2002-10-16City of Southlake, Texas
. l MEMORANDUM
IOctober 7, 2002
TO: Southlake Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors
FROM: Rick Black, Director of Public Safety
SUBJECT: Determine the Method of Awarding the Construction Contracts for the North
DPS Facility.
Action Requested: Board consideration on which method contains best value for the construction
- of the North DPS Facility..
Background
Information: The Seventy Seventh Texas Legislature made a number of changes to
purchasing laws applicable to municipalities, broadening options in a number
of ways. One of the bills, S.B. 510, provided alternative processes for the
construction of municipal facilities (buildings, not infrastructure). The
attached memo from City Attorney Betsy Elam provides a detailed review of
the options now available.
The, CIP is scheduled to contain the funding necessary to complete
programming and architectural design of the North DPS Facility in FY 02-03
and FY 03-04 and then construction in FY 03-04 and FY 04-05. This item is
placed on the agenda so that the Board can determine the method of best value
for the City of Southlake. This determination will be forwarded to City
Council who will make the final decision.
This issue was discussed with the Board on May 8, 2002, July 17, 2002 and
August 7, 2002. In addition, extensive research was conducted by staff, the
President and Vice President of Crime Control. Interviews were conducted
with different architectural and construction firms as to the merits of each
method. Interviews were also conducted with area City Managers and
employees responsible for construction of municipal buildings.
Attached to this memo is a chart that contrasts the top four methods for
awarding bids for construction of a Municipal Facility. This chart outlines
nine (9) different features of each method and illustrates the differences. Each
cell contains information that was derived from the interviews, discussions and
research conducted by staff and board members.
Financial
Considerations: Each method contains a substantial financial comparison to one another
ranging from 1.5% to 6% cost reduction.
6A-1
S6uthlake Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors
Determine the Method of Awarding the Construction Contracts for the North DPS Facility
October 11, 2002
Page 2
Financial
Impact: The common cost of each method is 3% plus general conditions of the total
project cost. The CIP currently contains the following monies allocated
towards the design and construction of the North DPS facility:
FY 02-03
$300,000
FY 03-04
$300,000
FY 04-05
$12,400.000
It is estimated at this point that the North Site will cost a total of $13,000,000,
- however, more valid cost estimates are currently being developed.
Citizen Input/
Board Review: The Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors determines the
funding that will be approved for use in constructing the North DPS facility,
and will provide input to the City Council regarding the method of best value.
Legal Review: The attached memo was prepared by City Attorney Betsy Elam to apprise
municipal officials of the alternatives now available as a result of recent action
by the Texas Legislature. Obviously, the attorneys would be intimately
involved in the preparation of request for proposal documents as well as
contracts, regardless of the method selected.
Alternatives: Continue researching the various methods available for the construction of the
North DPS Facility.
Supporting
Documents: "New Methods for Awarding Construction Contracts for Municipal Facilities,"
February 13, 2002, Betsy Elam
Comparison Spreadsheet contrasting four different methods of construction.
Staff
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the board discuss each method, share current research
findings and decide which method contains the best value for the construction
of the North DPS Facility.
6A-2
Methoos of Construction
Contrast Paper
Features
CM Agent
CM At Risk
Design/Build
Traditional
Key Points
(a) The Construction Manager -Agent
(a) The Construction Manager at Risk
(a) One contractor has the responsibility for(
a) The owner works with two contracts,
(CMA) manages the project for the owner
(CMR) assumes risk and controls more
design and construction of the facility.
I the architect and the general contractor.
in a fiduciary capacity. (b) The owner
aspects of the project (b) The owner and
¢ (b) The owner may not be involved
retains control of the project including
the CMR participate in competitive bidding
between general contractor and
procurement of trade contractors and
contracts with subs. (c) The architect is
subcontractors.
professional services. (c) The architect is
contacted for separately from the CMR.
contracted for separately from the CMA.
Who handles the contracts?
The CMA manages all contracts with
The CMR manages all contracts with
The DesigrhBuild Contractor manages all
The owner manages the contracts of the
exception to the architect
exception of the architect
contracts, including both tlie design and
Architect and General Contractor.
construction. A number of subcontracts
may be negotiated and not bid on a
competitive basis.
Points of contact with Owner
Single point of construction responsibility
Single point of construction responsibility
Single point of design and construction
Duel points of responsibility (Architect and
for cost, schedule and quality. The CMA
for cost, schedule and quality.
responsibility. Functionality but not quality
General Contractor)
also offers design assistance leading to
of design is known before prices given.
cost and time savings without sacrificing
.
ual'----------------
Representation
The CMA represents the owner with on.
Represents the owner but is responsible
No owner representation. More difficult
No owner representation by General
site supervision. Does not have sed profit
for the company's profitability on the
process to select and manage.
Contractor unless through history or
motivation due to fixed fee.
project
relationship.
Relationship (architect and
Non -adversarial relationship - public bid
Potential adversarial relationship. Trends
Potential adversarial relationship
Adversarial relationship inherent
Construction Manager)
opening at Owners location. Equal status
toward competitive sealed proposals or
with owner. Owner has final say on all
bids, typically opened at CMITs office.
issues.
r
Speed of Project
Schedule can be reduced
Manager responsible for schedule but will
Schedule can be reduced.
Inevitable longer schedule duration unless
not sacrifice profitability for shorter time
stiff liquidated damages are enforced.
frame. The CMR may also use the
schedule to enhance pricing.
Cost and Savings
Any savings goes directly to the owner
Any project cost savings is shared
No "Checks and Balances" Potential
Emphasis is on completing projects with
The CMA is motivated to increase project
between the CMR and the Owner. The
savings via the speed foo delivery (.e,
the company profit intact or increased. No
savings that will enhance opportunities for
CMR is not as motivated to reduce original
interest expense).
supervision over architects plans.
future projects and other references.
pricing. Change orders may be
Potential cost increases.
Change orders are approved/not approved
approved/not approved based on end
based upon end quality, not agent profit
profit, not quality of project Schedule and
The CMA nor sally will perform
quality could both suffer if numerous
constructability, reviews and have changes
changes.
made prior to bidding and this precludes a
lot of changes after award.
General Conditions
The General Conditions are predicated on
The General Conditions for a CM at Risk
Similar to CM at Risk
General Conditions costs are very
the project duration and are included in the
are usually inflated since it is difficult for a
conservative on competitive bids but
CM Agents feed fee, therefore motivating
layman to affect changes. These costs will
additional cost changes will increase the
early completion.
only increased the job cost increases
General Conditions as a percentage of
since the General Conditions are usually a
change. Normally competitive bidding will
percentage of any added cost changes,
not include a complete or full time staff on
site.
Public Sector ReVieWsYCMWAg!ntMhas
received the most positive
CM at Risk has receive some positive and
No history with this method in
Difficult to assess becausethis is theonly
views.
some negative reviews.
municipalities.
method cities could use. Southlake
refers a different method.
Southlake Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors
10/11/2002
FORT WORTH OFFICE:
6000 WESTmtN PLACE, Surm 200
1-30 AT BRYANT-ImN ROAD
FORT WORTH, TF -w 76107-4654
votcs: (817) 332-2580
Fxa: (800) 318-3400
(817)332-4740
.- IJ TOASEQTOASE.CDM
WERSUE: W W W.TOASE.COM
EuzAeETH ELAM
EXT. 211
betsvelem0toase.com
Billy Campbell
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street
Suite 460
Southlake, Texas 76092
Tall=-'! lsonsralla: ' m
Attorneys Counselors
February 13, 2002
DENTON OFFICE:
620 WEST HICKORY
DENTON. TEXAS 76201
VOCE: (940) 383-2674
hIETRo:(972) 434-3834
FAx: (940) 898-0118
p eIE�
FI:Rzs2002
Re: New Methods for Awarding bids for Construction of Municipal Facilities
Dear Billy
Senate 1510, c dified in Chapters 252 and 271 of the Local Government Code'
became effecti eptember 1", 2001 and provides for significant ' changes in ( ,
procedures and methods permitted for awarding construction contracts for municipal
facilities. A copy of Subchapter H of Chapter 271 is enclosed. Instead of being limited to (-: s
awarding the bid to the "lowest responsible bidder", a city can choose between one of
several methods when awarding a construction contract for a municipal facility. The
methods.for awarding construction bids include: (1) competitive bidding; (2) competitive
sealed proposals for construction services; (3) design build contract; (4) a contract that
involves using a construction manager -agent; (5) a contract that utilizes a construction
manager -at -risk; or (6) a job order contract for the minor repair, rehabilitation, or alteration
of a facility.
These methods apply to the construction, rehabilitation, alteration .or repair of
municipal facilities as defined by Section 271.111(7). A facility means buildings, the design
and construction of which are 'governed by accepted building codes, The term does not
include highways, roads, streets, bridges, utilities, water supply projects, water plants,
wastewater plants, water and wastewater distribution or conveyance facilities, wharfs,
docks, airport runways and taxiways, drainage projects, or related types of projects
associated with civil engineering construction; or buildings or structures that are incidental
to projects that are primarily civil engineering construction projects. .
PROCEDURES REQUIRED FOR ALL METHODS OF AWARDING CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACTS
Each method requires specific procedures, but the following rules and procedures
Unless otherwise noted, all codes references in this letter are references to the Local
Government Code.
W:1Southl2kelLETTERS1Campbell.EBE.002.wpd 6A-4
February 13, 2002
Page 2
apply to all methods in Chapter 271 unless otherwise specifically noted:
Determination of best value. For all methods except competitive bidding,.the City
Council (or its designated representative) must before advertising, determine
which method provides the best value for the governmental entity. For example,
before advertising begins, a city council could -by resolution make a finding that the
design- build method will provide the best value. If the City Council delegates its
authority, the designated representative should make. a determination in writing
stating which method provides the best value. (Section 271.114).
Criteria for selection of contractor. Unless otherwise specified below, for all
methods, the City Council must base -its selection among offerers on the following
criteria (referred to below as the "selection criteria")2:
1. the purchase price;
2. the reputation of the vendor and of the vendors goods or services;
3. the quality of the vendor's goods or services;
4. the extent to which the goods or services meet the City's needs;
5. the vendor's past relationship with the City;
6. the impact on the ability of the City to comply with rules relating to historically
(� Y underutilized businesses;
7. the long-term cost to the City to acquire vendor's goods and services; and
8. any other relevant factors specifically listed in the request for bids or
proposals. (Sections 271.113 and 271.114)
Required publication of notice. A City must publish notice of the time and place
the bids or proposals, or the responses to a request for qualifications will be
received and opened. The notice must be published in a newspaper of general
circulation in a county in which the municipality's central administrative offices are
located, once a week for at least two weeks before the deadline for receiving the
responses. (Section 271.112(d))
Criteria must be published. The City is required to publish in its request for bids,
proposals or qualifications all of the selection criteria that will be used to evaluate
the offerers and the relative weights given to the criteria. (Section 271.114(b))
Basis of selection must be documented. The City is required to document the
basis of its selection and make all of the evaluations public not later than the
seventh day after the date that the contract is awarded. (Section 271.114(c))
• Recycled Materials. The City must comply with the requirements found in Section
Some methods require other specific criteria in addition to the listed selection criteria.
W.\Southiake\LETTERS\Campbell.EBE.002.wpd 6A-5
February 13, 2002
Page 3
361.426 of the Health and Safety Code to give preference to re gcled materials.
(Section 271.112(b)) A copy of Section 361.426 is enclosed.
Engineer and Architect. Whenever an engineer or architect is required to be
selected or utilized, the engineer or architect must be in-house or selected by
demonstrated competence and qualifications -in accordance with the Professional
Services Procurement Act, found in 2254.004 of the Government Code. A copy of
the Act is enclosed.
Independent Testing. Whenever the City is required to provide independent
testing, inspection or verification services necessary for acceptance of the facility,
those services must be selected in accordance with the Professional Services
Procurement Act.
Charter Controls. A charter provision that requires the use of competitive bidding
or competitive sealed proposals or that prescribes - procurement procedures,
controls over these methods, unless -the City Council elects to have these
procedures supercede the charter. (Section 271.112(a))
DESCRIPTION OF EACH METHOD
Following is a description of each of the methods available to municipalities for
awarding contracts for the construction, rehabilitation, alteration, or repair of a facility:
1. Competitive Bidding. (Section 271.115)
• Key points:
a. Similar to traditional competitive bidding
b. The City may use the procedures in Chapter 252 or 271 of the Local
Government Code.
C. The City may not negptiate.with the bidders.
• The City need not make a determination on which method provides the best
Value.
•
If the procedures in Chapter 252 are followed, the contract must be awarded
to the lowest responsible bidder. The procedures in Chapter 271 allow more
flexibility, and the contract may be awarded on the basis of best value. The
procedures outlined here are those required by Chapter 271.
• The.City must publish notice seeking bids with selection criteria listed.
• The City must award a competitively bid contract at the bid amount to the
bidder offering the best value to the governmental entity according to the
selection criteria that were established by the- City and published in the
notice. (Section 271.115(c))
• The bids may be opened only by the City Council at a public meeting or by
an officer or employee of the municipality at or in an office of the City.
(271.026)
W:1Southlake\LE77ERSICampbell.EBE.002.wpd 6A-6
February 13, 2002
Page 4
W
• A bid that has been opened may not be changed for the purpose of
correcting an error in the bid price. (271.026)
• A bidder has the right to withdraw a bid due to material mistake in the bid.
(271.026(b))
• The City may not negotiate with bidders.
• The City council may reject any or all bids. (271.027(a))
2. Competitive Sealed Proposals. (Section 271.116)
• Key points:
a. The contractor is selected based on best value.
b. Negotiations are permitted with the offerers in ranked order.
C. Engineer and architects contracted separately.'
• The City Council or its designee must make a determination that this method
provides the best value.
• The City must publish notice seeking proposals.
• The City must select or designate an engineer or architect to prepare
construction documents for the project. (Section 271.116(b))
• The City is required to contract for the inspection services, the testing of
I4� construction materials engineering, and the verification testing services
necessary for acceptance of the facility by the City. The entity or person
providing these -services must be identified in the request for proposals.
(Section 271.116(c))
• The request for competitive sealed proposals must include the construction
documents, selection criteria, estimated budget, project scope, schedule and
other information that contractors may require to respond to the request.
The proposals must contain the selection criteria that will be used in
selecting the successful offerer as outlined above. (Section 271.116(d))
• The City is required to receive, publically open and read aloud the names of
the offerers and -if any pre required to be stated, all prices stated in each
proposal. (Section 271.116.(e))
• Not later than the 45"' day after the date of opening the proposals, the City
must evaluate and rank each proposal submitted in relation to the published
selection criteria. (Section 271.116(e))
The City then selects the offerer that offers the best value to the City based
on the published selection criteria. In determining best value, the City may
consider any of the factors stated in the selection criteria, and is not limited
to price alone.
• After selecting the offerer that provides best value, the City must then
negotiate a contract with the selected offerer. In negotiating the contract, the
City. and its engineer or architect may discuss options for a scope or time
modification and any price change associated with the modification. If the
City is unable to negotiate a contract with the first selected offerer, then the
City must formally and in writing end negotiations and proceed to the next
W:1Southlake\LETTERS%Campbell.EBE.002.wpd 6A- 7
February 13, 2002
Page 5
offerer in order of the selection ranking until a contract is reached or all
proposals are rejected.
3. Construction Manager -Agent Method. (Section 271.1-17)
• Key points: -
a. Manager -agent manages the project for the City in a fiduciary
capacity.
b. The City retains control over procuring general, sub, and trade
contractors.
C. Engineer or architect are contracted separately.
• The City must make a determination that this method provides the best
value.
• A construction manager -agent is a sole proprietorship, partnership,
corporation, or other legal entity that provides consultation to the City
regarding the. construction, rehabilitation, alteration or repair of a facility.
(Section 271.117(a))
• The City, by contract, may require the construction manager -agent to provide
administrative personnel, equipment necessary to perform the duties under
this method, and on-site management and other services specified underthe
F.:;..,.x contract. (Section 271.117(a))
• A construction manager -agent represents the City in a fiduciary capacity.
(Section 217,117(b)) This imposes a special legal duty on the construction
manager -agent to act primarily for the City's benefit in matters connected
with the construction of the facility.
• Before, or concurrently with, selecting a construction manager -agent, the
City must select or designate an engineer or architect to prepare the
construction documents. The City's engineer or architect may not act as the
construction manager -agent, unless the engineer or architect is selected in
accordance with the procedures for selecting a construction manager -agent
outlined herein. (Section 2TI.117(c))
• The City selects a construction manager --agent on the basis on demonstrated
competence and qualifications in the same manner as provided for the
selection of engineers or architects under the Professional Services
Procurement Act, except that the notice must be published in the same
manner as other methods, as outlined above. (Section 271.117(d))
• If the City uses this method, it must procure, "in accordance with applicable
law" (which means competitively bid or competitive sealed proposals if.
required by law) a general contractor, trade contractor or subcontractors who
will serve as the prime contractor for their specific portion of the work and,
be supervised by the construction manager -agent. (Section. 271.117(e))
• In accordance with the Professional Services Procurement Act, the City is
required to procure all of the testing and inspection services necessary for
acceptance of the facility by the City. (Section 271.117(f))
W.1Bouthiake\LETTERS1Campbell.EBE.002.wpd 6A-8
February 13, 2002
Page 6
4. Construction Manager -at -Risk Method. (Section 271.118)
• Key points:
a. Manager assumes risk and controls more aspects of the project.
b. The City and the. manager -at -risk participate in competitive bidding
contracts with subs.
C. Engineer or architect contracted separately.
d. The City may negotiate with ranked offerers.
• The City must make a determination that this method provides the best
value.
• A construction manager -at -risk is a sole proprietorship, partnership, or other
legal entity that assumes the risk for construction, rehabilitation, alteration or
repair of a facility at the contracted price as a general contractor and
provides consultation to the governmental entity regarding construction
during and after the design of the facility. (Section 271.118(b))
• The City must designate an engineer or architect to prepare the construction
documents. (Section 271.118(c)) .
• The City's engineer, architect or construction manager -agent for a project
may not serve alone or in combination with another as the construction
manager -at -risk unless that person or entity is hired to serve as the
construction manager -at -risk under procedures .in accordance with this
section.
• In accordance with the Professional Services ProcurementAct, the City must
provide for independent testing, and inspection services necessary for
acceptance of the facility.
• The City must select the construction manager -at -risk in either a one step or
two-step process: .
a. One step process.
L The City must prepare a request for proposals that includes
general information of the project site, project scope, schedule,
selection criteria, estimated budget, and the time and place for
receipt of proposals, and other information that may assist the
City in its selection of a construction manager -at -risk.
ii. Selection criteria is different from the general criteria for other
methods and includes the offerer's experience, past
performance, safety records, proposed personnel, and
methodology and other. appropriate factors that demonstrate
the capability of the construction manager -at -risk.
ill. The City may request as part of the ' offerer's proposal,
proposed fees and prices for fulfilling the .general conditions.
b. Two step process.
i. The City prepares a request for qualifications including the
a same information required in the request for proposal in a one
step process.
ii. The City may not request fees or prices.
W:1Southlake\LETTERS\Campbell.EBE.002.wpd 6A-9
February 13, 2002
Page 7
iii. The City may request that five or fewer offerers selected solely
on the basis of qualifications, provide addit onal information
including the construction manager -at -risk proposed fee and
its price for fulfilling the general conditions.
iv. The time and place the second step bids or proposals will be
received may be published at the same time the request for
qualifications are published.
• At each step, the City must receive and publically open and read aloud the
names of the offerers and any fees and prices stated in the proposal.
• Not later than the 451h date after opening the proposals (or the fees and costs
in a two step process), the City must evaluate and rank each proposal
submitted -in relation to the criteria as set forth in the request for proposals.
• The City selects the offerer that submits the proposal that offers the best
value based on the published .criteria, then attempts to negotiate with the
selected offerer. If a contract cannot be successfully negotiated, the City
negotiates with the next ranked offerer.
• The construction manager -at -risk must competitively bid and receive
proposals from trade contractors or subcontractors. The construction
manager -at risk may perform portions of the work only if it participates in the
competitive bidding process and is determined bythe Cityto providethe best
value for the City...
The manager -at -risk and the City review all trade contractor and
subcontractor bids and the manager -at -risk may recommend to the City to
accept a bid or proposal. The City makes the final determination as to which
trade or subcontractor to pick based on the best value. However, if the City
accepts a different bid or- proposal from the one recommended by the
manager -at -risk, the City maybe required to compensate the manager -at -
risk for changes in price, time or guaranteed maximum cost incurred
because of the selection.
• If a selected trade or subcontractor defaults in the performance, the
manager -at -risk may,. without advertising, fulfill the contract requirements
itself or with a replacement contractor.
• Must execute bonds.
5. Design -Build Method. (Section 271.119)
• Key points:
a. One contractor designs and constructs the facility.
b. The City may negotiate with ranked offerers.
• Determination of Best Value. The City must make a determination that the
design -build method provides the best value to the City.
• Design -Build Contract. A design -build contract means a single contract
with a design -build firm for the design and construction of a facility. (Section
271.111(3))
6A-10
W:1Southiake\LETTERS\CampbeA.EBE.002wpd
February 13, 2002
Page 8
I
• Design -Build Firm. A design -build, firm means a partnership, corporation
or other legal entity that includes an engineer or architect and builder
qualified to engage in building in Texas. (Section 271.111(4))
Independent Architect or Engineer. The City must designate an engineer
or architect independent of the design -build firm to act as its representative
for the duration of the work on the facility. (Section 271.119(b))
• Request for Qualifications. The City must prepare. a request for
qualifications that includes general information on the project site, project
scope, budget, special systems, selection criteria, and other information that
may assist potential design -build firms in submitting proposals forthe project.
(Section 271.119(c))
• Design -Criteria Package. • The City must also prepare a design criteria
:package that includes more detailed information on the project. A design
criteria package means 'a set of documents that provides sufficient
information to permit a design -build firm to prepare a response to the
request for qualifications and any additional information requested, including
criteria for selection. It must specify criteria the City considers necessary to
describe the project and may include, as appropriate, a legal description of
the site, survey information concerning the site, interior space requirements,
special material requirements, material quality standards, conceptual criteria
1 for the project, special equipment requirements, cost or budget estimates,
time schedules, etc. (Section 271.111(5))
• Publish Notice. The City must publish notice of the time and place the
response to a• request for qualifications will be' received and opened as
outlined above.
• Phase I of Evaluation and Selection Process. (Section 271.119(d)(1))
a. The City must evaluate each offerer's experience, technical
competence and capability to perform, past performance of the
offerer's team and members of the team, and other appropriate
factors submitted by the team or firm in response to the request for
qualifications.
b. Cost related or price related evaluation factors are not permitted and
may not be considered.
C. Each offerer must certify that each engineer and architect was
selected in accordance with the Professional Services Procurement
Act.
d. The City may qualify a maximum of five offerers to submit additional
information and, if the City chooses, to interview for final selection.
• Phase If of Evaluation and Selection Process. (Section 271.119(d)(2))
a: The City evaluates the information submitted by the offerers on the
basis of the selection criteria stated in the request for qualifications
and the results of an interview.
b. The City may request additional information regarding demonstrated
competence, qualifications, considerations of the safety and long term
durability of the project, the feasibility of implementing the project as
6A-11
W;lSouthlake\LETTERS1Campbell.EBE.002.wpd
February 13, 2002
Page 9
a
proposed, the ability of the offerer to meet schedules, costing
methodologies or other factors as appropriate.
C. The City may not require the offerers to submit detailed engineering
or architectural designs as part of the proposal.
d. The City must rank the offerers and select the design -build firm that
submits the proposal offering the best value to the City on the basis
of the published selection criteria and its ranking evaluations.
e. The City must negotiate with the offerers in the order they are ranked.
If the City and offerer cannot successfully negotiate a contract, the
City must end the negotiations in writing and proceed to the next
ranked offerer until' a contract is reached or all ranked offerers are
rejected.
Submission of Design Elements. The engineers or architects of the
selected design -build firm will complete the design and submit all design
elements to the City for review.
Independent Testing. As in other methods, the City must provide for
independent testing and verification services prior to acceptance of the
facility. -
Completed Plans. The design build firm is required to supply a signed and
sealed set of construction documents after completion of the project
6. Job Order Contracts for Facility Construction or Repair. (Section 271.120)
• The City must make a determination that this method provides the best
value.
• Applies to contracts for minor construction, repair or alteration of a facility if
the work is of a recurring nature, and delivery times are indefinite.
• The City may establish contractual unit prices for a job order.
• Awarded based on a sealed proposal method.
• The contract may be for a fixed lump sum payment based on estimated
quantities, or be a unit price order:
• . The contract may be renewable without advertising if the original publication
states the term and any renewal options.
I hope this has been helpful, please do not hesitate to call with any questions.
EBE/tc/ke
W.lSouthiake\LETTERS\Campbell.EB E.002.wpd
Vc-ry to dv vn"m
6A-12
1
February 13, 2002
Page 10
cc: Shana Yelverton
City of Southlake
1400 Main Street
Suite 460
Southlake, 'Texas 76092
W.\Southlake\LETTERS\Campbell.EBE.002.wpd 6A-13
SOUTHLAKE CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT
1/2% SALES TAX REPORT
2001-02 Collected Budget Balance
Budget to Date Balance Percent
$ 2.214,268 $ 2,385,486 (171.218) -7.73%
7C-1
Fiscal Year
Percent
Fiscal Year
Percent
Fiscal Year
Percent
1999-00
Increase/
2000-01
Increasel
2001-02
Increase/
MONTH
Actual
(Decrease)
Actual
Decrease
Actual
Decrease
October
$137,412
9.75°x6
$169,140
23.09%
$199,217
17.78%
November
134,564
45.68%
157,886
17.33%
192,022
21.62%
December
123,346
20.54%
162,373
31.64%
190,845
17.53%
January
160,790
18.56%
237,687
47.82%
281,020
18.23%
February
133,181
34.89%
157,640
18.37%
159,364
1.09%
March
122,112
27.40%
147,534
20.82%
158,580
7.49%
April
167,030
21.31%
206,912
23.88%
210,042
1.51%
May
149,947
18.45%
185,555
23.75%
201,261
8.46%
June
149,028
23.05%
213,711
43.40%
196,725
-7.95%
July
170,640
8.05%
223,490
30.97%
224,631
0.51%
August
153,942
27.19%
190,151
23.52%
190,257
0.06%
September
145,397
18.70%
180,172
23.92%
181,522
0.75%
TOTAL
1 $1,747,389
$2,232,251
.-$2,385,486
Three Year Revenue Comparison
by Month
3000W=
00000=250000
250000
fl
200000-
150000
100000
50000
0
�A�'; 3��1 3AT�
�^6 3lk 1 ���11 �1���41 31�611b
O Fiscal Year 1999-00
Actual ■ Fiscal Year 2000-01 Actual ❑ Fiscal Year 2001-02 Actual
Actual
Budget
Actual
Estimated
(budget -est)
°/a
2000-01
2001-02
2001-02
2001-02
Difference
Change
October
$ 169,140
167,777
199,217
199,217
$ 31,440
18.59°x6
November
157,886
156,614
192,022
192,022
35,408
22.43%
December
162,373
161,065
190,845
190,845
29,780
18.34%
January
237,687
235,772
281,020
281,020
45,248
19.04%
February
157,640
156,370
159,364
159,364
2,994
1.90%
March
147,534
146,345
158,580
158,580
12,235
8.29%
April
206,912
205,245
210,042
210,042
4,797
2.32%
May
185,555
184,060
201,261
201,261
17,201
9.27%
June
213,711
211,990
196,725
196,725
(15,265)
-7.14%
July
223,490
221,690
224,631
224,631
2,941
1.32°x6
August
190,151
188,619
190,257
190,257
1,638
0.86%
September
180,172
178,720
181,522
181,522
2,802
1.56%
TOTAL
$2,232,251
$ 2,214,268
$ 2,385,486
$ 2,385,486
$ 171,218
7C-1