I >> sorry I >> think we we have um so Shesh is here, Sean's here, Mike's here. >> I'm I'm talking to Jim right now. He's trying to join. I don't know if you have the ability to re invite him as panelist, but he it looks like he tried to start a teams meeting. So I'm trying
to get him in here. I'll go back to that attendees. I'll click on Jim. Promote to panelists. I just did that again. Mary Lee, let's see what happens. >> There we go. Nice. >> Yeah, I have the same problem. I went to
the team's meeting for some reason. Took me a team's meeting. >> There's Jim. Wow. Hear me? >> Yes, Jim. Good afternoon. Well, we're here. We do have a quorum. >> I can't hear anybody.
>> Can't hear me. >> Can I hear you? >> Hold on, Joe. Um, I think you're muted, Jim. How's that, Jim? Can you hear us now? >> How about now? >> Yes. >> We can hear you. I'm You might want to
increase your volume because we can hear you but not clearly. >> Hello. >> Okay. Can everybody hear one another? Okay, I think we're going to get move my screen. Okay,
>> hopefully technical difficulties are to the side of us and we can get underway if everyone's in agreement. We do have a a quorum. So 12:24 I'm going to offer to suggest we call the meeting to order.
12:24. I'll be taking minutes and so on. Let me share my screen. I'll share the agenda for the committee. Do you see that
the agenda? Okay, good. Okay. So, number one, meeting has been called to order. Number two, there's no past minutes to approve. Number three, just some discussion points for today's kickoff meeting on the pre-qualification
for the construction manager at risk delivery on the Shaker Lane Elementary School project. We've all seen the RFQ, so you're familiar with with the RFQ.
Are there any questions as to the process from anybody on the committee regarding the steps? Um, with the idea that it's a two-step process. Step one is the RFQ where the firms have already submitted
their qualifications. The evaluation committ the committee reviews the evaluations gives a score for each of the firms makes a determination of who and how many advance to step two which is the
request for proposal the RFP process. We're good with that for now and we can continue to talk through those steps if there's any hiccups or any questions. I can also send along if people want. There's a guide which I'll show you
right here on my screen. If you need it, there is the inspector general's office designing guidelines. And in here, real fast, I can send you this link.
It's on the the town uh state's website. Where'd it go? There it is. There's a whole process here quote step by step guidelines that the state procurement IG inspector general's office provides if there's any
reading PE people want to know about. >> Yeah, if you don't mind sending that out, that'd be great. >> Okay, I certainly will. I believe um I recall that whenever we have a pre-qualification meeting, there should be a pre-qualification
committee chair um of the five members just to act as the chair. While I'll say I am not a a voting member at this time with respect to you know Shereesh Sean Mike Jim Mary
Lee as the committee at large and Kelly is the alternate I think it's a good idea if the committee members want to consider voting in a chair for the purpose of having a chair I will probably act as the administrator or the MC of these
meetings just on on behalf of the OPM M and to help organize things and send out information. But um can I more or less ask the committee to consider nominating one of the five of
you as the committee chair? I would recommend doing promoting Sean to be the chair. That's okay with all. >> That's that's fine. This this would be the first time kind of going through this process, but I'm happy to do that if >> people want.
>> Okay. Okay. So, there's been a um a motion to approve. >> Second. >> Second by Jim. Okay. All in favor? I >> I >> Okay, >> the motion carries. Thank you, Sean, for
being the chair. Okay. Um, kind of go through this relatively not too quickly, but fast enough. You've all seen the the project dog website. You've seen that access. You now have access to all the RFQS. I know there was some technological
connections with the links, but does everybody have access to the submissions by way of Google Drive, One Drive, so on? >> Good. Okay. Um I guess number three E I don't think
we're going to necessarily assign any any particular com company uh member to do any particular um evaluation. I think it's in the best interest and I'll let the committee decide on their own that each member review eight all eight of these
submissions. There's eight of them. It's not it's kind of a heavy load but not too overpowering. Here's a score sheet that I I will send out that this is a score sheet that we've used in the past successfully. Now I will say column C which I just
highlighted. These are scored numbers that we've used and it's up to the committee if they want to change the scoring points per category. >> Peter, we can >> bring that on the screen. Yeah.
>> Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I shared my screen on that one. Sorry, I I'm not used to the Zoom. Um I thought it would have automatically jumped over. I can't tell. Is it on there now? You can see it now.
>> Sorry about that. I'm used to a team's zoom um invite regardless. So here's a spreadsheet uh call it score sheet that we've used in the past like I said on on a scoring
matrix if you will various schedule uh column A is the schedule the qualifications we've asked of the CM firms in the RFQ to provide their information on how they can um support and perform the project
from ownership summaries, the the management personnel, schedule D, project experience, and so on. Down to a score of 100. This point structure
in column C is what we've used in our office in the past. I we find it um reasonable, agreeable, and manageable. Um if the committee wants to change the point structure by category for example
if somebody feels or the committee feels safety and experience modifier should have more than five points that's fine. We can adjust that but we'd have to take points off a different category provided it all adds up to 100. So
what we can do if the committee wants I'll send this out to you. We can we can meet again at the next meeting. Number two, if there's a consideration to change the point structure, the committee can decide it at that point um
and go from there. So these are all the firms up above here. I'll I'll highlight it row seven. Um these are in alphabetical order. There's eight firms. Bond, Commodore,
Conigley, Fontaine, Gilbane, Lee, Kennedy, Shawit, and WT Rich. Um, I'll send this out and I just put in reviewer one, reviewer two at the bottom. I'll probably put your names in there. And what we're going to end up
doing at the end is summarize all these scores. And that'll be the consensus score sheet for the at the end of the project or the end of the evaluation, excuse me, to determine which firms um are going to advance to
the next step, the RFP phase. It's relatively straightforward. It's an evaluation by each committee member to take a look at the qualifications that have been submitted by each of the firms. I will um as you know I will
change my screen again and I just picked the first one. Um where's my screen? Whoops. Again, I just picked bond because they're the first ones alphabetically. There's no preference here. But as you
can see, here's their qualifications that they've submitted. It's 249 pages in length. Um, a lot of it's repetitive from the RFQ as you can see here. So all 249 pages um
don't carry every word is everything you need to worry about and you'll get you'll get the swing of it once you start reading these things and you'll get a flavor of what the firm offers, what kind of experience they have, what kind of staffing they they intend to
provide on the project. Um and again back here, I'm going to go switch my screen back again. Excuse me. Um back to the scoreeet we find and again this is the committee's decision
we find um schedule C which is the management and the personnel and schedule D the similar project experience that has the highest weight as far as points in our view you certainly as a
committee can change the view of how you want to how you want to evaluate But we find um the company itself and their experience and the people they're going to provide or the staffing they're going to submit on the project is paramount uh
particularly um the K12 market particularly elementary schools um and how they plan to staff the job and what kind of experience they have to include have the staff within that particular firm worked together in the
past again cohesion um collaboration among themselves and then of course with the awarding authority the design team and the OPM and all the other associated contractors. So um just a thought process there for you for
the team uh the committee to consider. I'll go back to the um agenda if you don't mind. I think I have to switch my screen back again. Interestingly, um so
that's item three. Um I think when we get into the the review and evaluation, it's important to call on the references that they've listed here. And so maybe maybe the committee considers who's
going to call what references of the eight firms. that would avoid five people from the committee calling all the references from all the eight firms. And if I'm a reference on one of the from one of the firms and I'm getting five phone calls about one of the CM at risk firms, I'd
be a little annoyed after the third one. So maybe today you want to consider who as a committee who wants to make what reference calls for what firms just to kind of divide up divide and conquer that um that task.
uh that's something we want to do right now maybe while we're talking about it just get it off the table or does the committee want to come back at the next meeting and make a decision after they've read the our FQs >> I'm assuming we could just do it now and
get it out of the way. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> All right. Let me switch my screen back to the listing of the firms just for the purpose of ease. >> Okay, >> so Peter, there's five of us.
>> There's five of you. Um, correct. >> There's Shereesh, Sean, Mike, Jim, and Mary Lee makes up the committee. So, somebody's going to take two firms if they want or you split it.
I forgot we mentioned Sean. We made Sean the chairperson. He gets three of them then or four of them. >> Yeah. And by the way, Sean, as the chair, you can you can you can shut me down and you can take command by all means. >> No, you're doing great, Peter. I appreciate it.
>> Thanks. >> All right. Um, so let's let let's go with bond. Who wants to do a bond? Well, can we can we split it up the type of people who are t like I would be happy to speak with other designers because I feel like we uh I would know better what questions to ask
and we would speak the same language. Maybe it makes sense for Jim to speak with town managers. Uh divide it up more like that. >> That makes a lot of sense. >> Okay. with >> why don't we do one thing Peter if you
and I can work on a list we'll put the list and name the references they've given us and put that list together and then you know circulate that that'll be the best way and we can you know like Mary suggested that's a good idea town manager to town manager and then you
know designer OPM we can do that you know and work that list down then >> that sounds like a a good approach approach. Okay, why don't we do that? I'll send uh Shesh and I will put that list together of the categories of
references as as just mentioned and circulate it. But I think we'll start off with Mary Lee will take all designers, Jim will take all town managers. Sean Shereesh and Mike can divvy up the balance. >> Sorry to volunteer.
>> Bon put subcontractors as a reference. I think the RFQ specifically asked for subcontractor records. They all seem to list those. Are we restricted to talking only to the listed references? Because I would prefer to speak to uh the most recent relevant projects and sort of
track down who is involved with those and speak to them. >> Sure. No, you're not restricted. >> Okay. >> Again, we're we're looking to to determine as a comfort level the contract the firm's um references. So because they listed
somebody and you have somebody else, that's fine. >> We've done that in the past. >> Okay. >> And it's been upheld in the SJSC. So that's already that president has already passed. So it's it's been upheld that you can call anyone you want to.
>> Okay. Um shoot. Do we want to be consistent? I think 3G. Let me highlight that one second. Oops. Oops. Yeah, the questionnaires I think it's probably a good idea to have some sort of standard questions.
So, there's quote an apples to apples >> evaluation. Um, we do have I should have presented that. We do have a list of standard questions that I can kick to everybody. Um,
and we it can be edited by all means. Mary Lee, I'm sure you have some particulars. Jim may have some, Sean might have some, Mike, and so on. So, >> maybe we should I think we should I would recommend that the committee consider
having a relatively standard format for questions or reference checks as they make their phone calls or their emails out to the out to the members. While phone calls will probably be ha held sometimes emails are also just as um
just as balanced. So we'll do that as well. >> The only question I would do is will we all respond to Peter only and not to all because we don't want to have a committee conversation going on online and that's just a becomes a conflict
later on. So we respond to Peter. Peter then puts it all together. What? Thank you for that. What I was What I've done it, but I'm going to do it if I haven't already. I will send out things to everybody blind copy. So, no,
nobody knows it. If you respond, it's only coming to me, not the group. That avoids um that avoids conflict. >> So, we can do it in that manner. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Good. Thank you. Sorry, I had to
step away all of for um an important call for a second. So, who do I have? >> Jim. Um the you got everybody. No. >> All right. I figured figured as much. That's okay.
>> No. Um Mary Lee suggested rather than breaking up company by by person, we break up references by people's position. So for example, Mary Lee will take all the designers reference checks.
Maybe you Jim as town manager can do all the municipality, business manager, town manager, etc. sort of references among all eight firms. Um, >> great idea. Great idea, Mary Lee. And
then we'll I'll put out a list, Sharesh and I will put out a list, Jim, of all the other types of references and share it share it with Sean and Mike as well and Cheresh and they'll divvy up who
they want to call and we'll kind of have a master list, if you will, of who's doing what, >> so we don't step on each other's toes and annoy annoy the references with too many inquiries. >> Perfect. Okay. Um, that's good.
Oops. So, there's the there's um 3 H, I mean 3G. We'll do the questionnaire thing we just mentioned. We'll get that out again, get it to the group here. Um, the selection process. I think we've talked about it. We we can talk about it
some more, but I'm going to send out that score sheet that you saw >> and that's an indiv in my that's an individual scoreeet that I'm going to say is your personal worksheet of how you want to evaluate it as you review
the process when you do it. Um, let me see. Somebody's waiting in the lobby. One, somebody just pinged me. One second, please. I'm the host. So, I gotta Who is that? >> That's on Teams.
>> That That must have been That must have been So, I bet you that's Kelly because I saw Kelly on the email chain um on the Teams thing because I I I thought we were we we were regrouping in
another environment. So, that's why I sent out a Teams invite for to everybody. >> Okay. Um, >> so let me let me go in there and cancel the meeting. >> Okay.
>> Does anybody have Kelly's text number? Do you want to join by Zoom? >> I'll um we're kind of almost done as well. I don't think there's too much more to do. >> Um, whatever you guys decide. I'll keep going if you want and Kelly can join if
he has the opportunity. Um, what was I going to say? >> Actually, while while Jim's doing that, could I ask how much of this process is going to be via public meeting and how much needs to be behind closed doors like the interview for example?
>> Well, to me, when it comes to the interview, what I've read and what I understand, it is a it is a public meeting. Although we do it we are and will we will
encourage the firms that are being interviewed not to enter the room. We can I've done this in town halls or public meetings. Um you know we sort of close the door but
we put a note on it public meeting. Um, and we ask those who are being interviewed to wait in the waiting room and not listen in while the firms that are being interviewed are are in process. Um, and and my experience,
nobody um tries to challenge that. Everybody respects that that because >> it's going to be their turn next and they don't want the same. It's just a >> it's not a matter of stealing proprietary information. It's just a comfort level in giving a relaxed
atmosphere for the firms to talk candidly with the with the awarding authority. So, um but generally speaking, it is a public meeting. I guess if the general public wanted to walk in, we we can't stop them because
it is public. Sort of like this meeting. This is a public meeting. >> So, and I'm taking minutes and we'll have to publish those. Um so, you know, there's always it has to be it has to be relatively transparent, so to
speak. The the the only thing that's not public, as you probably know or have read, is the um update statement and the and the contractor's financials. That is not a public request. If there's a public request for information, I'll work with the town clerk's office and
the committee to go through the town clerk's office for public records. Um, if if any of you get Hold on. If any of you get a a request for public records, um, I I would certainly direct
them to the town clerk's office. >> Yeah. >> Because that's where all all information should be disseminated from. and I will I will alert the town clerk's office that on behalf of the building committee or the pre-qualification committee, I will provide that information to the
town clerk and I can help separate any non public information for the town clerk's use. So, but other than that, it's public public. So, um, okay, we left off on the agenda. If
you can still see it on 3 G, we talked about the questionnaire. I'll get that out. 3H, the selection process. We're a few a few steps away from getting to the RFP. Um, maybe I should jump down for a minute to
item four, which is the schedule. Uh, which I got to switch my screen again. Excuse me. I thought it did it automatically. Here's the look ahead schedule. If you can see this of what this committee is
expected to do and when. Now, um, I'll move this around a little bit. Hopefully, zoom in. This is a this is a snapshot. I'm not saying this is hard and fast. We can we have to work at our own pace. you guys do the committee does, excuse me. Um, and when you're
ready to keep keep moving, I think what we should do tonight or today before we adjourn is schedule the next meeting. At that point, there should be enough time for each of you to have sufficient time to evaluate or
begin to evaluate or be say 50% through if not 100% through the evaluation and then we can see where we stand. go to the next step and we can have another we can have another meeting, a quick meeting um just to see where we all are
um as a group and then and then make another determination for the third meeting so to speak to submit our score sheets in a summary manner if that's a thought process. Again, this is just me offering thoughts and ideas. Committee
members can certainly weigh in on your process and your thinking as well. So, I'll I'll get this to you um as well, a schedule, but this again a snapshot. If there's a thought to change these dates, let me know. I can update it, not only for yourself, but for the
full building committee, so they have an idea of what's expected and when. Any questions there? Um I I will say, um we have listed here, let me let me look at this for a second. We were talking about
looking at a calendar. We were we were talking about or planning to put out the RFP in 2 weeks, November 4th. That might be too soon. If it is, that's okay. We can wait another week if you guys think it's necessary. It is
important that this is a thorough and thoughtful process. We we we are not I don't think we need to we don't need to um spearhead this in a in a very short manner because we are selecting a firm that's going to be with
the project for the next 36 months and is a viable very important team member. So a couple extra days is worth the effort in my view once we have some time. So yeah, >> I'll leave it at that for consideration.
Uh, go back. Let me just add I think Jim, you have to tell us because you have your town meeting, special town meeting, so you got to be pretty tied up with that, too. So, if you have we'll take the lead from you what works for you best. >> No, I I I I'll make it work. Don't
worry. Don't worry. You just whatever is in the best interest of the commute of of the committee, that's fine. Don't worry about that. Thank you. Thank you for that, though. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Should we try to plan to meet right after the town meet special town meeting?
>> Sure. >> In the meantime, we can get, you know, rest of the all the all the leg work done, all the calls made and all the references checked and we can then move forward from there. >> Mhm. >> Okay.
I hope my agenda is back on the agenda's back on the screen. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Good. Okay. Um, so that's pretty much item three. Item four, we just talked about the schedule. Those are just dates. You'll nothing to
really talk about. You've seen those, >> right? >> Again, anticipated. >> I'll I'll stop chatting here for a minute. I'll turn the microphone over to you guys. Uh, but I would like to see here it is today, October 22nd.
Jim, when is I don't I don't have it at the top of my head. When is town meeting? >> 28th. >> 28th. Okay. >> Next Tuesday. >> Next Tuesday. Okay. >> And then does the the town vote on November one? >> Correct. >> Okay.
Okay. So, what does the committee think about the next meeting date and time that might work? I'll let you guys talk among yourselves here and make a determination of what you need for time to review. Again, we don't have to be at a certain
point. It's just it's a level of when do we want to talk again? We can talk five more times or three more times. It doesn't matter. It's up it's up to the committee. >> Well, we've got two different ways of approaching it. we can do it
because there would be a potentially looking at a plan B if it if it fails at town meeting, passes at the ballot or vice versa. Um
then um so I I we would either do it we would wait until let's say that Monday after what is that be the uh first or the fourth Well, or we do it maybe maybe the 29th
or the 30th so to to take a temperature check where how how t how how the uh town meeting went. >> Good idea. Yeah, that's a good thought. >> So, why don't we why don't we why don't we plan if it's okay with you, Mr. Chairman, uh we can either I would
suggest we do it maybe the 30th. >> Sounds good. >> At some point. Is that okay? >> Yeah, that sounds good. >> Yep. Okay. >> And the 30th um is Thursday, one week from tomorrow. One week from tomorrow,
>> right? >> Is there a particular time that works for everybody? >> Uh after 12. >> 10 11 12 fine. >> Anytime after 12. anytime after 12.
>> I think I have one conflict in the later in the afternoon. So, >> how about 2 o'clock? >> No, that's what I have another meeting at 2:00. So, >> okay. >> Can Can we do Friday morning? Would that
work for 30? >> Fine. >> Fine by me. >> Halloween. >> Friday morning is fairly open. So, okay. >> Thursday is better for me, but um Okay. Um
what about uh what about Okay. What about Wednesday anytime? Um >> Thursday morning I can do if you want to do anything Thursday morning >> uh >> before before 12:00
>> I think Sean Sean or Mike couldn't do that. Um >> my Wednesday is wide open. My Friday is open except for 1:00. >> So I mean we can do something like 2 o'clock on Wednesday the 29th. >> That works for me.
Sesh. >> Yeah, that will work for that will work for me. 2 o'clock. >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. >> Okay. I'm going to repeat that. Wednesday the 29th of October at 200 p.m. >> Yes, please.
>> Very good. >> Back to the agenda, I guess. Is my agenda back on the screen? Yes, sir. >> Can't tell. Um, okay. That's more or less the the meats and potatoes of this agenda for the most
part. I'll just go through the other items. Any other business not reasonably anticipated in the last 48 hours, which was the timeline for this agenda? >> No. Okay. The next meeting date we just confirmed.
Item seven, uh, public comments. If there's anybody from the public, let me see. I guess I'm co-host. See if anybody else is on the screen here. I do not see anybody from the public. So, there's no public comment.
Are there any before we go to item eight from adjourn any questions so far on anything? any missing information that anybody wants to have or everything so good. So good. So far so good. Excuse me. >> Could I make a a suggestion on the
scorecard if you wouldn't mind bringing that up? >> Sure. One second. >> Let me switch my screens. >> Go ahead, Mary Lee. >> Okay. So, two things. Uh first on the uh
scroll down just a smidge. >> Sure. Yes. Okay. So, the the financial information and rating these firms on their financial information uh to some of us to some of us reading that information is going to go right over
our heads. So, I would suggest that maybe one or two people with expertise in that rate that instead of all of us needing to and then we just rely on that. >> Okay. Second that. The other suggestion would be on uh
>> Mary. Yes, >> just one second. Um, while we're on financials, >> by the way, it's it's allowed that >> if a pre-qualification committee member, >> let's use the audited financials, does not have the knowledge, expertise to do
that, we can appoint an external person to to do an evaluation and report back to the committee. Um, Jim, I'll just throw this out. town treasurer, town accountant. They seem to know numbers way better than me when it
comes to that kind of stuff. >> Yep. >> U just a thought. It doesn't have to be a town member, but it could and maybe they're best suited >> and closest closest to the pulse of the project that can, >> you know, scan this stuff in quick order. >> Um
>> I'll um All right. I'll volunteer the finance director or the assistant finance director. >> Okay. But you have to tell them. I'll volunteer them, but you have to tell them. >> I'll go like this. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. No, that won't be an issue. Thank you. That's a great suggestion. >> Um, I'll go on to I I'll offer them the information uh through an electronic portal to get the the financials. >> Okay. Okay. Perfect. >> So, thank you, Jim. Thank you, Mary Lee,
for that that thought. In a similar vein, the litigation portion of this, uh, it's sort of hard to tell from I I skimmed through these and I didn't necessarily see any red flags. I mean, I think anybody is going to at some point be involved in some litigation. That
doesn't necessarily mean that it was anything that should negatively impact them, but it would be a good idea to have somebody with more expertise in that look at it. And then I also related to this, we've got 10 points assigned to
the litigation category. I think it's further up. Yes, 10 points here. Uh because I didn't really see any red flags. Uh I would like to propose reducing that to five points and taking those extra five points and moving them up to the
experience category. So, we've got 25 points for both uh the management personnel and the project experience categories, C and D. >> I like that. >> Like that makes sense. >> Great job.
>> Check my formulas. They should work. They do. Okay, there you go. >> So, I don't have a suggestion of who should review the litigation stuff. Maybe maybe a thought um if there's any
red flags, committee member identifies it and we speak with town council who who could who could do a quick I I don't mean to use the word quick. I don't mean to say it that way, but could do it an evaluation on behalf of the committee similar to the town finance director.
>> Yeah, great strategy. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Um, okay. Another Okay, I'll stop. Anything else, Mary Lee? Any thoughts? >> Those are good good suggestions.
>> One other consideration, not for today necessarily, but just planting the seed. At some point, there will there will need to be a decision when the score sheets um get summarized.
We we need to qualify at least three firms to go into the next phase RFP. It's often recommended to do more than three um just for the point of if somebody
eventually decides by chance they're not going to go into the RFP phase because they may have just landed a project >> because as we all know every day contractors and everybody in any business is seeking the next opportunity
and the time frame just might be that they landed one that they they didn't think they were going to get. So maybe it's five people, five firms. I'm not saying it's five. I'm just offering a thought. But think about that. And then again, if
it's often recommended and encouraged, whoever makes it to the RFP phase gets interviewed traditionally. So be prepared for that. If there's five, there's five interviews. And based
on the process of an interview, you just for ballpark, it's no less than 1 hour per firm. >> By the time they do a 20, 25, 30 minute presentation, >> 20 minute conversation, 5 minutes of closing,
>> a water break, a setup time, it's 1 hour. So just again, not discouraging or encouraging, just putting out thoughts for recommendation when the time comes. Okay, and I'm all done.
>> Motion to adjurnn. >> Thank you. >> Second. >> Second 104. Thank you everybody.