The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2022-08-09-Meeting Minutes Administrative Services Committee Meeting Commission Chamber - 8/9/2022 ATTENDANCE: Present: Hons. Hardie Davis, Jr., Mayor; Hasan, Chairman; Scott, Vice Chairman; Frantom and B. Williams, members. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 1. Motion to approve the purchase of four Dodge Durango Pursuit SUVs at a total cost of $159,780 to Thomson Motor Center for the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office and Marshal’s Office. Item Action: Approved Motions Motion Type Motion Text Made By Seconded By Motion Result Approve Motion to approve. Motion Passes 4-0. Commisioner Sean Frantom Commissioner Bobby Williams Passes 2. Motion to approve the purchase of one 2022 Graco Paint Line Laser V 250DC at a total cost of $30,450.00 from Transafe, Inc. of Lawrenceville, GA for the Engineering Department-Traffic Engineering Division. (ITB 22-234) Item Action: Approved Motions Motion Type Motion Text Made By Seconded By Motion Result Approve Motion to approve. Motion Passes 4-0. Commisioner Sean Frantom Commissioner Bobby Williams Passes 3. Motion to deny the protest and appeal received from the Law Offices of Barnes & Thornburg on behalf of E.R. Snell Contractors, Inc., regarding their non-compliant status for RFP #22-195 13th Street Improvement Project and Telfair Street Improvement Project. Item Action: Approved Motions Motion Type Motion Text Made By Seconded By Motion Result Delete Motion to delete this item from the agenda. Motion Passes 4-0. Commisioner Sean Frantom Commissioner Bobby Williams Passes 4. Motion to approve HCD's request for 50/50 partnership with Honnête Habitats III, LLC to identify/develop up to three (3) lots for single-family housing, new construction within the Laney Walker/Bethlehem area. Item Action: Rescheduled Motions Motion Type Motion Text Made By Seconded By Motion Result Defer Motion to refer this item back to the next committee meeting. Motion Passes 4-0. Commisioner Sean Frantom Commissioner Francine Scott Passes 5. Motion to approve one (1) MOU with Garden City Jazz (GCJ).Item Action: Approved Motions Motion Type Motion Text Made By Seconded By Motion Result Approve Motion to approve. Motion Passes 4-0. Commisioner Sean Frantom Commissioner Bobby Williams Passes 6. Motion to approve the minutes of the Administrative Services Committee held on July 26, 2022.Item Action: Approved Motions Motion Type Motion Text Made By Seconded By Motion Result Approve Motion to approve. Motion Passes 4-0. Commisioner Sean Frantom Commissioner Bobby Williams Passes 7. Motion to approve the award of bid #22-166, Vernon Forest Park – Bathroom Construction, in the amount of $97,072.00 to Contract Management Inc. utilizing recaptured SPLOST funding. Item Action: Approved Motions Motion Type Motion Text Made By Seconded By Motion Result Approve Motion to approve. Motion Passes 4-0. Commissioner Bobby Williams Commisioner Sean Frantom Passes www.augustaga.gov Administrative Services Committee Meeting 8/9/2022 1:10 PM Attendance 8/9/22 Department: Presenter: Caption: Background: Analysis: Financial Impact: Alternatives: Recommendation: Funds are Available in the Following Accounts: REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: @r*rrr,rrr-rrq?b"rr4"rr-r,.44 'R' .G' I Room 605 - 535 Tellair Street, Augusta Georgia 30901 (706) 821-2422 - Fax (706) 821-281 1 u'\'l!.!_Llg!! L.1g{. g9 ! Register at www.demandstar.com/supplier tbr autornatic bid notification %. @*r@o^t, qtd"" TETTER OF INTENT TO PURCHASE FOUR (4) VEHICLES FROM THOMSON MOTOR CENTER This letter of intent dated, July 21, 2022,isto inform you that the Central Services Department - Fleet Management Division has concluded that we intend to purchase: four (4) Dodge Durango Pursuit SUVs for the Sheriff's and Marshal's Offices. 1. Buver: Augusta, Georgia -Centralservices Department: Fleet Management Division 2. Seller: Thomson Motor Center: 2158 Washington Road, NE, Thomson GA 30824 3. Vehicles Total Purchase Price: SL59,780.00 as listed below: a. One (1) Vehicle - Marshal's Office Package Durango at 543,059 b. One (1) Vehicle - Marshal's Office Administrative Durango at S38,907.00 c. Two (2) Vehicles - Sheriff's Office - Administrative Durango at $38,907.00 each The specific specifications and pricing information for these purchases are attached' A purchase order will be provided upon the approval of the Augusta, Georgia Commission' Respectfully submitted, "Wt*yfrDirector of Procurement Attachments: Vehicles Purchase Price /Specifications E--qH[Effi Scan this QR code with your smartphone or camera equipped tablet to visit the Augusta, Georgia r'EdHis;r::g '- ' t vlr -Ic€D Mac McAlister Fleet Manager 2158 Washington Road NE, Thomson GA 30824 Ofi ice: 706-986-571 4 Cell :706-699-1624 7t19t2022 Make:Dodse Model:Duranqo V6 Pursuit Packaoe AWD Year:2022 Color:Wite VIN:ubld Stock #:vbtd Mileaoe:10 Make: Modal Y6et1 qolorl VIN: Stock#: MHEA@: AUV: MSRP Sale Prics $3r 3.6L V6 24V WT Enoine Uoo I w/ESS Cloth Bucket Seats W/Rear Entire Fleet Alike Kev (FREQ 1 Total Manager Mac McAlister Customer UEST UATXII{G EqUI'IEl{T 3AIES I SEIYICC. ILC 115 SANDBARFERRYROAD AUGI,'STA, GA 30901 Phqre I 706-855{915 QUOTE Date (Fotc # 718t2022 7188 Name /Addreec FIRSTVEHICLE ATIN: ltRRI toBox507 AUGUSTA. GA3O9O3 ory It€n Deeaipticr Rate Totd 2 1 I I I I I I sou-PMglwsssB SOU-EMPS2STSSB FEN.F${NI6-B FEN-gENDCAPBR., sou-ETsA481csR coD{3100D1 R2 JOT425{580 lot4?*3704 lo14256.2@ ABL-140553 sLB - 25614 TINT LABOR 2022 DODGE D1JRANGO ADMINPACKAGE WTTH EQI'IPMENT CONSOLE & SIRBN/LIGHT CONTBOL BOX SOI'ND OFF PMEIWSSSB ITIINDoWSIIROUD KITTOR SINGLE 4" MTOWER WSTUD MOUNT SOI'NDOFF EMPS2STSSB MPOWER 4" STUD MOUNT-SINGLE COLOR BLIJE ( FRONTMNDSI{IELD) FENIEX FS.{I415+ S SERTES 4OO LIGI{TSTICK ALL BLI]E (REARBACK WINDOIV) FENID( 32-OOO2&01 SHORT END CAP ARM BRXT-EACH SOUND OFF ETSA4S1CSR {OO SERIES MIJLTIFI,'NCIION srREN WKNOB CONrROL, r00 WATT CODB3 C3TOODIJR2 C31OO w/ DUMNGO BRACKET |0TI0,t125{680 2t}21 DITRANGO CONTOUI, CONSOLE (20" FP) 'OTTYJ 42*37UDUAL INTERNAL CI'PHOLDER IOTI0 425{260 TTPPER STRUCTLTRC ARMRES'T ABLE2 14.0553 TRIPLE OUTLET sLB TIRE E}OINGI'ISHER W VEHICLE BRACKET WINDOW TINT. FRONT TWO ROLLDOIAINS AI{D STRIP LABORTOINSTALL ABOVE & CONNECTFACTORY WIG WAGFIINCI]ON 220.00 7.OO 410.00 r75.00 490.00 50.00 $.00 30.00 50.00 185.00 1,375.M v20.N 14.00 410.00 175.m 490.m so.m 60.00 30.m 60.00 185.00 L.375.@ this Quote is an offer by West Waming Equipment to ptudrase Goo& and/or provide Services (as ap,plicable) to Ore rccepidrtof this quote in accordance with the specifications stated herefur. This Sales Tax (8.0olo) $o.oo putdrase order for tlre quod goods drd/or serivces. Cnmmencen€nt of purchasing goods and/or provldlng serives will occur once both partiee agree upon a date. Quoted Prices are good for 30 Total s8,347'oo WEST WARNING EQUIPMENT SALES & SERVICE. LLG 115 SAND BAR FERRY ROAD AUGUSTA, GA 30901 7058s56916 Quote Date Quote # 718t2V22 7189 Name / Address FIRSTVEHICLE ATTN:TERRI POBOX507 AUGUSTA. GA 30903 Qtv Item Description Rate Total SOU-EMPLMS-... SOU-EMPS2STS4E COD-MICROPA... SOU.ETSA4SlCSR coD{3I00DUR2 JOT425{680 JOT425-6408 JO[-425-6053 JOT-425-6051 JOT425{049 Iqt425-370/. JOT42s-62CI ABLl,10553 JOT-4754965 JOT475-8848 Jqr47s4A2 5I_B -2s6t4 TINT I.ABOR RICHMOND COUNTY-MARSHALL PKG 2022 DODGEDURANCO SOI"IND OFF EMPLB4&SB.DB/A 48" MPOWER UGHTBAR FRONT : SINGLE COISR BLLJE \V/ TAKEDOWN REAR: DUAL COLOR BLLJE / AIUBB INCLUDES MOIJNTING STRAPS SOTJND OFF.EMPS2STS4E MPOWER 4" STI,JD MNT 12 T FN DUAL COIOR.BLTJE/WHITE (GRII-L) CODE3 MICROPAK-D,BW DIRECTIONAL LED HIDE A BI..I\ST MULfi COI"OR BLUE/WIIITE SOUND OFFETSA4SICSR 4OO SERIES MULTIFT'NCRON SIREN w/ KNOB CONTROL, 1OO WATT CODE3 C3 IOO SPEAKER. w/ BRACKET JOTTO 425-668A 2O2I DI.JRANGO CONTOI.JR coNsoLE(20'FP)4,5ffi8 4" 23 CONTROLHEAD EQUIP. BRKT 425&53 3" BLANK 425-605 I 2' FILLER PI-ATE 4,,5-ffi91'FILLERPTATE JOTTO 425.3704 DUAL INTERNAL CUPHOI-DER JOTTO 425-6260 TJPPER STRUCTT]RE ARMRES'T ABI Ii2 TRIPIJ OUTLET JOTTO 4?5-0965 14+ DURANGO SPACE CREATOR CAGE JOTTO 475{848 14+ DTJRANGO 2rc L,OWER PANEL JOTTO 475-OBZZ 2019+ DODGE DLJRAI.IGO REAR CARGOBARRIER 5LB FIRE DffINGTIISHER w/ VEHICLE BRACKET WINDOWTINT I.ABOR TO INSTALL AAOVE & CONNECT FACTORY WIG WAG FI.JNCIION als0.00 rr9.0o 79.00 410.00 175.00 490.00 0.00 o.oo 0.00 0.00 50.00 60.00 30.m 750.00 110.00 525.00 tr.00 185.00 1,950.00 2,150.00 238.00 3r6.m 4r0.00 175.00 490.00 0.00 0.m 0.00 0.00 50.00 60.00 30.00 750.m 110.00 s2s.00 60.00 185.00 1,9s0.00 QUOTE GOOD FOR 30 DAYS Sales Tax (8.O7") $o.oo Total $z,4ee.oo 48"./123cm 10-16 Volt IIP(AER 6 rilCH LED LTG|I|TBAR r.,,/ Lil ,/ sut I so4t I soo | | seo | | sa6 | | ss6 | I s66 | | so5 I \sa4\\ss4\/.sLU/tBLu/ leuul lmrl lar-ul leLul lnnri isrui \BLU\\61rr1lsa4l I srr_vrn" " io lse*llHrrl I cr:EAR io i*"i\s04\\so4\ lm2 | | 012 I lDtzl I D12 | I orz | | orz i / so4i ss/,i .\BLu\\BLu\la_al larAl ls;l Is_rl ls_ai ie_ritsLUttBLUtAccessories - pilFLBSpLTl, At TO-DIr,tItlount - Fixed lleight ttount (H{pLBKAI)H(x)K . PI{FLBFl4 Vehicle - D,odge Durango (ZoaS-L2) Program Routing .t---tt---/t---I l-r-I |___I I_-_I I_r_I l-_-Ir___\_--rl-r-t I i t_r-t\---\\---\lA--l lA--l lA__l lA__l lA__l lA__ l/__-/t___/' iardffitignal ! DSC TECHI{OLOGY /t /, HOME (HTrB://Srls.eoscPQ,couyl Quotes QE1@976 New ttem Conliguration Prayierrs Front View Rear View Top View mpower Rooftop IEMPI"BI Style ShelUEndcaps lnboards (http ://www.soundoffsignal. com/) quoTEs lllTIPs://sorroscpq.AOM/OnDER/LtSr_AtUeUOTE?REV=787O5 (,finFFggfiitlcAT5osossDE SF66l qicl( lm{r !o Enl.r8e Programming Sumnrary Administrative Services Committee Meeting 8/9/2022 1:10 PM 2022 DODGE PURSUIT DURANGOS Department:Central Services Presenter:Ron Lampkin Caption:Motion to approve the purchase of four Dodge Durango Pursuit SUVs at a total cost of $159,780 to Thomson Motor Center for the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office and Marshal’s Office. Background:The vendor, Thomson Motor Center, informed Fleet Management they currently have four Dodge Durango Pursuit SUVS schedule to be delivered in late August. Dodge manufacturing has cut off the order bank to take any new orders for 2022 Dodge Durango Pursuits. To ensure the purchase is secured by Augusta Richmond County, Procurement drafted a “Letter of Intent to Purchase” at the request of Central Services-Fleet Management Division. Due to the marketing conditions, there is a possibility Ford manufacture can choose to no fulfil any remaining orders due to low supply and high demand; however, the letter will prioritize that the trucks are built, and price guaranteed for Augusta Richmond County. Once Commission has approved the order, Fleet Management will acquire the purchase order and submit to the vendor for securing the asset purchase. Analysis:The Procurement Department approved the request to and issued a “Letter of Intent to Purchase” to Thomson Motor Center. Marshal Packaged Dodge Durango Pursuit SUV - $43,059/vehicle Marshal and RCSO Admin Dodge Durango Pursuit SUV - $38,907/vehicle Financial Impact:1 - Marshal Packaged Dodge Durango Pursuit SUV at $43,059 (330-03- 1310/222-03-9004/54-22110) 1 - Marshal Administrative Dodge Durango Pursuit SUV at $38,907 SPLOST VII Public Safety (330-03-1310/222-03- 9004/54-22110) 2 - RCSO Admin Dodge Durango Pursuit SUV at $38,907 each, totaling of $77,814 using SPLOST VII Public Safety (330- 03-1310/222-03-9002/54-22110) Alternatives:(1) Approve (2) Do not approve Recommendation:Motion to approve the purchase of four Dodge Durango Pursuit SUVs at a total cost of $159,780 to Thomson Motor Center for the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office and Marshal’s Office. Funds are Available in the Following Accounts: 1 - Marshal Packaged Dodge Durango Pursuit SUV at $43,059 (330-03- 1310/222-03-9004/54-22110) 1 - Marshal Administrative Dodge Durango Pursuit SUV at $38,907 SPLOST VII Public Safety (330-03-1310/222-03- 9004/54-22110) 2 - RCSO Admin Dodge Durango Pursuit SUV at $38,907 each, totaling of $77,814 using SPLOST VII Public Safety (330- 03-1310/222-03-9002/54-22110) REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Procurement Finance Law Administrator Clerk of Commission OFFICIAL VENDORS Dispensing Technology Corp. 390 Lombard Street Oxnard, CA 93030 Transafe, Inc. 1625 Spectrum Drive Lawrenceville, GA 30043 Traffic Supplies & Dist., LLC 3001 Industrial Avenue Three Fort Pierce, FL 34946 Attachment B Yes Yes Yes Addendum 1 Yes Yes Yes E-Verify Number 1843759 119117 1393095 SAVE Form No Non-Compliant Yes Yes YEAR 2022 2022 2022-2023 MAKE LineLazer V 250 DC Reflective Graco Graco MODEL 25D344 Part #25D344 LineLazer V 250DC LineLazer 250DC TOTAL PRICE $39,000.00 $30,450.00 $39,475.00 APPROXIMATE DELIVERY TIME:90 Days 2-3 Weeks 90-120 Days 2022 Graco 25D340 $28,500.00 3 to 4 Months Yes Bid Opening - Bid Item #22-234 2022/2023 Self Propelled Dual Color Line Sprayer Central Services Department-Fleet Maintenance Division Bid Due: Monday, June 13, 2022 @ 11:00 a.m. via ZOOM Total Number Specifications Mailed Out: 13 Total Number Specifications Download (Demandstar): 6 Total Electronic Notifications (Demandstar): 13 Georgia Registry: 167 Total packages submitted: 4 Total Non-Compliant: 1 BIDDER OFFER Sherwin-Williams Paint Company 2709 Peach Orchard Rd. Augusta, GA 30906 166336 Yes Yes Page 1 of 1 Administrative Services Committee Meeting 8/9/2022 1:10 PM 2022 ENGINEERING - LINE LASER PAINT MACHINE - ITB 22-234 Department:Central Services Presenter:Ron Lampkin Caption:Motion to approve the purchase of one 2022 Graco Paint Line Laser V 250DC at a total cost of $30,450.00 from Transafe, Inc. of Lawrenceville, GA for the Engineering Department-Traffic Engineering Division. (ITB 22-234) Background:Currently the staff utilizes asset # F00108, 2002 Sterling SC-8000 paint truck, which is a very complex, expensive to maintain and unreliable. The Engineering Department - Traffic Engineering Division is requesting to purchase a mobile paint line laser machine as new asset. The new line sprayer that is being requested is more accurate, compact, and transportable, provides better technology, user friendly and much more suitable for the jobs performed on a consistent basis the Traffic Engineering Division. Analysis:The Procurement Department published a competitive bid for a 2022 Graco Paint Line Laser V 250DC. Four responses were received of which one was non-compliant. Transafe, Inc. of Lawrenceville, GA offered the requested equipment within the designated budget and provided all the necessary specifications for the desired equipment. 2022 Graco Line Laser V 250DC – Transafe, Inc. – Lawrenceville, GA - $30,450.00 Financial Impact:2022 Graco Line Laser V 250DC at $30,450.00 each. The total purchase is $30,450.00 for the Engineering Department – Traffic Engineering Division. The equipment will be need to be purchased using Capital Outlay Funds: 272-01-6440/54.21110. Alternatives:(1) Approve the request; (2) Do not approve the request Recommendation:Motion to approve the purchase of one 2022 Graco Line Laser V 250DC at a total cost of $30,450.00 from Transafe, Inc. of Lawrenceville, GA for the Engineering Department-Traffic Engineering Division. Funds are Available in the Following Accounts: Capital Outlay Funds: 272-01-6440/54.21110. REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Procurement Finance Law Administrator Clerk of Commission Prominence in Buckhead 3475 Piedmont Road, N.E., Suite 1700 Atlanta, GA 30305-3327 U.S.A. (404) 846-1693 Fax (404) 264-4033 www.btlaw.com Christopher J. Daniels Associate 404-264-4053 CDaniels@btlaw.com June 8, 2022 VIA FEDEX AND EMAIL Geri A. Sams (procbidandcontract@augustaga.gov) Procurement Director Augusta-Richmond County, Georgia Suite 605, 535 Telfair Street Augusta, Georgia 30901 Re: RFP Item #22-195: 13th Street Improvement Project and Telfair Street Improvement Project Protest on Behalf of E.R. Snell Contractor, Inc., 1785 Oak Road, Snellville, GA 30078 Dear Mrs. Sams, The undersigned and this Firm represent E.R. Snell Contractor, Inc. (“Snell”) in the above referenced matter. I am writing in response to your letter dated June 2, 2022, wherein you determined that Snell was not eligible to bid on the Augusta-Richmond County (“Augusta”) Request for Proposal #22-195 (the “Project”) because it did not meet the Local Small Business Opportunity Program participation rate and because it failed provide support for its Good Faith Efforts. A copy of the letter and enclosed documents are attached hereto (“Letter”). For the reasons set forth below, Snell respectfully disagrees with your determination and submits this protest pursuant to the Augusta Code seeking reinstatement of Snell’s bid. In your Letter, you referenced that Snell failed to satisfy the local small business “required goal.” Also set forth in your Letter, you additionally claim that Snell failed to comply with the good faith efforts requirements of the Augusta Code and RFP. Neither of the foregoing assertions justified disqualifying Snell’s bid on the Project. In accordance with the guiding good faith efforts in the Augusta Code, Snell solicited twenty-two local small businesses meeting the definition under the Augusta Code. In response, Snell received two subcontracting bids, one of which it rejected since it was double the lowest bid for the same scope of work, and the other which it included as part of its bid in response to the RFP. Although it is not readily apparent based upon the language of the Letter, to the extent Augusta disqualified Snell’s bid on the grounds that it failed to meet the local small business utilization goal, Augusta misapplied its Code. The small business utilization “goal” for this Project is 6%. Based on the single response it received, Snell’s bid contained a small business utilization amount of 0.78%. Nowhere in the Augusta Code, however, is a general contractor responding to Geri A. Sams June 8, 2022 Page 2 an RFP required to meet the business utilization “goal.” If the Augusta Code required that a bid meet the local small business utilization goal before the bid would be considered, there would be no reason to: (1) state in the RFP, “3. Good Faith Efforts (GFE) Form (this form is required if LSB utilization is below 6%),” and (2) dedicate an entire section in the Augusta Code to what constitutes “Good Faith Efforts.” The Augusta Code and the RFP demonstrate that the local small business utilization goal is just that, a goal. In the event the aspirational goal cannot be accomplished, the bidder may still be considered upon a showing the contractor engaged in good faith efforts to subcontract with local small businesses. The conclusion is evident; failure to meet the local small business utilization is not an automatic disqualifier, and a bid may still be accepted if the contractor establishes good faith efforts. In your Letter, you stated, “The Local Small Business Opportunities Program’s minimum required goal for this project was 6%. The bidder/offeror did not meet the minimum participation and has approximately 0.78% utilization.” The local small business utilization target cannot simultaneously be a goal and a requirement. To the extent Augusta denied Snell’s bid on the fact that it did not meet a required local small business utilization of 6% in its bid, it either applied the Code incorrectly or arbitrarily, did not apply the Code at all, or the relevant Code provisions are too vague and ambiguous to be understood by those seeking to follow and enforce them. Next, your Letter asserts, “In addition, the bidder/offeror did not meet the burden of proof in support of its Good Faith Effort (GFE).” The Letter fails to explain how Snell fell short of the good faith burden. Instead, the Letter merely “include[s] some of the correspondence and forms from the specifications for your review.” Nothing attached to the letter explains how Snell failed to materially comply with its requirement to submit evidence of its good faith efforts. The RFP included a “Good Faith Efforts” form; but only includes spaces for the information of six local small businesses solicited for bids. Snell submitted its own form because it needed room to identify the twenty-two local small businesses from which it solicited bids on three different occasions over the course of one month. Pursuant to the RFP requirements, Snell provided the email evidence depicting the bid solicitations. Again, Snell received two responses to its solicitation efforts, one of which was included in Snell’s bid. None of the other twenty local small businesses responded, and therefore, Snell had nothing to report regarding these entities. Establishing the lack of a reasoned evaluation of the bids it receives, in particular Snell’s bid here, attached to this letter is a previous bid of Snell’s to Augusta in 2019 for the 9th Street James Brown Improvements Project. The local small business goal on the 9th Street Improvement Project was 15%. With its bid, Snell submitted the required local small business utilization plan noting that it failed to reach the 15% goal. The utilization plan stated that because of the failure to meet the local small business goal, Snell must “complete in its entirety the document titled GOOD FAITH EFFORTS and submit supporting documentation demonstrating good faith efforts.” Snell failed to complete the form or otherwise provide information regarding its efforts to solicit local small business bids on the 2019 9th Street James Brown Improvements Project. Augusta did not disqualify Snell’s bid on that occasion. Revealingly, Augusta awarded Snell the Geri A. Sams June 8, 2022 Page 3 Project. Therefore, to the extent Augusta refused Snell’s bid on this project as non-compliant, Augusta demonstrates its failure to follow its own ordinances and apply them in a non-arbitrary and non-capricious manner from bid to bid. In light of Augusta’s infringement on Snell’s ability to receive proper consideration on its bid in accordance with the Augusta Code, Snell requests that you exercise your authority as Procurement Director and permit the consideration of Snell’s compliant bid in relation to other submitted bids. To the extent Augusta remains steadfast in its refusal to consider Snell’s bid, Snell is prepared to exhaust its administrative and judicial remedies to ensure its bid is fairly considered. Should you have any questions, concerns, or requests for additional information, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Christopher J. Daniels cc: Phyllis Johnson, Director of Compliance Dr. Yolonda L. Jackson, DBE/LSBOP Coordinator (via e-mail only) Christopher J. Daniels Associate 404-264-4053 CDaniels@btlaw.com June 28, 2022 VIA FEDEX AND EMAIL Geri A. Sams (procbidandcontract@augustaga.gov) Procurement Director Augusta-Richmond County, Georgia Suite 605, 535 Telfair Street Augusta, Georgia 30901 Re: RFP Item #22-195: 13th Street Improvement Project and Telfair Street Improvement Project Request for Appeal of Decision Upholding Non-Compliant Finding on Behalf of E.R. Snell Contractor, Inc., 1785 Oak Road, Snellville, GA 30078, to the Augusta, Georgia Commission and for Hearing on Same Dear Mrs. Sams, As previously stated, the undersigned and this Firm represent E.R. Snell Contractor, Inc. (“Snell”) in the above-referenced matter. Please accept this correspondence as Snell’s appeal to the Augusta, Georgia Commission of Augusta’s June 21, 2022 letter (“Protest Decision”) upholding its determination that Snell’s bid was non-compliant and request for hearing on its appeal. For the reasons set forth herein, Snell respectfully requests that Augusta reverse the Protest Decision and reinstate Snell’s bid. For ease of reference, Snell has enclosed all prior correspondence submitted in its bid protest. At the outset, it is worth noting that Augusta’s original decision rejecting Snell’s bid was because it “did not meet the [Local Small Business Opportunities Program’s (“LSBOP”)] minimum participation and has approximately 0.78% utilization.” In its protest letter, Snell explained that the Augusta Code does not permit a noncompliance finding solely on the issue that a bidder is unable to obtain the LSBOP utilization goal. Augusta’s Protest Decision appears to have abandoned this argument as a basis for its decision. Consequently, Snell will address the points enumerated in the Protest Decision. To justify its non-compliance finding, Augusta asserts the “GFE form was submitted incomplete” and “[t]here is no indication of any results of the contact with any of those LSBOP firms nor the scope of work that was solicited from those LSBOP firms.” (Protest Decision, at 1). As noted in its Protest letter, the GFE form was inadequate to detail all LSBOP contractors Snell solicited and Snell had nothing to report because Snell received no responses from all of the twenty-two LSBOP contractors except for two, one of which is included with the bid. The lack of Geri A. Sams June 28, 2022 Page 2 responses is accurately reflected in the bid because there were no communications to report. Moreover, to say the bid entirely omits the scope of work solicited is simply incorrect. The letter of intent submitted with the bid establishes that Snell solicited bids for “miscellaneous hauling.” Additionally, the email solicitations plainly depict that Snell provided the scope of work to the solicited subcontractors in the form of the plans and bidding options. To the extent Augusta classified Snell’s bid non-compliant on the basis of these immaterial technicalities, Augusta defied its charge in soliciting bids. Moreover, there is nothing in the Augusta Code that requires a bidder to submit every Good Faith Effort (“GFE”) employed or that a bidder must comply with each and every bid requirement in order to be considered for a bid. If this were the case, Snell is entitled to know whether all the other bids submitted for RFP Item #22- 195 complied with all the GFE requirements (which is unlikely). The Supreme Court of Georgia explains why Augusta breached Georgia law in its finding: This Court is to construe statutes to give sensible and intelligent effect to all of their provisions and to refrain from any interpretation which renders any part of the statutes meaningless. The statement in O.C.G.A. § 36-91-21(b)(4) that the contract go to one who “meets the requirements and criteria set forth in the invitation for bids” cannot mean that every statement in the invitation for bids must be met precisely and without deviation; such a reading would render superfluous O.C.G.A. § 36-91-21(b)(4)’s specification that the recipient also meet the definition of a “responsive bidder,” and thus would render meaningless the definition of a responsive bidder as one whose bid “conforms in all material respects to the requirements set forth in the invitation for bids.” O.C.G.A. § 36-91-2(12). The reference to “material respects” must be given effect; to reach O.C.G.A. § 36-91- 21(b)(4) to mean that all terms stated in the invitation for bids must be met precisely would curtail the authority governmental entities are specifically given. R.D. Brown Contractors, Inc. v. Bd. of Educ. of Columbia Cnty., 280 Ga. 210, 212–13 (2006) (internal citations omitted) (emphasis in original). The rejection of Snell’s bid prior to the evaluation of its merits makes compliance with the above-referenced statutes impossible. By rejecting Snell’s bid outright, Augusta could not have properly considered the other requirements set forth under Georgia law, i.e., whether Snell was a responsible bidder because it conformed in all material respects to the bid invitation. Additionally, Augusta appears to assert it had grounds to deny Snell’s bid because it did not include information on a second subcontractor’s bid. This position demonstrates gratuitous rigidity. As Augusta knows, the second subcontractor bid was twice that of the subcontractor included in the bid and addressed the same scope of work. Including the second subcontractor would not change the bid in any material way. Snell could not accept two subcontractors to perform the work of one subcontractor. Accordingly, inclusion of information regarding the second subcontractor would have no impact on Augusta’s claimed goal, to increase LSBOP subcontractor participation in Augusta contracts. Geri A. Sams June 28, 2022 Page 3 Lastly, Snell’s protest letter highlighted Augusta’s haphazard treatment of the bids it receives. In a past request for proposal, after submitting far less GFE evidence than submitted here, Augusta awarded Snell the project. Augusta is not permitted to randomly decree when certain documentation is proper and when it is not. For the foregoing reasons, Snell asks Augusta to reconsider its Protest Decision and finding of non-compliance as to Snell’s bid on RFP Item #22-195 in the form of an appeal to the Augusta, Georgia Commission. In connection with this appeal, Snell requests a hearing on same. Snell appreciates Augusta’s continued attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact the undersigned with any questions, concerns, or requests for additional information. Sincerely, Christopher J. Daniels cc: Phyllis Johnson, Director of Compliance Dr. Yolanda L. Jackson, DBE/LSBOP Coordinator (via e-mail only) Prominence in Buckhead 3475 Piedmont Road, N.E., Suite 1700 Atlanta, GA 30305-3327 U.S.A. (404) 846-1693 Fax (404) 264-4033 www.btlaw.com Christopher J. Daniels Associate 404-264-4053 CDaniels@btlaw.com June 8, 2022 VIA FEDEX AND EMAIL Geri A. Sams (procbidandcontract@augustaga.gov) Procurement Director Augusta-Richmond County, Georgia Suite 605, 535 Telfair Street Augusta, Georgia 30901 Re: RFP Item #22-195: 13th Street Improvement Project and Telfair Street Improvement Project Protest on Behalf of E.R. Snell Contractor, Inc., 1785 Oak Road, Snellville, GA 30078 Dear Mrs. Sams, The undersigned and this Firm represent E.R. Snell Contractor, Inc. (“Snell”) in the above referenced matter. I am writing in response to your letter dated June 2, 2022, wherein you determined that Snell was not eligible to bid on the Augusta-Richmond County (“Augusta”) Request for Proposal #22-195 (the “Project”) because it did not meet the Local Small Business Opportunity Program participation rate and because it failed provide support for its Good Faith Efforts. A copy of the letter and enclosed documents are attached hereto (“Letter”). For the reasons set forth below, Snell respectfully disagrees with your determination and submits this protest pursuant to the Augusta Code seeking reinstatement of Snell’s bid. In your Letter, you referenced that Snell failed to satisfy the local small business “required goal.” Also set forth in your Letter, you additionally claim that Snell failed to comply with the good faith efforts requirements of the Augusta Code and RFP. Neither of the foregoing assertions justified disqualifying Snell’s bid on the Project. In accordance with the guiding good faith efforts in the Augusta Code, Snell solicited twenty-two local small businesses meeting the definition under the Augusta Code. In response, Snell received two subcontracting bids, one of which it rejected since it was double the lowest bid for the same scope of work, and the other which it included as part of its bid in response to the RFP. Although it is not readily apparent based upon the language of the Letter, to the extent Augusta disqualified Snell’s bid on the grounds that it failed to meet the local small business utilization goal, Augusta misapplied its Code. The small business utilization “goal” for this Project is 6%. Based on the single response it received, Snell’s bid contained a small business utilization amount of 0.78%. Nowhere in the Augusta Code, however, is a general contractor responding to Geri A. Sams June 8, 2022 Page 2 an RFP required to meet the business utilization “goal.” If the Augusta Code required that a bid meet the local small business utilization goal before the bid would be considered, there would be no reason to: (1) state in the RFP, “3. Good Faith Efforts (GFE) Form (this form is required if LSB utilization is below 6%),” and (2) dedicate an entire section in the Augusta Code to what constitutes “Good Faith Efforts.” The Augusta Code and the RFP demonstrate that the local small business utilization goal is just that, a goal. In the event the aspirational goal cannot be accomplished, the bidder may still be considered upon a showing the contractor engaged in good faith efforts to subcontract with local small businesses. The conclusion is evident; failure to meet the local small business utilization is not an automatic disqualifier, and a bid may still be accepted if the contractor establishes good faith efforts. In your Letter, you stated, “The Local Small Business Opportunities Program’s minimum required goal for this project was 6%. The bidder/offeror did not meet the minimum participation and has approximately 0.78% utilization.” The local small business utilization target cannot simultaneously be a goal and a requirement. To the extent Augusta denied Snell’s bid on the fact that it did not meet a required local small business utilization of 6% in its bid, it either applied the Code incorrectly or arbitrarily, did not apply the Code at all, or the relevant Code provisions are too vague and ambiguous to be understood by those seeking to follow and enforce them. Next, your Letter asserts, “In addition, the bidder/offeror did not meet the burden of proof in support of its Good Faith Effort (GFE).” The Letter fails to explain how Snell fell short of the good faith burden. Instead, the Letter merely “include[s] some of the correspondence and forms from the specifications for your review.” Nothing attached to the letter explains how Snell failed to materially comply with its requirement to submit evidence of its good faith efforts. The RFP included a “Good Faith Efforts” form; but only includes spaces for the information of six local small businesses solicited for bids. Snell submitted its own form because it needed room to identify the twenty-two local small businesses from which it solicited bids on three different occasions over the course of one month. Pursuant to the RFP requirements, Snell provided the email evidence depicting the bid solicitations. Again, Snell received two responses to its solicitation efforts, one of which was included in Snell’s bid. None of the other twenty local small businesses responded, and therefore, Snell had nothing to report regarding these entities. Establishing the lack of a reasoned evaluation of the bids it receives, in particular Snell’s bid here, attached to this letter is a previous bid of Snell’s to Augusta in 2019 for the 9th Street James Brown Improvements Project. The local small business goal on the 9th Street Improvement Project was 15%. With its bid, Snell submitted the required local small business utilization plan noting that it failed to reach the 15% goal. The utilization plan stated that because of the failure to meet the local small business goal, Snell must “complete in its entirety the document titled GOOD FAITH EFFORTS and submit supporting documentation demonstrating good faith efforts.” Snell failed to complete the form or otherwise provide information regarding its efforts to solicit local small business bids on the 2019 9th Street James Brown Improvements Project. Augusta did not disqualify Snell’s bid on that occasion. Revealingly, Augusta awarded Snell the Geri A. Sams June 8, 2022 Page 3 Project. Therefore, to the extent Augusta refused Snell’s bid on this project as non-compliant, Augusta demonstrates its failure to follow its own ordinances and apply them in a non-arbitrary and non-capricious manner from bid to bid. In light of Augusta’s infringement on Snell’s ability to receive proper consideration on its bid in accordance with the Augusta Code, Snell requests that you exercise your authority as Procurement Director and permit the consideration of Snell’s compliant bid in relation to other submitted bids. To the extent Augusta remains steadfast in its refusal to consider Snell’s bid, Snell is prepared to exhaust its administrative and judicial remedies to ensure its bid is fairly considered. Should you have any questions, concerns, or requests for additional information, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Christopher J. Daniels cc: Phyllis Johnson, Director of Compliance Dr. Yolonda L. Jackson, DBE/LSBOP Coordinator (via e-mail only) Administrative Services Committee Meeting 8/9/2022 1:10 PM Deny the Protest and Appeal of E.R. Snell regarding RFP #22-195 13th Street Improvement Project and Telfair Street Improvement Project Department:Procurement for Compliance Presenter:Phyllis Johnson via Geri Sams Caption:Motion to deny the protest and appeal received from the Law Offices of Barnes & Thornburg on behalf of E.R. Snell Contractors, Inc., regarding their non-compliant status for RFP #22-195 13th Street Improvement Project and Telfair Street Improvement Project. Background:The Augusta Procurement Department received a Protest letter from the Law Offices of Barnes & Thornburg. The Firm is representing E.R. Snell. E.R. Snell submitted a response for RFP 22-195 13th Street Improvement Project& Telfair Street Improvement Project. After receipt and review of the submittal, the Compliance Department determined that E.R. Snell was non-compliant; therefore, not eligible for award because the company, E.R. Snell did not meet the Local Small Business Opportunity Program Utilization Goal and because they failed to provide support for its Good Faith Effort. Analysis:On May 24, 2022, the Compliance Department deemed E.R. Snell non- compliant stating that E.R. Snell did to meet the minimum participation and submitted approximately 0.78% utilization. In addition, the bidder/offeror did not meet the burden of proof in support of its Good Faith Effort (GFW). The Procurement Department sent a non-complaint letter to E.R. Snell on June 2, 2022, as recommended by the Compliance Department. The Law Firm, Barnes and Thornburg submitted a protest letter on June 8, 2022. The protest was provided to the Compliance Department for review which Procurement provided a response to the Law Firm denying reconsideration as received from the Compliance Department, dated June 21, 2022. The Law Offices of Barnes and Thornburg submitted an appeal to the protest on June 28, 2022. Financial Impact:RFP #22-195 13th Street Improvement Project and Telfair Street Improvement Project is currently on hold. Alternatives:Uphold the protest and allow E.R. Snell to be included in the evaluation process for RFP 22-195 13th Street Improvement Project and Telfair Street Improvement. Recommendation:The Compliance Department request that you deny the protest. Funds are Available in the Following Accounts: N/A REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Finance. Law. Administrator. Clerk of Commission HH 2022 MOU 1 Memorandum of Understanding Laney Walker / Bethlehem (LW/B) Revitalization- Honnête Habitats III, LLC This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) is entered into on the ______ day of __________________________, 2022 by and between the Augusta, GA’s Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) and Honnete Habitats III, LLC. (HH) HCD serves as the Augusta, GA’s manager for Laney Walker/Bethlehem (LW/B). HH. serves as a supportive services partner and as an investor/developer partner. Honnête Habitats III, LLC is a real estate development company focused on constructing speculative houses in the southeastern United States. HH engages in building appealing designs of affordable houses that will meet the needs of a wide range of clients. As part of its plans to become one of the leading builders in the United States of America, HH adopts international best practices in the industry. The mission of HH is to develop, promote, and preserve quality housing while building strong, healthy neighborhoods in urban areas and helping residents improve their lives. The above-named parties to this Memorandum of Understanding recognize the importance of facilitating developments within the LW/B neighborhoods to include increasing homeownership opportunities for low to moderate income households as a joint, coordinated effort. This MOU and the accompanying program descriptions set forth the terms and conditions under which the parties express their intent to present and execute a comprehensive approach to achieving the goals of this initiative. It is expected that a signed Development Agreement will evolve from this MOU. Part I. Structure and Purpose of Initiative This local initiative will be known as the Laney Walker / Bethlehem Revitalization Project Initiative (the "Initiative"). The greater Initiative is designed to facilitate the development of residential housing and mixed-use development located on property currently owned by the Augusta, Georgia Land Bank Authority (AGLBA). Augusta, GA has concluded that it is beneficial to act as a team for the purpose of increasing homeownership and rental housing opportunities, as well as retaining the cultural and historic context that defines the Laney Walker & Bethlehem communities. Part II. Partnership Goals The goal of the Initiative is to continue HH. as a supportive service partner and as an investor/developer partnership which will: • Foster comprehensive revitalization, in partnership, and the promotion of new, single-family housing in the LW/B communities; • Increase affordable homeownership opportunities in LW/B through approved participating lenders and use of financing assistance offered through the LW/B bonds funds, various HUD programs and HH. • Foster the use of architecturally compatible building design that captures the character and history of the LW/B communities, utilizing the LW/B Pattern Book as a basis; HH 2022 MOU 2 • Increase homeownership by providing targeted counseling and education to potential homebuyers; • Conduct outreach activities to potential renters and homebuyers in the community to inform them of housing opportunities; • Provide ongoing supportive (wraparound) services for homebuyers; and • Build a model of partnership that can be replicated in other communities. Part III. Responsibilities of the Parties The parties will have the following responsibilities: Investor/Developer Partner • HCD to work with HH. to identify up to three (3) Single Family lots • HH. to identify Affordable/Workforce house plans for each identified lot • HH. to agree upon deal structure (land infusion, construction split, down payment, etc.) • HCD and HH. to utilize private partner funds for the development on Maple Street of three (3) parcels identified as: o Parcel #1 o 50% partnership commitment: $117,240.00 o Parcel #2 o 50% partnership commitment: $114,240.00 o Parcel #3 o 50% partnership commitment: $114,240.00 Part IV. Performance Objectives The overall performance of the Initiative will be evaluated on the completion of development and implement services (as shown above), and the number of residents who are actually able to obtain housing. To date, HCD has undertaken an extensive effort to ensure the success of this revitalization. Public meetings were initially held to receive stakeholder input, and on-going meetings are being held to keep the public informed. Land acquisition activities have resulted in significant and meaningful site control. Master plans have been designed to reflect the activity to date, while guiding future endeavors. Part V. Public Relations The parties agree that initially, and throughout the term of this MOU, marketing and public announcements relative to Initiative activities be coordinated among and approved by both HCD and HH. prior to public release. Part VI. Relationship of Parties HH 2022 MOU 3 Nothing in this MOU shall be deemed to constitute or create an association, partnership or joint venture among the participating parties, or any agency or employer-employee relationship. No party is granted, nor shall it represent that it has been granted, any right or authority to assume or create any obligation or responsibility, expressed or implied, on behalf of, or in the name of another party, or bind another party in any manner. Part VII. Term; Early Termination The term of the MOU is twenty-four (24) months from the date of the execution. It is the intention of the participants to work diligently to ensure that within 90 days, all of the Initiative Development Goals shall be met. At that time, renewal of the partnership may be extended upon the agreement of both parties. The participating parties reserve the right to terminate the MOU with 90-day notice. Part VIII. Administration and Reports HCD will facilitate monitoring the Initiative and providing bi-monthly reports to the participants. Part IX. Additional Provisions HCD and HH. shall each identify a primary contact and an alternative contact. Part X. Acknowledgements As the authorized representative for my organization, I have read this MOU regarding the Initiative. I agree that it accurately describes the purpose, operational plan and roles of the Initiative participants. I understand that this document is not a contract and is not a legally binding agreement. HH 2022 MOU 4 In Witness Whereof, the parties have set their hands and seals as of the date first written above. Attest: Augusta, Georgia By:__________________________________________ Date:________________________ Hardie Davis, Jr. As Mayor By:___________________________________________ Date:________________________ Takiyah A. Douse As Interim City Administrator By:___________________________________________ Date:________________________ Hawthorne Welcher, Jr. As Director, HCD Approved as to Form by:___________________________ Date: ________________________ Augusta, GA Law Department SEAL _____________________________________ Lena Bonner As its Clerk of Commission Honnête Habitats III, LLC By:____________________________________________ Date:_____________________ Name: Brea E. Elles Title: Founder Administrative Services Committee Meeting 8/9/2022 1:10 PM HCD_ Memorandum of Understanding with Honnête Habitats III, LLC (HH) Department:HCD Presenter:Hawthorne Welcher, Jr. and/or HCD Staff Caption:Motion to approve HCD's request for 50/50 partnership with Honnête Habitats III, LLC to identify/develop up to three (3) lots for single-family housing, new construction within the Laney Walker/Bethlehem area. Background:Honnête Habitats III, LLC is a real estate development company focused on constructing speculative houses in the southeastern United States. HH engages in building appealing designs of affordable houses that will meet the needs of a wide range of clients. As part of its plans to become one of the leading builders in the United States of America, HH adopts international best practices in the industry. The mission of HH is to develop, promote, and preserve quality housing while building strong, healthy neighborhoods in urban areas and helping residents improve their lives. Address Budget Project Type Parcel #1 $117,240 New Construction (labor/material) Parcel #2 $114,240 New Construction (labor/material) Parcel #3 $114,240 New Construction (labor/material) Analysis:Motion to approve HCD's request for 50/50 partnership with HH to identify/develop up to three (3) lots for single-family housing, new construction within the Laney Walker/Bethlehem area. Financial Impact:HCD agrees to commit $345,720 total in partnership with HH for the new construction of three (3) single family units within the LW/B area. Alternatives:Deny Recommendation:Motion to approve HCD's request for 50/50 partnership with HH to identify/develop up to three (3) lots for single-family housing, new construction within the Laney Walker/Bethlehem area. Laney Walker/Bethlehem Project Funds: GL Code: 298-07-7343-5413150 Funds are Available in the Following Accounts: REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Finance. Law. Administrator. Clerk of Commission HCD_GARDENCITYJAZZ MOU 1 Memorandum of Understanding Housing & Community Development/Garden City Jazz Partnership This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) is entered into on the ____ day of ____________________, 2022 by and between Augusta, GA (c/o) Housing and Community Development Department (HCD), and Garden City Jazz, (GCJ). HCD serves as Augusta, GA’s department liaison for the Laney Walker Bethlehem Revitalization Program. GCJ has consistently presented live music events in the Greater Augusta River Region since 2004, developed partnerships with local municipalities, non-profit organizations, small businesses, international interests, and featured homegrown professional musicians and student groups as well as touring groups. The above-named parties to this Memorandum of Understanding recognize the importance of facilitating events with Housing & Community Development that entail preserving the heritage of the Laney Walker Bethlehem Community as well as increasing economic development through local businesses. Part I. Structure and Purpose of Initiative This local initiative will be known as the Augusta, GA (c/o Housing & Community Development) – Garden City Jazz Partnership Initiative (the "Initiative"). The greater Initiative is designed to facilitate live entertainment and food vendors within the Laney Walker Bethlehem Community. Part II. Partnership Goals The goal of the Initiative is to collaborate with GCJ to provide live entertainment and food vendors, which will: • Provide the 2nd Annual Laney Walker Bethlehem Heritage Festival “Homecoming” theme on a Saturday during Fall/Other which will be integral to highlighting the history of Laney Walker/Bethlehem, • Be featured at the Dyess Park location and surrounding parcels, • Include live music entertainment and food trucks that will be lined up on James Brown Blvd. or the perimeter of the park, • Provide entertainment stage on the baseball field at Dyess Park, • Increase the economic growth and heritage within the Laney Walker/Bethlehem Community. Part III. Responsibilities of the Parties It is understood that HCD and GCJ will work together as a team to effectively meet the community’s needs within Laney Walker/Bethlehem. This level of collaboration will require thorough and timely communication between all parties. The parties will have the following responsibilities: • HCD to work with GCJ to identify additional event locations for future purposes, HCD_GARDENCITYJAZZ MOU 2 • GCJ will provide live music entertainment for the event, and facilitate event • HCD to work with GCJ to establish tentative dates for future events, • HCD and GCJ to agree upon fees for the events that will be paid to GCJ, • GCJ to work with sub-contractor TM Consultants to identify food vendors that will provide food trucks for event, to develop sponsorship packets, collect sponsorship fees, provide marketing i.e. (radio, TV, print, social media), development and deployment of program agenda, collaborate community stakeholders, and provide site map of event, • HCD to work with GCJ to provide scheduled meetings and provide reports, • HCD will secure the initial location for the event at Dyess Park via the Parks and Recreation Dept., and • HCD will work with City of Augusta Departments facilitate security and clean-up. Part IV. Payment and Fees HCD agrees to commit $10,000 (one time) to Garden City Jazz (in partnership) for service fees for deliverables, event activities to include (but not limited to) securing sponsorships, marketing (i.e. radio, billboards, social media, newspapers, banners), supplies, equipment (i.e. stage, sound, lighting), vendors, etc. as a pledge of support. Part V. Public Relations The parties agree that initially, and throughout the term of this MOU, marketing and public announcements relative to Initiative activities be coordinated among and approved by both HCD, and GCJ prior to public release. Part VI. Relationship of Parties Nothing in this MOU shall be deemed to constitute or create an association, partnership or joint venture among the participating parties, or any agency or employer-employee relationship. No party is granted, nor shall it represent that it has been granted, any right or authority to assume or create any obligation or responsibility, expressed or implied, on behalf of, or in the name of another party, or bind another party in any manner. Part VII. Term; Early Termination The term of the MOU is twenty-four (24) months from the date of the execution. It is the intention of the participants to work diligently to ensure that within 90 days, all of the Initiative Development Goals shall be met. At that time, renewal of the partnership may be extended upon the agreement of both parties. The participating parties reserve the right to terminate the MOU with 90 days’ notice. Part VIII. Administration and Reports HCD will facilitate monitoring the Initiative and providing bi-monthly reports to the participants. Part IX. Additional Provisions HCD, and GCJ shall each identify a primary contact and an alternative contact. HCD_GARDENCITYJAZZ MOU 3 Part X. Acknowledgements As the authorized representative for my organization, I have read this MOU regarding the Initiative. I agree that it accurately describes the purpose, operational plan and roles of the Initiative participants. I understand that this document is not a contract and is not a legally binding agreement. However, by executing this Memorandum of Understanding, I further understand that the participating parties are forming an alliance to accomplish the goals set forth herein. In Witness Whereof, the parties have set their hands and seals as of the date first written above. Attest: Augusta, Georgia By:___________________________________________ Date:________________________ Hardie Davis, Jr. As Mayor By:___________________________________________ Date:________________________ Takiyah Douse As Interim City Administrator By:___________________________________________ Date:________________________ Hawthorne Welcher, Jr. As Director, HCD Approved as to Form by:___________________________ Date: ________________________ Augusta, GA Law Department SEAL _____________________________________ Lena Bonner As its Clerk of Commission Garden City Jazz By:____________________________________________ Date:_____________________ Name: Title: HCD_GARDENCITYJAZZ MOU 4 Administrative Services Committee Meeting 8/9/2022 1:10 PM HCD_MOU in partnership with Garden City Jazz (GCJ) Department:HCD Presenter:Hawthorne Welcher, Jr. and/or HCD Staff Caption:Motion to approve one (1) MOU with Garden City Jazz (GCJ). Background:Garden City Jazz – GCJ has consistently presented live music events in the Greater Augusta River Region since 2004, developed partnerships with local municipalities, non-profit organizations, small businesses, international interests, and featured home-grown professional musicians and student groups as well as touring groups. HCD and GCJ recognize the importance of facilitating events that entail preserving the heritage of the Laney Walker Bethlehem Community as well as increasing economic development through local businesses. Address Budget Project Type Dyess Park $ 10,000 Special Event Project 902 James Brown Blvd. Augusta, GA. 30901 Analysis:Approval of this request will allow for the partnership with Garden City Jazz. Financial Impact:Augusta, Georgia receives funding from Bonds annually. Alternatives:Deny Recommendation:Approve one (1) MOU with Garden City Jazz Funds are Available in the Following Accounts: Funding: Bond GL Code: 297-07-5220-5211119 REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Finance. Law. Administrator. Clerk of Commission Administrative Services Committee Meeting Commission Chamber - 7126/2022 ATTENDANCE: Present: Hons. Hasan, Chairman; Scott, Vice Chairman; Frantom and B. Williams, members. Absent: Hon. Hardie Davis, Jr., Mayor. 1. Motion to approve the purchase of one 2024Truck, Single Axle Dump, at a total cost of $109,227.00 Item from CSRA Fleetcare, Inc. of Augusta, GA (Bid #22-229) for the Engineering Department -Maintenance Action:Division. Approved Motions Motion Type Motion Text Made By Approve Motion to aDDrove.ilili;; i,;IJ. il. Commissioner Francine Scott Seconded By f;tjf Commisioner Sean Frantom Passes 2. Motion to approve due to purchases on the individual purchase orders will exceed $25,000.00 per order. The following annual bid item: Fire Department: 22-038 Firefighter Work Uniforms and Accessories. The recommendation of award is for two (2) years with the option to extend for three (3) additional one (1) year upon mutual consent of both parties. Motions Motion Type Motion Text Item Action: Approved Motion to anorove.il;;t;; ;;;IJ. il. commissioner Francine Scott seconded By fffil Commisioner Sean Frantom Passes Made By Approve 3. Discuss the financial needs of the Augusta Richmond County Library System and how the commission can assist. (Requested by Commissioner Dennis Williams) Motion Result Passes Item Action: Approved Item Action: Approved Motions Motion Motion Textr ype Motion to delete this item from Approve the agenda. Motion Passes 4-0. Made By Commissioner Francine Scott Seconded By Commisioner Sean Frantom 4.Motion to approve the Administrator's recommendations as presentation. stated in the Employee Retention Plan Motions Motion Type Approve Motion Text Motion to approve the recommendations from the Administrator with funding from sales tax collections and the 2022budget. Motion Passes 4-0. Commissioner Ben Hasan Passes Made By Commissioner Bobby Williams Seconded By Motion Result 5. Motion to approve development of four (4) Affordable single-family homes, new construction. Motions Motion Type Motion Text Made By Seconded By f"'rli,' Commisioner Sean Frantom Passes. Motion to aDDrove.Approve iili;; i;r;IJ, il. Commissioner Francine Scott 6. Request to approve submission of the FY2022 Annual Action Plans and authority for the Mayor, as Augusta, Georgia's CertiSing Official, to execute the documents, including but not limited to, the SF- 424s and Certifications and Assurances required to be included with this submission, as well as Certifications of Consistency with the Consolidated Plan for HUD CoC Grant Applications for 2022. Motions Motion Type Motion Text Item Action: Approved Item Action: Approved Motion to aDDrove.i;;;i;;;";l;, il. commissioner Francine Scott seconded By f;tjil Commisioner Sean Frantom Passes Made By Approve 7. Motion to approve the minutes of the Administrative Services Committee held on July 12,2022.Item Action: Approved Motions Motion Type Motion Text Made By Seconded By Approve M:Iffi l,""3ljJ?:[. Commissioner Francine Scott Commisioner Sean Frantom Motion Result Passes www.auqustaga.gov Administrative Services Committee Meeting 8/9/2022 1:10 PM Minutes Department: Presenter: Caption:Motion to approve the minutes of the Administrative Services Committee held on July 26, 2022. Background: Analysis: Financial Impact: Alternatives: Recommendation: Funds are Available in the Following Accounts: REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Invitation to Bid Sealed bids will be received at this office until Wednesday, March 2, 2022 @ 11:00 a.m. via ZOOM Meeting ID: 830 3158 1228; Passcode: 894949 for furnishing: Bid Item #22-166 Vernon Forest Park – Bathroom Construction for Augusta, GA – Central Service Department Bids will be received by Augusta, GA Commission hereinafter referred to as the OWNER at the offices of: Geri A. Sams, Director Augusta Procurement Department 535 Telfair Street - Room 605 Augusta, Georgia 30901 Bid documents may be viewed on the Augusta, Georgia web site under the Procurement Department ARCbid. Bid documents may be obtained at the offices of Augusta, GA Procurement Department, 535 Telfair Street – Suite 605, Augusta, GA 30901 (706-821-2422). A Pre-Bid Conference will be held on Monday, February 14, 2022 @ 10:00 a.m. via Zoom Meeting ID: 817 7615 8135 Passcode: 667933. Optional Site-Visit, Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at the site location. Contact Marie Rivera-Rivera at (706) 821-1629 for additional information. All questions must be submitted in writing by fax to 706 821-2811 or by email to procbidandcontract@augustaga.gov to the office of the Procurement Department by Wednesday, February 16, 2022 @ 5:00 P.M. No bid will be accepted by fax or email, all must be received by mail or hand delivered. No bids may be withdrawn for a period of ninety (90) days after bids have been opened, pending the execution of contract with the successful bidder. Invitation for bids and specifications. An invitation for bids shall be issued by the Procurement Office and shall include specifications prepared in accordance with Article 4 (Product Specifications), and all contractual terms and conditions, applicable to the procurement. All specific requirements contained in the invitation to bid including, but not limited to, the number of copies needed, the timing of the submission, the required financial data, and any other requirements designated by the Procurement Department are considered material conditions of the bid which are not waiveable or modifiable by the Procurement Director. All requests to waive or modify any such material condition shall be submitted through the Procurement Director to the appropriate committee of the Augusta, Georgia Commission for approval by the Augusta, Georgia Commission. Please mark BID number on the outside of the envelope. The local bidder preference program is applicable to this project. To be approved as a local bidder and receive bid preference an eligible bidder must submit a completed and signed written application to become a local bidder at least thirty (30) days prior to the date bids are received on an eligible local project. An eligible bidder who fails to submit an application for approval as a local bidder at least thirty (30) days prior to the date bids are received on an eligible local project, and who otherwise meets the requirements for approval as a local bidder, will not be qualified for a bid preference on such eligible local project. GEORGIA E-Verify and Public Contracts: The Georgia E-Verify law requires contractors and all sub-contractors on Georgia public contract (contracts with a government agency) for the physical performance of services over $2,499 in value to enroll in E-Verify, regardless of the number of employees. They may be exempt from this requirement if they have no employees and do not plan to hire employees for the purpose of completing any part of the public contract. Certain professions are also exempt. All requests for proposals issued by a city must include the contractor affidavit as part of the requirement for their bid to be considered. Bidders are cautioned that acquisition of BID documents through any source other than the office of the Procurement Department is not advisable. Acquisition of BID documents from unauthorized sources placed the bidder at the risk of receiving incomplete or inaccurate information upon which to base his qualifications. Correspondence must be submitted via mail, fax or email as follows: Augusta Procurement Department Attn: Geri A. Sams, Director of Procurement 535 Telfair Street, Room 605 Augusta, GA 30901 Fax: 706-821-2811 or Email: procbidandcontract@augustaga.gov No bid will be accepted by fax or email, all must be received by mail or hand delivered. GERI A. SAMS, Procurement Director Publish: Augusta Chronicle January 20, 27, 2022 and February 3, 10, 2022 Metro Courier January 20, 2022 OFFICIAL Vendors Attachment "B"E-Verify Number Save Form Base Bid Quintech Solutions Inc 2550 Lithonia West Drive Lithonia, GA 30058 Yes 590711 Yes $120,620.60 Blounts Complete Home Service Inc 2907 Tobacco Rd. #C. Hephzibah, GA 30815 Yes 209640 Yes $112,000.00 Contract Management Inc. 1829 Killingsworth Rd. Augusta, GA 30904 Yes 225306 Yes $97,072.00 Allen-Batchelor Construction Co. Inc. 1063 Franke Industrial Dr. Augusta, GA 30909 Bid Opening Bid Item #22-166 Vernon Forest Park- Bathroom Construction for Augusta, GA - Central Service Department Bid Date: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 @ 11:00 a.m. Total Number Specifications Mailed Out: 33 Total Number Specifications Download (Demandstar): 330 Total Electronic Notifications (Demandstar): 5 Total Georgia Procurement Registry:1677 Total Packages Submitted: 4 Total Noncompliant: 0 No Bid Response Page 1 of 1 Administrative Services Committee Meeting 8/9/2022 1:10 PM Vernon Forest Park - Bathroom Construction Department:Central Services Presenter:Ron Lampkin Caption:Motion to approve the award of bid #22-166, Vernon Forest Park – Bathroom Construction, in the amount of $97,072.00 to Contract Management Inc. utilizing recaptured SPLOST funding. Background:This project relates to the construction of a new bathroom facility at Vernon Forest Park, located at 2101 Telfair St. in Augusta, GA. This Park, recently named in honor of Vernon Forrest, is a community park which has tennis courts, a pavilion, and a playground. The bathroom addition will increase facility usefulness. Analysis:Central Services recommends award to Contract Management Inc. as they submitted the lowest compliant bid. Financial Impact:Recapture SPLOST funds, as indicated below, totaling $84,869.00 into SPLOST 7; GL: 329-06-1110 JL: 218-05-7126 that has a balance of $12,203.00 creating a project budget of $97,072.00. 328061110 – 211066202 $49,869 – Elliott 328061110 – 211066701 $20,000 – Brookfield 328061110 – 211066502 $15,000 – Brigham Alternatives:(1) Award bid with recaptured funding (2) Do not award bid with recaptured funding Recommendation:Motion to approve the award of bid #22-166, Vernon Forest Park – Bathroom Construction, in the amount of $97,072.00 to Contract Management Inc. utilizing recaptured SPLOST funding. Funds are Available in the Following Accounts: Recapture SPLOST funds, as indicated below, totaling $84,869.00 into SPLOST 7; GL: 329-06-1110 JL: 218-05-7126 that has a balance of $12,203.00 creating a project budget of $97,072.00. 328061110 – 211066202 $49,869 – Elliott 328061110 – 211066701 $20,000 – Brookfield 328061110 – 211066502 $15,000 – Brigham REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Procurement