COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA REQUEST PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND NINE COPIES OF THIS REQUEST AND DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT. MADE BY: William H. Williams MEETING DATE: February 10, 2003 OFFICE: Commissioner, Pct. 2 TIME PREFERRED: 9:30 a.m. SUBJECT: (Please be specific) Consider, discuss and take appropriate action on Amendments to Intergovernmental Agreement between Kerr County and Upper Guadalupe River Authority to reflect agency name changes, contract numbers, professional engineering company name change, amount of UGRA cash matching funds, removal of paragraph #6 as shown in attached amended agreement, and name changes on signature page. EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: (PLEASE STATE REASON) NAME OF PERSON(S) ADDRESSING THE COURT: Commissioner Williams, Eric Hartzell and Dave Tucker, GrantWorks, County Attorney. ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION: 10 Minutes IF PERSONNEL MATTER NAME OF EMPLOYEE: Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in accordance with Title 5, Chapter 551 and 552, Government Code, is as follows: Meeting scheduled for Mondays: 5:00 P.M. previous Tuesday THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED ON: All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine if adequate information has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court meetings. Your cooperation is appreciated and contributes toward your request being addressed at the earliest opportunity. See Agenda Request Rule adopted by Commissioners Court. C~Op~ Memorandum To: Commissioner Bill Williams From: David Motley Subject: Interlocal Agreement Form Date: February 4, 2003 For purposes of § 791.011, Texas Local Government Code, I am going to assume, without further research, that it is lawful for both the U.G.R.A. and Kerr County to enter into an interlocal agreement to borrow money for, acquire, establish, enter into related contracts, build, own, operate and administer wastewater treatment facilities. I am fairly certain that Mr. Mosty has either agreed to remove the language in ~6, page 2 of the draft "Intergovernmental Agreement for Texas Community Development Program and Texas Colonia Construction Fund Awards" concerning award of contracts to the successful bidder. Other information I would request changing has to do with the "parties" to the agreement, other than U.G.R.A. and Kerr County. I have found no statutory authority to exempt a professional grant administrator, such as GrantWorks, from the RFP procedure and the rules disseminated by O.R.C.A. require that all professional services contractor's services (including engineering consulting and project administration services) be procured through competitive negotiation and a procedure as described in Chapter 2 of the current O.R.C.A. grant guideline book. Said grant book requires that professional services contractors be procured by the more stringent of state law or those procedures they set out in Chapter 2. For that reason, I would request that in the revised Intergovernmental Agreement for Texas Community Development Program and Texas Colonia Construction Fund Awards, the two named professional consultants be identified generically, rather than by specific name, for example..."the applicable consulting engineer for the County" or "consulting engineer" and "consulting project administrator." I would much rather see some terms used in the Intergovernmental Agreement for Texas Community Development Program and Texas Colonia Construction Fund Awards defined therein as I have been unable to find all of same in any applicable statute. More specifically, from ¶ 2, page 1, "County projects," from ¶ 6, page 1, and from ¶ 14.1, page 4, "program," ¶ 10.1, page 3, "contract supervision services" and from ¶14.2, page 4, "consultants." Perhaps "contract supervision services" are the same thing as I have referred to as "consulting project administrator?" If this is so, either term is acceptable. There is a disagreement as to U.G.R.A.'s authority or responsibility to obtain right-of- way for contemplated projects in ¶ 10.5 and ¶ 11.2, page 3 and I think this can be easily rectified. Kerr County, as the grant recipient, ultimately has the responsibility for providing various reports and information concerning the grant and the project(s) it funds and I question, perhaps the wisdom, as opposed to the legality, of totally assigning those and other supervisory duties relating to oversight of the construction of the project to U.G.R.A., as is done in ¶ 13, page 4. In O.R.C.A.'s eyes, Kerr County would be the party ultimately held responsible, should some detail not be properly supervised or reported or should grant fiznds not be properly accounted for. I think this is an area where further discussion as to the desirability of such a paragraph would be warranted. Along the same lines, ¶ 10.1, page 3 is inconsistent with ¶ 12.1, page 4 as regards who shall have the responsibility to supervise the construction during terms of O.R.C.A. projects, the first section providing for supervision by the General Manager of U.G.R.A. and the latter giving all such supervisory authority to both U.G.R.A. and Kerr County. cc: Richard Mosty County Judge Commissioner, Precinct One Commissioner, Precinct Three Commissioner, Precinct Four file 2 STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY OF KERR § INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR~AAf TEXAS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Al! D TEXAS CO1.0?\if1 CONSTIiiJCTT(.)N FU'\1) AWARDS This agreement is entered into this _ day of ,pursuant to the terms of Chapter 791 of the Texas Government Code, by and between the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, hereinafter called "the County", and the Upper Guadalupe River Authority, hereinafter called "UGRA", for the purpose of providing certain services relating to the administration of the operation of the ~AA~ TEXAS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND ~~~- # 72 /07S" TEXAS COLONIA CONSTRIICTION FDND AWARDS ' ,Kerr County has, applied for and _ ply in the future for grants under the ljeea-eded~ ~88I- Texas Community Development Program (TCDP) nd/or the Texas Colonic Construction Fund Colonic Fund ~~} from the Office of Rural Communirit Affairs ORCA to oonstnict treated water, wastewater or other ' cxiu~e improvements in the ~~3' Proj~, and WHEREAS, the County finds, . it in the best intent of the health and welfare of its residents, absentee property owners, visitors and guests, to accept and implement such~rojects. the-ABP WHEREAS, the Caimy finds that effecrive implementation of the Mich projects '~7eatrast will provide good environmattal health practices whidi, among other benefits, ultimately will promoGe•safeguards for the ooanty's suntaoe and public drinking water ataundards; and - WHEREAS, UGktA's temtoriat jurisdiction is the same as the County's and UGRA is charged to, among other matters, Protect. preserve and maintain the quality of surface water in Kean County, and WHEREAS, GrantWork:s has an established program and staff to administer the current and pending I ORCA projects T~~eatiast oa behalf of the County; and WHEREAS, Tetra Tech. Inc. Ei~eeriag has an established expertise and staff to serve as the I consulting engineer on the current proiec«trejest; and WHEREAS, UGRA has expnessod a willingness to oversee the dese8a and oonstnudion of the current ~d A projects ~~-~ejest, and has the program and staff to do so; and I WHEREAS, the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Kerr County would be best served by both parties entering into this Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement pursuant to the authority granted by Chapter 791 of the Texas Government Code. Ode M WHEREAS, UGRA, by resolution, has previously committed itself to providing 5~~ A~A:BA-~ cash matching funds for the awarded and amending tk~9A~ ORCA protects ~prajesE, and WHEREAS, the County cad UGRA mutually desire to be subject to the provisions of Texas Government .- ,T Intcrgovernmcntal Agreement for implementation of ~ ~±~'{ ~. ~'~H£~4 !'_itt7_I!~ l .~ _ Page 1 - Code Chapter 791, which provides for interlocal cooperation contracts, for the purpose of establislung the funding, oversight, and eventual ownership of ±+;: (: ~ ~'. ~. ~. ;; r+ ~;, ~ ; ~ ' THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM OF AGREEMENT: This Agreement shall commence on the date it is si ed as indicated below and shall remain in full force for a term commensurate with the term of a;. the ~_'R,i__--"!. i~r+_~i~~i~~'~~l? r' ~ ^* ~•^~^^^ ~r•^ ~'^••^~•• ^^~' Tr'u~" ~ including any contract end-date extensions), -r~-k±~±-~- --- . . . . . ..,. . ~~. '= ' 2. CONTRIBUTION OF MATCHING FUNDS: UGRA shall contribute the matching funds for, ci went i~1f~ »n~~ n - - -=- -- -IAMt21fi N C- (~-73;99A} ~,ach funds to be placed in an <~RC'A_ ~'£4~Ir Project Fund account opened by the County as provided for herein. 3. KERR COUNTY FUNDING: Kerr County shall pay funds made available to the County through any ORCA I projeci< «ith regard to the current (RCA p~ects. and upon current available funding by the County. 4. AWARD OF BIDS: Tetra. T'ec}~. lnc..-_^^°^ ~^^~^°°^^^-shall review the bid package as prepared by Grant ~ Works and shall make such design and consulting recommendations as it deems necessary. Kerr County shall solicit and receive all bids. All accepted bids shall be referred by Kerr County to Tetra Tech. Inc. d the UGRA who shall jointly evaluate the bids and make recommendations to Kerr County. Kerr County shall award the actual bids pursuant to the Texas Local Government Code. 5. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES: 5.1 Kerr County is the contracting party with ORCA for Texas Community Development Program (TCDP) and Texas Colonic Constructioa Fund (Colonic Fund) for the I ro~ect 5.2 Grant Works shall provide the County with administrative services and oversight of the current ~1 I ~eORCAproject~. ~-a~r~~ee„~„mt-e t~e-gti~~*~^ted 5.3 Tetra Tech, inc. shall be the Consulting Engineer for the County, and will work in conjunction and cooperation with UGRA in the oversight of the construction aspects of the current 5.4 UGRA shall be responsible for general oversight of the construction of the ORCA projects. In firlfilling this duty UGRA or its designated administrative service provider shall furnish copies to the County of plans and specifications, bids, contracts, invoices and pay estimates received by UGRA from any and all professional service providers and construction contractors for projects, and in consultation with the applicable coj~snlfin~ en pincer far tl-e Caunh- shall recommend awarding of bids, contrachial agreements with contractors and payment of appropriate invoices. 6. - -- - --- - ~~ u.~ ~,u package as prepar d shall make such design and consulting recommendations as it deems proper. _ The a iicable consulling_cnaincer for t ~c 'ew the actual bids received and recommend bidders to UGRA, who will forward the bid to the County. If tl~e applicable con r the Count~_ 7. PAYMENT OF CONSTRUCTION INVOICES: All invoices for constntction services provided on the current and ndin ORCA projects, and an.' future ORCA projects appro~•ed b~~ the C_ount~~ and UGRA shall be forwarded Intergovernmental Agrcement for implementation of i,?~<,__,~t ~DI4C-f4 E~tt(~,1 t: t_ t ~~ Page 1 ____.__ __ directly to the County. Copies of the invoices shall be forwarded to !h~_;~P1~i~cat?Ic cc~n_~~lti»;~_c~~it~