite 623, Dallas Texas 75202-3340(214) 653-7431 • Fax (214) 653-7449. gtorres@dallascounty.org

--------------------------------

1 3

vendors submitting bids, four (4) vendors (Accent Autoglass District, Ace Tinting & Glass, Inc.,Richardson Detail & Auto Glass, Inc., and Triump Auto) failed to provide one or more of therequired documentations requested in the bid. The matrix below indicates each bidder'scompliance and/or deficiencies with the bid specifications.

Vendor NAGS 2 Years of Certified CostCalculator Experience Technician Analysis

Date Documentation DocumentationAccent Autoglass District Yes No (1 st day of No $1,439.14

(09/12/2005) business7/12/2004)

VVP America, Inc. Yes Yes Yes $1,772.99(01/09/2006)

Detail Auto Glass Yes Yes Yes $1,995.79(0 1/09/2006)

Fort Worth Auto GlassCenter, Yes Yes Yes $2,068.81Ltd. (0 l/09/2006)Safelite Fulfillment Yes Yes Yes $2,082.51

(0 l/09/2006)Triul11p Auto Yes No No $2,123.62

(0 l/09/2006)Richardson Detail & Auto No No No N/AGlass, Inc.Ace Tinting & Glass, Inc. No No No N/A

Dallas County requested the date of the NAGS calculator since the NAGS publication hasdifferent prices for the same glass type based on publication date. As an example, replacementglass type DWOO 109-1 0 CLN reflects a price of $241.85 (02/28/2005), $456.45 (09/12/2005), or$232.75 (01109/2006).

The low bidder, Accent Autoglass District, does not meet the experience requirements and didnot provide documentation that technicians are certified. The bid specifications included severalquestions that were required to be submitted with the proposal. Accent Autoglass Districtindicated on the bid specifications that they provided eviden.ce of two (2) consecutive years ofexperience maintaining, servicing, and repairing auto glass. However, the Texas Sales and UseTax Permit submitted with the bid proposal shows a first business date of July 12,2004, whichdoes not meet the two (2) year requirement by approximately three (3) months. In addition,Accent Autoglass District answered "no" to the question concerning the provision of the name(s)of certified technicians who would be providing services under this contract. Based on thecombination of deficiencies in the bid proposal, the Purchasing Department recommends thatAccent Autoglass District is not a compliant bidder.

1 4

The second low bidder, VVP America, Inc., provided all of the required documentation. A listof three (3) references was provided that were able to verify that VVP America has two (2)consecutive years of experience maintaining, servicing, and repairing auto glass. In addition,VVP America provided a list of eight (8) names of technicians with an average of 17 years ofexperience. Six (6) of the technicians are certified, with three (3) having master levelcertification. VVP America met all of the requirements of the bid specifications and isrecommended and the lowest compliant bidder.

Financial Impact

The Purchasing Department performed a cost analysis based on replacement glass for a FordTaurus, Crown Victoria, and F-150 Tmck, the most common vehicles within Dallas County'sfleet operation. Based on these vehicles, the bid submitted by the lowest bidder would result in atotal cost of $1 ,439.14 to repair the windshield and back window of each vehicle type. Thesecond lowest bidder has a total cost of$I,772.99, for a difference of$333.85. Attachment Aprovides the detail for the cost analysis. The estimated annual expenditures for this contract areapproximately $25,000.

Recommendation

The Purchasing Department, in conjunction with the Automotive Service Center, recommendsBid No. 2006-040-1798 Annual Contract for Vehicle Replacement Glass and Repair Services beawarded to VVP America, Inc. dba Binswanger Glass as the lowest compliant bidder meetingthe stated bid specification requirements. Accent Autoglass District was notified of therecommendation to award to other than the low bidder as required by Local Government Code262.027(c). The attached letter was faxed on March 15,2006 and receipt was verified with afollow-up call on that same day.

ATTACHMENT A

Vendor NAGS Pricer Date Vchicle Type/Year \¥indow Type NAGS No. NAGS NAGS Net Cost After Labor Labor Cost or Kit Cost Total Cost/ Total wlo kitsPrice Discount Ilise Applied Hours Rate/hr Labor

4. SafcUte Fullfilll11clll January 9,2006 Crown Vic 1002·06 Windshield OWO 1506 230.650 18% 189.133 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 189.133Inc.

Back Window OB09692 263.400 13% 229.158 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 229.158

Sa/elite Fullfil/menl Illc. January 9, 2006 Taurus 2000-06 Windshield OWOl218 224.250 18% 183.885 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 183.885

Back Window OBI0205 1019.000 13% 886.530 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 886.530

Safelite Fullfil/menthlc. lanuary 9, 2006 Ford F-150Truck Windshield OWO 1256 244.600 18% 200.572 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 200.5722000-03

Back Window OB08981 452.000 13% 393.240 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 393.240

Safelite Fullfillment 2,082.518Inc. Total

*5. Triump Auto January 9, 2006 Crown Vic 2002-06 Windshield OWO 1506 230.650 27% 168.375 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 168.375Back Window OB09692 263.400 7% 244.962 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 244.962

Triump Auto January 9, 2006 Taurus 2000-06 Windshield OWO 1218 224.250 27% 163.703 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 163.703Back Window OB10205 1019.000 7% 947.670 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 947.670

TrillmpAulo January 9, 2006 Ford F-150 Truck Windshield OWO 1256 244.600 27% 178.558 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 178.5582000-03

Back Window 0808981 452.000 7% 420.360 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 420.360Triump Auto Total 2,123.627

*6. Accent Autoglass September 12, 2005 Crown Vic 2002-06 Windshield OWO 1506 247.700 45% 136.235 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 136.235

Back Window OB09692 272.650 40% 163.590 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 163.590

Accent Autoglass September 12, 2005 Taurus 2000-06 Windshield OWO 1218 229.900 45% 126.445 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 126.445Back Window 0810205 1019.000 40% 611.400 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 611.400

---I.Accent Autoglass September 12, 2005 Ford F-150 Truck Windshield OWO 1256 244.600 45% 134.530 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 134.530

2000-03 0)Back Window 0808981 444.900 40% 266.940 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 266.940Accent Autoglass Total 1,439.140

*7. Richardson Detail Nothing Indicated- Crown Vic 2002-06 Windshield OWO 1506 0.000 32% 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.000& Auto Glass Center NAG Priccr

Information NotProvided.Thereforc unableto evaluate cost ofservice

Back Window 0809692 0.000 34% 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.000

ATIACHMENTA

Vendor NAGS rricer Date Vchicle Type/Year Window Type NAGS No. NAGS NAGS Net Cost After Labor Labor CosI of Kit Cost Total Cost Tutal wlo kitsPrice Discount Disc Applied Houl's Rotelhr Labor

Richardson Dewil & T,urus 2000-06 Windshield DWO 121H 0.000 32% 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.000Auto Glass CcnLer

Back Window D810205 0.000 34% 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 11.00 0.000

Richardson Detail & Ford F-150 Truck Windshield DWO 1256 0.000 32% 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.000Aulo Glass Center 2000-03

Back Window D80898I 0.000 34% 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.000

Richardson Detail & 0.000Auto Glass CenterTotal

*8. Ace Tinting & Nothing Indicated- Crown Vic 2002-06 Windshield DWO 1506 0.000 38% 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.000Glass Inc. NAG Pricer

Information NotProvided.Therefore unableto evaluate cost ofservice

Back Window D809692 0.000 38% 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.000

Ace Tinting & Glass Taurus 2000-06 Windshield DWO 1218 0.000 38% 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.000Back Window D810205 0.000 38% 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.000

Ace Tinting & Glass Ford F-150 Truck Windshield DWO 1256 0.000 38% 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.000Inc. 2000-03

Back Window D808981 0.000 38% 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.000Ace Tinting & Glass 0.000Inc. Total

'" Represent non-

compliant bidders .......

~

1 8

DALLAS COUNTYPURCHASING DEPARTMENT

March 15, 2006

Steven SituOwnerAccent Auto Glass Dist.2924 Reward LaneDallas, Texas 75220

Via Fax to 214-366-0166

Dear Mr. Situ,

This letter serves as notification that the Dallas County Purchasing Department intends topresent a recommendation to award Bid No. 2006-040-1798 Annual Contract for VehicleReplacement Glass and Repair Services to VVP America, Inc. dba Binswanger Glass onTuesday, March 21, 2006. While Accent Auto Glass submitted the lowest cost bid,required information was not submitted with the bid proposal as outlined in the attachedbriefing document.

If you wish to dispute this recommendation, you may register for the public commentperiod during Dallas County Commissioners Court on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 bycalling the Commissioners Court Clerk, Ms. Paula Stephens, at 214.-653,..7165 by 4:00p.m. on Monday, March 20, 2006. A final award decision will be made on Tuesday,March 28, 2006.

If you have questions concerning this bid or the recommendation, please feel free to callme at the number listed below.

:}l~)j/;yuwJShannon S. BrownPurchasing Agent

509 Main Street, Suite 623, Dallas Texas 75202-3340(214) 653-7597. Fax (214) 653-7449. sbrown@dallascounty.org

1 9

DALLAS COUNTY COMPANY NAME: .Vi..f-rn .J.hv\ Pr tr t7 ('LP:.A fJitJ<. uJ!h1U'pfr...,Vendor Statistical Report ADDRESS: i./...,.,O(n W t i~NI >'1 f1 J <,)~ W1 ,nrLlIII':' To,{ ,"'1:!?:L"7;)(priD:ic{Abs.pcrfom:lizlg>l9%oCiaitiativc)

Permuent FuB-TIme Employment TELEPHONE: Q11-. ,-1fO ·-05';:l./(oot part timeltanp(seasooaJ)

MALE WHITE BLACK WSPANIC NATIVE AMER. ASIAN PACIFIC ASIAN INDIAN OTHER

OfficialslMsnage t+ProfessioDals

TecImiciaDs ,i) JSalesW_ I

Offia:IClcricaI tCraft Womr.. (Skillcd) ~ ~ dOpentivcs (Semi Skilled) C? rLabon:Is (UnsIdl/ed)

SERVICEWORKERS

TOTAL 24 l£.f !tt- IfORMALON-nm-JOBTRAINE£S:

WIII1E COllAlt

.JlCIKJCIION

FEMALE WHITE BLACK lllSPANlC NATIVE AMER- ASIAN PACIFIC ASIAN INDIAN OTHER

OlllcialslMaDagas '2Pnd'essionaIs

TecImiciaDs

SaksW_

OlficclClcris:al ZCtaftW_(Sb1led)

Operative-(Semi Skilled)

Labon:Is (Unskilled)

-Scrricc Wodo:os

fTOTAL IU

fORMAL ION:nm-JOB TRAINEES:

WHmlCOllAlt

PR1lDOCllOlf

TOTAL

CHECK Minority-Owned Fum Certification# IBsuedby SlgDaturelDa~ j~ (l""AA/~ONE:

NCTRCA-

Womon-Owned Finn Certification # lasucdby Typed Name and Title:

~k-NCTRCA

Lee.Ann -:;a.ie51iNoo-Minority Owned Finn

50F7

20

DALLAS COUNTYPURCHASING DEPARTMENT

March 21, 2006

TO:

THROUGH:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

Background

Commissioners Courtn(};(

Shannon S. Brown VtlUPurchasing Agent .

Gloria McCulloch WebbPurchasing Contract Supervisor

Election Voting Booths

The Dallas County Elections Department currently utilizes the Gemini VII Dual Voting Booth with lamp assembly as partthe of the election voting process. This unit is a single, self-contained case, which converts into (2) two, full-size stand alonevoting booths constructed ofhigh-density polyethylene.

The Dallas County Purchasing Department has contacted several election equipment suppliers and manufacturers to explorethe opportunity to procure this unique piece ofequipment or similar type design and construction from different sources tono prevail. The manufacturer ofthe equipment, Election Data, has provided Dallas County with documentation stating thatElection Systems and Software is the exclusive distributor of their Gemini VII Dual Voting Booth equipment. The purposeof this briefing is to request the approval from the Court to purchase the Gemini VII Dual Voting Booth from ElectionSystems and Software.

Operational Impact

Presently, the Elections Department has over 1,800 of the Gemini VII Dual Voting Booths in inventory which werepurchased the over past twenty (20) years from Election System and Software and Business Records Corporation ElectionDivision, which was later acquired by Election System and Software. Throughout the years, these units require replacementdue to shrinkage (loss), age, deterioration, mechanical difficulties, and increase in number of polling locations. TheElection Department is requesting to purchase this additional voting booth as a part of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA)signed by President Bush on October 29,2002. The Elections Department submitted information regarding this purchase ina briefing on HAVA items dated October 25,2005.

Financial Impact

The Elections Department is proposing to buy 1,000 units at $265.00 per unit. Funding for this purchase is being providedthrough HAVA grant at total cost of$265, 000.00.

Legal Impact

Texas Local Government Code 262.024 (a) (7) allow for discretionary exemption for items that can be only obtained from onesource. The attached letter fonn Election Data confinns that Election System and Software is the sole distributor ofthese typevoting booths.

Recommendation

The Purchasing Department in conjunction with the Election Department, recommends a sole source be granted to only knowndistributor (Election System and Software) of the Gemini Voting Booth as manufactured by Election Data.

509 Main Street, 6thFloor, Suite 623, Dallas Texas 75202-3340

(214) 653-7431 • Fax (214) 653-7449. gwebb@dallascounty.org

2 1FROM : ELECTION DATA

DATE:TO:

FROM:.

SUB.met:·

FAX NO. :760 751 1141

Ma:t'ch 2, 2006.Bruce SllerbetDallas County AdministratorElection DataDick. StephensModel 7 Gemini Booth

I I .L£..LU 0.111. (}.j-U..:J-£VUO

Mar. 02 2006 06:06PM P2/2

•• Election Data

Llc,

Election Data is an exclusive manufacturEiT ofthe ModeJ 7 Gemini Booth. This booth isdistributed exclusively by Election Systems and Software.

Election Data

ELECTION DATA' 29751 VA!..LEY CENTER RD.• VAllEY CSNTRR, CA 92082 • 71'>1)(751-1101 • FAX 7601751.1141

.........,-~

To:.From:Through:Date:Subject:

22

1 ;··.i':' .....: _j 4

DALLAS COUNTY TAX OFFICEDAVID CHILDSTax Assessor-Collector

Honorable Commissioners Court. Shirley JacobsonDr. David ChildsMarch 15, 2006Property Tax Collection Fee Per Parcel

~;~ ~ r:~ t)"_. 't.._o:~

BACKGROUND: Since 1991, the Dallas County Tax Office has been providing taxcollection services and now has 44 entities at a cost to them of $1.15 per parcel.

A recent audit of "consolidated tax collection service expenses" by the Dallas CountyAuditor's Office has documented and recommended an increase in the "per parcel" feefrom $1.15 to $1.35. This fee will take effect for the 2006-07 tax season, and will becalculated based upon the entity's number of accounts on the July, 2005 certified taxroll.

There has been a significant increase in taxpayer return visits to their "community" taxoffice to pay city taxes this month, school taxes next month, etc., creating an increase intransactions to be processed.

Also, there has been a dramatic increase in credit card payments on the web site,creating a huge increase in bank and credit c~rd transaction processing fees, which arebeing absorbed by Dallas County even though 80% of the fees apply to payment of cityand school taxes.

IMPACT ON OPERATIONS: None

FINANCIAL IMPACT: $360,000 increase in fees

LEGAL IMPACT: None

RECOMMENDATION: The Dallas County Tax Office requests that Commissioner'sCourt approve this $.20 increase in the per parcel fee charged entities for our collectionservices.

23

; .; ,

~ ,.'-. l, ; ~r

DALLAS COUNTYOFFICE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGCy: H c; j:S ;; 3: 29

March 15, 2006

TO:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

Commissioners Court

Robert Clines (tJt .Chief Information Officer

Amendment #15 to the JISIAIS Development Contract

PURPOSEThe purpose of this briefing is to approve Amendment #15 to the JIS/AIS DevelopmentContract to include the following tasks:

1. Four additional months of AIS HelpDesk & Operations support2. Four additional months of AIS Application Support

BACKGROUNDCommissioners Court awarded the contract for Operation & Enhancement of the DallasCounty Juvenile Information System (JIS) and Development of the Adult InformationSystem (AIS) to Infolntegration, Inc. on June 24, 2003.

The initial contract was for the period 07/01/03 - 06/30104 with four 1-year renewal options.The initial contract included Tasks 1-6 for JIS in the budgeted amount of $423.479.81 andTasks 7-9 for AIS in the budgeted amount of $460,878.88 for a total budget of $884,358.69.

Amendment #1 was approved October 21, 2003 for JIS Tasks 10-20 in the budgetedamount of $388,839.30.

Amendment #2 was approved February 10, 2004 for AIS Tasks 21-26 in the budgetedamount of $553,100 and JIS Tasks 27-33 in the budgeted amount of $430,430.06 for atotal budget of $983,530.06.

Amendment #3 was approved July 13, 2004 and exercised the first of four extensionoptions for the period July 1,2004 through July 31,2005. The amendment also approvedAIS Tasks 28a, 29a, 30a, 31-32, 33a, 34a, 35a, 36a,& 37a in the budgeted amount of$674,276 and JIS Tasks 38-39 in the budgeted amount of $133,849.83 for a total budget of$808,125.83.

JIS Task #40 was approved on July 27, 2004 in the budgeted amount of $10,000.

411 Elm Street - 3rd Floor, Dallas, Texas 75202-3340(214) 653-7339. Fax (214) 653-6517. rclines@dallascounty.org

24

Amendment #4 was approved September 21,2004 for JIS Tasks 41J-43J in the budgetedamount of $247,146.

Amendment #5 was approved October 19, 2004 for JIS Tasks 29A-b, 35A-b, 37A-b, & 44A­55A in the budgeted amount of $925,909.

Amendment #6 was approved December 14, 2004 for JIS Tasks 56J-60J in the budgetedamount of $397,790.64.

Amendment #7 was approved on February 8, 2005 for JIS Task 61 J in the budgetedamount of $265,795.54.

Amendment #8 was approved on April 26, 2005 and exercised the second of four extensionoptions through July 31, 2006. The amendment also approved AIS Tasks 62A-64A in thebudgeted amount of $777,939.

Amendment #9 was approved on June 28,2005 for AIS Tasks 66J-71J in the budgetedamount of $161,523.08.

Amendment #10 was approved on August 9,2005 providing for a total of $70,000 inexpenditures for interfaces from the AIS system to Tiburon RMS and SunGuard HTE RMSsystems.

Amendment #11 was approved on September 6,2005 for AIS Task 65A in the budgetedamount of $9,700. .

Amendment #12 was approved on September 19, 2005 for AIS Task 74A and 75A, whichincluded six more months of Helpdesk and Application support in the budgeted amount of$473,432.58.

Amendment #13 was approved on December 2,2005 for AIS Task 76A and 77A, whichincluded the creation of software interfaces between AIS and the cities of Dallas and GrandPrairie.

Amendment #14 was approved on February 21,2006 for AIS Task 78A and 79A, whichincluded the creation of a Police Agency AIS Arrest Interface and a Bond Forfeiture AuditReport.

OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

As detailed in Exhibit 0, Amendment #15 provides for four additional months of AISoperations and support and application support. The breakdown of resources and rates isincluded in Attachment A. The current operations and support contract with Infolntegrationends on March 31,2006. The contract between Infolntegration and Dallas County expireson July 31,2006. Infolntegration has stated that they will not be renewing their contract withthe County at that time. A copy of the formal letter of notice not to renew is included inAttachment B.

Page 2 of 33/15/2006

25

The additional four months of support will ensure support continuity of AIS until theexpiration of the contract with Infolntegration and will allow for transitioning of knowledgeand support tools to other resources to continue the support of AIS on an ongoing basis.

As positions are defined and filled to continue the support of AIS, a future briefing will comebefore the Court to approve additional expenditures for the transitioning costs associatedtransferring knowledge from Infolntegration to the newly acquired resources.

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONSThe District Attorney's Office has reviewed and approved Amendment #15.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Development Activities

Amendment 15 will cover two specific tasks. The total amount allocated for the two tasks is$307,088.60.

Task aOA is for first and second tier support of AIS.

Task 81A is for AIS application support.

Funding is available in the FY06 Major Technology Fund.

SCHEDULEThe tasks included in Exhibit D are scheduled to be completed by July 31, 2006.

RECOMMENDATIONIt is recommended that the Court approve Amendment #15 to the Contract for Operationand Enhancement of the Dallas County Juvenile Information System ("JIS") and theDevelopment of the Adult Information System ("AIS") and the expenditures as detailed inExhibit D, with funding provided by the FY06 Major Technology Fund.

Recommended by:

Robert A. Clines, CIO

cc: Robert A. ClinesMauri ElizondoTonya BrennemanRon Stretcher

Page 3 of 33/15/2006

26

Exhibit D to Amendment No. 15AIS Interfaces

April 1, 2006 - July 31, 2006Contract Amendment

Task Start & Completion Dates Amount

Task 80A - AIS HelpDesk & Operations

Task 81A - AIS Application Support

April 1, 2006 - July 31, 2006

April 1, 2006 - July 31, 2006

$ 191,878.08

$ 115,210.52

Total $ 307,088.60

Deliverable Statements

Task 80A -AIS HelpDesk & OperationsFirst and second tier support, 24 x 7 (on site and on call after hours) support of AISIssue tracking and reporting via HIMS (Helpdesk Issue Management System)System Administration and SecurityTrouble Resolution for Helpdesk TicketsRecords Management for AISSite Security Administration and MonitoringChange Management - Generation of change orders for out of scope issues causingnew developmentMonthly reporting of Issue Management, User Satisfaction, and AIS MetricsOngoing support of Agency Administration Function - PoliceOngoing support of County Administration Function - District Attorney,Magistrate, Grand Jury, Sheriff Department, Detention Court, Divert Court, DistrictCourt, County Court, District and County ClerkRoutine Maintenance and Periodic Security Patches to hardware and softwareDisaster Recovery and Backup Management .Ongoing Network and VPN Support

Task 81A -AIS Application SupportApplication Break-fix troubleshooting and resolutionTrouble Resolution for Helpdesk TicketsThird tier support of user reported issuesRoutine Updates of Agency Data into AISRoutine Update of Agency Data out of AISDatabase Performance TuningProblem Resolution of Data InconsistenciesWeb Services support and error resolutionsMonitoring of daily FTP jobs

ATTACHMENT A

AIS Operations & Maintenance Estimates April through .July 2006

115,210.52

307,088.6076,772.15 $$

9 151.99 $ 1,367.91

80 68.59 $ 5,487.20

42 109.20 $ 4,586.40

80 109.62 $ 8,769.60

42 90.24 $ 3,790.08

42 114.32 $ 4,801.44

$

1075

Estimated Hourly Estimated

Hrs. Rate Cost24 151.99 $ 3,647.76

126 95.49 $ 12,031.74

168 43.31 $ 7,276.08

168 43.31 $ 7,276.08

168 64.97 $ 10,914.96

126 54.15 $ 6,822.90

$ 191,878.08

Totals

Project Management

Web Developer

Sr. DBA

Web Developer

Web Developer/Reports & Web Services Support

Sr. DBA

Project Management

Operations Manager

Helpdesk Support

Helpdesk Support

Technical Writer

Network AdministratorlHelpdesk Support

Monthly Estimates

l"­N

Assumptions:

4 PTE Helpdesk support

1 PTE Technical Writer

1 PTE Web Developer

.5 PTE Sr. DBA

.25 PTE Web ServiceslReports support

The number of AIS Users is projected to remain the same

Training needs are met by one of the full-time helpdesk staff

Web development, DBA and Web services hours are intended to support the existing application and in scope requests

Initial 30 days of web development and DBA support for system enhancements is allowed for in additional tasks

o & M support for out of scope requests are managed and approved by the AIS Governance Committee and brought forward

under separate tasks

Existing Service Levels are maintained

Hours billed are actual hours expended to complete the work

Page 1

28

ATTACHMENT B

.&Infolntegration~...l BringingInfoJ1natlonTogether

March 7,2006

Michael K. Griffiths, DirectorDallas County Juvenile Department2600 Lone Star Drive·Dallas, Texas 75212

Dear Mike:

As the contact person for all correspondence between Dallas County and InfoIntegration,Inc., I am sending this notification to you. .

As I mentioned on Friday, February 24th, in our meeting with Bob Clines and

Commissioner MikeCan~rell, InfQlntegration, Inc has decided not to renew our Contractwith .Dallas County for the ongoingdevelQpment and support for AlS.

Contract tenns and conditions, required Infolntegration, Inc. to provide written notice tothe County at least ninety (90) days prior to the tennination or expiration ofthis Contract.Our current contract expires July 31, 2006. So that you can have more than ample timeto provide for support ofthe AlS application beyond July 31st, we hereby give you formalnotice ofour intent not to renew.

We have enjoyed working with you and the Dallas County Users. We look forward tovalidating your Transition Plan in May 2006 and are willing to work with you to providea successful, seamless transition ofthe support for AlS.

Sincerely Yours,

T~~~President

ce. Dalla.s County Commissioner Mi~e Cantrell ..·Dallas County CIO, Bob: Clines .

P. O. Box 12368 Dallas, Texas 75225www.infointegration.com

v:214.750.8339

29

DALLAS COUNTYOFFICE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

March 15, 2006

TO: Commissioners Court

FROM: Robert ClinesChief Information Officer

SUBJECT: Staff Augmentation for support of Adult Information System (AIS)

PURPOSEThe purpose of this briefing is to obtain approval to create positions for internal staffing ofAIS system support.

BACKGROUNDThe current Operations contract with Infolntegration expires on July 31,2006.Infolntegration has given the County a letter if intent not to renew this contract for anadditional term. That that time, their operation and maintenance support of AIS will cease,as well.

The Department of Information Technology proposes to work with Dallas County HumanResources to create and post in-house positions before the end of the contract to take overthe support functionality and continue the on-going maintenance of AIS.

The current needs to adequately staff the support organization are as follows:

Sr. Systems Analyst (2)Sr. Database Administrator (2)Web Developer (2)Support Analyst (1)

OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONSInfolntegration's support of AIS will terminate on July 31,2006. To optimize the support ofAIS on an on-going basis, it is critical to obtain resources prior to the end of the contract togain the technical knowledge of the application before the external support ends.

SCHEDULESupport positions must be created and posted as soon as possible so that there is ampletime to fill the positions and transfer the technical knowledge before the end of the contractterm.

411 Elm Street - 3rd Floor, Dallas, Texas 75202-3340(214) 653-7339. Fax (214) 653-6517. rclines@dallascounty.org

30

RECOMMENDATIONIt is recommended that the Court approve the Department of Technology's proposal tobegin working with Dallas County Human Resources to create and post the positions forsupport and maintenance of AIS.

Recommended by:

~~Robert A. Clines, CIO

cc: Robert A. ClinesMauri Elizondo

Page 2 of 23/16/2006

3 1

DALLAS COUNTYPublic Works

March 15,2006

To:

From:

Subject:

Allen Clemson, Court Administrator

Don HOlzf!:!!t!Director of Public Works

Request for Same Day Approval

TxDOT, Austin Division, has requested the Loop 9 Fatal Flaw Analysis (FFA) contract,previously approved by Court in November, 2006, be separated from the Loop 9 DEIS Study.

TxDOT request this action in order to track payments from two different funding levels(FedILocal match). The DEIS Study is funded at 50/50 while the FFA Study is funded at 80/20.In order to obtain a separate CSJ account number, TxDOT is requesting the FFA be a separatecontract and removed as Amendment 5 to the DEIS.

Critical time has been spent on the above issue. Public Works has a need to move this projectforward without further delay. Therefore, Public Works request the court approve the same daybriefing and court order.

411 Elm Street - 4rd Floor, Dallas, Texas 75202-3340

32

DALLAS COUNTY

PUBLIC WORKSTransportation Planning Division

ORDER ON FORMAL AGENDAL. -- ('-~ ,-;...' i :. .~:- :~:~ ~:: ~··i' 9

March 21, 2006

MEMORANDUM

TO:

THRU:

THRU:

FROM:

Commissioners Court

Commissioner John Wiley Price, District 3

Commissioner Kenneth A. Mayfield, District 4

Donald R. Holzwarth, P.E.Director of Public Works

SUBJECT: Rescind Loop 9 Amendment #5 - Fatal Flaw Analysis Contract andAmendment #2 - Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT)Local Participation Advanced Funding Agreement (LPAFA)

Approve separate Loop 9 Fatal Flaw Analysis Contract and revised LPAFA

BACKGROUND

On November 29, 2005 the Commissioners Court approved Amendment #5 ofthe Loop 9 DraftEnvironmentalImpact Study (DEIS) contract. Amendment #5 awarded additional work to Parsons Transportation Group($73,215.00) to conduct a Fatal Flaw Analysis Study (FFAS). Under the same Court Order, the County Judgewas authorized and directed to execute Amendment #2 of the LPAFA. (Court Order #2005-2342)

The FFA Study will identify transportation modes that may work within the constraints of the existing Loop 9alignment, grades and available main lane width. The results will be presented to the Loop 9 Policy Group forfurther consideration.

NCTCOG and TxDOT agreed to change the funding level forthe FFA Study to 80% federal and 20% localmatch. The DEIS Study is currently funded at 50% federal and 50% local match.

411 Elm Street, 4th Floor Dallas, Texas 75202 214-653-7151

33

funding levels could not have the same CSJ Project Number and requires the FFA to be a separate contractwith a separate CSJ Project Number. The separate CSJ Number will help facilitate payments in a timelymanner.

Dallas County Public Works, working with TxDOT and the consultant, has separated the Amendment #5contract from the DEIS contract. The new contract is consistent with the approved Amendment #5 DEIScontract and will provide the same services as previously approved by Court. Project cost remains at $73,215.00. Total cost the County is expected to be $14,643 (20% match) and Federal Participation (80% match) will$58,572.

TxDOT request the Dallas County Commissioners Court rescind the Local Participation Advance FundingAgreement Amendment #2, approved on November 29, 2005 and approve the a new Local TransportationProject Advanced Funding Agreement (LPAFA).

FINANCIAL IMPACT

Pending approval of the TxDOT LPAFA, $58,572.00 in federal funds will be available for the Fatal FlawAnalysis Study. Dallas County will be responsible for a 20% local match of$14,643. The funds will be evenlysplit and paid by 1991 Bond Funds allocated to Road & Bridge Districts 3 and 4.

IMPACT ON OPERATIONS

Dallas County Public Works will work closely with NCTCOG staffand the consultant to expedite completion ofthe initial phase of this Fatal Flaw Analysis Study. The results of the initial phase will determine what if anymodes are feasible and ofthose which will require further detail analysis. This study will determine ifchangesare necessary in the DEIS approach and schedule.

PROJECT SCHEDULE

The initial phase of the Fatal Flaw Analysis Study is expected to be complete four-months after the consultantreceives Notice-to-Proceed (estimated completion July, 2006). The results of this initial phase will determinefuture schedules ofadditional phases and DEIS process. Dallas CountyPublic Works will work closely with allparties to ensure schedules are met in a timely manner.

RECOMMENDATION

Public Works Department request Commissioners Court rescinds Court Order#2005-2342 and Local AdvanceFunding Agreement Amendment #2 approved on November 29, 2005.

We recommend approval of a separate contract with Parsons Transportation Group Inc. to provide the sameprofessional services as approved in Court Order #2005-2342 for the Loop 9 Fatal Flaw Analysis Study, Phase1. The contract fee remains $73,215.00 with funding from the Federal Surface Transportation Program­Metropolitan Mobility Project (STP-MM) at $58,572 (80% Federal) and Dallas County $14,643 (20% Local).

We also recommend Commissioners Court approval of the TxDOT Local Transportation Project AdvanceFunding Agreement (LAPAFA) between Dallas County and the State of Texas (Texas Department ofTransportation, CSJ 2964-10-002 Loop 9 Major Investment Study/Environmental Impact Statement). TheLAPAFA accepts the approved federal funds in the amount of $58,572.00.

411 Elm Street, 4 th Floor Dallas, Texas 75202 214-653-7151

34

If the Commissioners Court concur, a "Same Day Briefing/Court Order" is requested in order to expedite thestudy in a timely manner.

APPROVED BY

~zw~~Director of Public Works

Cc: Sam Wilson, Asst. DirectorBarbra Leftwich, Sf. Transp. PlannerEdmund Haas, ParsonsMoosa Saghian, TxDOTFile-Loop 9

411 Elm Street, 4th Floor Dallas, Texas 75202 214-653-7151

35

<COfYSTAND-ARD-AGREEMENT

FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

This AGREEMENT made and entered into this day of , 2006, byand between Dallas County, Texas, hereinafter referred to as the "CLlENT", and PARSONSTRANSPORTATION GROUP INC., an illinois corporation (hereinafter referred to as the"CONSULTANT") with an office located at 15770 North Dallas Parkway, Ste. 500, Dallas, Texas 75248.

WIJNESSE1H:

WHEREAS, the CLIENT desires to engage the services ofthe CONSULTANT to fumish technical andprofessional assiStance in connection with the Loop 9 AlternativeModes Fatal Flaw Analysis, hereinafterreferred to as the "PROJECT" and the CONSULTANT has signified its willingness tofumish technical andprofessional services, to the CLIENT;

NOW lHEREFORE, the parties hereto do mutually agree as follows:

Article 1. Scope ofCONSULTANTS Services

The CONSULTANT agrees to perfonn in a good and professional mariner those services outlined inAttachment A, whieh isattachedherero-and inoorporated.·inthis~AGREEMENr, and·otherworkfuatmayfrom time to time be directed in writing bythe CLIENT in support ofthe Project.

Article 2. Information and Services to be Provided by the CLIENT

The completion of1he services to be perfonned by1he CONSULTANT under1he AGREEMENT iscontingentupon the timely receipt from the CLIENT, at no costto the CONSULTANT, ofservices, data, andreports described in AttachmentB,whichis·attach.ed·hei-eto·andinco~'in-tiris' AGREEMENT:

Article 3. Time ofPerfonnance

The services ofthe CONSULTANT will begin upon receipt ofa written Notice to Proceed and wil~

absent causes beyond 1he control ofthe CONSULTANT, be completed within four (4) months thereafter.

Article 4. Compensation

The maXimum cOmpensation for this Contract, hereinafter referred to as the ceiling price, shall not exceedSeventy-Three Thousand Two Hundred Fifteen Dollars ($73,215.00).

CONSULTANT shall endeavor to perfonn the specified work and ofuerworkfuat may fromtime to timeredirected·bytlwCLlENT; andallother'obligations'Underthisoontract;within1he-tOtah~el1ing'priee:TheCONSULTANT shall not be obligated to continue perfonnance ifto do so would exceed 1he ceiling price,unless or until1he CLIENT shall have notified the CONSULTANT in writing that1he ceiling price has beenIncreased atid shall have specified.:iiI. the notice a revised Ceiling that shall conStitute the ceilitig price forperformance under this Contract. When and to the extent1hat the ceiling price has been increased, any hoursexpended and material costs incurre4 by the CONSULTANT in excess offue ceiling price before theincreareshall be-a11owab1~to'thesafi1eex1ent as'ifthe hours expended'and·material-cOsts·had'been'inctirred'after the increase in the ceiling price.

Professional'Services ContractLoop 9Alternative Modes Fatal Flaw Analysis

311512006Page 10/11

36

Ifat anytime the CONSULTANT has reason to believe that the cost it expects to incur in the nextsucceeding3f)·days; ifadded to all other'payments and costs previously accrued; willexceed 80 percent ofthe .ceiling price, the CONSULTANT shall notify the CLIENT in writing to that effe~ giving the revisedestimate ofsuch total cost for the perfonnance ofthe Contract. No change in the scope ofservices, whether ornot sueh ehange may have· an: effect on the cost ofthis Contract, shall be made except pursuantto·supplemental agreementbetween the parties.

The CONSULTANT shall be compensated for services rendered under this Agreement an amount equalto the-direct salarytimesafactor of- 3.0 for all ofCONSULTANT's personnel-engaged directlyon-1he·Project. Direct expenses will be reimbursed at cost. The total ceiling price of$73~215 includes $36,696 for1aborand $36.519 fOf other'direct costs. CLIENT shall reimburse CONSULTANTwrthin thirty (30) days of·receipt ofan approved invoice, or that portion ofan invoice that is not in dispute.

CONSULTANT shall submit an invoice every four (4) weeks identifying the employee grade, the labor:rate, the number ofhours-actuallyworked; and other direct costs incurred on-this Project. See Attaebment C .for the labor:rates and the breakdown ofdirect expense items.

Article 5. Additional Work/Changes

Work not specifically described under "Scope ofServices" must be approved by supplemental agreementto this contract by the CLIENT before it is undertaken by the CONSULTANT. Special cases may arise underthiS'contra:ct-where asupplemental-agreementcovering suekchange-cannotreprocessed and·delaysto' .CLffiNT would resuh. Such work in these cases can be authorized by a letter from the Client to be followedby the supplemental agreement Ifthe CONSULTANT is ofthe opinion that any work it has been directed toperfonn is' beyond the scope ofthis agreement and consti:1utes' extrawork, the CONSULTANT shallpromptly notify the CLIENT in writing. In the eventthe CLIENT finds that such work does constitute extrawork, then the CLIENT shall so advise the CONSULTANT, in writing, and shallprovide extra compensationtothe'CONSULTANffor'doingthis-wo*onthesame-basis-as-coveredunderJ'CompensationJI andas'provided under a written Amendment to this Agreement.

Article 6. Records/Audits

The CONSULTANT shall maintain complete and aceumte books, documents, papers, accounting records,and other evidence with respect to allowable costs incurred and manpower expended under thisAGREEMENT. Allsuch-records--shall·be maintainedonthe basis'ofgenerally-accepted-accounting-principles·and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. The CONSULTANT shall provide access dUringregular business hours to authorized representatives ofthe CLIENT to such data and records, and the right toinspect and audit all data and records ofthe CONSULTANT relating to its penonnance undertheAGREEMENT, and to make transcripts therefrom as necessary to allow inspection ofall work data,documents, proceedings, and activities related to this AGREEMENT for a period ofthree (3) years from thedate offinal payment under this AGREEMENT.

Article 7. Ownership ofDocuments

Upon completion ortennination ofthis contract, all documents prepared by the CONSULTANT orfurnished to the CONSULTANT by the CLIENT shall be delivered to and become the property oftheCUENf. Allbasic- sketches; charts, ca1culations,plans; andt>ther'dataprepared under1his·contractshall be­made available, upon request, to the CLIENT without restriction or limitation on their further use. TheCONSULTANT may, at its own expense, have copies made ofthe documents or any other data ithasfurnished the CLIENT under this contract without restriction Of limitation on their :further use by theCONSULTANT.

ProjessionalSefvices Contract·Loop 9Alternative Modes Fatal Flaw Analysis

311512006­Page20jll

37

The CONSULTANT shall not be liable for use by the CLlENT ofsaid plans, documents, or oilier data forany purpose other1han for the purpose for which this AGREEMENT has been executed

Article 8. Tennination

The CLIENT and the CONSULTANTwill have the right to terminate the AGREEMENT by writtennotice to the other party at least Ten (10) days prior to the specified effective date ofsuch termination. In suchevent; all-:finished-and unfinished documents and work papers prepared by the CONSULTANTunder this­AGREEMENT will, at the option ofthe CLIENT, become 1he CLIENTs property, and the CONSULTANTwill be paid for services satisfactorily rendered up to the date ofsuch termination, plus reasonable terminationcosts. Neither lost profit nor anticipatory profit will be paid.

Article 9. Excusable Delays

The CONSULTANT will not be in default by reason ofany failure in performance of1his AGREEMENTin accordance with its terms (including any failure by the CONSULTANT to make progress in the"prosecution of1heworkhereunderwhich endangers such perfonnance}ifsuch: failu.re. arises aut o-fcauses­beyond1he control and without1he fault ornegligence of1he CONSULTANT. Such causes may include, butare not restricted or limited to, acts ofGod, or ofthe public enemy, acts of1he government in either itssovereign or contractual capacity, fires~ floods, epidemies~ quarantinerestrictlons,strikes,fteight embargoes,and unusually severe weather but in every case 1he failure to perform must be beyond the control and without1he fault ornegligence ofthe CONSULTANT or its subcontractors. An excusable delay will pennitCONSULTANT an extension oftime for such reasonable-period asmaybe-muiuallyagreed upon between­1he parties.

Article 10. Disputes

All claims, disputes and matters in question arising out of or relating to this Contract or the breachthereofshall be resolved in the following manner:

A. Disputes where the potential liability ofeither party exceeds the amount of one million dollars($1,000,000) shall be resolved in a court ofcompetentjurisdiction where the project is located orwherethecontractor?sservicesare provided. In any such litigation, the parties agree to waive theirrights to a jury trial on all issues.

B. Disputes where the potential liability ofeach party is less than one million dollars ($1,000,000)shall be resolved by arbitration in accordance'with 1he Construction Industry Arbitration Rules oftheAmerican Arbitration Association then in effect subject to the following conditions:

I. There will be a single arbitrator appointed by the American Arbitration Association from itsNational Panel in accordance with its normal procedures for selection ofarbitrators.

2. The arbitrator will issue a detailed written decision setting forth. the legal and factual basis ofthe decision. Ifthere is more than- one issue upon which a party's claim: is-based, the' decision,will separately address each issue.

3. The parties will produce documents as ifthe arbitration was governed by the Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure.

4. Any questionofarbitrability shall be decided by: the appropriate court and not by arbitration.

Professional Services ContractLoop 9Alternative Modes Fatal Flaw Analysis

3/15/2006Page 3 of11

38

5. The agreement to arbitrate does not apply to any claim ofcontribution or indemnity basedupon a claim or action by a person who does not consent to become a party to arbitration with theparties.

6. The award rendered by the arbitrator (s) shall be final andjudgment may be entered upon it inaccordance with applicable law in any courthaving jurisdiction.

7. The. parties.agreeto consolidate any arbitration under this. contractwith any other arbitrationinvolving either party and arising out of a common question offact or law.

C. Prior to the institution ofeither arbitration oflitigation, the ChiefExecutive Officer ofthe parties,ortheir-designated-representatives; shall meet personally in-a good'faith effort to resolve-the issuesto­be litigated or arbitrated. This requirement is a condition precedent to the commencement oflitigationor arbitration.

D. This contract shall be construed in accordance with the law ofTexas, except that any arbitrationagreement shall be governed by the Federal. Arbitration Act.

Article 11. Indemnification

Engineer shall indemnify, hold hannless, and defend County, its officers, agents and employees fromany loss, damage; liability or expense-, includingreasonable-attemeys f-ees, on aceoont ef damage- to.property and injuries, including death, to all persons, including employees ofEngineer or any associateconsultant, which may arise from any errors, omissions or negligent acts on the part ofthe Engineer, itsemployees; agents;consultants·or subcontractors, in the·perfonnance·ofthis Contract, or any breach ofany obligation under this Contract.

Article 12. Insurance

The CONSULTANT shall place and maintain with responsible insurance carriers the following insurance.The CONSULTANT shall deliver to CLIENT, upon request, certificates ofinsurance which shall providethirtydays'writtennotice to be given to CLIENT in the event ofcancellation. CONSULTANT shallrequireall Subconsultants to maintain adequate insurance coverage.

A Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liabi1i1;y Insurance

a. Workers' Compensation in compliance with the applicable state and federal laws.

b. Employer's Liability. Limit $1,000,000.

B. Commercial General Liability Insurance including Professional Liability, Blanket contractual, XCDHazards, Broad. Fonn Property Damage, Completed Operations and Independent Contractor's Liabilityailapplicable to PersonalInjUry, Bodily Injury and·Property Damage·to·a;oombined'single·limit Qf$1,000,000 each occurrence/claim subject to $2,000,000 annual aggregate for Professional Liability,Completed Operations and Personal InjUry otherthan Bodily InjUry.

C. Automobile LiabilitY Insurance including owned, hired and non-owned automobiles, Bodily Injuryand Property Damage to a combined single limit of$1,000,000 each occurrence.

Article 13. Nondiscrimination

Professional Services Contract·Loop 9 Alternative Modes Fatal Flaw Analysis

311512006Page 4 of11

39

A. Compliance with Regglations: The CONSULTANT shall comply with Federal Regulations relative tonondiscrimination ofthe Department ofTransportation, Title 49, Code ofFederal Regulations, Part 21,and Title 23, Code ofFederal Regulations, Part 710.405(b), as they may be amended from time to time(hereinafter referred to as 1he regulations), and with Executive Order 11246 titled Equal Employmentopportunity as amended by Executive Order 11375 and as supplemented by Department ofLaborRegulation (4ICFR60) which are herein incorporated byreference and made a part of1his contract.

B. Nondiscrimination: The CONSULTANT, with regard to 1he work perfunned by it during thecontract, shall not discriminate on the grounds ofrnce, color, sex, or national origin in the selectionand retention ofsubcontractors, including procurement ofmaterials and leases ofequipment. TheCONSULTANT shall not participate either directly or indirectly in 1he discrimination prohibited bySection 21.5 and Part 710.405(b) ofthe Regulations, including employment practices when thecontract covers a pf()grnm set forth in Appendix B ofthe ReguIati.ons.

Article 14. Contingent Fees

The CONSULTANT warrants 1hat ithas not employed or retained any company or person, other than abonafide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT, to solicit or secure 1his contract and that it hasnot paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bonafide employee working solely for 1heCONSULTANT, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts or any other consideration, contingentupon or resulting from 1he award ormaking ofthis contract. For breach or violation of1his warranty, theCLIENT shallhave fue right to annul this contractwi1hout liability.

Article 15. Conflict ofInterest

The CONSULTANT certifies that to the best ofits knowledge no CLIENT employee or office ofanypublic agency interested in the AGREEMENThas any pecuniary interest in the business of1heCONSULTANT and thatno person associated with1he CONSULTANT has any interest fuat would conflictin anymanner or degree with the perfonnance of1he AGREEMENT.

Article 16. Compliance with Laws

The CONSULTANT shall at all times observe and complywith all laws, ordinances, and regulations ofthe state, federal, local, and city government which may, in any manner, affect the perfonnance oftheAGREEMENT.

Article 17. Assignability

The CONSULTANT shall not assign any interest in the AGREEMENT and shall not transfer any interestin the same (whetherby assignment or novation), without prior written consent of1he CLIENT; provided,however, fuat claims for money due or to become due to the CONSULTANT from the CLIENT under thisAGREEMENT may be assigned to any commercial bank or o1her financial institution wi1hout such approval.

Article 18. Personnel

All ofthe services will be perfunned by the CONSULTANT; and none ofthe work or services covered by1his AGREEMENT will be subcontracted without the priorwritten approval of1he CLIENT. TheCONSULTANT represents that it has, or will secure at itS own expense, all personnel required to carry outand perfonn the Scope ofServices ofthis AGREEMENT. Such personnel will not be employees ofor have

ProfessionalServices ContractLoop 9 Altemative Modes Fatal Flaw Analysis

3/15/2006Page 5 of11

40

any relationship with any ofthe members of1he CLIENT. Such personnel will be fully qualified and will beautllorized under state and local law to perronn such services.

Forthis study effort Parsons win utilize me Solutions, a current team member ofthe Loop 9 MISIDEISStudy, to assist in this Alternative Modes Fatal Flaw Analysis ofthe Loop 9 corridor.

Article 19. Project Management

The·CLIENThereby designates as its Executive Administrator, . CONSULTANThereby designates as its Project Manager, Edmund Haas, AICP. All direction, correspondence andcoordination ofthe Project shall take place through these representatives.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CLIENT and the CONSULTANThave executed this AGREEMENT onthe date and year first above written.

CONSULTANT:

Signature

Dave N. Carter. P.E.Typed Name

Vice PresidentTitle:

Attachments:

CLIENT:

Signature

Typed Name

Title:

Attachment A, "Scope ofWorkII, 4 pages, dated December 16, 2005.

Attachment B, "Client Furnished Jnfonnation", 1 pages, dated December 16, 2005.

Attachment C, "Compensation"

Professional Services ContractLoop 9Alternative Modes Fatal Flaw Analysis

3/15/2006Page60fll

4 1

ATTACHMENT A

SCOPE OF WORK

Date: December 16,2005

LooP 9 DEIS Contract Amendment #5December, 2005

Purpose of SCOPE Amendment

To investigate the feasibility of adding alternative modes of travel to the Loop 9 corridor with funding comingthrough alternative mechanisms made possible by new Texas legislation (lIB 3588). Alternative modes to beinvestigated within Loop 9 include:

• Freight Rail• Managed lanes for trucks, autos, or mix oftrucklautos.

Ramifications to the physical aspects ofthe existingLoop 9 corridor include:

• The ability of the proposed 400'/350' right-of-way width to safely accommodate alternative modes.• Logical tie-in points.

Ramifications to the design aspects ofthe proposed corridor:

• Ability of alternative alignments to accommodate freight rail from a horizontal and vertical designstandpoint

• Design mix ofalternative modes.• Design speeds ofthe mix ofalternative modes (phase 2).• The increased vehicular volumes associated with intrastate truck/auto traffic in addition to the projected

growth ofthe Metroplex (Phase 2).• Connectivity with other intrastate and interstate roadway facilities (phase 2).

For the purpose of briefing the Loop 9 Policy GrouplTask Force and securing their approval prior to detailedinvestigation, this analysis will quickly investigate the geometric compatibility, of alternative modal considerationswith existing proposed alignments of the Loop 9 corridor. A strategic level planning approach would be employedin this initial analysis.

Our scope of effort is detailed below. Please note that this scope of services and associated cost estimate addressonly the initial feasibility effort (phase 1) of this investigation. Detailed analyses and potential inclusion of viablemodal alternatives into the Draft BIS process will require additional scope and budget and would be based on thenumber ofadditional alternatives to be included in the documentation process.

Fatal Flaw Analysis Investigation

Purpose: To identify alternative modes oftravel jiJr inclusion into the existing Loop 9 corridor, identify technicalissues and /imitations; and recommend modesjiJr detailed evaluation in the DEISprocess. Policy Group and TaskForce approval ofthe analysis and recommendations will be necessary prior to fitrther evaluation ofalternativemodal consideration.

Task Elements:

1. Detennine geometric criteria for alternative modes within the Loop 9 corridor and compatibility with existingLoop 9 alignments. Research to be based on industry standards and other available inforination (i.e. TICdesign criteria).

Professional Services ContractLoop 9 j1lternative Modes Fatal Flaw Analysis

3/15/2006Page 70f11

2.2.4.2.2.5.2.2.6.

42

1.1. High Speed Freight Rail1.1.1. Determine appropriate design speed1.1.2. Determine the maximum vertical grade to maintain desired speed1.1.3. Determine the minimum horizontal curvature to maintain desired speed1.1.4. Determine where the existing Loop 9 aligmnent fail to meet criteria

1.2. Managed Auto Lanes'1.2.1. Determine appropriate design speed1.2.2. Determine the maximum vertical grade to maintain desired speed1.2.3. Determine the minimum horizontal curvature to maintain desired speed1.2.4. Determine where the existing Loop 9 aligmnent fail to meet criteria

1.3. Managed TrnckLanes1.3.1. Determine appropriate design speed1.3.2. Determine the maximum vertical grade to maintain desired speed1.3.3. Determine the minimum horizontal ci:Jrvature to maintain desired speed1.3.4. Determine where the existing Loop 9 aligmnent fail to meet criteria

1.4. Identify mode(s) for further analyses.

2. Define viable modal alternatives and determine critical problem areas. For cost estimate purposes, one cross­section for each viable mode will be defined. Cross sections will be provided by NCTCOG and verified byTXDOT.2.1. Define the cross-section for viable modes determined in Task 1.

2.1.1. Review TIC design strategies for possible incorporation into Loop 9 corridor.2.1.2. Define right-of-way needs for viable modes. Descn1le implications of selected modal alternatives

(i.e., benefits/implications of mixed flow, designated lanes, "triggers" for certain lane mix basedon available information).

2.1.3. Determine worse-ease scenario right-of-way envelope for analysis purposes.2.1.4. Obtain feedback from NCTCOG and TxnOT with regard to right-of-way needs determination.

2.2. Determine potential impacts ofviable modal alternatives with connections at major freeways/crossings.2.2.1. Determine potential connection locations along corridor

2.2.1.1. Review TIC functional criteria of accessibility, spacing and triggers for connectivity.2.2.1.2. Identify functional locations for connections with Loop 9.

2.2.2. Define conceptual connections and ramifications (i.e. pros/cons ofvarious connection types - slipramp, direct connect, wishbone). Determine optimal connection for use ill detennining potentialimpact with Loop 9.

2.2.3. Determine interchange impacts for each mode based on grade, curvature requirements and optimalconnectivity, including the following elements:HeightLengthWidth

3. Meet with Study Team to discuss initial findings prior to meeting with the Task Force. Identify any criticalissues to address/follow-up prior to Task Force Meeting. Follow-up of any critical issues is limited to thoseidentified in the initial Study Team meeting.

4. Document Findings4.1. Prepare draft technical memorandum documenting findings and recommendations. Ten (10) copies of the

draft memorandum will be submitted for use by the Client An electronic version will also be submitted.

5. Meetings. 5.1. Attend one (1) meeting with the Study Team

5.2. Attend one (1) Technical Meeting with TXDOTINCTCOG5.3. Attend one (1) Policy GrouplTask Force Meeting detailing the results of the analyses

The number of meetings is difficult to estimate. Ifthere is a need for additional meetings over those identifiedabove, they will be billed on a time and expense basis.

Professional Services ContractLoop 9Alternative Modes Fatal Flaw Analysis

3/15/2006Page 8 of11

43

Schedule

We believe the technical portion of this analysis can be completed in one month and could be wrapped up shortlythereafter with a technical meeting with TXDOT I NCTCOG and then, culminating with a joint meeting of thePolicy Group and Task Force Members. Subject to Notice-to-Proceed at the first of 2006, it is anticipated that thetechnical work Can be completed by the end of January 2006, a Study Team meeting held in the :first to mid­February and the Task Force meeting in March 2006. Subject to Policy Group/Task Force approvals, a revisedschedule for additional efforts (phase 2-Conceptual Schematics and Phase 3-DEIS inclusion) will be developed andreviewed with Dallas County.

It is anticipated that NcTCOG will play a vital role in the Policy GrouplTask Force meeting to discuss issuesassociated with the Trans Texas Corridor, modal cross-sections, travel forecast modeling and its relation to TIC,development of genetal alternative modal concepts capable of accommodating projected demands and regionalimplications of the comdor.

As Parsons will be focusing staff efforts to these feasibility analyses, the eurreJ).t DEIS process will be put on holduntil the completion of these efforts. The period of time required to perform the proposed feasibility investigationswill delay the DEIS process by the same amount of time. The DEIS schedule will also be impacted by the numberofadditional alternatives to be included in the documentation process.

Professional Services ContractLoop 9Alternative Modes Fatal Flaw Analysis

311512006Page 9 of11

44

ATTACHMENT B

CLIENT FURNISHED INFORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Date: December 16, 2005, Janumy 23, 2006

The North Central Texas Council of Govemments will playa vital role in the Policy GroupfTask Forcemeeting to discuss issues associated with the Trans Texas Corridor, modal cross-sections, travel forecastmodeling and its relation to TIC, development of general alternative modal concepts capable ofaccommodating projected demands and regional implications ofthe corridor. Dallas County will serve tocoordinate the transfer of all relevant materials from NCTCIG to Parsons.

Materials to be provided for this effort include; alternative modal cross~sectionscapable ofaccommodating projected demands, travel forecast modeling and its relation to the Trans Texas Corridor,and regional implications ofthe alternative modes within the corridor. Such infonnation will be neededat the outset ofthe study in order to facilitate the proposed compressed schedule offour months.

Dallas County will also serve to coordinate and facilitate technical meetings with TXDOTINCTCOG and theLoop 9 Policy GroupfTask Force. Notices, meeting minutes andlor other meeting documentation will also beprovided by Dallas County.

Professional Services ContractLoop 9Alternative Modes Fatal Flaw Analysis

3/15/2006Page 100f11

45

ATTACHMENT C

COMPENSATION

The maximum compensation for this Contract, hereinafter referred to as the ceiling price, shall not exceedSeventy-Three Thousand Two Hundred Fifteen Dollars ($73,215.00).

CONSULTANT shall endeavor to perform the specified work and other work that may from time to timebe directed bythe CLIENT, and all other obligations underthis contract, within the total ceiling price. TheCONSULTANT shall not be obligated to continue performance ifto do so would exceed the ceiling price,unless or until the CLIENT shall have notified the CONSULTANT in writing that the ceiling price has beenincreased and shall have specified inthe notice a revised ceiling that shall constitute the ceiling price forperformance under this Contract. When and to the extent that the ceiling price has been increased, any hoursexpended and material costs incurred by the CONSULTANT in excess ofthe ceiling price before theincrease shall be allowable to the same extent as ifthe hours expended and material costs had been incurredafter the increase inthe ceiling price.

Ifat any time the CONSULTANT has reason to believe that the cost it expects to incur in the nextsucceeding 30 days, ifadded to all other payments and costs previously accrued, will exceed 80 percent oftheceiling price, the CONSULTANT shall notify the CLIENT in writing to that effect, giving the revisedestimate ofsuchtotal cost for the performance ofthe Contract. No change in the scope ofservices, whether ornot such change mayhave an effect onthe cost ofthis Contract, shall be made exceptpursuant tosupplemental agreement between the parties.

The CONSULTANT shall be compensated for services rendered under this Agreement an amount equalto the direct salary times a factor of 3.0 for all ofCONSULTANT's personnel engaged directly on theProject. Direct exPenses will be reimbursed at cost. The total ceiling price of$73,215 includes $36,696 forlabor and$36,519 for other direct costs. CLIENT shall reimburse CONSULTANT within thirty (30) days ofreceipt ofan approved invoice, or that portion ofan invoice that is not in dispUte.

COMPENSATION BILLING RATES

Senior Advisor - Rodney W. Kelly, P.E.Project Manager - Edmund Haas, AICPDeputy Project Manager - Kyle W. Keahey, AICPPrincipal Engineer - Dave N. Carter, P.E.Project Planner - Katie WhiteQuality Engineer - .Boro Dedeitch, P.E.Senior Engineer - Joel Fitts, P.E.Design Engineer - Weidong Li, P.E.CAD Technician - Lopez MatthewsAdministrative - Anna Fitts

Professional Services ContractLoop 9Alternative Modes Fatal FlawAnalysis

$229.33$129.81$209.13$160.10

$81.12$115.71$122.43$121.32$100.29

$60.84

. 3/15/2006Page 11 ofll

46

CSJ #: 2964-10-002District #: 18Code Chart 64 #: 50057Project: Loop 9Location: IH 20 to Ellis/Johnson County LineProject: Major Investment Study(MIS)/Environmental Impact StatementFunding Category: SlP-MM

STATE OF TEXAS §

COUNTY OF TRAVIS §

LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PROJECTADVANCE FUNDING AGREEMENT

For a Surface Transportation Program - Metropolitan Mobility Project(Off State System)

THIS Local Project Advance Funding Agreement (LPAFA) is made by and between the State of Texas,acting by and through the Texas Department of Transportation, hereinafter called the "State", and DallasCounty, acting by and through its duly authorized officials, hereinafter called the "Local Government."

WITNESSETH

WHEREAS, a Master Agreement between the Local Government and the State has been adopted and statesthe general terms and conditions for transportation projects developed through this LPAFA; and,

WHEREAS, the Texas Transportation Commi.ssion passed Minute Order 108812 that provides for thedevelopment of, and funding for, the project describe herein; and,

WHEREAS, the Governing Body of the Local Government has approved entering into this LPAFA by resolutionor ordinance dated November 29, 2005, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Attachment A fordevelopment of the specific project which is identified in the location map shown as Attachment B.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual covenants and agreements of theparties hereto, to be by them respectively kept and performed as hereinafter set forth, it is agreed as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. The period of this LPAFA is as stated in the Master Agreement, without exception.

2. Termination of this LPAFA shall be under the conditions as stated in the Master Agreement, withoutexception.

3. Amendments to this LPAFA shall be made as described in the Master Agreement, without exception.

4. Scope of Work.The scope of work for this LPAFA is described as the incorporation of freight rail and managed lanes to thealternative modes of transportation and/or a mix thereof; to evaluate the effects to the physical aspects ofthe existing Loop 9 Corridor, and the design aspects of the proposed corridor from IH 20 to theEllis/Johnson County Line.

5. Right of Way and Real Property - Not applicable to this agreement.

6. Adjustment of utilities - Not applicable to this agreement.

7. Environmental Assessment and Mitigation will be carried out by the Local Govemment.

8. Compliance with Texas Accessibility Standards and ADA will be as stated in the Master Agreement,without exception.

9. Architectural and Engineering Services will be provided by the Local Govemment as stated in the MasterAgreement, without exception. The Local Government is responsible for performance of any required

47

CSJ #: 2964-10-002District #: 18Code Chart 64 #: 50057Project: Loop 9Location: lH 20 to Ellis/Johnson County LineProject: Major Investment Study(MIS)/Environmental Impact StatementFunding Category: STP-MM

architectural or preliminary engineering work. The State may review and comment on the work as requiredto accomplish the public purposes of the State. The Local Govemment will cooperate fully with the State inaccomplishing these local public purposes to the degree permitted by State and Federal law.

10. Construction Responsibilities - Not applicable to this agreement.

11. Project Maintenance - Not applicable to this agreement.

12. Local Project Sources and Uses of Fundsa. Project Cost Estimate: A Project Cost Estimate is provided in Attachment C. Any work done prior to

federal authorization will not be eligible for reimbursement. It is the Local Government's responsibilityto verify with the State that the Federal Letter of Authority has been issued for the work covered by thisAgreement.

b. A Source of Funds estimate is also provided in Attachment C. Attachment C shows the percentageand absolute dollar amount to be contributed to the project by federal, state, and local sources.

c. The local Govemment is responsible for all non-federal and non-state funding, including all project costoverruns, unless provided for through amendment of this agreement.

d. Prior to the performance of any engineering review work by the State, the Local Government will pay tothe State the amount specified in Attachment C. At a minimum, this amount shall equal the LocalGovernment's funding share for the estimated cost of preliminary engineering for the project. At leastsixty (60) days prior to the date set for receipt of the construction bids, the Local Government shallremit its remaining financial share for the State's estimated construction oversight and constructioncosts.

e. In the event that the State determines that additional funding by the Local Government is required atany time during the Project, the State will notify the local Government in Writing. The LocalGovernment shall make payment to the State within thirty (30) days from receipt of the State's writtennotification.

f. Whenever funds are paid by the Local Government to the State under this Agreement, the LocalGovernment shall rernit a check or warrant made payable to the "Texas Department of TransportationTrust Fund." The check or warrant shall be deposited by the State in an escrow account to bemanaged by the State. Funds in the escrow account may only be applied by the State to the Project.If, after final Project accounting, excess funds remain in the escrow account, those funds may beapplied by the State to the Local Government's contractual obligations to the State under anotheradvance funding agreement.

g. If any existing or future local ordinances, cornmissioners court orders, rules, policies, or otherdirectives, including but not limited to outdoor advertising billboards and storm water drainage facilityrequirements, are more restrictive than State or Federal Regulations, or if any other locally proposedchanges, inclUding but not limited to plats or replats, result in increased costs, then any increased costsassociated with the ordinances or changes will be paid by the local government. The cost of providingright of way acquired by the State shall mean the total expenses in acquiring the property interestseither through negotiations or eminent domain proceedings, including but not limited to expensesrelated to relocation, removal, and adjustment of eligible utilities.

h. The state auditor may conduct an audit or investigation of any entity receiving funds from the statedirectly under the contract or indirectly through a subcontract under the contract. AcCeptance of fundsdirectly under the contract or indirectly through a subcontract under this contract acts as acceptance ofthe authority of the state auditor, under the direction of the legislative audit committee, to conduct anaudit or investigation in connection with those funds. An entity that is the subject of an audit orinvestigation must proVide the state auditor with access to any information the state auditor considersrelevant to the investigation or audit.

48

CSJ #: 2964-10-002District #: 18Code Chart 64 #: 50057Project: Loop 9Location: IH 20 to Ellis/Johnson County LineProject: Major Investment Study(MIS)/Environmental Impact StatementFunding Category: STP-MM

13. Document and Information Exchange. The Local Government agrees to electronically deliver to the Stateall general notes, specifications, contract provision requirements and related documentation in aMicrosoft® Word or similar document. If requested by the State, the Local Government will use the State'sdocument template. The Local Government shall also provide a detailed construction time estimateincluding types of activities and month in the format required by the State. This requirement applieswhether the Local Government creates the documents with its own forces or by hiring a consultant orprofessional provider.

14. Incorporation of Master Agreement Provisions. This LPAFA incorporates all of the governing provisions ofthe Master Advance Funding Agreement (MAFA) in effect on the date of final execution of this LPAFA,unless such MAFA provision is specifically excepted herein.

15. Insurance. If this agreement authorizes the Local Government or its contractor to perform any work onState right of way, before beginning work the entity performing the work shall provide the State with a fullyexecuted copy of the State's Form 1560 Certificate of Insurance verifying the existence of coverage in theamounts and types specified on the Certificate of Insurance for all persons and entities working on Stateright of way. This coverage shall be maintained until all work on the State right of way is complete. Ifcoverage is not maintained, all work on State right of way shall cease immediately, and the State mayrecover damages and all costs of completing the work.

16. Signatory Warranty. The signatories to this agreement warrant that each has the authority to enter into thisagreement on behalf of the party represented.

IN TESTIMONY HEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be executed in duplicatecounterparts.

THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT - DALLAS COUNTY

By: _

Margaret KeliherCounty Judge

Date:

THE STATE OF TEXASExecuted for the Executive Director and approved for the Texas Transportation Commission for thepurpose and effect of activating and/or carrying out the orders, established policies or work programsheretofore approved and authorized by the Texas Transportation Commission.

By: _

Janice MullenixDirector of Contract Services SectionOffice of General CounselTexas Department of Transportation

Date:

49

CSJ #: 2964-10-002District #: 18Code Chart 64 #: 50057Project: Loop 9Location: ill 20 to Ellis/Johnson County LineProject: Major Investment Study(MIS)/Environmental hnpact StatementFunding Category: STP-MM

ATTACHMENT A

RESOLUTION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAPPROVING THIS LPAFA

50

CSJ #: 2964-10-002District #: 18Code Chart 64 #: 50057Project: Loop 9Location: ill 20 to Ellis/Johnson County LineProject: Major Investment Study(MIS)/Environmental Impact StatementFunding Category: STP-MM

ATTACHMENT B

. PROJECT LOCATION MAP

ATTACHMENT CPROJECT BUDGET ESTIMATE AND SOURCE OF FUNDS

CSJ# _District # -.,....------Code Chart 64 #-----Prqject: _

Description Total Federal State LocalEstimate Participation Participation Participation

CostTotal

ParticipationLand (no cash) 0 0 0 0 0

Utilities (no cash contribution) 0 0 0 0 0

Major Investment Study(MIS) $73,215.00 $58,572.00 0 $14,643.00 $14,643.00/Environment Impact Statement -

80% Fed. I 20% LocalEnvironmental (no cash contribution) 0 0 0 0 0

Preliminary Engineering 0 0 0 0 0

Construction 0 0 0 0 0

Direct State Costs·(including plan $146.43 0 0 $146.43 $146.43review, inspection and oversight) -

100% Local

TOTAL $73,361.43 $58,572.00 0 $14,789.43 $14,789.43

Total participation required from the local government =114,789.43

(Jl-1.

AFA-LPAFA_OffSys Page 6 af6 Revised 2/2/06

52

53

DALLAS COUNTY .COMMISSIONERS COURT ADMINISTRATIONDEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPfIqJ~fNJI}' I [1

March 8, 2006

TO: Commissioners Court

THROUGH: J. Allen Clemson, Administrator

FROM: Rick Loessberg, Director ofPlanning & Development -...

SUBJECT: Tax Abatement Request from Essilor

BACKGROUND

Essilor, which is a major international manufacturer of optical lenses, has its U.S. headquarterslocated in Farmers Branch. The firm has recently begun implementing the first of three expansionphases in this city and has requested that the County consider providing a five-year 75% taxabatement on real property on each of the two remaining phases.

DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT

Essilor already employs 600 people in Fanners Branch on the west side of 1-35 at Valley View. Asshown below, it is anticipated that over the next five years, the three expansion phases will createan additional 380 jobs and will result in the construction of several new facilities that willcollectively be worth about $27.4 million.

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

Year New Jobs2006 1002007 50

2006 -0-2007 502008 50

2008 -0-2009 502010 80

Construction Value$3.4 million

$4 million$8 million-0-

$8 million$4 million-0-

The City ofFanners Branch has agreed to provide a five-year 75% abatement on real property taxesfor each ofthe three phases. However, as the demolition and site work associated with Phase 1 has

411 Elm Street, 3rd Floor, Room 313 Dallas, Texas 75202-3301Dallas County Administration Building e-mail: rloessberg@dallascounty.org

Telephone: (214) 653-7601Telecopier: (214) 653-6517

54

Page 2 of 3

already begun, this phase is not eligible for consideration under the County's abatement policy. Thetwo remaining phases, though, are eligible for consideration.

IMPACT ON OPERATIONS

This project, which is located in a State-designated enterprise zone, is considered to be an expansionproject under the County's abatement policy. Such projects must create at least 50 new jobs andincrease the County's tax base by $2.5 million in order to be eligible for consideration. As each ofthe two remaining phases will create between 100-to-130 new jobs and increase the local tax baseby approximately $12 million, these phases each meet the policy's requirements. Similarly, therequested five-year 75% tax abatement on real property for each ofthe two remaining phases is alsoconsistent with County policy.

IMPACT ON FINANCE

The requested Phase 2 abatement would go into effect on January 1, 2008 and the requested Phase3 abatement would begin no later than January 1, 2011. Collectively, these two abatements wouldresult in the County abating about $6400-12,800 a year in tax revenue that does not presently existwhile collecting about $19,250-$38,500 a year in new revenue.

The project would also increase the estimated total amount ofproperty that the County would abatein tax year 2008 from approximately$1.247 billion to $1.255 billion and from approximately $1.145billion to $1.153 billion in tax year 2011. The 2008 and 2011 increases are not significant enoughto increase the total percentage ofthe County's tax base that would be abated in either year; it wouldremain at the current projected level ofapproximately 0.9% for 2008 and 0.8% for 2011.

MlWBE INFORMATION

An EEO-l report for Essilor's U.S. operations has previously been provided to the Court underseparate cover.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the County provide Essi10r with a five-year 75% abatement on real propertyfor each ofthe firm's Phase 2 and Phase 3 expansion efforts.

Page 3 of 3

Recommended by:

1. Allen Clemson, Administrator

cc: Virginia Porter, AuditorDavid Childs, Tax Assessor/CollectorRyan Brown, Budget OfficerBrenda Starr, Essilor

55

56

DALLAS COUNTYOFFICE OF BUDGET AND EVALUATION

March 15, 2006

TO: Commissioners Court

THROUGH: RyanBro~t Officer

FROM: RonicaL~, Senior :Budget and Policy Analyst

SUBJECT: DIVERT Grant Application

BackgroundThe Criminal Justice Division, Office ofthe Governor, is accepting applications for FY2006­2007 Drug Court funding. The Dallas County DIVERT Court program began operation inDecember 1999. The Dallas County DIVERT Court program is modeled after the program thatwas developed in Miami, Florida in 1989. Drug courts are.designed to reduce the impact ofcrime on individuals, families, community and the criminal justice system by using the power ofthe courts to engage nonviolent drug offenders in appropriate treatment as an alternative totraditional criminal justice processing. The grant application is requesting continuation fundingfor residential substance abuse treatment and an in-house adult outpatient substance abusetreatment program for indigent drug-addicted offenders projected to be enrolled in the DallasCounty DIVERT Court program in FY2007. The purpose ofthis briefing is to provideCommissioners Court with a recommendation for the submittal of this grant.

Operational ImpactThe DIVERT adult substance abuse outpatient counseling program provides for one substanceabuse counselor and residential substance abuse treatment services through contract providers.The counselor provides DIVERT participants with outpatient counseling, substance abusecounseling, and monitor urinalysis testing. These activities ensure accountability and promotesuccessful completion ofthe DIVERT program.

The goal of the project is to reduce recidivism among felony drug offenders by providingstructured and supervised substance abuse treatment along with intensive case management andjudicial monitoring that assists the participants in maintaining abstinence from drugs and/oralcohol.

411 Elm Street - 3rd Floor, Dallas Texas 75202-3340(214) 653-6448 • Fax (214) 653-6517 • rlwatkins@dallascounty.org

57

Performance MeasuresAs part ofthe requirements of the grant both output and outcome measures have been establishedby the Standard CJD Drug Court Objective for the 2005-2006 grant period. The performancemeasures reflect the services being provided and the extent to which the goals of the project havebeen achieved. Performance measures since the start of the program (or data first available):

a) Number ofpeople assessed for eligibility 156b) Number of new enrollments 992c) Number ofparticipants during FY2005-FY2006 238d) Number ofparticipants that successfully completed program 539e) Number ofparticipants that failed to complete the program

because they were:- terminated 410- voluntarily withdrew 38- died while in the program 5

f) Number ofparticipants currently enrolled 119

Financial ImpactThe grant seeks funding for one full-time counselor to provide outpatient counseling services andmoney to purchase residential substance abuse treatment services through contract providers.The grant application is requesting funds in the amount of$169,200 with no required cash match.Fund 421 funding process is based on a three year 20% Decreasing Funding Ratio (DFR). Thefirst year's request sets the benchmark for the grant and is funded at 100%. Year two is funded at80% ofthe benchmark, and year three at 60% ofthe benchmark.

RecommendationThe Office ofBudget and Evaluation recommends submission of the grant application to theCriminal Justice Division, Office of the Governor. The grant application request funding for out­patient counseling and residential treatment services in the amount of$169,200 for the period ofSeptember 1, 2006 - August 31, 2007.

58

DALLAS COUNTYCOMMISSIONERS COURT ADMINISTRATIONDan Savage, Assistant Administrator for Operations

March 21, 2006

TO: Commissioners Court

FROM: Earl Dedman, Project Coordinator

THROUGH: Dan Savage, Assistant Administrator for Operations

SUBJECT: George L. Allen Sr. Civil Courts Building Addition and RenovationProposed Change Order No. 16

BACKGROUND: Court Order No. 2003-1312 dated July 22,2003 authorized a contract to Hawsand Tingle, Ltd. for general construction for the George L. Allen Sr. Civil Courts Building Additionand Renovation. Haws & Tingle defaulted on the contract in August 2005 and the surety,represented by Zurich American Insurance Company, has assumed responsibility for the completionof the project per the ''Takeover Agreement" dated 10/4/05 (Court Order 2005-1906 dated 10/4/05).

The design of the expanded and renovated George Allen Sr. Courts Building was based on manyfunctional and operational criteria - two of these were increased security in the building andoptimization of staffing to minimize long term operating costs. As a result of these two criteria, theArchitect and the County (with the concurrence of most of the Judges who use the courthouse)agreed that there should only be one primary entry point for the public and the staff (the main lobbyon Commerce Street) which would minimize breaches in security and allow the security staffing tofluctuate to match the varying traffic flows into the building.

In December 2005, several adjacent landowners to the immediate south of the GACB petitioned theCommissioner's Court to maintaining an entry door on Jackson Street. This issue was briefed onMarch 14,2006. Based on that briefing, this Change Order will authorize the contractor to proceedwith the work to construct the physical building modifications and infrastructure. Additionally therewill be a cost to maintain the security equipment plus staff the security station which will require atleast one contract security guard and one armed building security officer to satisfy the Judge'sconcem that proper security be maintained. This Change Order authorizes the physicalconstruction only - not equipment or staffing.

IMPACT /OPERATIONS: The construction of the new tower addition for the George Allen Sr.Courts building project is nearly complete. This change will occur in the renovation phase of theexisting building that is scheduled to start in late March 2006. The first floor of the existing GeorgeAllen building will be closed for construction for approximately six months.

LEGAL: This change order amends the original Contract for Construction as provided for in theGeneral Conditions of the Contract for Construction, Article 7, Changes in the Work.

MIWBE INFORMATION: N/A

59

Commissioners CourtMarch 21, 2006George L. Allen Sr. Courts Building Addition and Renovation - Change Order #16Page 2

FINANCIAL IMPACT: The total cost this Change Order is an increase of $10,733.00. All projectappropriations in Fund 196, Project 70128 (Major Capital Improvements, Buildings, Civil Courts)have been expended. Commissioner's Court is requested to approve and authorize additionalfunding for this Change Order.

Amount original contract amountChange Order No. 1Change Order No.2Change Order No.3Change Order NO.4Change Order NO.5Change Order NO.6Change Order No. 7Change Order NO.8Change Order NO.9Change Order No. 10Change Order No. 11Change Order No. 12RChange Order No. 13RChange Order No. 14Change Order No. 15Proposed Change Order No. 16Total Revised Contract Amount

$38,291,000.00-0­

($10,851.00)-0­

$1,482.00$83,413.00

$113,031.00$124,035.00$172,703.00($31,750.00)

($466,628.00)-0­

$248,456.00$96,447.00 .$71,187.00

$316,918.00$10,733.00

$39,020,176.00

SCHEDULE IMPACT: The work included in this Change Order will not have an impact on thecompletion schedule for the new tower or the renovation of the existing building project. ThisChange Order approves and authorizes cost only. No time extension will be granted in connectionwith this Change Order.

RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Commissioners Court authorize Change OrderNo. 16 to the construction contract for $10,733.00 associated with changes to the addition andrenovation of the George Allen Courts Building. Additionally it is recommended that theCommissioner's Court approve additional funding of $10,733.00 for the project without an extensionof the October 28, 2005 completion date and authorize the County Judge to sign on behalf of DallasCounty.

Approved by:

Dan Savage, Assistant Administrator for Operations

Dallas County Administration Building411 Elm Street, 3'd Floor Dallas, Texas 75202-3317

e-mail: dsavage@dallascounty.org

Telephone: (214) 653-7650Fax: (214) 653-6517

60

YATESMarch 7, 2006

Mr. Earl DedmanProject Representative·Dallas County Project Management600 Commerce Sf, 9th Floor ,Dallas, Texas 75202

Re: George L. Allen Sr. Civil CourtsBuilding Addition & Renovation

Proposed Change #152/(No PR Issued) Plaza Level Revisions

Dear Mr. Dedman,

On behalfofFidelity and Deposit Company ofMaryland, Colonial American Casualty and SuretyCompany and Zurich American Insurance Company we have attached our pricing for the abovereferenced proposed change in the amount of$16,819.00. In addition, we believe that this itemwill affect our construction schedule and request that a total of_0_ days be added to the '

co~for~W;~rk.;: :' 'i:" .': ,: i, n ,(; .! : ,. "

Please note that our pricing is based oil the following qualifications and/or ex.chisions:

1. As requested, we offer the following breakdown ofour pricing:Area I - Revise South Entry $10,733.00Area 2 - Revisions to Child Support $6,086.00Area 3 - Reconfigure Break Room E-127 0.00

2. There are two symbols added to the Area 2 space denoted by a P and V. We assume 'these are owner furnished items with no additional work required.

3. We believe that the plumbing associated with Area 3 will conflict with the structuralbeam along Grid Line ex. It appears that this area will require a minor shift or offsetfrom the beam to accommodate the new plumbing riser. Prior to starting work, we willneed direction from the County and/or Rees Associates confirming the final layout.

Should, you find this pricing to be acceptable, please note your approval by signing in the spaceprovided below. Upon receipt ofa Change Order from the County, we will proceed with thiswork.

Very truly yours,W.G. Yates & Sons Construction Co.

I!f:c~

Approved:__.,.- _by:

Sr. Project Manager Date:-----------cc PC 152 file

5050 Poplar Ave.. Suite 634 • Memphis. TN 38157 • PHONE (901) 761-0010 • FAX (901) 761-0087 • www.wgyates.com

W.G. YATES & SONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

6 1

March 21, 2006

MISCELLANEOUS

1) ELECTIONS - requests approval:

a) for the use of Facilities space and parking for the dates and times listed below:

FunctionEarly Voting

Supply Pick Up

Election Day

Election Day

Date04-03-06through

04-07-06

04-08-06

04-11-06

04-11-06

04-11-06

Time6:30 a.m. - 8:00 a.m.

I :00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.

5:00 a.m. - until complete

5:00 p.m. - until complete

~:oo a.m. - until complete

LocationRecords Building andOak Cliff Sub-Court­house

Health & HumanServices Bldg. Lobby,North Dallas Govern­ment Center (Pleaseleave the lights on inthe parking lot.)

George Allen ParkingGarage

North Dallas Govern­ment Center (Pleasethe lights on inthe parking lot.)Health & HumanServices Building 6th

and 8th Floors

b) for security assistance for the dates and times listed below:

FunctionEarly Voting

Supply Pick Up

Date04-03-06through04-07-06

04-08-06

Time6:30 a.m. - 8:00 a.m.

1:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.

LocationRecords Building andOak Cliff Sub-Court­house (One officerper location)

Health & HumanServices Bldg. Lobby,North Dallas Govern­ment Center. (OneOfficer per location)

Election Night 04-11-06

62

5:00 p.m. - until complete NorthDallas Govern­ment Center (OneOfficer) andHealth & HumanServices Building,6th and 8th Floors(Two Officers)

2) HUMAN RESOURCES/CIVIL SERVICE - requests approval to pay TheWaters Consulting Group, Inc. for the collection and reporting of market data onthree new positions requested by Information Technology and approved byCommissioners Court. HR proposes the following Professional Services line itemcosts for current market data: six hours of consulting (two hours per position) at$175 per hour, for a total not to exceed $1,050.

3) PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT - requests approval to hold a public hearingduring the Commissioners Court's April 11 formal agenda to obtain input for thedevelopment of the boundaries of a possible foreign trade zone in the Lancaster­Wilnier-Hutchins-Southeastern Dallas area and publishing a public hearing noticein the non-legal sections of various newspapers.

4) OPERATIONS - requests approval to move into the expansion of the George L.Allen Sr. Courts Building. Staff asks that the Commissioners Court considerholding a formal Open House in conjunction with the Dallas Bar in May, 2006.Potential dates are Friday, May 12th or 19th

, 2006 from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.with the formal ceremony beginning at 12 noon. If the Court concurs, staff willwork to develop a program for the event.

5) DATA SERVICES - requests approval to purchase 200 Kronos Web UserLicenses from Kronos and first year maintenance. This will expand the numberof licenses owned from 1500 to 1700 and should accommodate the current needsas well as near-term projected growth in usage. The 'total cost is $8,050 ($35 x200 = $7,000 for licenses, plus $1,050 for maintenance). Funds are availablefrom the IT Services Maintenance Budget 120.1090.6520.2006.

6) PUBLIC DEFENDER - requests approval to utilize $2,790 from the MentalHealth Division Dallas County Public Defender's Office Grant (Fund 466, Grant#06603) to pay for three Public Defender employees (one attorney and twocaseworkers) to attend the GAINS 2006 Conference in Boston, Massachusettsfrom April 4, 2006 through April 8, 2006. The conference will highlight strategiesin designing, implementing, and delivering innovative programs for people withmental health disorders in contact with the criminal justice system.Recommended by the Office of Budget and Evaluation.

7)

8)

63

DISTRICT CLERK- requests approval to utilize $2,200 in overtime toefficiently organize the file and process desk operations due to the Civil Courtconstruction project. The overtime is required to ensure that District Clerkservices are not disrupted during the construction project. Funds are available inthe District Clerk's budget due to salary lag. Recommended by the Office ofBudget and Evaluation.

FACILITIES MANAGEMENT - requests approval:

a) for the Phil Smith Productions to conduct a documentary "The OverlookedSuspect" at the Frank Crowley Criminal Court Building on Wednesday,March 22, 2006 from 4 p.m. until 7:30 p.m. District Court Administrationconcurs and the documentary does not present any conflict. This request isbeing submitted subject to courtroom availability. Phil Smith Productionsacknowledges that they will be charged a standard filming fee, utilities fees,and additional security charge per hour.

b) to proceed with requested modifications to convert the east end of the existing(second floor) laundry room to a Courtroom to house the City of DallasMagistrate. The Sheriff's Department has requested these modifications togain needed space in the Intake area. The existing Magistrate Court will berelocated to the newly constructed space. The estimated cost associated withthis modification is $12,250. Funds are available in Fund 196 (MajorProjects) 0.08130 (Building Improvements) 2006 (FY 2006) 70140 (CentralIntake).

c) for the North Texas Tollway Authority to host a town hall meeting at theGeorge Allen Sr. Courts Building on Tuesday, March 28, 2006 from 8 a.m. to10 a.m. in Courtroom 434, located on the 4th floor. District CourtAdministration concurs and the meeting does not present any conflict. Theorganization will not be charged for the facilities.

TRAVEL REQUESTS

9) OPERATIONS - requests approval for Abbas Kaka to attend the ManagementSeminar in Dallas, Texas on April 26, 2006: $249

10) PUBLIC WORKS - requests approval for Donald R. Holzwarth, Alberta Blair­Robison, Selas Camarillo, Noah New, and Sam Wilson to attend and participatein the Annual Transportation Summit in Irving, Texas on August 8-11, 2006:$2,000 (registration fee) is available in General Fund, Public Works Department,Conference & Staff Development Account, FY Budget 2006,(00120.2010.2050.2006).

64

11) PROBATE COURT NO.1 - requests approval for Judge Nikki DeShazo andAnn Brockington to attend the National College of Probate Judges in Orlando, FLon May 24-28: $2,131.20 ($425 registration fee) is available in Grant Fund,Probate Court No.1, Education Fund, FY Budget 2006,(00532.4701.21667.2006).

12) PROBATE COURT NO.3 - requests approval for Judge Joe Loving to attendthe Texas College of Probate Judges in South Padre Island, Texas on May 16-20,2006: $1,295 ($350 registration fee) is available in General Fund, Probate CourtNo.3, Education Fund, FY Budget 2006, (00120.4703.21667.2006).

13) INSTITUTE OF FORENSIC SCIENCES - requests approval for:

a) Randy Hanzlick to attend the National Association of Medical Examiners inDallas, Texas on April 30, 2006 through May 2, 2006: $657 is available inGeneral Fund, Medical Examiner Department, Business Travel Account, FYBudget 2006, (00120.3312.04010.2006).

b) Jim Dempsey to attend the 5th Annual International meeting in Missoula,Montana on October 16-20, 2006: $130 (registration fee) is available inGeneral Fund, Forensics Crime Lab Department, Conference Travel Account,FY Budget 2006, (00120.3311.04210.2006).

14) CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO.3 - requests approval for Tyrie Carroll,Judge Robert Francis, and Trina Willis to attend the National Association of DrugCourt Professional Annual Conference in Seattle, WA on June 20-25, 2006:$6,205.20 ($1,350 registration fee) is available in Grant Fund, Criminal DistrictCourt No.3, SAFPF Re-Entry Court Grant, FY Budget 2006, (00466.4403.DJ-05­AI0-18041-01.2006).

15) CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO.4 - requests approval for Peter Boger,Kevin Brooks, Chad Clements, John Creuzot, Marsha Edwards, Lela Mays, DebraPinnock, Julie Turnbull, and Vivian Watson to attend the National Association ofDrug Court Professional Annual Conference in Seattle, WA on June 20-24, 2006:$14,720 ($2,700 registration fee) is available in Grant Fund, Criminal DistrictCourt No.4, Divert Court Grant, Conference Training Account, FY Budget 2006,(00466.4404.2460.2600.2006) and $416.92 is available in Divert Court EscrowFund, Criminal District Court No.4, Business Travel Account, FY Budget 2006,(00532.4404.4010.2006).

16) IT SERVICES - requests approval for Robert Clines to attend a meeting withDavid Morgan-CIa Bexar County in San Antonio, Texas and to stop in Austin,Texas to review implementation ofVM-Ware with City of Austin on March 23­24, 2006: $371.10 is available in General Fund, Commissioners CourtAdministration, Business Travel Account, FY Budget 2006,(00120.1020.4010.2006).

65

17) HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES - requests approval for:,

a) Anita Freidman to attend the Texas Public Health Association AnnualEducation Conference in Plano, Texas on April 23-25, 2006: $240(registration fee) is available in Grant Fund, CPS Bioterrorism Department,Conference Training Account, FY Budget 2006, (00466.08723.02460.2006).

b) Don Hutcheson, Luz Betancourt, and Dianne Blocker to participate in theCDC National STD Conference in Jacksonville, FL on May 8-11, 2006:$4,220 is available in Grant Fund, VD Epidemiology Department, ConferenceTraining Account, FY Budget 2006, (00466.08706.02460.2006).

c) Jennifer McMillian to attend the 5th UCLA Conference on Public Health &Disasters in Long Beach, CA on May 20-24, 2006: $1,980 ($425 registrationfee) is available in Grant Fund, CPS-Bioterrorism Department, ConferenceTraining Account, FY Budget 2006, (00466.08723.02460.2006).

MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT

'1

(1)

(2)

DEPARTMENT:ITEMS:

ESTIMATED COST:FUNDING SOURCE:

REASON FOR BRIEF:PROPOSED ACTION:

DEPARTMENT:ITEM:ESTIMATED COST:FUNDING SOURCE: '

Data ServiceslDistrict Clerks Office8 - Zebra Label Printers12 - HP 4250 TN Printers

. $22,000Major Technology Fund ($22,000) CivilCourts equipment budgetPrinter requirements for Phase II.Data Services requests CommissionersCourt approval to purchase 8 Zebra LabelPrinters and 12 - HP 4250TN printers. TheLabel Printers and HP Printers are needed tosupport the printing needs of the CountyClerk Office, County Courts at Law, ProbateCourts and Mental Illness Courts. Funds areavailable from the Major Technology Fund

Civil Courts Equipment Budget.Recommended by Data Services and DistrictClerks Office.

4832 Justice of the Peace Ellis Pet. 3-21- Paper Shredder$ 180Within Budget

EXPENDITURE SOURCE:

PROPOSED ACTION:

66

00120.4832.2090.2006 (General Fund,Justice of the Peace 3-2, Property Less than$5,000, FY2006)Judge Ellis is requesting a paper shredder.The current shredder is inoperable and thewarranty has expired. Recommended byOffice ofBudget and Evaluation.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS REQUESTS

Constable Precinct 5 requests to install a data-line cable 0 the 2nd floor of theSDGC room 200 to relocate computer. Installation: $58.75; no recurring cost.Recommended.

Health & Human Services - requests:M-0602015 to install a data-line cable on the 1st floor room 103 to relocateexisting workstation. Installation: $58.75; no recurring cost. Recommended.

M-0602054 to provide a headset for an employee on the 2nd floor room 200.Equipment: $113.41; Installation; $0.00, labor covered by contract; no recurringcost. Recommended.

Family Court Services - requests:M-0602042 & D-0602016 to install a phone line and a data-line on the 2nd floor ofthe GACB new tower room A-250 to relocate workstation. Installation: $100.25;no recurring cost. Recommended.

M-0602043 & D-0602017 to install a phone line and a data-line on the 2nd floor ofthe GACB new tower room A-248 to relocate workstation. Installation: $100.25;no recurring cost. Recommended.

District Attorney M-0602046 requests to activate a long distance access code foran employee on the 11 th floor of the FCCB room A-45. Equipment: $0.00;Installation; $0.00, labor covered by contract; no recurring cost. Recommended.

Human Resources M-0602048 requests to provide a polycom conference phonefor the 1st floor of the Records building room 101. Equipment: $309.23;Installation; $0.00, labor covered by contract; no recurring cost. Recommended.

67

Sheriff M00602052 requests to install three single-line phone in the Clerks areand two single-line phones in the Nursing area 0 the 3

rdfloor of the LSJC.

Equipment: $235.00; Installation; $207.00, labor covered by contract; no recurringcost. Recommended.

Jail Health M-0602053 requests to install a single-line phone in X-ray and one inroom 3M015. Equipment: $94.00; Installation; $0.00, labor covered by contract;no recurring cost. Recommended.

Funding for the above request is available from countywide Department 800, lineitem 432, Telephone Contingency.