court order order no. - dallas county · 2012-03-06 · i court order order no. 2012, 0417 date:...

COURT ORDER

ORDER NO.

DATE: March 2012

STATE OF TEXAS §

COUNTY OF DALLAS §

BE IT REMEMBERED, at a regular meeting of the Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas,

held on the _____ ._6:..:th=-___ day of March , 2012 on motion made by

J2.r:.,,_Elba Garcia, Gommissioner oL ..... Dw.i"'sllj'.ir.Ji-'-c-'t--1N"'o-'--'4<-___________ and seconded by

Jolm Wiley Price, Commissioner of Di stri ct No.3 the following Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, it has been determined that the Commissioners Court meetings scheduled to be held on the 2m' Tuesday in March and the last tbree Tuesdays in July could be canceled every year for spring and summer holiday breaks; and

WHEREAS, accordingly, all Dallas County Elected Officials and Department Heads are bereby notified of sucb event, and informed that any formal actions to be taken by tbe Court, to be effective prior to the next official meeting scheduled to be beld on the fltst Tuesday in August lnllst be approved at the 111ceting 011 or prior to last tneeting held in Jnly; and

WHEREAS, all Elected Officials and Department Heads are specifically notified tbat new employees that are not approved on or before the last July Commissioners Court meeting will uot receive a pay check until after Commissioners Court approval at tbe first August court lneeting; and

WHEREAS, the Commissioners COlltt acknowledges that certain priority claims may be received after the COlltt action of the last meeting in July, and in those cases if justification exists, the County Treasurer and County Auditor, may mutually agree to make such payments according to existing budget authority; and

WHEREAS, the Commissioners Court hereby designates senior Commissioners Court official, Commissioner John Wiley Price as official signature authority, in the absence of County Judge Clay Lewis Jenkins, to sign tUne sensitive dOCU111cnts such as grants on behalf of Dallas County, due to the canceled court meetings.

IT IS THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by the Dallas County Commissioners Court that all regularly scheduled Commissioners Court meetings to be held on the 2nd Tuesday in the month of March and the last three Tuesdays in the month of July are hereby canceled; and the County Treasurer and County .Auditor are hereby authorized to process emergency payments for Dallas County that would have otherwise been timely paid had the Court not been closed. The Court further designates senior Commissioners Court official, Commissioner John Wiley Price, as Dallas County's signature autbority, in the absence of County Judge Clay Lewis

Jenkins, to sign time sensitive documents on behalf of Dallas County, due to the canceled court lneetings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that a condition of such emergency payments and related Budget transfers, payments relative to contracts previously approved by Commissioners Court or compensation orders, is that both the County Treasurer and County Auditor must agree and that it is formally approved by the Commissioners Court at their next formal meeting.

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that new employees not approved on or before the last July court session will not receive a pay check until after Commissioners Court approval at the fIrst August court meeting.

this the __ -,6,,-,t±!h~_day of

aurine Dickey, Istrict #1

March __ ,2012.

District #2

d2~£ Dr. Elba Garcia,

District #4

fll" " .. ,

Recommended By: ..!i . ' Da yl Martin, Administrator

I COURT ORDER

ORDER NO. 2012, 0417 DATE: March 6, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS §

COUNTY OF DALLAS §

BE IT REMEMBERED, at a regular meeting of the Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas,

held on the 6th day of ____ M=a~r~c~h'__ __ , 2012 on motion made by

Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of District No.4 and seconded by

-=J,::o"-lm"-,--,,W,:,i=l,,,e.J.Y-,=-P=-r=-i:::cs:e-'., -",Co",===-' S""S""l",,' o"'n"'e"'r"-.'o"'f"-"D"'i"'s'-'t"'r"'i"co.'t'-"N"'oc,.-"3'--__ the following Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, on January 18, 2011, the Commissioners Court was briefed on a revised process to

appoint citizens to various boards and committees; and

WHEREAS, the revised process included the Commissioners Court members discretionary request that potential appointees complete a voluntary Background Investigation Fonn; and

WHEREAS, on February 21, 2012, the Commissioners Court was briefed on proposed revisions to Section 2-31 of the Dallas County Code, "Qualifications" (Revised) for appointments to Dallas County Boards and Committees; and

WHEREAS, the Commissioners Court is now recommending prospective appointees meet the revised qualifications for Board and Committee appointment, complete a Board and Committee Nominee Resume and Infonnation FOhn and the Background Investigation Form before being considered for appointment.

IT IS THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Court does authorize the revision to Section 2-31 of the Dallas County Code, "Qualifications" as attached for Board and Committee appointments.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that all prospective appointees complete the Board and Commission Nominee Resume and Information Form and the Background Investigation Form before being considered for appointment.

~ \

6th day of "'/'""=--_-_-'M~ar'_"c""h ___ , 2012.

~~~~ District #1

Mike Cantrell, District #2

~ -"S......J.::;:;~~~~~~

Dr. Elba Garcia, District #4

DALLAS COUNTY BOARD AND COMMISSION NOMINEE RESUME AND INFORMATION

NOMINEES FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

If you are considered for a Dallas County board, commission or committee, some of this information

may become public record.

Please print or type. You may attach additional information about yourself to this form if you wish.

Date: / /

Name of Nominee:

Nominated For: County

Type of Board: Advisory __ _ Quasi-Judicial ___ Instrumentality __ _

Nominated By:

Resident Address: Telephone No:

Business Address: Telephone No:

E-mail Address:

Race: Sex:

Date of Birth: Place of Birth:

Resident of Dallas County For: _______ Years _______ Months

Name of Spouse/Domestic Partner: ---------------------------

1. Are you a registered voter? If so, please indicate voter registration number.


2. What is your current place of employment or business affiliation? If you are selfemployed, a homemaker, or not employed, please indicate. Also, describe briefly the nature of your current employment (Be sure to include the name of your employer or entity under which you are conducting business, and position and/or title i.e. manager, partner, associate, clerk, etc.).

3. Do you or your spouse, either individually or through your employers, have any financial interest, directly or indirectly, in any contract or subcontract with the County or in the sale to the County of land, materials, supplies or services or any pending bids, proposals or negotiations in connection with a County contract? If so, list below:

4. Are you or your spouse, either individually or through your employers, involved in any pending litigation or claims against the County? If so, list below by caption and style number:

5. Do you represent the private interests of others in litigation or a claim to which the County or an employee of the County is a party? If so, list below:


Sec. 2-31 - Qualifications (Revised).

The Dallas County Code establishes certain qualifications that must be met by all members of County boards and commissions. In addition to any special qualifications for service on a particular board, a board member must:

-- Have been a resident of Dallas County for at least six months prior to the date of appointment.

-- Be a qualified Dallas County voter at the time of appointment.

-- Not be in arrears on any County taxes, fines, fees or other obligations owed the County.

-- Has not been charged with the commission of a Class A or Class B misdemeanor or in the case of a felony offense under an information or indictment;

-- has not, in the five years preceding the date of application, been convicted of a Class A or Class B misdemeanor.

-- Has not been convicted of a felony within the ten years preceding the date of application or been adjudicated as having engaged in delinquent conduct violating a penal law of the grade of felony in the ten years preceding the date of application.

-- Have a creditable record of attendance and performance in any previous Dallas County board service.

In addition, applicants must disclose:

• whether he/she is an adversary party to pending litigation against the County;

• is an employee or a business associate of either an adversary party or a representative of an adversary party;

• has a pecuniary interest in any pending litigation or claim, other than an eminent domain proceeding.

• whether he/she or their spouse either individually or through an employer has any financial interest, directly or indirectly in any contract or subcontract with the County or in the sale to the County of land, materials, supplies or services or any pending bids, proposals or negotiations in connection with a County contract.

Section 2-31 of the Dallas County Code lists the qualifications for appointments to Dallas County Boards, Commissions and Committees.

''The Commissioners Court Administrator shall inform the nominating Court member, or in the case of a joint appointment the entire Commissioners Court, if any person nominated for appointment to a board has been convicted of a misdemeanor offense, other than a traffic violation, or of any felony offense."

Before a nominee can be considered for appointment to a Dallas County board or commission, the nominee must provide a written and signed statement authorizing the County to conduct a complete and thorough criminal background check.

Please complete the information on the other side of this form in order that we may obtain the required criminal history information. The District Attorney has stressed that it is important that all of the information is completed in order that a complete background check can be made.

We will NOT be able to conduct the necessary background check without your written permission.

If you have any questions about this procedure please let me know. My telephone number is (214) 653-7327.

Darryl Martin Dallas County Commissioners Court Administrator


Notice: By signing this form you agree that the information you provide below may be used to check your criminal history. You also agree that this information may be shared with the Commissioners Court. You also acknowledge that some of this information may become public information and subject to open records requests and available to anyone who requests the information.

Nominee's full name (Last name, First name, Middle name) (Maiden name)

Additional name or names ever used by nominee (Alias name or names) Maiden name

Date of birth Sex Race

Texas driver's license number Social Security number

Name of board to which you have been nominated

Have you ever been finally convicted of a felony offense? Yes __ _ No __ _

I hereby state that all of the information in this statement is true and correct. I further request and authorize all law enforcement officials and criminal justice agencies to release any criminal history records concerning me to Dallas County in order that my qualifications for service on a county board or commission may be checked. I understand that any information so released is public information and may be released to members of the Dallas County Commissioners Court and to any other person requesting it.

Signature of Nomine

TO: INTERESTED CITIZENS & COMMUNITY LEADERS

The County Judge and Commissioners are very interested in you serving as a member of a Dallas County Board or Commission. As an interested citizen and community leader, you can provide an invaluable service to Dallas County through your membership and participation. Board and Commission members volunteer many hours annually sharing their time and expertise and enjoy learning more about the County through their membership.

You may visit the Dallas County Web site at www,da!iascQuntv.org to download a Board and Commission Resume Application. Information on the Web site includes:

• List of board and commission members • Board and commission staff support contact information • Detailed description of each board and commission • Forms for board and commission members

Boards and commissions members must meet the required qualifications listed below: The Dallas County Code establishes certain qualifications that must be met by all members of County boards and commissions. In addition to any special qualifications for service on a particular board, a board member must:

-- Have been a resident of Dallas County for at least six months prior to the date of appointment.

-- Be a qualified Dallas County voter at the time of appointment.

MM Not be in arrears on any County taxes, fines, fees or other obligations owed the County.

-- Has not been charged with the commission of a Class A or Class B misdemeanor or in the case of a felony offense under an information or indictment;

-- has not, in the live years preceding the date of application, been convicted of a Class A or Class B misdemeanor.

Has not been convicted of a felony within the ten years preceding the date of application or been adjudicated as having engaged in delinquent conduct violating a penal law of the grade of felony in the ten years preceding the date of application.

Have a creditable record of attendance and performance in any previous Da!las County board service.

In addition l applicants must disclose:

• • • •

Additionally:

whether he/she is an adversary party to pending litigation against the County; is an employee or a business associate of either an adversary party or a representative of an adversary party; has a pecuniary interest in any pending litigation or claim, other than an eminent domain proceeding; whether helshe or their spouse either individually or through an employer has any financial interest, directly or indirectly in any contract or subcontract with the County or in the sale to the County of land, materials, supplies or services or any pending bids, proposals or negotiations in connection with a County contract.

• A person appointed to a board must meet the minimum qualifications at the time of appointment and during the entire period of service on the board;

• The Commissioners Court Administrator shall inform the nominating Commissioners Court Member if any person nominated for appointment to a board has been convicted of a misdemeanor offense other than traffic violations in the last five years or of any felony offense;

• A person is not disqualified from board service (for being in arrears on County taxes, tInes, fees or other obligations owed the County) if the person has entered into an agreement (authorized by the County, state law, or court order) to pay the obligation on a scheduled payment plan is cun'ent on payment under the plan and in compliance with all terms and conditions of the plan.

state law, or court order) to pay the obligation on a scheduled payment plan is current on payment uuder the plan and in compliance with a\l terms and conditions of the plan.

Please complete the resume/application and return to your County Commissioner or County Judge. You will find their address and telephone number on the Dallas County Website (www.daJJascount:LQ[g). However, if you have questions, please call my office at 214-653-7327.

Sincerely,

Darryl Martin Dallas County Commissioners Court Administrator

,

I

DALLAS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT

CONFI

Background Investigation Form - Board Appointment

NTIAL

For Business Use Only: 0 SSN/Criminal D MVR 0 Employment Verification

Personal Information Section: PLEASE PRINT IN INK OR TYPE NAME: LAST, FIRST, MIDDLE

"

BIRTH DATE" 1 SOCIAL SECURITY NO, DRIVERS LICENSE NO, & STATE

BOARD/COMMISSION OF CONSIDERATION:

".

Residential Section' ""''''-

PRESENT ADDRESS" CITY STATE ZIP DATES: From/To

PREVIOUS ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP DATES: From/To i

."

PREVIOUS ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP DATES: From/To

I

I

PREVIOUS ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP --""""--

I DATES: FromlTo

----Employment History Section' Employer [ Address

[

~"--,, Job Title I Start Date I End Date

- ""--,----------"--,-"~ I Contact Name and Number i

I

Employer I Address I Job Title I Start Date '-f,,"d-Oate -'I Contact Name and Number

Employer Address

Job Title I Start Date End Date I Contact Name and"Number

Date of birth and Socia! Security Number are required solely for the purpose of verifying background information and to insure the accuracy in the search of public records. Neither will be used for any other purpose.

** Provide addresses for at least the last seven (7) years.

In connection with my board appointment with Dallas County, I understand that Dallas County or an outside agency may complete a background investigation regarding such areas as employment history, driver's license, and criminal history or convictions.

I agree that a Photostat or copy of this authorization shall be considered as effective and valid as the original.

! authorize and request all persons, schools, businesses, corporations, government agencies, credit bureaus, and faw enforcement to release such records without restrictions or qualifications. I also release Dallas County or any of its employees, representatives, or agents from any and all liability associated with this background investigation. If discrepancies are found, ! understand I will be given the opportunity to explain any inaccuracies.

/ have read and understand the above statement,

411 Elm Street, 2'd Floor Administration Building

Applicant Signature

Dalias, Texas Equal Opportunity Employer

Date

214.653.7327

C:\Documents and Settings\ALSMITH\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Filcs\Content.Oul1ook\HFECPD03\Dallas Co Board Appointment Background Check Form222812.doc

2012 0418 ORDER NO: '

COURT ORDER 1 ,

------

DATE: March 6, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS

BE IT REMEMBERED, at a regular meeting of Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas, held on the

______ ~6~th _________ dayof ____ ~M~ar~c~h __________________________ ,2012,0n

a motion made by Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of District No, 4 , and seconded by

_J",o",l.:oill,-"W=i=-le=.Y,--,P",r,-"i",c",e..L' -,C",o""rrnn""",i""s""sl",' o",n""e",-r-",of",-,D""i",s",t""r ... i c"'-t"'--'N"'oLL,---'-3 _____ , the following Cou rt Orde r was adopted:

WHEREAS, Commissioners Court was briefed on February 28, 2012 concerning additional service requests from HDR Architecture, Inc. (HDR) and Hill International, Inc. (Hill) associated with the Dallas County Jail Medical Modification Project; and

WHEREAS, HDR is requesting six (6) additional services be added to the design contract for the additional rnechanical system design, additional site surveying, additional cost estimating services, furniture planning services, audio-visual design services, additional construction administration services, and funding for reimbursable expenses for a total cost of $331 ,684; and

WHEREAS, Hill is requesting two (2) additional services be added to the contract for construction rnanagement for third party inspection, testing and commissioning of life safety systems such as the fire alarm and sprinkler systems and for test and air balancing (TAB) inspection, testing and commissioning services for the HVAC/exhaust system for a total cost of $327,900; and

WHEREAS, funding for these additional services is available within the project budget (Project 70143)

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Court hereby approves the attached additional service proposals submitted by HDR Architecture, Inc. in the amount of $331 ,684 for additional services as listed by the named sub-consultants.

IT IS THEREFORE FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGE, AND DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Court hereby approves the attached additional service proposals submitted by Hill International, Inc. in the amount of $327,900 be approved for life safety system testing and commissioning and HVAC/exhaust system testing and balancing and commissioning by the named sub-consultants.

_--,?u,,-th_~--da:--A---+-~-!-M=a=rCh-'-----~--. -----:7"9":-~ -:!-:-"'""--fl::?:""'I'&;,.J"'-"'---;;:----,--:--,- Ma u r~ickey, District #1 Mike Cantrell, Di 'ct #2

d istrict #3 Dr. Elba Garcia, District #4

JA~ om mended b .31lJLIt~-)fb..) Shannon S. Brown, Assistant Administrator

February 21,2012

Shannon Brown Assistant Administrator Dallas County 411 Elm Street Dallas, Texas 75202

11111 Hill International

Re: Dallas County Jail Medical Modifications Project Court Order: 2011-178 Purchase Order: 242654

Hill International, Inc, 17304 Preston Road, SUite 800

Dallas, Texas 75252 Tel 214-438-3709

www.hillintl.com

Subject: Recommend Approval of HDR Architecture, Inc. Additional Service Proposal (ASP) No_ 001

Dear Mrs. Brown,

As the design requirements for the Dallas County Jail Medical Modifications Project evolved, Hill International's project management plan has been continually updated to reftect these changes. Through constant discussions with the project representatives, including Dallas County, M&O, Sheriffs Office, Parkland Health & Hospital System staff and HDR's design team, Hill has developed a project progress plan in order to control and successfully complete the project.

SCOPE

The attached ASP from HDR is the culmination of those efforts, including several months of scope and cost negotiations to ensure that Dallas County is receiving the best services at the best price. A detailed breakdown of the services is attached, and summarized as follows:

1. Provide revised mechanical system design services;

2. Provide additional site surveying at the south side of the plaza;

3. Provide additional cost estimating services;

4. Provide furniture planning services;

5. Provide audio-video design services for PHHS spaces;

6. Provide additional construction administration services.

COMPENSATION

Per the scope of services listed. herein and attached, Hill International recommends approval of the HDR Architecture, Inc. additional services proposal in the amount of Three Hundred Sixteen Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Four Dollars ($316,684.00).

lUll

Hill International, Inc. February 21, 2012

Page 2

If you have questions, or wish for additional information, please let me know at your convenience.

Sincerely,

Eric Short Project Manager ES/es

Attachments (1) Exhibit A: HDR Architecture, Inc. February 6, 2012 Proposal

cc: R. Ferguson, Hill International, Inc. J. Sousa, Hill International, Inc.

February 6, 2012

Mrs. Shannon Brown Assistant Administrator Dallas County 411 Elm Street Dallas, TX

Dear Shannon,

HDR appreciates the opportunity to submit this proposal for additional services for the Dallas County Jail Medical Modifications project. We are honored by your continued trust in our capabilities and consider it a privilege to have input on more aspects of your project.

SCOPE

1. Provide revised mechanical system design services.

a. As part of the Schematic Design and Design Development process, the design team developed a complete HY AC design solution for the project. However, as the project definition was further defined and details refined, it was decided by the Owner that the design of the project be 100% independent of the existing Lew Sterrett North Tower Jail facility, which includes the HY AC and Central Plant systems. The decision was primarily in an effOli to not impact any of the existing life safety systems, including the North Tower's existing smoke evacuation system. Upon review of existing equipment and completion of various feasibility studies by the design team, multiple alternatives were presented to the Owner for consideration. Ultimately, the "best alternative" solution decided upon by the Owner revised the expansion of the existing mechanical system design as approved in the Schematic Design Report to a new stand-alone system incorporating:

b. Additional air handling units, including smoke evacuation and pandemic functions,

c. Outdoor air-cooled chillers and pumps, and

d. Demolition and re-use of the existing Co-Gen Building slab.

HOR Architecture, Inc. 17111 Preston Road SUite 300 Dallas, TX 75248-1232

Phone: (972) 960-4000 Fax: (972) 960-4185 www.hdrinc.com

e. This independent HV AC system has been reviewed and approved in numerous meetings and is detailed in the Design Development Submittal, including budget impacts, Owner comments and design team responses.

f. Full service design for this work including demolition of the Co-Gen Building is included. The understanding is that the Co-Gen Building (from the slab up) and its equipment will be demolished and removed from the site and the new equipment will be placed on the existing slab. No reinforcement of the existing foundation is anticipated, therefore is not included in this proposal.

2. Provide additional site surveying at the south side of the Plaza.

a. Existing documentation is insufficient in the areas immediately adjacent to the Security Screening Building to complete the design, which requires additional surveying.

3. Provide additional Cost Estimating Services.

a. In anticipation of procuring the Construction Manager at Risk prior to completion of the Schematic Design, f-lDR's contract did not include Cost Estimating Services for the Design Development or Construction Document design phases. This request provides for Cost Estimating through the Construction Documents Phase and provides hourly rates for reviewing and coordinating with the County's CM @ Risk Contractor. Fees are broken down in accordance with the anticipated submittals. In the event a Construction Manager is selected and the additional cost estimates are deemed unnecessary by the Owner, only the services completed will be invoiced.

4. Provide Furniture planning services.

a. Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment design was not included in the original scope of Architcctural Services. This proposal provides those design services in a coordinated manner for spaces included within the Medical Modifications project.

b. The attached document, dated July 6. 20 II fully describes the scope of these services.

!-lOR Architecture, Inc

1. Please note that the 'equipment' provided in this proposal does not include Medical Equipment. Medical Equipment selection and coordination is included in our current scope of services. We have provided a catalogue, complete with 'cut sheets' for each piece of medical equipment required for the project.

Page I ]

5. Provide Audio-Video Design Services for PHHS Spaces.

a. HDR's current contract does not include Audio-Video Design Services. This proposal incorporates the design of Audio-Video equipment for the PHHS conference rooms etc., including extension oflhe County's existing CATV system into housing dayrooms, offices and staff break areas.

b. The scope of services includes design of A-V Equipment and preparation of Construction Documents and Specifications and coordination with other engineering disciplines.

6. Provide additional representation during Construction Administration a. HDR's original contract anticipated attendance at

Owner! Architect/Contractor meetings an average of twice per month. b. Due to the separation of the original schedule into two separate stages,

resulting in two compressed schedules, increased representation during Construction Administration will be required. This proposal provides for attendance by the HDR Construction Contract Administration representative at weekly Owner! Architect/Contractor meetings.

COMPENSATION

Total compensation per this Additional Services Request - $315,684.00 as follows;

I. Revise mechanical system design to respond to owner directives. -$97,740.00

2. Provide additional site surveying at the south side of the Plaza. - $4,500.00

3. Provide extended Cost Estimating Services. - $41,224.00

a. Design Development Estimate Submittal - $18,560.00

b. 50 % CD Estimate Submittal- $12,024.00

c. 100% CD Estimate Submittal- $10,640.00

d. Hourly rate - $141.00! hour

4. Provide Furniture planning services. - $95,000.00

5. Provide A-V Design Services. - $39,300.00

6. Provide additional representation during Construction Administration. $37,920.00

All prices include labor only, expenses incurred in conjunction with these services will be addressed per our original contract.

HOR Architecture, Inc,

Page i 4

We look forward to continuing to be a valued team player as we assist Dallas County in the renovation of your jail's medical operations.

Sincerely,

~~-fieidi Higgason Vice President and Director of Operations - South

Cc: Donovan Wattier Curt Parde .TeffForrest .Tim Ingels

HOR Atchitecwre, Inc.

Mr. Jeff Forresl HDR ARCHITECTURE, INC, 17111 Preston Road, Suite 150 Dallas, Texas 75248

Re: Professional Land Surveying Services DALLAS COUNTY DETENTION CENTER Medical Modifications Dallas, Dallas County, Texas MAPSCO: D45-N

Dear Mr. Forrest:

July 27,2011 PK No.: 0100

Pacheco Koch Consulting Engineers, Inc, is pleased to submit this proposal to provide professional land surveying services relating to the referenced project. It is our understanding the project consists of the courtyard area of the Dallas County Jail Facility, depicted by the crosshatched area on the attached Exhibit "A.

SCOPE OF SERVICES

Based on our preliminary discussions and review of the information received to date, the following is our perception of the services to be provided by Pacheco Koch for the referenced project:

PARTIAL TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY: Pacheco Koch will perform an on the ground survey of a portion of the property under the direct supervision of a Registered Professional Land Surveyor.

Included in this item: Location of permanent improvements on, and immediately adjacent to, the site.

• spot elevations on a 50-foot grid. • Contours on one foot intervals.

Top of curb and gutter elevations for paving on, and immediately adjacent to, the site. • Locations, common name and trunk diameter of trees over 6-inches in caliper. • Location of visible utilities and appurtenances. • Location and sizes of underground utilities based on available recard information. • Pacheco Koch will graphically plot, if any, the Special Flood Hazard Area from the Flood

Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), published by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), for this area.

• Coordination with the Dallas County Detention Center for right-of-entry. Survey will be referenced to the Texas State Plane Coordinate System.

Not included in this item: • Species names of trees.

Trees less than 6-inches in diameter. • Boundary surveying. • Research or review of easements that may affect the subject tract. • Subsurface utility engineering services. • Parking spaces in parking garages. • Location of irrigation control valves. • Surveying of underground tunnels, basements or foundations.

8350 N' CENTk'AL C=XPWY. SiE 100,') • DALl.AS. IX 75206 • T 972,235,3031 • 1- 972.235.9544. WWW.PKCE.COM

Mr. Jeff Forrest July 27.2011 Page 2

SCHEDULE

Pacheco Koch acknowledges the importance to HDR Architecture. Inc. of the project schedule and agrees to put forth its best professional efforts to perform its services under this Agreement in a manner consistent with that schedule. HDR Architecture, Inc. understands, however, that Pacheco Koch's performance must be governed by sound professional practices. If requested, Pacheco Koch would be pleased to develop a project schedule outlining each of the items included previously described in the Scope of Services.

COMPENSATION

Pocheco Koch proposes to provide the services described above on a Fixed Fee bosis for a total fee, inclusive of usual and customary direct reirnbursoble costs. of $ 4,500.00.

SUMMARY

This proposal, unless otherwise noted, constitutes our understanding of the services to be provided by Pacheco Koch Consulting Engineers. Inc. on the project described above. This proposal is offered for a period of thirty (30) days ofterwhich. if said proposal has not been executed, said proposal should no longer be valid.

Pacheco Koch Consulting Engineers, Inc. is pleased 10 have this opportunity to submillhis proposal and look forward to working with you on this project. If the proposol and accompanying agreement is occeptable to you as presented. please execute one copy of the agreement form and return one original copy to our office. Upon receipt of notice to proceed, either in writing or verbally, it will be assumed said agreement is accepted by all parties and services will be provided accordingly. If you have any questions or would like any additional information, please do not hesitate to call us at your convenience.

EAK/smm 01-9912

Sincerely,

Tom E. Flaherty. R.P.L.S.

1~ Pacheco !!:2!:,!! .~ DALLAS II FORT WORTH .. HOUSlON

STANDARD BILLING RATES FOR IN HOUSE REIMBURSABLE CHARGES (Rates are subject to change at any time.)

Reproduction:

Black Line Bond Prints ............................................................ .

Black Line Vellum Prints ............................................................................. .

Black Line Mylar Prints ......................................................................... .

Calor Band Plots ............................................. .

..... $ 0.50/sf

.. $ 1.50/sf

... $ 2.00/sf

.. ... $ 3.oo/s1

Color Prints (8 1/2" x II") ................................................................................... $ I.OO/ea

Photocopies (8 1/2" x II") .................................................................................. $ 0.1 Olea

Mounting:

Foam-core (3/16") ......................................................... . .. .... $4.00/s1

Binding Services:

Punch & Bind ........................................................................................................ $2.00/ea

Storage Media:

Floppy (1.44 Mb) ................................................................................................. $ I.OO/ea

CD .......................................................................................................................... $ 8.00/ea

Travel Expenses:

Per Diem (Lodging/Meals) ............................................................. $ 100.00/Day/Person

rev. 08/2009

8350 N CENTRAL EXPWY. STE 1000 • DALLAS, TX 75206 • T 972.235.3031 • f 972,235.9544. WWW.PKCE.COM

August 18, 2011


Dear Shannon)

HDR is pleased to present this proposal to provide Cost Estimating Service in association with the Medical & Mental Health Services Construction at the Lew Sterrett Jail. We are honored with your continued trust in our capabilities and consider it a privilege to have input on more aspects of your project.

SCOPE

We propose to provide Cost Estimating Services at each of the following phases:

Design Development SO % Construction Documents 100% Construction Documents

This scope provides estimates at each of the remaining 3 milestone dates up until the receipt of the bids.

Should the County decide to engage the services of a Construction Manager, HDR is also prepared to provide services relating to the review of CM Estimates prepared at subsequent phases. These efforts are more difficult to quantify and depend on the amount of detailed pricing offered by the Contractor as well as his accuracy and transparency. For this reason, we'd like to propose that these services be provided on an hourly basis, if and when they are required.

STAFF

We propose to provide these services through our consultant, Keith Kothmann (Construction Cost Management). Keith has a long history providing similar services for every building currently constructed on the Jail/Courts Campus. He also provided similar services on the previous design efforts for this project and as such is an invaluable resource.

HDRArchiteclure, [ru:. 17111 Preston Road Suite 300 Dallas, TX 75248-1232


Keith will be working with the HDR design team to prepare and review each estimate to provide the highest degree of accuracy possible.

COMPENSATION

The fee for providing the Basic Estimating Services is $42,224.00

Hourly rates for participation studies and reviewing Construction Manager Estimates is $141.00/ hour.

We look forward to continuing to be a valued team player as we assist Dallas County in the renovation of your jail's medical operations.

Heidi Higgason, AlA, LEED AP, NCARB Vice President and Managing Principal

Cc: Curt Parde Jeff Forrest Jim Ingels

H D R Architecture, Inc.

July 6,2011


Dear Shannon,

HDR appreciates the opportunity to submit a proposal for furniture, fixtures and equipment (hereafter referred to simply as furniture) planning services for the Dallas County Jail Medical Modifications project. We are honored with your continued trust in our capabilities and consider it a privilege to have input on more aspects of your project.

SCOPE

From conversations and emails Jeff Forrest and John Niesen have had with you, Sharon and Carina, and based on experience providing this service, following is what we propose as the scope for this work.

The renovated Jail Medical areas (approximately 149,000 sf) affect 5 departments. Each of these depal1ments' furniture needs shall be assessed as well as common space and service areas. We have assumed all furniture will be new. As such, this proposal does not include inventory services. If existing items will be relocated, we will look to the Owner to provide us a list of said items along with their sizes and specifications before we begin our pre-planning phase. Tertiary items such as trash/recycle cans, clocks, marker boards, tack boards, computers, printers and fax machines, are included in this proposal. Medical Equipment planning is provided under a different agreement and we will coordinate the furniture with this equipment. If you wish to have us coordinate the planning of other items, we certainly can modify the scope to include them as well as other move planning services that may be needed.

HDR will meet with each department head to arrive at furniture needs for the new facilities. Since the architectural team has already met with department heads to determine conceptual furniture layout that confinned the wall layout, we have included in this scope two additional meetings with each department in a manner described below. As an integral part of the process, !-lDR will develop and maintain a rough budget estimate so that projected costs can be tracked.

o Prior to the first meeting, !-lDR will review conceptual furniture plans produced during the architectural planning process. HDR will also review the Parkland fumiture standards that have been provided and update the conceptual plans to

17111 Preston Road Suite 300 Dallas, TX 75248-1232


reflect the Parkland standards. Prior to the first user meetings, we will meet with you, Sharon and purchasing to verify the configurations and aligu expectations. HDR would appreciate purchasing sharing with us the costs for established standards at this point so we can input them into our Budget tracking mechanism. HDR's fumiture planning team will also meet with the medical equipment planner already on the project to establish boundaries in order to prevent overlap and review products being identified for the purchasing department.

o The first round of User meetings will review and confirm the updated fumiture plans. We may encounter users that wish to change building items already in plan. For this reason, we strongly encourage that either you or Sharon attend this and all user meetings to remind users of the project's history and why decisions to-date were made.

o The second round of User meetings is expected to be a formality and final review of the layouts. If not already presented, we will show Users the furniture items being purchased for the new Parkland Hospital that will also be used for this project. Depm1ment heads will be asked to sign off on their area at this meeting. Most departments only need these two sessions to finalize their furniture needs. As such, additional meetings or work required to get to approval have not been budgeted into this proposal.

With all department head approvals, HDR will finalize the furniture package and inform the electrical engineer of appropriate power and data outlet quantity and positioning. The package will consist of a specification-type booklet with potentially four sections:

Section 1 - Drawings Section 2 - Furnishings Schedule by Room Number Section 3 - Furnishings Specifications by Item Tag (only for non-standard items

not already being ordered for Parkland) Section 4 - Appendix (as needed)

Since the County's purchasing department will be including these items with the purchase offu111iture for the new Parkland Hospital, HDR will structure the furniture package to read as a shopping list rather than a bid specification. We anticipate that the County will already be under contract with afumiture vendor and standard furniture items (brand, model, finishes, etc.) will have been selected. We will work with purchasing and the fU111iture vendor, if needed, to propose products and select finishes for the few items that may be unique to this project. HDR will coordinate printing three copies of the furniture package for the Owuer and one for HDR as a reference set. We will also include three CDs for digital use.

We assume that all purchasing and contracting activities will be coordinated by the County. HDR will be available to answer questions as they mise.

Between this time and furniture ordering, HDR will be available to receive and process the few submittals anticipated from the furniture vendor. HDR will expect these submittals all together in one package for efficient coordination. If finish selection is needed at this time, we will select finishes that coordinate with the other furniture and building finishes and yet be appropriate for their final use. Presentation to the Owner or Owner's representative of these finishes or their involvement in the selection of these finishes can be accommodated as an additional service. Once the furniture vendor is onboard and attends weekly construction meetings, HDR will assist the vendor and Owner's representative with coordinating building details, such as final electrical and data outlet locations to ensure a smooth furniture installation.

HDR will walk the installation twice per phase (two phases are anticipated) to be available to the installation crew and Owner for on-the-job questions about placement.

When installation is substantially complete, HDR again will walk the project and generate a punch list for the furniture vendor's and Owner's use to identify furniture items that need completion or repair before the County accepts the furniture. We will coordinate scheduling of this punch with the furniture vendor to allow for a single session per phase.

Lastly, since many workers compensation claims arise from improper furniture, it is important to train staff how to operate and appropriately adjust their task chairs. The furniture vendor will coordinate and lead this training.

LIST OF TYPICAL STAGES IN PROCESS

Following is a listing of the typical steps in a furniture procurement process, based on CUlTent industry best practices and modified for this particular project. Each stage generally requires multiple players. If someone other than HDR is to exclusively perfonn or lead the task, it is noted in parentheses.

Detennine Overall FF & E Budget (Owner) Review standards with Owner User Group Round I Meetings Confinn budget User Group Round 2 Meetings and sign-off Update budget Finalize furniture package Procurement (Owner) Submittals (Vendor)

The following are repeated for each Phase Order Product (Vendor) Manufacture Product (Vendor)

Ship Product (Vendor) Receive, Inspect and Stage Product (Vendor) Furniture Installation (Vendor) Substantial Completion and Punch List Final Completion (Vendor) Product Training (Vendor) Owner Occupancy (Owner) Warranty Period (Vendor)

STAFF

HDR recognizes the value that maintaining staff from one phase of the project to the next can provide the Owner as well as the entire team, To this end, Paola Contreras, currently the project's Interior Designer, will assist John Niesen, who will manage this furniture process from planning through Owner occupancy, Jeff Forrest, the Project Manager for the architectural process, will be present during the user meetings in order to provide continuity for the users.

COMPENSATION

The fee for performing this comprehensive furniture planning process is $95,000, This includes lahor and expenses,

We look forward to continuing to be a valued team player as we assist Dallas County in the renovation of your jail's medical operations,

Heidi Higgason Vice President and Managing Principal

Cc: Curt Parde Jeff Forrest John Niesen Jim Ingels

,

ONE COMPANY IMany Solutionr"

February 22,2011


Dear Shannon,

HDR is pleased to present this proposal to provide Audiovisual Design Service in association with the Medical & Mental Health Services Construction at the Lew Sterrett Jail. We are honored with your continued trust in our capabilities and consider it a privilege to have input on more aspects of your project.

SCOPE

Construction Documents (CD) • Write a Basis of Design narrative • Prepare AlV and CATV specifications • Create AN and CATV infrastructure drawings for the A V spaces • Create block diagrams and functional diagrams • Create AN and CATV details • Create electrical coordination drawings (for electrical load requirements at devices) • Review electrical drawings • Create CAD infrastructure drawings • Create block diagrams and functional diagrams

Bid Phase • Review Vendor Proposals

Construction Administration (CA) • Review A V product submittals • Answer A V -related RFI's • Perform site walk thm's

Pricing Constmction Documents Bid Phase CATV Construction Administration Total

Compensation $22,300.00 $ 2,400.00 $ 7,800.00 $ 6,800.00 $39,300.00

17111 Preston Road Suite 300 Dallas, TX 75248·1232

Phone· (972) 960"4000 Fax· (972) 960-4186 WIJIIW.hdrinc.com

, """"'""'~CN'M_"'"'.'<J"."" -.,'> "",,,

> I o • o ~

~ 0 ~ OJ

&- 'rr .. , ,

1 !

o

®-TT ! 1 ,

®- tt-~-~

.1 __ ~ ",

1

i ~!! t--r

, I

~-4--i 1 ""

I i'" ~

1 I" --- I-

-t-----1

+-ii/-,

~·-t-l- -<~-

-I +.""",, , ,

-n 0

" n I ~ t~~,t "U

>: z

I "U $! £r m z~~ I » , mr

I g , >rr ~

"-nCO m 0 ~5;:IJ 0 Gl "'00

I >"C , z o 0

I

o 000 o--'H'--j-~:} J i i! 1

0-"-$."~'"

, '

" 0- it-

II I~

------"~---

0) ,D 0-~

" 0 m ' " II ~ ~ ~ " ~ 0-

~ 5 0

" ~ ~

" II @}_" __ ..J.....I __

II Ii I i

0--- +i- ~ -i -- i

II

February 7,2012

Shannon Brown Assistant Administrator Dallas County 411 Elm Street Dallas, Texas 75202

11111. Hill International

Re: Dallas County Jail Medicat Modifications Project Court Order: 2011-178 Purchase Order: 242654

Hilt International, tnc. 17304 Preston Road, Suite 800

Dallas, Texas 75252 Tel: 214-438-3709

www.hillintLcom

Subject: Additional Service Proposal (ASP) No. 001 - Life Safety, HVAC Testing and Air Balancing Inspection and Commissioning Services

Dear Mrs. Brown,

Hill Intemational is pleased to present this additional Professional services proposal to provide the Dallas County Jail Medical Modifications project with 1) Life Safety; 2) Heating, Ventilation & Air Conditioning (HVAC) Testing and Air Balance (TAB) Inspection and Commissioning Services. We are honored with your continued trust in our abilities and are privileged to serve your project management needs.

SCOPE

Safety and security of the occupants of any facility is paramount to a project's success. This includes the integration of several systems through hardware, software and personnel. As technologies, building systems and codes have increased in complexity over the years it has become more important to have a set of independent "set of eyes" representing the Owner to verify the contractor's work in order to protect the Owner from unnecessary risk, or incurring additional maintenance costs.

Currently, the Dallas County Jail Medical Modifications project has contracted through Hill and HDR Architecture "typical" architectural, engineering and construction inspection services, along with some specialty services such as physical and electronic security. However, Dallas County does not have Life Safety or Heating, Ventilation & Air Conditioning (HVAC) Testing and Air Balancing (TAB) inspection and commissioning services. Therefore, Hill International strongly recommends to the County the use of a third party technical service provider to provide fire alarm, fire sprinkler and HVAC-TAB system inspection and commissioning services.

The scope of service(s) described in this ASP represents areas of high risk to the project's occupants. Therefore, the project must provide special attention and assurance to Dallas County and Parkland Health & Hospital System that all life safety systems are compliant and operational when deemed ready to operate and maintain. Based on our knowledge concerning the existing jail's past history, discussions with Dallas County M&O staff and the project team during the Design Development Phase of the Project, a reasonable scope of work was identified.

II I til

STAFF

Hill International, Inc. February 7, 2012

Page 2

Hill International proposes to provide the following services through our subconsultants, Aon Fire Protection Engineering Corporation (Richardson, Tx.) and Engineered Air Balance Co., Inc, (Dallas, Tx,), respectively,

• Aon, formally Schirmer Engineering, has a national reputation for providing unparalleled life safety engineering services, including fire alarm and sprinkler systems.

• Engineered Air Balance Co" Inc, has a long history of providing excellent services throughout North Texas including a strong recommendation from Dallas County staff,

Both firms will be working with the Hill International project management team to inspect and commission the construction documents, construction process and project close-out.

COMPENSATION

Through several months of scope definition, refinement and negotiations with each firm, the total fees for providing the Life Safety and HVAC TAB inspection and commissioning services is in the amount of Three Hundred Twenty Seven Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($327,900,00), and is summarized as follows with detailed back-up attached,

1, Life Safety inspection, testing and commissioning services in the amount of Fifty One Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($51,900,00),

A. Fire Alarm System 50% CD Review B, Fire Alarm System 100% CD Review C, Construction Kick Off Meeting 0, Fire Alarm System Submittal Review E, Fire Alarm System Installation Inspections F, Fire Alarm System Device Testing G, Fire Alarm System Integrated Testing H, Sprinkler System 50% CD Review

I. Sprinkler System 100% CD Review J, Sprinkler System Submittal Review

2, HVAC TAB inspection, testing and commissioning services in the amount of Two Hundred Seventy Six Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($276,000,00).

A. Document Review B. Pre-TAB Services C, TAB Services 0, HVAC Control Verification E. Support Project Commissioning Process F. Project Close-out

I1IU

Hill International, Inc. February 7,2012

Page 3

We look forward to adding these valuable team members to the Dallas County Jail Medical Modifications project. If you have questions, please contact me at your convenience.

Sincerely,

Eric Short Project Manager ES/es

Attachments (2) Exhibit A: Aon Fire Protection Engineering Corporation, January 4, 20121 Proposal Exhibit B: Engineered Air Balance Co., Inc., January 27,2012 Proposal

cc: R. Ferguson, Hill International, Inc. J. Sousa, Hill International, Inc,

AON January 4, 2012 Revised January 16, 2012

Mr. Eric Short, LEED AP Project Manager Hill International, Inc. 17304 Preston Road, Suite 800 Dallas, Texas 75252

EXHIBIT B

Reference: Fire Alarm System Commissioning Services Dallas County Jail Medical Modification 133 Riverfront Blvd. Dallas, Texas 75207 Aon FPE Proposal No. 1712006P1

Dear Mr. Short:

•• email: [email protected] •• •• Phone: 214-438-3709"

** 6 pages **

Aon Fire Protection Engineering Corporation (Aon FPE), formerly Schirmer Engineering, is pleased to submit this proposal for fire alarm system commissioning services to Hill International (Client).

Project Description

The project involves the finish-out of the bottom three floors of the Lew Sterrett Tower for the Dallas County Jail, plus two very smaIJ 500 and 1,500 gsf buildings within the jail complex. The three floors are currently sheIJ space; everything wiIJ be new and stand-alone, including the Fire Alarm and Fire Sprinkler systems.

The current schedule has a construction NTP in summer of 2012. The Basement wiIJ complete in spring 2013, which wiIJ require a fuIJy functional system for public use. The Ground and First Levels wiIJ complete in December 2013 and includes a smoke evacuation system, which will require testing and commissioning of the entire project smoke evacuation, fire alarm and sprinkler systems.

Applicable codes for the project are as follows:

International Building Code (IBC), 2009 edition.

National Fire Alarm Code, 2007 edition (N FPA 72).

Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, 2007 edition (N FPA 13)

I. Basic Services

For this project Aon FPE assumes the folJowing:

The smoke control system (i.e. compliance, submittals, testing, commissioning, reports, sequence of operation, reports, etc.) wiIJ be done by others in accordance with IBC Section 909 and NFPA 92B.

Aon Fire Protection Engineering Corporation 1701 N. Coliins Blvd. I Suite 2351 Richardson, TX 75080 t 972-234-16171 f 972-234-27531 AonFPE_com Texas P,E. Firm Registration No. F-1593

Fire Alarm Systems Commission Services Dallas County Jail Medical Modification 133 Riverfront Blvd. Dallas, Texas Aon FPE Proposal No. 1712006P1

January 4, 2012 Revised January 16, 2012

Page 2

Fire alarm system testing will be in accordance with IBC Section 907 and NFPA 72 Chapter 10.

Aon FPE agrees to provide the services described below for the above referenced project.

A. Review 1 complete set of 50% fire alarm system Construction Documents (drawings and specifications) once for compliance with the above referenced codes. Issue review comments to the Client. Attend 1 meeting with the Architect to review comments.

B. Review 1 complete set of 100% fire alarm system Construction Documents (drawings and specifications) once for compliance with the above referenced codes. Issue review comments to the Client.

C. Attend 2 half-day construction kick off meeting at the project site. One meeting will be with the CM-R and the second meeting will be with the fire alarm contractor. Meeting minutes to be provided by others.

D. Review 1 complete submittal of contractor prepared fire alarm system shop drawings, samples, calculations and other information from the contractor for conformance with the design concept and compliance with contract documents and code requirements. Submit letter to the Client summarizing the results of the review. One complete re-submittal is contemplated.

E. Perform 12 half-day construction observation site visits of the fire alarm system installation when requested by the Client.

F. Witness the final NFPA 72 test of the fire alarm system devices for up to 60 manhours and prepare a letter to the Client identifying deficiencies. The test is to verify fire alarm device placement, circuitry and information reported to the fire alarm control panel from each device (pull station, smoke detector, sprinkler devices, etc.). Aon FPE assumes one test for the basement and a separate test for the 1 ,I and 2"d floors.

G. Witness integrated testing of the fire alarm system for up to 60 man-hours and prepare a letter to the client identifying deficiencies. At this time, details of other systems tied to the fire alarm system are not known. Aon FPE assumes one test for the basement and a separate test for the 1 ,I and 2"d floors. Aon FPE will review the contractor prepare test reports required by NFPA 72 and the State of Texas.

H. Review 1 complete set of 50% sprinkler system Construction Documents (drawings and specifications) once for compliance with the above referenced codes. Issue review comments to the Client. Attend 1 meeting with the Architect to review comments.

Fire Alarm Systems Commission Services Dallas County Jail Medica! Modification 133 Riverfront Blvd. DaUas, Texas Aon FPE Proposal No. 1712006P1


Page 3

I. Review 1 complete set of 100% sprinkler system Construction Documents (drawings and specifications) once for compliance with the above referenced codes. Issue review comments to the Client.

J. Review 1 complete submittal of contractor prepared sprinkler system shop drawings, samples, calculations and other information from the contractor for conformance with the design concept and compliance with contract documents and code requirements. Submit letter to the Client summarizing the results of the review. One complete re-submittal is contemplated.

II. Optional Services

Aon FPE can provide the services described below for the above referenced project.

K. Perform 10 half-day construction observation site visits of the sprinkler system installation when requested by the Client.

L. Witness the hydraulic pressure test of the sprinkler system for each stage for up to 40 man-hours and prepare a letter to the Client identifying deficiencies.

M. Provide on-site supervision of the new fire alarm and/or sprinkler system installation.

N. Provide code consulting services when requested by the Client.

III. Client Responsibilities

Client agrees to provide Aon FPE with the following:

• Hardcopy of the building drawings, including fire protection system, architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical, and plumbing, and other information pertaining to the project. These documents will be used to assist Aon FPE in completing Aon FPE's Scope of Work. It is understood that Aon FPE may rely upon the accuracy of all documents and electronic data furnished.

• Copies of all documents related to Aon FPE's scope of work printed/issued throughout the project duration.

• Copies of all agreements with the AHJ.

• Arrange for, coordinate, and provide undelayed escorted access to the building.

IV. Professional Fee

Aon FPE's fee for Basic and Optional Services described below:

Item Basic Services Professional Fee

A Fire Alarm System 50% CD Review $3,500.00 - -


B Fire Alarm System 100% CD Review

C Construction Kick Off Meeting

0 Fire Alarm System Submittal Review

E Fire Alarm System Installation Inspections

F Fire Alarm System Device Testing

G Fire Alarm System Integrated Testing

H Sprinkler System 50% CD Review

I Sprinkler System 100% CD Review

J Sprinkler System Submittal Review

Item Optional Services

K Sprinkler System Installation Inspections

L Sprinkler System Testing

M On-Site Supervision

N Code Consulting


Page 4

$2,500,00

$1,900.00

$3,750.00

$11,750,00

$9,750.00

$9,750.00

$4,000.00

$3,000.00

$5,000.00

Professional Fee

$9,750,00

$6,250.00

Time and Expenses

Time and Expenses

The fee for Basic Services does not include Additional Services described herein,

Aon FPE's fee shall be paid monthly in proportion to services performed,

If the project is canceled prior to completion of Aon FPE's services, Aon FPE's charges will be based upon the actual time expended at the Billing Rates in effect at the time the work is performed.

V, Reimbursable Expenses

Reimbursable Expenses are in included in the fees for Basic and Optional Services unless otherwise stated herein.

Client agrees to reimburse Aon FPE for any expenses incurred by Aon FPE as a result of the Client canceling or rescheduling a meeting or site visit. These expenses will be billed at cost plus ten percent.

Reimbursable Expenses shall be paid monthly upon presentation of itemized expenses incurred by Aon FPE's employees or consultants in connection with this project.

VI. Additional Services

This proposal contemplates a scope of service based upon one project scheme. Major project revisions outside of Aon FPE's control or responsibility that will require rework of



Page 5

completed work, or more extensive work than originally agreed upon, will be considered Additional Services.

Additional Services also include all work not outlined in Basic Services (such as consultation, negotiation with AHJ, engineering solutions, services associated with the smoke control system, etc.).

Additional Services will not be performed unless requested by the Client.

Aon FPE's fee for requested Additional Services will be based upon billing rates in effect at the time services are performed. Reimbursable Expenses associated with requested Additional Services will be based upon the schedule in effect at the time services are performed.

Client may request or it may become necessary for to perform Additional Services in order to further the objectives of the Project. Whenever reasonably possible, Aon FPE will notify Client in advance of Aon FPE's intention to perform the particular Additional Service, and Client's failure to instruct Aon FPE not to perform the Additional Service shall be considered Client's acquiescence in Aon FPE's performance of the Additional Service and agreement to pay for it. Notwithstanding any other description of Basic or Additional Services, any services which client requests Aon FPE to perform after final payment has been made to the contractor(s) or more than 60 days after the project has been certified to be substantially complete shall be considered Additional Services. Any modifications or changes requested by Client inconsistent with Client's prior approval(s) shall be considered Additional Services.

VII. Terms and Conditions

This proposal is valid for 60 days.

Aon FPE reserves the right to assign personnel on an "as avai lable" basis.

SURVEYS AND REVIEWS TO BE PERFORMED BY AON FPE ARE FULLY DEFINED BY THE SCOPE OF SERVICES OF THIS PROPOSAL.

Aon FPE invoices are due upon receipt. Accounts unpaid for 45 days from the date of invoice are subject to a 1.5 percent per month service charge. Accounts unpaid for 75 days from the date of invoice will be cause for Aon FPE to suspend all performance under this Agreement upon a 14-day written notice, unless payment in full is received within 14 days from the date of the written notice. In the event of a suspension of services, Aon FPE shall have no liability for any delay or other damage, contractual or otherwise, caused by or arising out of the suspension of services for nonpayment. Acceptance by Aon FPE of any payment more than 75 days old shall not serve as a waiver of Aon FPE's contractual right to suspend services for nonpayment.

Billing rates stated herein are valid through the end of the calendar year of the date which this proposal was written. Fees for work performed beyond this date will be based upon billing rates in effect at the time the work is performed.

In the event the Client fails to pay within 45 days from the date of the invoice, Aon FPE reserves the right to retain counsel and/or commence litigation to collect the account. In the event Aon FPE retains counsel and/or commences litigation to collect the account, the Client agrees to indemnify and hold Aon FPE harmless from any and all loss,



Page 6

liability costs and expense, including but not limited to reasonable attorney fees and other litigation expenses, arising out of Aon FPE's efforts to collect the invoice. The Client consents to and agrees to submit to jurisdiction and venue in the courts of the State of Texas for any litigation commenced by Aon FPE to collect the account. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted according to the laws of the State of Texas.

Any representations, recommendations, opinions, or conclusions relating to the work performed by Aon FPE must be made in writing by duly authorized Aon FPE's representatives. Aon FPE will not be bound by any oral representations, recommendations, opinions, or conclusions.

The Client agrees to indemnify Aon FPE for any expenses which Aon FPE may incur as a result of the Client's negligence or of negligence of any contractor hired by the Client.

THE CLIENT AGREES TO THE LIMITATION OF AON FPE'S PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY TO AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000.00 OR THE FEE, WHICHEVER IS GREATER.

BY EXECUTING THIS PROPOSAL, THE CLIENT HAS READ ALL OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS PROPOSAL AND FULLY UNDERSTANDS THEIR CONTENTS. THE EXECUTION OF THIS PROPOSAL CONFIRMS THE CLIENT'S UNDERSTANDING AND ACCEPTANCE OF THOSE TERMS.

This agreement may be accepted by signing in the space below and returning a countersigned copy of this agreement, or by authorizing, directing, or permitting Aon Fire Protection Engineering Corporation to proceed with the Scope of Services.

Submitted by:

AON FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEERING CORPORA TION

/}J,li~'f4 Mark Hayes, SET Dallas Office Manager

Approved by:

Hill International Inc.

signature date

printed name

title

Proposal No, 1120042A

ENGINEERED AIR BALANCE CO., INC.

============~~~~====~=~'

To: Hill International, Inc, 17304 Preston Rd, Suite 800 Dallas, TX 75252

DAlLAS,HOlISTON,SAN ANTONIO 1 $51 Nmth {3ienvlf!@ Drive, Suite 201 "Ii Richardson, Texas 750B1

Phone wni 818-9000 fJ: Fat: {S'T2} 8'18·0997

Email: zabc18Has@eabcoincJ;om

Web Page: \N\!\iW.B&ncoinC.Com

Re: Dallas County Jail Medical Modifications 133 Riverfront Blvd, Dallas, TX 752002

Attn: Eric Short Date: January 31, 2012

THIS PROPOSAL EXPIRES 30 DAYS FROM THE ABOVE DATE

We are pleased to revise our proposal for our services of testing, adjusting, and balancing the heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems in the subject project

In particular, we are proposing our services of Testing, Adjusting, and Balancing the HVAC systems and related equipment for the sUbject project in accordance with the Preliminary Specifications, Section 23 05 93, entitled "Testing, Adjusting, and Balancing for HVAC", and the Preliminary (100% DD) Mechanical Drawings, dated November 14, 2011, and the list of services you requested,

Specifically our proposal includes the following services:

1, Document Review ",,"""''''''''',,' ,,' , , , " , ,.".""" "." ,$ 24,000,00

• During the design stages, review mechanical drawings and specifications • During construction, review the HVAC submittals • Provide written commentary and attend meetings

2, Pre-TAB Services", " .. ,','" ''',,' "" , .. ' '''' ,,,,,, ..... , ,"," '" """ ''',', '" ""'" ''''', ,$ 16,500,00

• Perform HVAC inspections • Observe duct pressure tests • Test a sample single duct supply air terminal and retest, if required • Witness and document the manufacturer's AHU leakage and deflection testing

Proposal No. 1120042A

3. TAB Services ................................................ ,.,' '" "".""""."""""""""" .. $141 ,500.00

• Perform TAB of the HVAC systems

Note: This price includes TAB associated with smoke control. The current design documents associated with the smoke control are incomplete. We have estimated our services associated with testing, adjusting, and balancing the smoke system using the currently provided information at $24,500,00, If there are significant changes that will require additional TAB, we will submit revised pricing for approval.

Note: This price includes TAB associated with existing AHU-4 and RF-17. The current design documents associated with the existing systems are incomplete. We have estimated our services associated with testing, adjusting, and balancing AHU-4 and RF-17 using the currently provided information at $2,800,00. If there are significant changes to the existing systems that will require additional TAB, we will submit revised pricing for approval,

• Perform sound testing • Pump vibration testing does not apply; all pumps are less than15 hp • WITness and assist with the manufacturer's AHU & Fan vibration testing

4. HVAC Control Verification""""."."".""""." ............ "" ... ,, ........... " ...... $ 42,000.00

• Perform HVAC Sensor Calibration Verification, • Perform HVAC Control Sequence of Operation Verification • Verify and document Point-to-Point and Graphics communication at the EMS front end

Note: This price includes HVAC sequences associated with smoke control. The current design documents associated with the smoke control are incomplete. We have estimated our services for HVAC control verification of the smoke system using the currently provided information at $22,000.00. If there are significant changes that will require additional verification, we will submit revised pricing for approval.

Proposal No, 1120042A

5, Support of Project Commissioning Process"""""""""""""""", """,," "'" $ 27,000,00

• Attend coordination meetings and actively provide input • Assist with the Functional Performance Testing • Assist with the Integrated Systems Testing

Note: The current design documents associated with the Commissioning Process are incomplete, We have estimated our services using the currently provided information, When documents are finalized, we will submit revised pricing for approval.

6, Project Closeout Allowance (10%) """"'''''''''''' """ " '" " "",,",,"""" ,,,$ 25,000,00

• Assist with after the fact design, construction, and/or operation issues

TOTAL NET PRICE FOR THE ABOVE SERVICES .............................. $276,OOO.OO

The above noted services are estimated as follows:

Sr. Project Manager

Project Leader

Technician

$130,00 per man hour

$95,00 per man hour

$85,00 per man hour

Any further changes in scope or change orders will be estimated at the above noted rates, Our invoicing will be monthly; representative of the percent of the project that has been completed,

We thank you for the opportunity of proposing our services, If we may be of further assistance, please contact our office,

Yours truly,

ENGINEERED AIR BALANCE CO" INC,

Thomas p, Schlachter

TPS/cm

\\01nas01\Data-Backup\CMoKee\Proposal No. 1120042Adoc

COURT ORDER I !

ORDER NO: 2012 0419 DATE: March 6, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS


__________ ~6t_h __________________ dayof __________ ~M~a~rc~h~ ____________________ ,2012,on

a motion made by Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of District No.4 , and seconded by

_J_o_lm __ W_l_'l_e-"y __ P_r_i_ce~,,--C_o_rmn_l_' s_s_i_o_n.c..e_r_o:..;f...-D,;.:i.:,.s.:...tr::.:lc..· c:..;t ___ N..:.o.:,., _3=--______ , the following Court Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, on February 23,2012, Dallas County property located at 400 S. Beckley, Dallas, Texas (commonly referred to as the Oak Cliff Subcourthouse) experienced a fire that required the building to be closed through February 27,2012 and all operations to cease, impacting the Tax Office, Constable Precinct 5 and Justice of the Peace 5-2; and

WHEREAS, as a result, emergency restoration services were procured to allow the facility to resume normal operations on February 28, 2012; and

WHEREAS, the cause of the fire is being investigated by the Dallas County Fire Marshal; and

WHEREAS, additional cleaning and restoration services will continue in the building; and

WHEREAS, Texas Local Government Code Subchapter 262.024 (a) (1), allows for a discretionary exemption for purchases in case of public calamity if it is necessary to make the purchases promptly to relieve the necessity of the citizens or to preserve the property of the county;

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Court does hereby authorize all purchases associated with the fire event at the Oak Cliff Subcourthouse be procured in accordance with Texas Local Government Code Subchapter 262.024 (a) (1) and authorizes all county documents/payment to reflect accordingly.

DONE IN OPEN COU 6th day of Maroh ,2012.

~~' ~e<U dP d~ stnet #3 Dr. Elba Garcl~ #4

-------Rooommoe'" b~~ Shannon S. Bown, Assistant Administrator

.) . ,. 2"· ORDER NO: i'" U 1· u420

COURT ORDER

J DATE: March 6,2012

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS


__ --'~ ________ day of __ -"M"'-"'ar"'c"h ______________ , 2012, on

a motion made by Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of District No.4 , and seconded by

_J_o_lm_W_l_' l_e-,Y_P_r_i_c_e.,.,_Co-,-IllIlU __ ' s_s..::i:..:o",nc:.eccr_0c.f--.c:Dc::i:c:s:..:t.:cr.:::i.::c-=ct_N",o:..::..:. :..:3=--___ , the following Court Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, on February 28, 2012 the Dallas County Commissioners Court was briefed by the Dallas County Bail Bond Taskforce concerning various improvements to the Dallas County bail bond process including authorizing the following positions to the District Attorney Civil Division: a) Attorney VI (Managing Attorney); b) Attorney V; and c) two Legal Assistants, grade 10; and

WHEREAS, the additional staff will be responsible for processing bond forfeitures ensuring that Dallas County collects on any bail bond forfeitures that are owed; and

WHEREAS, the Office of Budget and Evaluation will monitor bond forfeiture collections compared to historical averages to ensure that bond forfeiture collections increase by an amount greater than the cost of the additional staff; and

WHEREAS, the FY2012 cost for the following positions: a) Attorney VI (Managing Attorney); b) Attorney V; and c) two Legal Assistants, grade 10 is $194,076 and the annual cost of the positions is $363,552,

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Court does hereby authorize the District Attorney Civil Division the following positions: a) Attorney VI (Managing Attorney); b) Attorney V; and c) two Legal Assistants, grade 10 with the Human Resources/Civil Service Department reviewing the positions for the appropriate classification,

DONE IN OPEN CUT this the __ 6""t""h ___ day of March-- 2012

~~~ .. ~ Mom' . <oy. D',"'ce #l ~ik" C,,,'rell, D'''rict #2

~~~J2dL istrict #3 Dr. Elba Garcia, District #4

eco mended by: J3. '1- nrC w '"' Ryan Brown, Budget Officer

COURT ORDER

J ORDER NO: 2 0 12 0421 -----

DATE: March 6,2012

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS


______________ ~~ _____________ dayof ________________ ~M~a~r~ch~ _____________ ,2012,on

a motion made by Dr, Elba Garcia, Commissioner of District No, 4 , and seconded by

-.:J:...:0c:lm=-__ W",i",le","y'-'.P",r:..::i:..:c..ce-,,-..CC.:c0IIlITllc-_· s_s-,i,-o_n_e_r __ o_f_D_J._· s_t_r_i_c_t __ N_o_, _3 _____ , the following Court Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, the Dallas County Commissioners Court was briefed by the Office of Budget and Evaluation on February 28, 2012 recommending adjustment of the rates for independent court interpreters; and

WHEREAS, the Dallas County Commissioners Court wishes to rescind Court Order 99-520 establishing the current rates for independent interpreters; and

WHEREAS, the Commissioners Court is authorized to establish a rate structure for independent interpreters per Texas Code of Criminal Procedures Article 38.30; and

WHEREAS, the Court agrees to set a new fee structure for certified independent interpreters providing services in Spanish and Other languages for pleas, trials, and afterhours work as follows:

Minimum per day (2-hour minimum) Hourly (billable in 30-minute increments)

Spanish

$110.00 $55.00

Other

$130.00 $65.00

WHEREAS, in conjunction with the new fee structure, interpreters may be called upon to do several interpretation assignments during the initial two hours at the daily minimum rate; and

WHEREAS, there will be a $75 fee for cancellations within 24 hours of scheduled interpretation for interpreters in the North Texas Region unable to schedule subsequent assignments on the same day of cancellation, as well as reimbursable expenses including airfare and hotel, with receipts, for those interpreters traveling beyond a 150-mile radius surrounding Dallas County; and

WHEREAS, staff requests a thirty day extension (April 1,2012 through April 30, 2012) to Bid No. 2008-053-3399 Annual Contract for Licensed/Certified Court Interpreters as awarded to Access Language Center; and

WHEREAS, per Local Government Code 262.030(a)(4), Commissioners Court authorizes a discretionary exemption to the competitive bid requirements; and

WHEREAS, Dallas County will assume direct administration of court interpreter services for all courts upon expiration of the Annual Contract for Licensed/Certified Court Interpreters with Access Language Center, LLC; and

WHEREAS, the two Senior Secretary positions within the County and District Criminal Court Managers Departments will handle all live interpreter requests and assignments; and

WHEREAS, Human Resources/Civil Service Department will review the Senior Secretary (Grade 8) positions within the County and District Criminal Court Managers Departments for reclassification as a Grade 12 positions due to the significantly different workload handling interpreter requests; and

WHEREAS, the Court Manager Offices will develop the application and list of certified interpreters which will be included on the Dallas County website; and

WHEREAS, the new court interpreter rate structure and will be effective May 1, 2012 upon expiration of the Annual Contract for Licensed/Certified Court Interpreters with Access Language Center, LLC and reclassification of the Senior Secretary Positions within the County and District Criminal Court Managers Departments; and

WHEREAS, this action supports Vision 1, Strategy 1.3 of the Strategic Plan by providing a sound, financially responsible and accountable governance

IT IS THERE~"ORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that in accordance with Article 38.30, Texas Code of Criminal Procedures and Local Government Code 262.030(a) (4), the Dallas County Commissioners Court does hereby; 1) rescind Court order 99-520; 2)authorize the new fee structure herein for certified interpreters used by Dallas County; 3) allow the review ofthe two Senior Secretary positions within the County and District Criminal Court Managers Departments for reclassification as Grade 12 to handle all live interpreter requests and assignments; 4) authorize a thirty day extension (April 1, 2012 through April 30, 2012) to Bid No. 2008-053-3399 Annual Contract for Licensed/Certified Court Interpreters as awarded to Access Language Center and; 5) authorizes all county documents/payments to reflect accordingly.

-..--DONE IN OPEN ) RT this the __ ....-'6L

II1 __ day of ___ -+ __ -"M"'a"'r-"ch"---__ -=~-

A~~6f2~~~~~t.->C-_~:::~:!:~.-C~~~~M-i~£~:,: :"id #2


Recommended by: ~ ~ - h yo w""'Ryan rown, Budget Officer

COURT ORDER 11-ORDERNO: ____ _

DATE: March 6, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS


6lh day of March, 2012, on a motion made by Dr. Elba Garcia, Cormnissioner District 4 and seconded

by Jolm Wiley Price, Commissioner District 3 _, the following Court Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, the Dallas County Commissioners Court was briefed on February 28, 2012 regarding a data sharing agreement between the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) and the County Clerk Collections Division; and

WHEREAS, the agreement included information access from TWC regarding history of wage records, salary range, unemployment benefit amount, employer tax information, current address and other information for up to ten (10) users; and

WHEREAS, the County will spend $1,500 per year for access to the information; and

WHEREAS, the County will save approximately $40,000 per year through revenue increases as a result of having access to this information for a net savings to Dallas County of $38,500.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, that the Dallas County Commissioners Court hereby authorizes the County Clerk's Collection Division to enter into a data sharing agreement with TWC at a cost of $1,500 for access up to ten (10) users.


Recommended by: ~y P'CvJ--' Ryan Brown, Budget Officer

ORDERNO:2U12 -0423 COURT ORDER I ,/ ,

DATE: March 6,2012

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS


6th day of __ --"M"'a"'r""c"'h ___ , 2012, on a motion made Dr. Elba Garcia, Dist. 4 and seconded

by John Wiley Price, Dist. 3 , the following Court Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, on March 6, 2012, the Dallas County Commissioners Court was briefed by the Office of Budget and Evaluation concerning the grant funds availahility under the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs' Bureau of Justice Assistance, Drug Court Discretionary Grant Program; and

WHEREAS, Judge Peggy Hoffman, County Criminal Court #9 has developed the Positive Recovery Intensive Divert Experience (PRIDE) Program in response to the announcement and requests approval for the online submission of the grant application; and

WHEREAS, the total request is for $200,000 there is no required match; and

WHEREAS, the submission of this grant is consistent with the County's Strategic Plan Vision 1:3 Dallas County is safe, secure and prepared.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Court does hereby authorize the online submission of the grant application to the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs' Bureau of Justice Assistance Drug Court Discretionary Grant Program. Dallas County designates the County Judge, as the grantee's authorized official. The authorized official is given the power to apply for, accept, reject, alter or terminate the grant on behalf of the applicant agency.

_--"6,,th,--_ day of ___ ---:7""","'a"'r"'ch"-________ _

Recommended by: h '1- pro\.)..),",Ryan Brown, Budget Officer

ORDER NO:

DATE:

Ii)!]' 6) a.l 2"" Il '"' ~ J r-:"", V ':i .. l~

March 6, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS'

COUNTY OF DALLAS'

COURT ORDER

I 1 I

BE IT REMEMBERED, at a regular meeting ofthe Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas, held on the

6th day of March, 2012, on motion made by Dr. Elba Garcia, Dist. No.4

and seconded by Jolm Wiley Price, Dist. No.3 , the following Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, Commissioners Court was briefed on February 28, 2012, regarding Amendment No.9 to the Senior Supplement Plan Group Health Insurance Policy aud Amendment No.6 to the Medicare Advantage Group Health Plan Service Agreement (attached); and

WHEREAS, Both plans include coverage for prescription drugs (Medicare Part D) in accordance with the centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and are designed for Medicare eligible retirees and their dependent (spouses) age 65 and older; and

WHEREAS, Retirees and their dependent (spouses) may "opt-out" of the Senior Supplement Pharmacy Plan if they have another Medicare Part D prescription plan elsewhere; and

WHEREAS, Amendment No.9 updates the Senior Supplement Plan (PSS) agreement between PacifiCare Texas Inc. and Dallas County and provides for 2012 rates with or without the Medicare Part D prescription benefits; references the commercial wrap prescription drug plan coverage, which is part of the Senior Supplement Plan prescription drug benefit; and provides a greater savings to the employer without additional cost to retirees; and

WHEREAS, Amendment No.6 updates the Medicare Advantage Plan (PMA) agreement between PacifiCare Texas Inc. and Dallas County and includes the Medicare Advantage Plan monthly premium for 2012; and

WHEREAS, These Amendments suppot1s Vision I, Strategy 1.3: Dallas County provides sound, financially responsible, and accountable governance.

K:\Court Orders 20 1 2\PEBC 2012 Amendment No.9 (Senior Supplement Plan) and Amendement No.6 (Medicare Advantage Plan)-2.doc

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Court hereby approve Amendment No.9 and Amendment No.6 agreement between PacifiCare Texas Inc. and Dallas County and authorize the County Judge to sign the document on behalf of Dallas County

Recommen

this the 6th day of March, 2012.

Commissioner District #4

e Mauldin-Taylor, 1. , Director Resources/Civil Servi e Department

Mike Cantrell District #2

K:\Court Orders 2012\PEBC 2012 Amendment No.9 (Senior Supplement Plan) and Amendcment No.6 (Medicare Advantage Plan)-2.doc

AMENDMENT #9 TO THE GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE POLICY

BETWEEN PACIFICARE LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY AND DALLAS COUNTY

WHEREAS, PACIFICARE OF TEXAS, INC., a Texas corporation, hereinafter referred to as "PacifiCare" and Dallas County, as a member of the Public Employee Benefits Cooperative ("PEBC"), hereinafter referred to as "Group Policyholder", entered into an Agreement effective January 1, 2006 for provision of Senior Supplement Plan F group health services ("the Agreement"); and

WHEREAS, PacifiCare is a wholly-owned subsidiary of UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company (which, on behalf of itself and its subsidiaries and affiliates, is collectively referred to herein as HUnitedHealthcareH) which assumed all of the rights and obligations of PacifiC are under the Policy and the corresponding Policy Information Page, the group health insurance certificate, attachments, and amendments as they apply; and

WHEREAS, effective January 1, 2011, the Group Policyholder continues to offer the Senior Supplement Plan F group health services program under the name UnitedHealthcare Senior Supplement, which is insured by UnitedHealthcare and made available to Group Policyholder's eligible Retiree membership as set forth in the Group Health Insurance Certificate and the Senior Supplement Plan F Plan Summary; and

WHEREAS, both parties acknowledge that effective since the Agreement's inception and to complement the Senior Supplement Plan F group health services program, Group Policyholder offers its eligible Retirees a Medicare Prescription Drug Plan (PDP) plan in accordance with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) rules for such services, which is offered by UnitedHealthcare or one or more of its predecessor companies under a separate contract, such PDP plan which includes administration of Low-Income Premium Subsidy CliPS"); and

WHEREAS, the Agreement is subject to the terms, conditions, rights and privileges as set forth under the corresponding cover sheet, Group Policyholder's eligibility rules, and unless expressly amended herein, Policy Amendments and Attachments; and

WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement and the rates effective January 1,2012:

WITNESSETH

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the parties agree as follows:

1. Effective January 1, 2012, UnitedHealthcare shall provide commercial wrap prescription drug plan coverage pursuant to the materials attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Commercial Wrap Prescription Drug Plan coverage is provided in accordance with the Medicare Coverage Gap Discount Program ("CGDP"), set forth at Section 1860D-14A of the Social Security Act ("SSA"), and CMS regulatory guidance regarding the provision of drug coverage in the coverage gap under a Medicare Part D Plan. The Commercial Wrap Prescription Drug Plan is a fully insured state filed insurance product, which shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. Exhibit A, Commercial Wrap Prescription Drug Plan, is attached hereto and is hereby added and fully incorporated into the Agreement.

2. The Policy Information Page is amended to reflect the 2012 Health Plan monthly premium effective January 1,

Page 1 of 2

2012, which is inclusive of both the Senior Supplement Plan F group health services monthly premium and the PDP Plan monthly premium, available to eligible Retirees enrolled in the Health Plan and the PDP Plan.

Senior Supplement Health Plan Monthly Premium (With PDP Plan)

Medicare Retiree Only: Medicare Retiree & Medicare Spouse:

$492.16 $984.32

The Policy Information Page is further amended to reflect the 2012 Health Plan monthly premium effective January 1, 2012, without PDP Plan enrollment, available to eligible Retirees enrolled in the Senior Supplement Plan F group health services plan.

Senior Supplement Health Plan Monthly Premium (Without PDP Plan)

Medicare Retiree Only: Medicare Retiree & Medicare Spouse:

$324.46 $648.92

3. Unless otherwise notified by UnitedHealthcare and advised by Plan Administrator, premium payments remain payable to PACIFICARE OF TEXAS, INC. and are to be mailed to the address listed below.

PACIFICARE OF TEXAS, INC. P.O. BOX 200651 DALLAS TX 75320·0651

Except as expressly amended herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement, together with its Amendments, Attachments and Cover Sheet remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment #9 to the UnitedHealthcare Senior Supplement Health Plan F group health services on the date indicated below.

unty UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company

\ -1l " f

t BY: '~7=-<f-"'P'------- BY: f\. NAME: I i TITLE: / I . i

'DATE: Marcl 6, 2012

Approved as to form}, 7 #' "

BY: ~A;v~/

Page 2 of 2

NAME: Ellen Sexton TITLE: Vice President, Group Retiree Services

DATE: ___________ __

AMENDMENT #6 TO THE HEALTH PLAN TERMS AND CONDITIONS

BETWEEN PACIFICARE OF TEXAS, INC. AND DALLAS COUNTY

WHEREAS, PACIFICARE OF TEXAS, INC" a Texas corporation, hereinafter referred to as "PacifiCare" and DALLAS COUNTY, as a member of the Public Employee Benefits Cooperative ("PEBC"L hereinafter referred to as "Group", entered into an Agreement effective January 1 ,2006 for provision of a Medicare Advantage with Prescription Drug Benefit (MA-PD) plan in accordance with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) rules for such services ("the Agreement"): and

WHEREAS, PacifiCare is a wholly-owned subsidiary of UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company (which, on behalf of itself and its subsidiaries and affiliates, is collectively referred to herein as "UnitedHealthcare") which assumed all of the rights and obligations of PacifiCare under the Agreement and the corresponding cover sheet, evidence of coverage, schedule of benefits, retiree summary of benefits insert, attachments, and amendments as they apply: and

WHEREAS, the Agreement is subject to the terms, conditions, rights and privileges as set forth under the corresponding cover sheet, Group's eligibility rules, and unless expressly amended herein, Amendments and Attachments: and

WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement and the rates:

NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed as follows:

Effective since its inception, the Agreement applies to (a) a group MA-PD plan: and (b) a group PDP plan, both offered by UnitedHealthcare or one or more of its predecessor companies. References in the Agreement to "Medicare Advantage" and/or "Secure Horizons" are understood to mean the group MA-PD plan and the group PDP plan. References in the Agreement to "group health services" are understood to mean health care services and products covered under the MA-PD plan and prescription drugs covered under the PDP plan.

1. Effective January 1, 2012, the Cover Sheet is amended to reflect the 2012 Health Plan monthly premiums.

Medicare Advantage Plan Monthly Premiums

Retiree Only MA-PD $149.94

Retiree & Medicare Spouse MA-PD: $299.88

2. Unless otherwise notified by UnitedHealthcare and advised by Plan Administrator, premium payments remain payable to PACIFICARE OF TEXAS, INC. and are to be mailed to the address listed below.

PACIFICARE OF TEXAS, INC. P.O. BOX 200651 DALLAS TX 75320-0651

Except as expressly amended herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement as previously amended remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment #6 to the Health Plans Terms and Conditions on the date indicated below.

MA Health Plan Tenns and Conditions Amendment #6 Page 1 of2

GROUP:

BY: NAME: TITLE:

DATE: ___ -'-""""-_____ _

MA Health Plan Terms and Conditions Amendment #6 Page 2 0[2

UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company

BY: NAME: Ellen Sexton TITLE: Vice President, Group Retiree Services

DATE: ___________ __

COURT ORDER

ORDER NO:

DATE: March 6, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS

BE IT REMEMBERED, 3t a regular meeting of the COll1ll1issioners Court of Dallas County, Texas, held on the~tlL"day of

"",,'~=,,-, _,_~""" 2012, on motion made by Dr. Elba Garcia, District 114 and seconded by

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

~~~~~_, the following Court Order was adopted;

on September 21,2010, KPMG, LLP was awarded the contract to perfonn required annual Financial Audits of Dallas County, Juvenile Board and Community Supervision and Corrections Department through RFQ# 20 I 0-072,5146 and Court Order 2010,1772; and

on August 2, 2011 with Court Order 2011,1283 the first extension for liseal year 2011 Financial Audits was approved; and

on February 21, 2012, the Commissioners Court was briefed 011 an amendment to authorize an audit of two additional programs for Single Audit in accordance with federal guidelines; and

the Single Audit required for reporting combined federal and state financial assistance was approved at $105,000 for six programs and allowed an increase (based upon required federal and state thresholds) of up to four additional programs at $10,500 each; and

the cost of two additional programs is $21,000; and

the recommendations are consistent with the Dallas County Strategic Plan Vision 1, ensuring sound financially responsible governance.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREE ' t at the Dallas County Commissioners Court does hereby approve a contract amendment authorizing fees tor two additional pro r al s increasing the cost ofFY20 11 Single Audit by $21,000.

DONE IN OPEN COURT this the~~"""'?f 2012,

Mike Cantrell, Commissioner of District #2 Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of District #4

Recommended for Approval by:

2012 04 ~!~eURT ORDER

\ , I

ORDER NO:

DATE: March 6, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS }

COUNTY OF DALLAS }

BE IT REMEMBERED at a regular meeting of the Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas, held on the

_---'6~t'"-h'_ __ ,day of ___ -"Ma~r_"c""h ______________________ 2012, on a motion

made by Dr. Elba Garcia, Connnissioner of District No.4

and seconded by Jolm Wiley Price. Commi ssj over of Di stri ct No 3 ' the following Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, Commissioners Court was briefed on February 28, 2012 about the attached "Progress Report and Recommendations" from the Dallas County Bail Bond Task Force; and

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

the Dallas County Bail Bond Task Force was chaired by Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner District #4, and included broad representation from multiple Dallas County elected officials and staff and the local bail bond industry; and

the "Progress Report and Recommendations" document includes six recommendations for action; and

the Dallas County Bail Bond Task Force will become a standing committee of the Dallas County Criminal Justice Advisory Board and will continue to work to improve the processing of bail bonds and bail bond forfeitures in Dallas County; and

the Bail Bond Committee of the Dallas County Criminal Justice Advisory Board will provide regular updates to the Dallas County Criminal Justice Advisory Board and Commissioners Court; and

the recommendations from the Dallas County Bail Bond Task Force support the following Visions from the Dallas County Strategic Plan: Vision 1: Dallas County is a model interagency partner and Vision 3: Dallas County is safe, secure and prepared.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Commissioners Court of Dallas County accepts the attached "Progress Report and Recommendations" from the Dallas County Bail Bond Task Force and supports efforts to implement the six recommendations included in the document.

DONE IN OPEN COURT this th 6th da~A-~Ma~r~cllil------(r/~"~'------_~--'2012'

~~k Mlk, C'"t",,~A~~;;j~ Commissioner District #1

Dr. Iba Garcia Commissioner District #4

Recommended by: __ ~ ____ -=--~!...!'I~/U=~.::.It:...:;{.~,(.:.:::J:::::,.-' ____ _ Ron Stretcher, Director of Criminal Justice

triet #2

Progress Report and Recommendations Dallas County Bail Bond Task Force

February 21,2012

Background Dallas County created a task force to perform a comprehensive review of the bail bond forfeiture processes and practices within the County. The efficiency of the bail bond forfeiture process requires the cooperative efforts of multiple elected officials and county departments. The task force was given the responsibility to review existing processes and practices and to make recommendations for improvement to the Dallas County Criminal Justice Advisory Board (CJAB) and Dallas County Commissioners Court.

This progress report summarizes the work to date of the task force and includes recommendations for action going forward. As specific issues have been identified by the task force, work has been initiated to resolve those issues.

Task Force Membership and Work Progress The task force is chaired by Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of Precinct 4 and Chair of the Dallas County CJAB. Task force membership includes the elected County and District Clerks, the Dallas County Auditor and staff from County departments involved in the bail bond forfeiture process. The task force has met regularly since its inception. It is recommended that the task force become a standing committee of the Dallas County CJAB and continue to meet to review progress in implementing recommendations and to respond to additional issues as they arise.

Members of the task force have been very active in working on the whole bail bond forfeiture process. Meetings involve tasking out action items that are then reported out at the next meeting. The following Dallas County elected officials and staff have been active in the work of the task force and are recognized for their good work. Input from the local bond industry has been coordinated by Drew Campbell, a consultant for the Dallas County Bail Bond Association.

Page 1

Sheriff's Department Daniel Simon Marlene James Scott Jones

County Clerk Hon. John Warren Stephen Dyson Lola Roberts

Auditor's Office Virginia Porter Tim Morton

District Attorney's Office Gordon Hikel Ellyce Lindberg

District Clerk Hon. Gary Fitzsimmons Virginia Etherly Tia Finney-Davenport

County Judge's Office Shay Cathey Maria Arita

Commissioners Court Administration Ryan Brown Darryl Martin

Criminal Justice Advisory Board Dr. Elba Garcia Dr. Michael Noyes Brooks Love

IT Services Mary McPhaul Mark Crooks

Criminal Justice Department Ron Stretcher Duane Steele Jill Reese

District Criminal Courts Han. John Creuzot Han. Dorothy Shead Han. Terri McVea Kerry Young Dana Wrisner

County Criminal Courts Han. Douglas Skemp Patricia Johnson

Bond Forfeiture Processes The bond forfeiture process in Texas Counties is complex with multiple decision points. Attached is a "Flowchart for the Issuance of Bond Forfeitures" that provides an overview of the general process. The Texas law related to bail in general is found in Chapter 17 of the Code of Criminal Procedures. Forfeiture of bail is found in Chapter 22 of the Code of Criminal Procedures. Also attached is a "Glossary of Terms Used in Bond Forfeiture Proceedings" that helps explain the terms used throughout the bail bond forfeiture process.

Scope of Issue An initial priority of the task force was to determine the exact scope of a central issue in the overall bail bond forfeiture process: the amount of uncollected monies due to Dallas County from bond forfeitures. This has proven to be a challenging task and remains a work in progress. An initial review of available data indicated a total of $35.8 million in unresolved bond forfeitures. This amount is further divided into two categories: bond forfeitures and bond forfeiture court costs and related assessments. Extensive additional research is underway by the District and County Clerks to confirm or refute the validity of these unresolved bond forfeiture receivables. Based on currently available information, it appears that only a relatively small portion of the initial $35.8 million is actually due. A summary of the two categories of unresolved bond forfeitures is provided below.

$23.6 million in bond forfeiture receivables identified in the current system:

Page 2

• Represents 21,448 bonds • Cases totaling $22.5 million need specific research to resolve data

conversion errors, duplicate receipt numbers and other anomalies to confirm how much are actually valid assessments

• $17.5 million from 15,941 cases is over ten years old (74.35% of the $23.6M total)

• $7.07 million appears to be from Pre-trial release and Personal bonds, which have not historically been pursued for forfeiture

2

$12.2 million in bond forfeiture court costs and related assessments are recorded in a now-discontinued mainframe application system without corresponding assessments on the current system:

• Represents 30,216 bonds • 99.9% of the $12.2M is greater than 10 years old • Only $3.1 M of this total is from bonds issued after 1989

IT Systems The biggest challenge identified by the task force is the lack of a central electronic system for processing all activities related to bail bonds and bond forfeitures. Information related to bonds is located in four non-integrated systems:

• Criminal Receipt Inquiry System (CRIN) mainframe financial assessment and payment records for bond forfeiture activity accessible by the bond number

• Bond (BN1 0) - a discontinued mainframe application • AIS - the Adult Information System contains details about bond activity • Adult Information Bond (AIBN) - a mainframe application that contains

bond records and forfeiture assessments, created to allow staff to create financial assessments

As the task force started its work, Dallas County IT Services began developing a consolidated data base that collected data from the separate sources into a single system. The consolidated bond data base is now in production. Staff has been trained and can now utilize this data base to research the status of all bonds accepted since January 1, 2007. Sometime soon, IT Services will expand the consolidated bond data base to include bail bonds posted prior to that date. Attached is an overview of this system, "Consolidated Bond Systems Reporting Tool."

While developing this new data base, IT Services was also able to resolve some long-standing issues with the processing of bonds within Dallas County's electronic systems. For example, a flaw in the bond number creation mechanism was identified that periodically led to duplicate bond number values, which caused ambiguity in the electronic records. This defect was corrected and bond number values for outstanding bonds affected by the problem were cleaned up accordingly. However, IT Services has only prepared reports based on end user needs and responded to specific issues within the data system. IT Services has not been tasked with an overall re-engineering of the electronic systems used in processing bonds and bond forfeitures. Dallas County is partnering with the Conference of Urban Counties and other Texas counties to develop a new adult criminal courts case management system (ACMS). It is critical that the new ACMS includes all required functionality needed to process bail bonds and bond forfeitures. IT Services' prepared the attached review of the bond system, "Observed Technical Issues with Dallas County Bond Systems." This report is a

3 Page 3

critical part of the requirements for the new ACMS. A review of potential developers of the new ACMS is underway. It is anticipated that initial portions of the ACMS will be implemented within an eighteen to twenty-four month timeframe.

Auditor's Review of Bond Processing The Dallas County Auditor conducted a review of financial records and electronic bond forfeiture activity within the disparate systems. The Auditor's final report, "Bail Bond Receivables," released December 19, 2011 is attached. The report is addressed to the County Clerk and District Clerk and includes the findings of the Auditor's review and specific recommendations for resolving discrepancies in the available data. The District and County Clerks have both started working on the recommendations in the Auditor's report.

County and District Clerk Activities Both County Clerk John Warren and District Clerk Gary Fitzsimmons have been active in the work of the task force. They and their respective staff have also worked closely with the Auditor's Office in the above-detailed review. Staff members of both offices have already begun to conduct the research needed to resolve pending bond cases. Due to the problems noted with current electronic systems, much of this research will take quite some time to complete because the review is labor intensive and requires a physical review of the numerous case records. Mr. Fitzsimmons and Mr. Warren are first focusing on bond forfeiture cases from January 1, 2007 forward. Once these more recent cases are resolved, both offices will begin working on older cases.

District Clerk Gary Fitzsimmons' office sampled 192 outstanding bond forfeiture cases. His report of the results of this audit is attached. County Clerk John Warren's office has to date reviewed 939 bond forfeiture actions. The review found that for 719 cases (76.6%), all monies due Dallas County were received and no additional action was needed other than correcting data reporting entries. The remaining 220 cases reflect an outstanding balance owed to Dallas County of $116,387. To date, 39 of these cases have been referred for Court action with the remaining cases still in process.

District Attorney Recommendations The task force requested and received recommendations from the District Attorney's office related to improving the overall bond forfeiture process in general and establishing a bail bond unit within the DA's office specifically. Attached to this report are the written recommendations from the DA's Office on the staffing necessary to form a bail bond unit. Because the forfeiture of a bail bond is an adversarial process, the task force strongly recommends that the District Attorney be centrally involved in the bond forfeiture processes and procedures moving forward and that the request for dedicated staffing be given due consideration by Commissioners Court.

4 Page 4

Policy and Process Issues The task force's review of the local bail bond processes and procedures finds a need for coordinated policy and process decisions at several critical points. There are 17 felony criminal courts and 13 misdemeanor criminal courts in Dallas County. When the task force started its work, there were no consolidated local rules for processing bond forfeiture cases. While there has been some alignment of processes, the Courts generally process bond forfeiture cases somewhat differently. The task force recognizes that each Judge has some discretion to exercise a certain amount of judicial preference in bond forfeiture cases. However, it is critical that there be common rules and practices followed by all Courts in how decisions on bond forfeiture cases are reported and implemented. To that extent, the Honorable John Creuzot, Criminal District Court No.4, and the Honorable Douglas Skemp, County Criminal Court No.3, have taken the lead on coordinating efforts of the judiciary to improve the bail bond process.

Members of the local bail bond industry requested that the task force review current processes for notifying the Court when a defendant is in custody in another jurisdiction and when a bond agent has reason to believe that a defendant has absconded. The processes are provided for in Sections 17.16 and 17.19 of the Code of Criminal Procedures. As with most issues related to bail bonds, multiple departments have roles within these processes. A detailed analysis of these processes is underway by a senior business analyst and a recommendation for improvement will be ready soon.

The task force has spent significant effort on reviewing the processes employed when a defendant fails to report for a Court date. There was general agreement among all stakeholders that, in many cases, the defendant has not truly "absconded" but either was not aware of the Court date or had some reason for not being present as required. The task force recognized that, in some cases, the process for setting Court dates may contribute to some defendants not appearing. Significant staff time is then spent on processing a case action that becomes unnecessary when the defendant is located and returned to Court. The task force recommends that a process be developed and implemented that allows for the defendant to be located and made available to the Court before initiating forfeiture action. The District and County Criminal Court Judges have agreed to consider such a process. A senior business analyst is currently working with all stakeholders to develop this process, which will be piloted in a few Courts. Once all stakeholders are confident that the new process is working, it will be expanded to all Courts.

Input from the Bail Bond Industry The task force recognizes that the ultimate purpose of a bail bond is to ensure that a defendant returns to Court to resolve pending cases. The fewer times an individual case requires Court action, the less the cost to the system. The Courts, the bail bond industry, and the entire system must work in partnership to gain the efficiencies needed to improve the local system. Representatives of the

5 Page 5

local bail bond industry have participated in the work of the task force and have submitted recommendations for the task force's consideration. Attached are two documents submitted by bail bond industry: "Oal/as County Bail Bond Task Force Process Recommendations" and ''Oal/as County Bail Task Force-Second Letter of Recommendations." Please note that these two documents were submitted by representatives of the local bail bond industry. The task force makes no assurances as to the accuracy of any of the information provided or of any statutes cited in the documents. Those recommendations are summarized as follows:

1. Improve the bail bond industry's access to real time data involving bond cases.

2. Standardize bond forfeiture processes among all Courts with a specific request to consider a process that provides an opportunity to resolve failure to appear issues.

3. Standardize processes for releasing a bond under Section 17.16 of the Code of Criminal Procedures and for requesting the issuance of a warrant or capias to allow the arrest of an absconder as provided for in Section 17.19 of the Code of Criminal Procedures.

Task Force Recommendations The following recommendations are a result of the work of the task force to date. Work is already underway on many of the tasks included in each recommendation. The task force will continue to update Commissioners Court and the Dallas County CJAB on progress towards implementing these recommendations.

1. Continue to improve the functioning of IT systems to support all processes relating to bail bonds. The consolidated bond reporting database should be continued and expanded to include cases prior to 2007. The database should also be used to produce regular reports of Dallas County bonding activities. Existing systems should be utilized to provide the bond industry with real time access to the data needed to process bonds and monitor case status. IT Services staff are currently evaluating options to provide the bond industry with improved access to "real time" data within the constraints of existing systems.

2. Ensure that all bail bond processing is provided for in the new Adult Case Management System (ACMS) currently in development. Stakeholders must be involved in the ACMS development and provide detailed requirements related to bond processing to ensure that the new system improves processing.

3. The Dallas County Commissioners Court is asked to provide funding for dedicated staff for the District Attorney's office for processing bond forfeitures. The task force recognizes the current pressures upon Dallas County's budget

6 Page 6

and understands that this request is outside of the normal budget cycle. However, the task force believes that dedicated District Attorney Staff is necessary to attain the system improvements that are needed and to ensure that Dallas County collects on any bail bond forfeiture receivables which are owed.

4. The District Criminal Court Judges, County Criminal Court Judges, District Clerk and County Clerk should continue to evaluate process changes that will benefit the entire system. Any proposed process changes should be piloted in a small number of Courts. No changes should be made systemwide until all stakeholders are comfortable that any changes will produce the desired results and that adequate process support is available from current IT systems. Work is already underway on processing bond actions under CCP 17.16 and 17.19 and the processing of cases that fail to appear in Court. Recommendations for improvement will be available in the near future.

5. The District and County Clerk should continue their work to resolve cases following the recommendations of the Auditor. Both offices have already begun to review and correct individual cases. The District and County Clerks should provide monthly reports on their progress that includes any amounts collected as a result of their work.

6. The Bail Bond Task Force should become a standing committee of the Dallas County Criminal Justice Advisory Board. The committee will continue to meet as needed to monitor progress in implementing these recommendations and address new issues related to bond forfeitures that may arise.

7 Page 7

FLOWCHART FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BOND FORFEITURES

Defend to appear at fixed docket

setting.

The defendant's name is called

three times by the bailiff.

,-_Ic..s-,-th",e",· •• -,-cl,-ef-,-e~n-,-d-,-an __ t"p_r-,-es,--e-,-n-,-t .... ?_-,f·· No

Felonies:

Bond is forfeited immediately.

..·······1 The defendant attends· court

Misdemeanors:

Bond is forfei'ted immediate'ly.

A judgment NISI is issued. A judgment NISI is an interlocutory judgment that will stand unless the

adversely affected party appears and shows cause why it should be withdrawn.

The case jacket is sent to the forfeiture department. Felonies are sent to-the district clerk.

Mlsderneanors are sent to the county clerk.

The defendant and surety are notified of the judgment ii'lsi by.a writ of scire faCias, a'judicial writ

requiring the person against whom it is brought to show cause why the judgment of forfeiture should

not be made final.

The surety has the 1St Monday after the expiration of 20 days afterth'e service b'f citation to answer

the writ pf sclre facias.

A NISI hearing should be set with at least 4S days notice of such setting to the defendant and su'rety,

but should not be set prior to 180 days in a misdemeanor nor 270 days in a felony after the date the

defendant failed to appear, If no. answer is filed a default nihil dicit may be taken at any time ..

NISlheariQg;held, '

Yes

Motion for New Trial may be filed within 30 days of the finaLjudgment o(a Bill .of Review can be fil~d

by the surety if defendant was returned within two (2) years of thedate the defendanffailed to'

. . appear. .•• '.

1 Surety failed t8 pay judgment? I··

No

Final judgment is paid to the

County or Distrin Clerk.

Yes Abstract Judgment issued, An

execution is prepared and sent to

the Sheriff's Department. Surety

added to the cut off list.

If defendant was returned to custody prior to the 270 days for a felony or 180 da'ys for a misdemeanor,

the surety can sub(Ylit a Bill. of Review, for remittitur to recover some oJ the forfeited bDnd.

Page 8

GLOSSARY OF TERMS USED IN BOND FORFEITURE PROCEEDINGS

Judgment nisi

Scire Facias

Answer

Final Judgment

Abstract of Judgment

Writ of Execution

Nulla Bona

Motion for New Trial

Special Bill of Review

Page 9

the interlocutory judgment rendered and signed by the court declaring the bond forfeited and directing the issuance of a capias (translation, "judgment unless")

the citation, a copy of the judgment of forfeiture Qudgment nisI), a copy of the forfeited bond, and a copy of any power of attorney attached to the forfeited bond

response to scire facias filed by the bonding agency by 10:00 am on the first Monday after the expiration of 20 days from the date the bondsman was served with the citation

the written decision/verdict of the Court determining whether the State recovers a judgment and the amount and terms of such judgment

document recorded with the County Clerk in the property records giving public notice of a judgment lien

a process from the Court to enforce a judgment and to collect costs issued to any Sheriff or Constable in the State of Texas

the Sheriff's return of the Writ of Execution indicating a diligent search and the inability to find property for seizure to satisfy a monetary judgement

pleading filed within 30 days of the final judgment asking the Court to reconsider and rectify a trial error by granting a new trial

a new lawsuit filed not later than 2 years after the date of final judgment in the same Court where the judgment was taken seeking to reform the judgment or seeking remittitur

Dallas County Department of Information Technology

Ii t n " I I

nty I logy

Novem 9,

This document describes, at a very high level, the system developed to increase visibility into the data underlying the current Dallas County bond process. The system is a consolidated

database environment that merges information from several disparate platforms, allowing

users to gain a more unified view ofthe bond process from a data perspective.

It is not intended for this implementation to be a long-term solution. Instead, it is an

intermediary step that helps facilitate bond account research in the existing environment while

Dallas County plans the transformation to a more robust and sustainable solution.

Dallas County Department of Information Technology I Consolidated Bond Systems Reporting Tool ",cv"",i"

Page 10


NOTE: First time access requires users to log off and log back on to their computer before

proceeding. To access the system, open the link http://l0.11.12.172/ReportServer IPages/ReportViewer.aspx? IBo nds/BondTable&rs:Comma nd- Rende!: and enter Windows credentials when prompted. Be sure to add the link to browser favorites for quick future reference.

Sample interface

Available Parameters: Start I End date

Case No

Case Type

Open NISI

Bond Co

Bond No

Bond Receipt No

Bond Status in AIS

Bond status in Court

Forfeiture Activity

Restricts the record set based on the bond date

Limits record set to bonds associated with a single case number

Felony or Misdemeanor

Bonds with associated NISI forfeiture activity that doesn't have a subsequent Set Aside or Discharge activity. Bond company I surety or attorney responsible for the bond

Limits record set to bonds with the specified bond number value

Limits record set to bonds with the specified bond receipt value

The 'Discharged' checkbox in AIS

The 'Bond Discharged' field in the mainframe

limits record set to bonds that have associated forfeiture activity with the selected status(es). Order of activity is not considered.

Remember that all parameters work together. The values '(unlimited)' and 'NULL' indicate that

the associated parameter will not be considered when the query is evaluated.

Dallas County Department of Information Technology I Consolidated Bond Systems Reporting Tool

Page 11

Available Report Columns

Bond No

Bond Dt

Defendant Name

Bond Amount

Bond Payment Type

Bond Receipt

Bond Rept feels)

fee Acct(s)

Fee Comments

Bond Type

Amou nt Assessed

Date Assessed

fCC (Mf) ReptTotal

fCC (Mf) Receipt History

Discharge in AIS

Discharge in Court

MF B080 Comments

Comments

Forfeiture Activity History

Case

Offense

Filing Agency

Court

last Setting

last Setting Dt

Disp

Disp Dt

Acct

Account Name

Address

City

St

Zip


Primary identifying moniker for a bond record (SOURCE: AIS)

Date the bond record was written (SOURCE: A!S)

Name of the defendant for whom the bond was posted (SOURCE: AIS)

Amount of the bond (SOURCE: AIS)

Type of payment posted to satisfy the bond record (SOURCE: AIS)

Primary identifying moniker for a bond receipt record (SOURCE: AIS)

Amount(s) posted against the bond record (SOURCE: A\S)

Account(s) associated with the bond receipt fees (SOURCE: AIS)

Comment(s) associated with the bond receipt fees (SOURCE: AIS)

Type of bond issued (SOURCE: AIS)

Amount ordered by the court for the defendant to pay in fines and court costs (SOURCE: MF)

Date the assessment was generated (SOURCE: MF)

Sum of all receipt amounts posted against an assessment (SOURCE: MF)

listing of each receipt record (SOURCE: MF)

Boolean indicating whether or not a bond has been manually 'discharged' in AIS (SOURCE: AIS)

Boolean indicating whether or not a bond has been discharged by the court (SOURCE: MF)

B080 Comments from JI66 Screen (SOURCE: Mf)

Comments associated with bond records (SOURCE: AIS)

Listing of each forfeiture activity (SOURCE: AIS)

Primary identifying moniker for a case (SOURCE: AIS)

Description of the offense (SOURCE: AIS)

Agency that filed the case (SOURCE: AIS)

Court to which the case is assigned (SOURCE: MF)

Code associated with the latest court setting (SOURCE: MF)

Date of the latest court setting (SOURCE: MF)

Disposition of the case (SOURCE: MF)

Date the case disposition was set (SOURCE: MF)

Primary identifying moniker for the party that posted the bond (SOURCE: AIS)

Name of the party that posted the bond (SOURCE: AIS)

Address of the party that posted the bond (SOURCE: AIS)

City of the party that posted the bond (SOURCE: A!S)

State of the party that posted the bond (SOURCE: AIS)

Zip of the party that posted the bond (SOURCE: AIS)

It is intended that the resulting record set be exported to another platform for further analysis and reporting.

The following formats are available by selecting the disk icon ( ):

• XML • Excel

• CSV • TIFF

• PDF • Word

• HTML


Page 12


• For more information about each field on the report layout hover over the corresponding column header with your mouse (website only).

• Click on the link in the Bond No field to activate a consolidated report for the selected record. • Click on the link in the FICC Receipt Total field to see the account distribution of the receipt values. • To enable sorting in Excel, deactivate the 'Merge and Center' button for the selected area. • Red font indicates active warrant status according to AIS.

The consolidated bond system reporting tool is based on SQL Server 2008 R2 and uses SQL

Server Reporting Services (SSRS) as the primary user interface.

Behind the scenes, SQL Server Integration Services (5515) gathers information from various sources and launches a series of SQL stored procedures that process and consolidate related

information into a data warehouse environment which serves as the basis for the SSRS reports.

Data cannot be modified directly through the reporting tool. Users must modify associated

records in the corresponding source systems if necessary. AIS information is automatically

refreshed every day at 5:00am and mainframe information is automatically refreshed every

Sunday at noon.

Security is controlled through an SSRS security model that references a dedicated group in

Active Directory.


Page 13


" I I I

fJrc'n:clred by Crooks

information

Novem 7, 1

As a part of the Bond Taskforce Initiative established in 2011, Dallas County IT Services developed a consolidated database environment that combines information from multiple systems, allowing users to gain a comprehensive view of the entire bond process.

During the discovery and development phases of this project, several design flaws and technical inefficiencies were identified in the source systems as having a potentially adverse impact on the overall bonding segment of Dallas County. It is the purpose of this document to report those issues so they may be acknowledged and addressed in current and future systems.

This document does not signify an exhaustive technical analysis of the systems that support the Dallas Count bond segment. Rather, it is a byproduct of the effort to increase visibility into the bond process and serves to illuminate some of the issues discovered during that exercise that are thought to impede, complicate or endanger the bond process.

Dallas County Department of Information Technology I Technical Issues with Dallas County Bond Systems

Page 14


Issues

It's outside the scope of this document to discuss or recommend procedural changes. However, the lack of a clear and coherent vision pertaining to the bond process perpetuates the dysfunction of the systems that support it. Strong, clear and unambiguous requirements must be established and set forth before the technical environment can reasonably be expected to help sustain the process.

While information systems routinely work together to achieve common goals, the overall level of complexity and the potential for failure increases with each additional system interface. From synchronization and timing concerns to structural incompatibility and data format issues, successful system interaction must be carefully planned, well executed and stringently maintained.

It's common knowledge that Dallas County remains in a long-term transition phase concerning IT systems. The migration of mainframe functionality to alternative environments has been particularly slow, leaving some tasks simultaneously dependent upon multiple systems, none of which provide a comprehensive view of the overall task and the sum of which is less stable than the component pieces.

In no area is this issue more evident than in the bonding segment. Below is a drastically simplified diagram of the bond process showing how various stages rely on different systems, thus complicating and potentially destabilizing the overall course while simultaneously obscuring the 'big picture'.

Simplified Bond Process Flow --Systems Perspective

AIS MF Courts MF Cash Receipting Oracle

Bonds Oul ... Heming Held

• ,

• FOlte,\ure • Process

[NO] Dofendan( Ap~Bafed ,

Fines I Cosis Assessed

, [Y",SI Amount [NO]

Luwerm~n ,.oj--"

Chock from DC Bond ~

Fund losu€,j


Page 15


Currently, there is no reliable mechanism for recording the history of a bond's value, Procedurally, clerks are encouraged to type comments into a free-form text field in the mainframe describing / justifying changes to the bond amount, However, no entry is required and the data that is captured in comment fields is neither reliable nor easily minable,

A key is used to tie related information together in a database, In the case of the Dallas County bond process, this key is often the bond number. Records associated with a given bond (such as forfeiture activities) reference the bond number at the table level to maintain a relationship in the database,

Currently, bond number key values are pieced together from individual bits of information:

Bond Number Construct

Offense Type Sample values

M = M~lll>tr,,\e

K~OutofCounty

rs = Mi,denwanor Wlit

2~digit Year Case I Warrant

Sequence

[X][OO][OOOOO][OO]

Bond Suffix Sample values

00·15 = In-County, not fa"ed 90-99 In-CQuntv. Foxed

80-89 In"Couflty, Faxed etc. ...

Theoretically, this type of approach to key nomenclature allows information to be gleaned by deciphering the individual elements of a single, multi-purposed field, However, modern database methodology has largely moved away from this practice because it can't be consistently relied upon to yield unique values, The recently addressed problem with duplicate bond numbers in Dallas County exemplifies this phenomenon,

Additionally, a key produced in this manner can easily become out-of-sync with the fields that were used to populate it, leading to the misrepresentation of contemporary data, Conversely, modifying the key to reflect changes in underlying data can result in the disassociation (or orphaning) of related records,

For the most part, the database side of this issue has been mitigated in AIS by behind-the-scenes usage of unique identifier fields in SOL Server. However, the problem persists in several key areas including:

• GROUP BY clauses in SOL statements (i.e" GROUP BY BondNo instead of BondID),

• Relationships to cases and warrants predicated upon the case / warrant segment of the bond number.

• All communication to and from the mainframe,

It should also be noted that considerable resources are used to generate bond number values in the production environment of AIS, At present, it takes multiple tables and over 400 lines of SOL code consisting of a labyrinth of multi-tiered, nested conditional statements to generate bond number values in their current format This structure is prone to errors, is hard to support, leads to performance degradation and would not be necessary if the bond number model was simpler and leveraged the reliability and efficiency of identity seeding devices native to SOL Server,

From the end-user perspective, consumers continue to rely on columnar information contained in the bond number despite the potential for the data to be out-of-sync with the rest of the record,


Page 16


Certain field values that should be unique are set by procedural logic instead of identity seeding mechanisms. This leaves room for errors while also consuming unnecessary recourses. In AIS, these values aren't typically used as database keys, but they are often used in conditional clauses in queries and are commonly referred to in the office environment because they appear on official documentation and portend to represent a single legal item. For example, the bond receipt number is a field that should be unique (one unique receipt per bond). However, there are currently over 4,000 receipt records that have conflicting receipt number values.

Statute dictates a series of steps be taken in the bond forfeiture process. The Dallas County IT system that handles bond forfeiture activity, AIS, provides a basic mechanism that simply stores information entered by the forfeiture clerk into what ultimately amounts to a spreadsheet.

Input of forfeiture activity records is minimally regulated and there are no mechanisms that evaluate the associated database tables for milestones or triggers. Instead, bond clerks can enter activity in any order they choose and are free to ignore stipulations concerning forfeiture activity and case disposition. For example, a clerk may elect not set the bond disposition to 'Discharged' status even after the bond has been set aside or discharged by the court.

Certain account number values are used to qualify particular types of bond. For example, account 249 is used to indicate a personal recognizance bond. Since there is no bond company with account number 249 and because of the very nature of PR bonds, reports and other interfaces that don't account for this particular scenario are potentially misleading.

When a bond is posted, a receipt is issued that shows the amount received or owed. In practice, it is understood that a bond shouldn't exist without a bond receipt (and vice-versa). However, AIS does not require the creation of a receipt when a bond is created.

This fact leads to several system vulnerabilities, including the possibility of circumventing the account limit restriction on bond companies. Because the receipt value feeds the total amount liable by the bond company (the account balance), if a receipt is not issued in association with a bond, the bond amount will not contribute to the overall account balance, potentially allowing the company to exceed the imposed limit.

Furthermore, all known internal and external bond reports treat the bond record and the bond receipt record as mutually inclusive (with a SQL INNER join). In other words, if one item is missing, neither will be displayed. While this design doesn't necessarily encumber bonding a defendant out of jail, it prevents bonds that don't have an associated receipt from being displayed on all known reports, including the weekly report of outstanding bonds sent to the bond companies and attorneys.


Page 17

DAl .. I~,o\S COUNTY COUNTY AUDITOR

TO

FROM

SUBJECT:

ISSUE DATE: RELEASE DATE:

SCOPE

Honorable John Warron, County Clerk Honorable Gary Fitzsimmons, District Clerk

Virginia A. Porter County Auditor,ll>'«

Bail Bond Receivables

September 13,2011 December 19, 2011

As pali of ongoing reviews of County Departments and compliance with statutory regulations, we have performed a review of financial records and electronic bond forfeiture activity within the Criminal Receipt lnquiry (CRIN) system, the discontinued mainframe Bond (13N10) application, the Adult Information System (ATS) bond tab details, and the mainJi'amc Adult Information Bond (ATBN) records, for the County Clerk and District Clerk bond forfeiture assessments.

13i\(:I«(;I{OtJr<Il Bone! forfeiture fees assessed by both offices have historically varied by officeholder. District Attorney (DA) Civil Section and Attorney General (opinions) have prOVIded guidance.

U~GAL

Statutes governing bail bonds and forfeitures include Code of Criminal Procedure, Chapters 17 and 22, and Occupations Code Chapter 1704. o rIlci al opinion issued by the Court of Appeals for the Firsl District of Texas on November 7, 2008 indicated that 'civil 11 ling fees' should be collected in bail bond forfeiture cases referencing a 1993 Court of Criminal Appeals Dees v. Slate opinion which rejected the argument that civil court costs do not apply because bail bond forfeitures are criminal matters.

I<EVIEW PHOCEIlUHES Limited review processes were applied to data from the departments in order to evaluate receivable reporting accuracy within the CR system, but did not include a review of original hard copy bonel records, case jackets, andlor other COllrt documentation. A random sampling or total activity was selected for certain procedures. Review steps included, but were not limited to, the foiIowing:

• Obtained various electronic files of AIS bond extracts, CRIN receivable report R12058. and AlBNIBN10 data for select bonds from IT Services

• Matched bond data from separate filcs to compile master flies of bond activity • Reviewed sample bond activity on ldS, eRIN, BNl 0, and/or AIBN

509 Main Street, Suite flO? Dallas. Texas 75202

Page 18

214 653 ~ 6472 FAX 21/1 653 6440

Honofrrble John Warren and llonorah!e Ciary Fitzsimmons Bail Bond Clclln~Ur Page 2 of?

FINDINGS

Receivables L Approximately, $23.6 million in calculated bond forfeiture receivables fa]' 21,448 bonds Or! E J 2058

as per data extracted from unpaid assessments on CRIN as of July 11, 20 II. CR IN bond forfeiture receivables aged greater than ten years for I. 5,941 bonds total over $17.5 miliion of the $236 million receivable balance or 74.35%.

2. Approximately, 812.2 million in bond f(Jrfeiture fine amounts on BNIO (use ofBN10 discontinued after conversion to AIS in 2005) for 30,216 bond records without con-csponding assessments on CRIN or notations of payment on BNJ O. While data conversion to the mainIi-ame Central Criminal Receipt System in November 1989 may have resulted in some purged payment records, bonds issued after 1989 totaling over $3.J million are part of the $12.2 mi Uion BN 10 total without CRrN payment records. BN! 0 bond amounts aged greater than ten years account for 99.9'/0 of the S12.2 million.

Partial Analysis of $23.6 Million CIUN Receivable Balance 3. Various data conversion cnors from BN10 to ATS in 2005 including 3,835 bonds with unpaid

assessments totaling $6,690,580.99 on CRIN with a statns incorrectly retlected as Tinal Judgment Remittitur' on AlS when remittitur was not part of the status on BN10. Partial analysis of data

revealed an estimated 90% of accounts and 73% of the receivable dollars should retleet a status of Abstract of Judgment, Execution Issued/Returned, or execution returned Nulla Bona rather than [he status reflected on A1S. Two defunct bonding companies [md out-or·county bonds account for $4.4 million of the $6.7 million in unpaid assessments retlcctcd on CRIN.

4. 2242 bonds with assessments totaling $4,105,454.91 (ove)" $3.9 million of the total is a bond fine assessmel1l) on CRIN with a status of Final Judgment Against State on AIS or 'JGAS' on AlBN. Approximately, 97% of the asscssments are pre-AlSo 2158 of the 2242 were nol converted to AJS due to ',lGAS' status. Sample review of bonds on BNIO revealed 'Judgment Against State' without an entry of Final. Judgment. Reason for assessments recorded to CR1N could not be determined.

5. 654 bonds with assessments totaling %983,696.97 (approximately $928,000 of the lotal is a bond n.no assessment) on CRIN including 616 with a status of 'PAID' or 'I'D' on AIBN. 618 of the 654 bonds were not converted to AIS due to 'Paid' recorded on BN 10. Sample reVie"lN ofboncls revealed assessment errors on CRlN, partial payments only with balances clue, forfeited cash bonds returned to the surety, or fees paid for motions for new trial, bills of review, andlor sLlperseacias appeal bond fees.

6. 999 bonds with assessments totaling $1,592,441.76 (approximately $1.5 million of the total is a bond fine assessment) on CRIN with a status of 'Discharged' on AIS or 'DSG' on AlBN. 167 or the 999 bonds were not converted to AIS. Sample review of bonds revealed' Judgment Against Slate' without an entry of Final J ucigmcnt, fllrfeited cash bonds not eon-cctly applied [0 assessments or coneet bond number, order to set aside, bill of review granted, motion fbr new trial granted, dc.

7. 2561 bonds with assessments totaling $885,606.29 (approximately $845,000 of the total is a bond fine assessment) on CRIN with limited information on BN 10 or no corresponding information on BN10, AlBN, 01' AIS to validate the aceuraey o[(ho receivable.

Page 19

Honorable John Warren and Honorable Grlry Filzsimmons Bail Bond Clean-up Page 3 of 7

8, 9284 bonds with assessments totaling $7,269,609,94 on CR1N with a stmus of 'Abstract of Judgment' (AB), 'Execution' (E), or 'Nulla Bona' (NB) on AIS, AIBN, andlor BNIO, Approximately, $6.4 million of the $7,3 million is for Pre-Trial Release or Personal Recognizance bonds,

9, Separate file provided by IT Services on July 18,2011 included 2672 bonds witb NISI amounts totaling $7,721,206 ($2.4 million of the total is for Personal Recognizance bonds), Sample review revealed: most with NISI as the only action; others with last status of Seire Facias Returned, Paid, Set Aside, FJAS tax costs, etc, including one dating to 1966; two contained date errors; and three were missing the NISI date, Approximately, $6.4 minion (1909 bonds) of the $7.7 million total was over 180 days for misdemeanor cases or 270 days for felony cases from the date of NISI. Approximately, $4,7 million (74.63%) of the $6.4 million and 646 (33.84%) of the 1909 bonds were aged greater than 5 years from the date ofNISL

NISI Without Fina! Judgment 10, A review of existing A]S bond reports revealed: an ad hoc or standard report of !lon-discharged

'bonds written' by surety is not available within AIS, AIS bail bond reports comparable to previously existing Mainframe bail bond reports available prior to conversion were not replicateci in A1S, A listing of non-discharged 'bonds written' with NISI or Final Judgment loy surety is not available within AIS while bondsman or attorneys that rcquest to receive a weekly listing of non·· discharged bonds for their specitlc account receive an email version from IT Services, Account numbers '000' {Cash} and '249' {Pre-Trial Release} arc not part of the Bond Company Maintenance summary inlclrmatioll and a listing by surety name for account number '342' {Out-of, County) is not available,

Status: IT Services has providcd data extracts to the Clerks based on individual specific requests, but standard reports arc still lacking within A1S, In November 2011, IT Services provided a link to a ncwly created bOlld database for the Clerks to extract inicll'lnatioll based on user defined parameters,

Miscellaneous 11, Incomplete system functionality within the bond forfeiturc tab. Inquiry access is incomplete

preventing view of all bond receipt details on AIS entered by the Sheriff including bond company and attorney maintenance screens,

12, Anomalies in data analysis were caused by: multiple bonds issued fc)r the same case wi.thout it

change in the bond extension (for example sequencing did not increase from 0] to 02 011 the next bond); duplicate issuance ofreeeipt numbers; data conversion errors from BNJO to i\JS; i\lS bond detail tab for bonding company name or bonding uttorncy name and/or account number not in agreement wilh AIS bond receipt history tab for bond company name or attorney name and/or account number; or bond status date on last bond forfeiture action the same as other bond forfeiture status dates,

Status: IT Services updated programming processes to prevent future occurrences of duplicate bono suffix numbers, IT Services created a one-time systemic llx to the bond extension on AIS only, Any affected bonds with an existing assessment on CRIN were not Ex cd on the sick which will result in unmatched receivable items going forward,

Page 20

Honorable John Warren and Honorable Gary Fitzsimmons Bail Bond Clean-up Page 4 of7

RECOiVlMENDATIONS

1. Test unpaid forfeitures for foHow-up action and validity. Procedures should include continuing the practice of placing bonding companies/bondsmanlattomeys with unpaid forfeitures on the cut-off list provided to the Sheriff Bail Bond section, issuing writs of execution, and filing abstracts of judgment (now valid for twenty years). Consider referring delinquent receivables exceeding 180 days 10 the DA .- Civil Section for possible litigation and/or third party collection.

Response: The Clerks have created task forces within their specific offices to research as time allows unpaid forfeitures for follow-up action and validity. Initial priority will be glV(:n [0

bonds created on or after .January 1,2007.

2. Prioritize research of ENIO forfeitures without assessments. Prioritize forfeitures i()r those bonding companies/bondsmanla(torneys that are still active. If forfeitnres are provcn valid. accurate, and unpaid, assessments should be created through CIZr\M by the bond forfeiture clerks with collection actions pursued.

3. Develop a test environmcnt and rc-populate erroneous conversion statuses from BNI0 to AlS. Document and communicate (0 IT Services bond reporting requirerncnls withm AIS including reports containing detailed listings of non-discharged bonds written with statuses NISI and final judgment [or out-county-bondsman account number 342 by bondsman nRrnc. Clerks in conjunction with the Sheritf and DA should develop a process to monitor financial viability of insurance companies and ensurc Dallas County is listcd as creditor when insurance companies file or arc forced into bankruptcy.

4. Review forfeiture assessments on CRIN (for validity and accuracy) and corresponding bond documentation with a forfeiture status on AIS or AIBN of 'JGAS" Final Judgment Against Statc, Final Judgment Against State (No Cost), niH of Review (BORG) Judgment Against the State (No Cost), etc. Invalid assessments should be removed / cleared through ClZr,\M and incorrect assessment amounts should be revised by supervisory personnel. Reinforce training of court clerks and bond iorfeiturc staff responsible for recording assessments to not record assessments through CRA.M when judgments have been made against the State without costs due. If subsequent judicial actions (after an entry of final forfeiture judgment had been ordered by the court) result in the bond forfeiture 1lne amount set aside or reduced, the bond forfeiture clerks should correspondingly adjust the existing bond forfeiture fine amount through CRAM. Court costs, re-arrest fees, and interest accrued on the bond amollnt from (he date of forfeiture should be collectcd on special BOR's granted in accordance with Code of Criminal Procedure, § 22.17.

Response: The Clerks have created task forces within their spccific offices to research as time all.ows unpaid forfeitures for follow-up action and validity. Initial priority Ii be given to bonds created on or after January 1,2007.

5. Review forfeiture assessments on CRIN (for validity and accuracy) and corresponding bond documentation with a forfeiture statns Oll of 'PAID' or 'PlY. Invalid

Page 21

Honorable John Warren and Honorable Gary Fitzsimmons Baii Bond Clean-up Page 5 of7

assessments should be removed / cleared thTough CRAM and incorrect assessment amounts should be revised by supervisory personnel. Bonds with partial payments only that lililcd to convert from BNI0 to AIS should be identified, Clerks should request IT Services assistance to populate bond activity in AIS that failed to convert from BNl 0 (for valid unpaid bond t~)rfeiture receivables) to AIS after successful completion in a tcst environment

Response: The Clerks have created task forces within their specific offices to research as time allows unpaid forfeitures for follow-up action and validity, initial priority will be given to bonds created on or after January 1,2007,

6. Review forfeiture assessments on CHIN (for validity and accuracy) and corresponding bond documentation with a forfeiture status of 'Discharged' on AIS or 'DSG' on AIBN. Invalid assessments should be rcmovcd / cleared through CRAM and incorrect assessment amounts should be revised by supervisory personnel. Forfeited cash bonds should be accurately and timely applied to assessments, Clerks should request IT Serv; ces assiSTance to populate bond activity in AIS that failed to convert from 8N10 (for valid unpaid bond forfeiture receivables) to AIS after successful completion in a test ellvironn1ent.

Response: The Clerks have created task forces within thuir specific oHices to research as time allows unpaid forfeitures for foJ]ow-up action and validity, Initial priority will be given to bonds created on or after January 1,2007,

7, Research (for validity and accuracy) the 2561 bond receivable assessments on CRlN with limited or no information on BN10, AIS, and/or AIBN, Invalid assessments should be removed / cleared through CRAM by supervisory personnel.

8. Consider refeHing delinquent receivables exceeding 180 days to the District Attorney -Civil Section for possible l.itigation andlor third party collection,

Response: The District Attorney's ollice has presented a proposal to create a special unit to handle bail bond cases and pursue unpaid forfeitures,

9, Set bond forfeiture hearings after judgment NISI in accordance ,vitb statutes and Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants and sureties exonerated from liability of the forfeiture upon the incarceration of the defendant within! 80 clays misdemeanor and 270 days felony after the defendant's failure to appear in court are still liable for the payment of court costs, any reasonable re-ancst fees, rmd interest accrued on the bond amount hom the date of judgment NISI to the date of the defendant's incarceration in accordance with Code of Criminal Procedure, § 22, 13(a) (5) and (b),

10, Document and reinforce ongoing training requirements to comply with applicable laws and regulations for necessary system and control edits to produce accunlte and reliable information, Document and communicate to IT Services bond reporting requirements within A!S including reports containing detailed listings of non-discharged bonds written with statuses of NISI and final judgment.

Page 22

Honorable John \Van-cn and Honorable CJary Fitzsimmons Bail Bond Clean-up Pagt 6 of 7

11. Expand functionality of bond tab details to allow the clerks to record all relevant forfeiture activity, Forfeiture activity should be listed in date order processes occur and include tbe use of system edits to prevent inaccurate date entries. CJerks should be granted inquiry access rights to review all related hond information maintained by the Sheriff and visa versa.

12. Create system edits within AIS to prevent duplicate issuance of the same bond number with automated sequencing of the bond extensions. System edits should exist within A!S 10

prevent duplicate issuance of the same bond receipt number. Bond receipt history tabs and bond forfeiture detail tabs should contain the same bond company/attorney names andlor account nun1bcrs.

Response: Resolved.

13. Enter the hond fine forfeiture amount recorded by the magistrate or Judge to ATS and CRAM.

14. Complete all pending bond forfeiture actions (inclnding refund of cash bonds) prior to court ordered expunctioll of records.

Response: Agreed.

15. Record comment notations on CRIN and AIS when refunds are issued through the request for payment pro\:ess. Record cash bOlld disbursements on AIS cash bond tab (County Clerk in conjunction with IT Services developed an automated process in 201 () and relilled in 2011).

Status: Systemic process developed by IT Services for the County Clerk to automatically record the disbursement information created through Oracle Accounts Payable was not fully tested and resulted in incomplete and inaccurate available balances on A!S and duplicate payments. Additional testing and research to address these issues arc ongoing.

J 6, Review (for accuracy and validity) and correct existing assessments on non-tinal actions or llo-amount-due cases. Bonds with negative court costs balances, negative bond fine balances, or negative special fund balances should be reviewed and corrected as necessary by supervisory personnel. IT Services assistance may be required to adjust previous assessment amounts carried over from the 1989 Central Criminal Receipt System conversion.

17. Provide appellate court decisions to the bond forfeiture section for follovv-up action based on the opinion rendered.

Response: Agreed.

SUMMARY This report is intended for the information and use of the Clerks' Offices. While we have performed a limited review of bond financial records, this review will not necessarily disclose all matters of a material weakness. It is the responsibiIity of the departments to eSlablish and maintain effective internal control over compIiance with thc requirements of laws and regulations applicable.

Page 23

I-1onorable John \V,Hrcn i:lnd Honorabit Gary Fitzsimmons Bait Bond Clean-up Page 70f7

Accurate I timely recording of bond forfeiture transactions impact operational liabilities and financial risks. Identified risk factors include the amount and volume of transactions processed, the lack of a standard AIS bond reports, and the lack of an interface (which requires duplicate work effort) between AIS and the mainframe assessment system for bond forfeiture activity. Technology enhancements providing management information and outstanding work f10ws should continue. Ongoing management oversight and coordination of all responsible departments relevant 10 bond data details should be periodically affirmed. The Clerks' and Sheriff should coordinate development of additional AIS bond reports and update of bond forfeiture procedures. The Clerks' and judiciary should evaluate effect of set asides and subsequent incarceration on outstanding receivables.

Our review was conducted on a lest basis and was not designed to identi fy all deficiencies in internal control. Adherence to and follow-through with the recommendations should strengthen internal controls and compliance with Dallas County's policies and procedures.

Ce; Commissioners Court Honorable Judge Martin Lowy, LAD]

Page 24

TO:

FROM:

DATE:

SUBJ.:

DALLAS COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK GARY FITZSIMMONS

VIRGINIA ETHERLY. CHIEF DEPUTY

RON STRETCHER

GARY FITZSIMMONS

DECEMBER 6, 2011

DISTRICT CLERK'S BOND FORFEITURE AUDIT

ABSTRACT

The District Clerk sampled 192 outstanding bond forfeiture cases with NISI dates ranging from January 2007 to July 2011.

An "outstanding" hond forfeiture case is defined as a case with no discharge entered into the record.

Ofthe 192 cases, 80 were pending as of July 31,201 L A pending case would be one in which a Nisi was issued but had not heen finally adjudicated.

Of the remaining outstanding cases:

• 59% were "set aside" by the court after the issuance of the Nisi but before the case was set on scire facias docket.

• 20% of the cases resulted in a "Final Judgment Against the State" at some point in the life cycle of the bond forfeiture action. This includes both initial judgments made by the magistrate and judgments made at a new trial or on appeal.

• 6% ofthe cases were brought to resolution involving an execution issued by the clerk's office.

• 5% of the cases were denied on appeal for which a mandate was received from the Court of Appeals but the clerk had not issued an execution.

• 4% of the cases involved ATGOB's filed by the surety with the court recalling the bond forfeiture warrant or not issuing the bond forfeiture warrant.

• 4% of the cases appear to have been "dropped" when the underlying case was dismissed.

• 1 % of the cases involved overdue bills of review.

600 COMMERCE STRLET DALLAS. TEXAS 75202 (214) - 653 -7JOI FAX (214)·653 - 6634 e-mail: gCitzsimmons@dal!ascounly_org

Page 25 web site: www,dallascounty,org/distclerk/index,hlml


VlRGINIA ETIIERL Y, C! IILF DFPUTY

• 1 % of the cases were errors in which bond forfeitures were entered incorrcctly into the case record but not removed,

The District Clerk has made the following observations relative to his bond forfeiture operations:

• Lack of effective overall management and oversight of the bond forfeiture process;

• Lack of eftective management reporting tools to ensure catch and reduce the incidence of error;

• Ineffectivc communication between court clerks and the bond forfeiture desk resulting in incomplete records;

• Inadequate understanding of the bond forfeiture process and varying practices among the courts:

• The development of informal processes designed to accommodate bond forfeiture set asides in order to avoid warrant recalls;

• The inability to discharge new bonds sct by the court after the bond forfeiture action has been set aside and the original bond reinstated;

• Disconnect between the appeals desk and the bond forfeiture desk after mandates are received from the Court of Appeals;

• Accounting and data entry issues addressed in the Auditor's Report;

• AIS record is insufficiently granular to account for and track bond forfeiture activity;

• Information on bond forfeitures kept in FORVUS and AIS;

• Equipment deficits in the bond forfeiture section and the preservation of superl1uous legacy processes,

DrSCUSSION

The criminal court magistrates are deputized with the task of adjudicating bond forfeiture actions, The district clerk's bond forfeiture desk manages the process after the Judgment NlSl's are forwarded by the courts to them,

600 COMMERCE STREET DALLAS, TEXAS 75202 (214) - 653 - 7TD! FAX (214) - 653 - 6634 e-mail: [email protected]

Page 26 web site: www.dallascounty.org/distclerklindex.html


VIRGINIA ETIIERLY, CHIEF DEPUTY

Fortunately, the bond forfeiture desk is staffed with seasoned deputies with long tenure in the department. Those deputies have effectively managed the process meeting timeliness standards with a high level of accuracy,

However, the deficiencies identified in the District Clerk's audit of his business process reveal that in the absence of those deputy's experience and individual work ethic, the entire system would likely break down and result in a loss for the county, Specifically, the lack of reporting tools and consequent lack of oversight means that any systematic error is replicated throughout the process, The task of the district clerk's office is to create effective reporting tools and ensure that information is communicated appropriately between the courts, bond forfeiture desk, appeals desk and the Sheriff

The audit reveals that up to 60% or 1110re of all bond forfeiture actions are terminated within 24 hours to 2 weeks after the clerk has entered the Judgment Nisi, The frequency of these set asides has resulted in an enormous volume of recalled bond forfeiture warrants, Staff has attempted to delay the issuance of capias and citations for up to three days so as to avoid having to issue recalls, As there is a 10 day time period required for the issuance of process from the date of the Nisi, this increases the likelihood that clerks may miss the cut off time.

[n addition, set asides by the court that happen after the proeess is issued and the bond forfeiture (B/F) case is placed on the scire facias docket is not reliably being communicated to the B/F desk causing confusion and making it difficult to identify the status of the action,

The district clerk has noted a long and regrettable pattern of mismanagement in his criminal process section. That mismanagement is most acute in the appeals section, As a result, mandates received from the Court of Appeals are not being reliably routed to the B/F desk and subsequent executions not issued. The district clerk found that of the 192 cases surveyed, executions had not been issued in 6 cases returned on appeaL

The district clerk has determined that some courts are misinterpreting the nature of bond forfeiture actions such that some of those actions are being terminated when the underlying ease is dismissed or when a warrant is issued secondary to the filing of an ATGOB, In addition, it appears that there is a misunderstanding of vocabulary used to describe B/F actions, The discharge of a bond does not "discharge" the B/F actions. yet that is what appears to he occurnng.

The most difficult problem is the dispersion of eritical information between the court file, FORVUS and AIS that should all be consolidated into AIS. The AIS record does not include sufficient granular level information to suitably track the life cycle of bond forfeiture actions, After the implementation of AIS and the migration ofB/F tracking from FORVUS to AIS, no reporting capability was developed for B/F actions to replace the old FORVUS reports,

600 COMMERCE sTRITr DAI.I.AS, TEXAS 75202 (21'1)·653·7301 FAX (214) - 653 - 6634 e-mail: gCilzsimmons,J})dallascounty,org

Page 27 web site: wWVv,da!lascounty,org/distclcrk/index.html


VIRGlNIA ETHERLY, CHIEF DEPlJTY

RESOLUTION

The deficiencies previously identified make it ditlicult for management to track and report out the status of bond forfeiture actions for any given time period. However, the district clerk's audit reveals that his ofllee is reliably processing the bond forfeiture actions submitted to him by the court.

The district clerk has developed a reporting tool to assist management in the tracking of B/F cases. Further work needs to be done to perfect the report, but it is expected within the next two months.

The AIS record has been substantially modified to include granular level information. The office has eliminated the old paper "call sheets" and now manages the actions exclusively in the AIS system. Further training is needed by both the eourt clerks and appeals desk to better use the AIS system and migrate fltlly otT FORVUS. In addition, court clerks have received additional training to cnsure that information is properly communicated to the BIF desk.

It is not the district clerk's role to second guess decisions made by the judiciary. However, the district clerk does have an interest in eusuring that the county receives payment for court costs associated by his activities. The district clerk has notified the judiciary that the practice of set asides may inhibit him from collecting court costs and has requested that they moderate their practice of the same.

The appeals desk is under new management and has been given a technology overhaul. Training deficits have been identified and corrected. Mandates received from the Court of Appeals secondary to bond forfeiture actions are now being reliably transmitted to the B/F desk so that executions may be issued.

The district clerk continues his nse of the "courtesy call" to sureties prior to the issuance of an execution. That practice has been very successful in ensuring payments are received without the necessity of issuing the executions and abstracts.

Beginning in January, it is expected that management will produce a monthly bond forfeiture rcport documenting activity for the past month along with outstanding issues. This report will be submitted with criminal sections monthly reporting and reviewed by senior management at the monthly meeting. This will ensure accuracy and accountability.

The Dallas County Auditor has identified procedures needed to ensure that the AIS record matches the FORVUS financial records. In addition, the auditor has identified a backlog of cases stretching back some 40 years in which financial documents do not renect the court's record. The district clerk will be concentrating on reviewing and perfecting records from January 1,2007 to present and will address older records after he is confident that there are no outstanding issues involving current records.

600 COMMERCE STREET DALLAS, TLXAS 75202 (214) ~ 653 - 730] FAX (214) - 653 - 6634 e-mail: gfitzsiml1lol1s@dallascounty,org

Page 28 web site: www,dallascounly,org/distclcrklindcx,html


VIRGlNli\ ETI-IFRLY, CHieF DEPUTY

GLOBAL RECOMMENDATIONS

Local Rules for the criminal district courts should be adopted by the judiciary stipulating the process for handling bond forfeiture actions, the issuance of warrants, the use of set asides and rules governing the submission of ATGOB's.

Forms documenting the reasons for set asides submitted by defense attorneys or sureties should be implemented similar to those used in Travis County to ensure the process has maximum transparency.

A standard set-aside "order" should be implemented in each ofthe courts rather than the use of the "stamp" on the docket sheet.

Support the development of a District Attorney bond forfeiture team and develop a close working relationship to ensure accurate and timely communication and movement on issues.

Develop a method for pursuing pre-trial release bond forfeiture actions.

Improve communication between the Magistrate Court at Sterret and the courts.

Develop an appropriate system for routing Sheriff Verifications to the courts.

600 COMMERCE STREET DALLAS. Tf;XAS 75202 (214) - 653 - 7301 FAX (214) - 653 - 6634 e-mail: gfitzsimmons@dallascounty,org

Page 29 web site: www.dallascounty,orgidistclerkfindcx_html

QUESTION PRESENTED:

What recommendations would you make in creating a bail bond unit for the Dallas County Criminal District Attorney's Ojjice?

General Rules and Law:

"The laws of Texas vest in district and county attorneys the exclusive responsibility and control of criminal prosecutions and certain other types of proceedings." ivfeshell v. State, 739 S.W.2d 246, 259 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987); TEX. CONST. Art. V, § 21; TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 2.01;; TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 44.157. While bail bond forfeitures follow the rules of civil procedure, they are substantively criminal cases. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 22.10; Dees v. State, 865 S.W.2d 461, 463 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992); Williams v. ""tate, 707 S.W.2d 40, 43 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986); International Fidelity Insurance Company and State, No.1 0-03-178-CR, 2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 10658 (Tex. App.---Waco 2003). Therefore, the District Attorney has a core function of prosecuting bail bond forfeitures.

Nevertheless, the prosecution of bail bond forfeitures requires a co-operative effort among the District Attorney, County and District Clerks, Sheriff s Department, Judges, and Bail Bond Board. Anyone of the departments can cause the whole system to fail through either a failure to follow the law, or a failure to co-operate with one or more of the other departments. Rebuilding a bond forfeiture program for Dallas County, given good co-operation among the departments, will require two to five years. There may need to be changes in policies and procedures in most of the departments and offices.

The Process:

The forfeiture process begins with the defendant's failure to appear at any proceeding at which his presence is required. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 22.01. In most counties, the Judges call the announced and posted docket and, within a reasonable time period after the stated appearance time, will direct the bailiff to call the defendant, and will record the failures to appear. When the docket is called, the prosecutor should request bond forfeiture on each case where the defendant failed to appear timely. The granting of the judgment nisi is a ministerial duty once the elements are present. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 22.0 I; Allegheny Mutual Casualty Company v. State, 710 S.W.2d 139 (Tex. App.-]-[ouston [14th Disl.] 1986). However, in Dallas County, the Judges, while posting dockets, allow defendants and attorneys to appear at will. This makes the systematic forfeiture of bonds exceptionally difficult and requires prosecutors to be constantly on call. The Dallas County open docket call may be unique. Dallas County does not make use of the "certijlcate of call" for the bailiffs and relics upon the Judge and the court staff to keep bond forfeiture records. The certificates of call are made a part of the court's record and are elsewhere used as evidentiary support in forfeiture cases. (The law does not require the use of certiflcates of call.)

Once the failure to appear occurs and is recorded, the clerks (County or District, respectively) prepare a judgment nisi for the Judge's signature. The clerks routinely delay the processing and flling of judgments nisi because of the large number of judicial set asides and declarations of insufilciency. The judgment nisi is the basis for the State's litigation over the bail bond and begins the enforcement proceeding. Cheatam v. State, 13 Tex. C1. App. 32 (1884); Swaim v. Slate, 498 S.W.2d 988 (Tex. Crim. App. 1973). Unless waived by the surety, the clerks issue citations to the surety and notice is provided to the defendant. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.

Page 30

ANN. art. 22.04. After citation is issued, the clerks place the cases on a civil docket or a scire facias docket. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 22.10. Dallas County uses the scire facias docket format.

Both the surety and the principal are entitled to the benefits of any civil proceeding including discovery and a trial on the merits of the bond forfeiture. This is an adversarial proceeding as is any criminal trial, but in bond forfeitures, the State is also entitled to conduct discovery. Kubosh v. State, No. 01-04-00268-CV, 2005 Tex. App. LEXIS 998 (Houston [1st Dist.] 2005). Once the notices for trial are given in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure and the local rules, the case may proceed to trial on the merits or the District Attorney may negotiate a settlement. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 22.125. Currently, in Dallas County, the District Attorney does not appear to be involved in the negotiation or trial of misdemeanor bond forfeitures. Felony bond forfeitures, however, are handled in magistrate courts and prosecutors are present but are rarely in charge of the proceedings on behalf of the State.

Even though the State may obtain a final judgment in a bond forfeiture case, the surety can delay the collection of a final judgment through legal maneuvers for two to six years. (This is the reason some counties set up settlement schcdules in which the various remedies such as appeal, remittitur, and bills of review are waived.) Even if the connty collects the judgment from a surety, the surety can force a refund from the county through the statutory remittitur process for up to two years if the principal is apprehended within the two years following the judgment. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 22.16 and 22.17. An equitable bill of review may even be possible for up to four years after the judgment.

Stalling for a hail bond unit in the District Attorney's Office:

Experience has shown that to have an efficient and meaningful bail bond forfeiture unit in the District Attorney's Office, there is a need for the following: two attorneys (One ADA VI and One ADA V, fll~all bail bond attorneys will h~<;glJir£sLl<Lhave civil litigation experIence and be subject to licensing in federal district courts and the 5[h Circuit Court of Appeals].

RecljJonsibiiities The supervisory attorney will be responsible for administrative duties as well as being

an active litigator with the other attorney working on felonies and misdemeanors case. Since bond cases may be appealed to the intermediate appellate courts and the Court of Criminal Appeals, the attorneys will need to be able to address those appeals. To collect on final judgments on bondsmen outside Dallas County, the attorneys may be required to engage in litigation in other counties that will require more than a novice level of litigation and procedural experience. If a bondsman files bankruptcy or the insurance company is placed in receivership, the bond litigation will move to the federal courts and become subject to that appellate process and another set of rules of procedure. I

Two legal secretaries (LS 10). The secretaries will need experience in developing and maintaining forms related to litigation as well as experience in formatting and filing appellate briefs. They will also assist in obtaining and organizing the documentary evidence for hearings and trials.

I Harris County's Chief of Bail Bond Forfeitures indicates that she now spends a substantia! portion of her training budget and time with bankruptcy seminars. Mlgigi'3ri'tion Building 411 Elm Street 5th Floor Dallas, Texas 75202 214/653,7358 Fax 214/653,6134

In most counties with bond forfeiture departments, the forfeiture attorneys report to the chief of the civil division and operate out of the civil division. The location of the bail bond forfeiture unit and its lines of reporting arc important. The resolution of the bond forfeiture matter should not be an element of the criminal case and should not be connected directly. It is not uncommon for bond forfeiture to continue well after the defendant has been tried and sentenced. The independence and separation of the criminal case and the boud forfeiture may best be compared to the similar process in Chaptcr 59 asset forfeiture cases and the underlying criminal proceeding. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 59.

Bond forfeitures are paper intensive and the State presents the majority of its ease through documentary evidence which must be prepared in advance. While one attorney can generally prosecute numerous cases, a minimum of two attorneys should be available to handle the various matters which may arise and to cover any scheduling conflicts. Legal secretaries are essential because of the volume of paperwork and need to obtain documents from various criminal courts. They also route the various notices and J1Iings to the proper case files and generally keep the dockets updated for the attorneys. An investigator is often needed to serve subpoenas and obtain supporting evidence.

A bond forfeiture attorney must work with all other departments, including the District and County Clerks, the Sherifrs Department, the judiciary, and fellow prosecutors. The bond forfeiture attorney must have considerable discretion in litigation including the ability to compromise or dismiss cases. Once a bond forfeiture unit is established, the District Attorney should set out a general policy and guidelines for the prosecution of bail bond forfeitures and the collection of final judgments. Line prosecutors should receive training in routine procedures which alIcct the prosecution of bail bond forfeitures. Such policies and guidelines need not be in writing; the general rules to follow in bond forfeitures for both the prosecutors and the judiciary are found in the Code of Criminal Procedure Article 22.

General Duties:

Prosecute or negotiate settlcments in both misdemeanor and felony bond forfeiture cases to obtain final judgments. TEX. CODE CRIN!. PROC. ANN. art. 22.125.

Attend (prosecute) hearings on motions for new trial, applications for remittitur, statutory bills ofreview (2 years), and equitable bills of review ( 4 years)

Advise County and District Clerks, Treasurer, Auditor, Bail Bond Board, and Commissioners Court (the bail bond funds collected go to the general fund TEX. CODE CRIN!. PROC. ANN. art. 103.0(4) on bail bond issues and procedures (this is a county attorney function subsumed in the criminal district attorney duties). This can be a substantial duty and very time consu1111ng.

Monitor and assist prosecutors in obtaining judgments nisi hom courts

Be prepared to appear in court for motions to set aside, CCP 17.19 affidavits, and a variety of attempts by bondsmen or attorneys to affect the judgments nisi

Monitor issuance of writs of execution and filing of abstracts of judgment for in county final judgments

Mmilli'3~tion Building 411 Elm Street 5" Floor Dallas, Texas 75202 214/653-7358 Fax 214/653-6134

Establish and prosecute the collection of flnal judgments on out of county bonds 111

conj unction with the District and County Clerks including abstracting and writs of execution

Monitor the issuance of citations and notices from Clerks' offices

Brief and argue appeals of bail bond cases (this depends upon DA office policy on appeals)

Monitor the filing of the CCP 17,16 affidavits to release sureties (new duty from May, 2011 statute SB 877)

Monitor and report unpaid final judgments to the Bail Bond Board along with the clerks

Represent the State (or the County) in both state and federal courts when the prosecution and collection of final judgments moves into bankruptcy or receivership litigation

What will a bail bond prosecution unit cost?

The funding for a bail bond unit will cost the County approximately, $382,696,57 in salaries and benefits annually, Please see the attached chart of salaries including benefits for the members of a bail bond prosecution unit.

What can the bail bond prosecution uuit provide for the County?

Currently, based upon reports from the District and County Clerks, the County has collected approximately $845,000,00 in misdemeanor bond forfeitures and approximately $237,0()(),00 in felony bond forfeitures? The following counties, which have smaller populations than Dallas County, and each county has a dedicated bail bond prosecution unit and have recently had the following annual results):

Tarrant County - $1,500,000,00 Denton County - $700,000,00 Ellis County - $200,000,00 (pop, 170,000) Travis County - $2,000,000,00 El Paso County - $850,000,00

The Harris County prosecutors continue to lead in the prosecution of forfeitures both in tcrms of the development of the law and in the number of collections, They have experienced a substm1tial reduction in staff and in the rate of collection, Harris County reports approximately $2,700,00(),00 in annual collections,

By forming a bail bond prosecution unit and co-ordinating the efforts of the District and County Clerks, the Sheriffs Department, the Bail Bond Board, the judiciary, and the line prosecutors, Dallas County should be able to double its current bail bond forfeiture collections, Depending upon the future actions of the Legislature 4, Dallas County should be able to achieve

2 This makes $1.082,000,00 total collections for Iisca12011. 3 The listed counties were kind enough to provide data estimating their collections over at least the past two years. Each county reports substantial declines in collections over the past few years. 4 A brief review of legislative history beginning in 2003 to the present, reveals that the bondsmen have been successful in modifying the variolls codes related to bail bond forfeitures to make it very difncult for the State to collect and retain 100% of a bail bond forfeiture. Even after a final judgment, the bondsmen petition the courts to order counties to refund a portion or all of their collections on a bail bond for up to two years after the payment of P'1lgi&i'3~tion Building 411 Elm Street 5th Floor Dallas, Texas 75202 214/653-7358 Fax 214/653-6134

and maintain annual bail bond collections of approximately $2,000,000.00. This substantial increase of collections will not be immediate, but will require from two to five years to achieve through education, training, and policy changes throughout the County.

the judgment TEX, CODE CRIM. PROC. A:\N. 22.16. There has been a statewide, bi-annual decline in bond forfeiture collections since 2006. Mlgigi'3'1'tion Building 411 Elm Street 5" Floor Dallas. Texas 75202 214/653-7358 Fax 214/653-6134

Monthly Service Monthly Annual Medicare FICA Retirement Insurance Annual Monthly

Salary Incentive Salary Salary 1.2S% 6.4% 10.4% Total Total Assistant District Attorney VI $9,425.24 $400.00 $9,825.24 $117,902.88 $1,709.59 $7,309.98 $12,261.90 $8,100.00 $147,284.35 $12,273.70

Assistant District Attorney V $8,270.48 $160.00 $8,430.48 $101,165.76 $1,466.90 $6,272.28 $10,521.24 $8,100.00 $127,526.18 $10,627.18

Legal Secretary 10 $3,236.13 $0.00 $3,236.13 $38,833.56 $563.09 $2,407.68 $4,038.69 $8,100.00 $53,943.02 $4,495.25

Lega I Secreta ry 10 $3,236.13 $0.00 $3,236.13 $38,833.56 $563.09 $2,407.68 $4,038.69 $8,100.00 $53,943.02 $4,495.25

$382696.57

Page 35

DALLAS COUNTY BAIL BOND TASK FORCE

PROCESS RECOMMENDATIONS

Page 36

Table of Contents

Title Page

Introduction ........................................................................ . 3

Discussion Points .................................................................. . 3

IT Issues & Information Transfer ............................................. . 4

Discharge of Surety's Liability Due to Defendant Detained 17.16 ...... . 5-6

Current Affidavit to Go Off Bond 17.19 ...................................... . 7-9

Bcst Practices Court Appearance Model. ..................................... . 10

"F 'I 'N tOt' " . al ure IS 0 an p IOn ...................................................... .. 11-12

The Cost of Failure ............................................................... .. 13-15

Closing ... 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0 ••••••••••••• 0 •••••••••••••••• IS

2

Page 37

DALLAS COUNTY BAIL BOND TASK FORCE PROCESS RECOMMENDATIONS

INTRODUCTION

We want to thank the Dallas County Bail Bond Task Force for providing us the opportunity to help create a successful system that assures; Transparency, Accountability and Fiscal Oversight, while maintaining a primary focus on Public Sc~fety and Good Public Policy.

We identified several areas of concern and places we could provide input and recommendations that would be helpful in the architecture of a successful system.

Our goal is to help Dallas County create a "best practices model" as it relates to the release and supervision of a criminal defendant as he/she moves through the criminal justice system.

We have identified the "stakeholders" as; (1) criminal delendants, (2) the judiciary, (3) Dallas County, (4) the surety companies and (5) the taxpaying citizens of Dallas County, which require us to consider the following when managing a system or creating procedures or protocol;

1. Public Safety 2. Good Public Policy 3. Transparency 4. Accountability 5. Fiscal Oversight

DISCUSSION POINTS

We think the following are areas to which we can give insight and guidance;

1. IT Issues & Information Exchange

2. 17.16 and 17.19 process and procedure with flowchart

3. "Best Practices" Appearance Model and flowchart

3

Page 38

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ISSUES AND TRANSFER

JAIL INFO A V AILABLE FOR

i DEFENDANT , RELEASE ON

COUNTY WEBSITE

I COURT , NOTIFICATIONS

• UPDATE OF COURT RESETS

• CHANGESOF STATUSES

• UNFILED CASES

• NOTRESET CASES

ONLY PARTIAL INFO STILL HAVE TO ALL REAL - 11ME AVAILABlLE PHYSICALLY INFORMATION

CONTACT DALLAS ' IliA T IS NEEDED , COUNTY AND TO FACILITATE ! UTILIZE COUNTY 11IE 11MELY ,

'I MANPOWER TO , RELEASE OPA I

OBTAIN ~DEFE.,I\II},,JNT FR, OM I .1 ____ iV F'--.C",,) i",? ",I1A"-,-"-l1",U,,,lv,--' ___ "" 11IL,-,-, C"Ol"",,',N T Y J,_.",I.,IL I

-----~=--·-r' , -NO STANDARDIZED FORMAT OR UNIFORMITY OF COURT NOTICIS, TIlEY RANGE FROM: PHONE CALL, US MAIL, FAX, EMAIL,

, OR NO NOTICE AT ALL

"--~~"-~---"-

• *PRINTED I II,ICIRONIC FORMAT DELIVERED WEEKLY

• 'CASE STATUS NOT CLEARLY DEFINED

• *NO CLEAR DEFINED PROCEDURE RELATING TO NOT FILED CASES

• "LACK OF

1, a~o's OF MANUAL / PHYSICAL INTERACTIONS WITH

, DALLAS COUNTY

II STAFF EACH MONTH h-'XHA USl1NG 100 's

I OF HOURS OF

jJ'VfANPOWER

lIA VING SURETY EMAIL ADDRESSES ON RECORD WITH COUR,/;') AND

: COUNTY WOULD /JELl' WITH NOT! FlCA 110N PRACTICES,

1,000 's OF MANUAL il THE -

'PHYSICAL 'DEVELOPMENTOF INTERAC710NS WITH AN ELECTRONTe DALLAS COUlI/TY FORM/1 T THAT STAFF EACH MONTH : DELIVERS ' EXHAUS71NG 100's I TRANSP,JRENCY AS OF lIOURS OF IT REIA TES TO MANPOWER COURT RESETS

, AND STATUS ClIANGES OF CURRENT CASES

TRANSPARENCY FOR CASES Nor RESET & i

L-_______ '--_u_N_F_ll_.I'_:D ___ l, _______ -'-_______ _ 4

Page 39

Discharge of Surety's Liability Due to Defendant Detained 17.16

i s)"u"" \'\!.M r ,11H C'I'

[)'2 t,;:'1 (I '8nd f'i:.1CE Hold

N(;tifit,;tr,:,n

f'Ji :::d·::-rn ~:,:tn'>r ((>!Jntv'CiBtl

2. Fil·~ jtxmp (II

MUst 8+ k~d To 8,:;.nd De::;!

1" l~d

5tq:. ,tel!

2 Sh<2niff \}/iH Notifv til.::!) ~<o2nt t\! Oist;ietCh:rLfoF t;1isci2fneanof to County Clerk rvllsd;:;:meanOf to DA offici:::

1",1 isd'~ln<:,'in':'t

,)1 F,~I'>n,;

!Case fkt Fdd! (;':!l>?!' .:,1 Fil0.

1(&".:;

(C'!.II t I:':

JUJlS(];ct!on

5

Page 40

!:;su;: V'/;I r,~nh)r

Dd;in bnd Pi)·: e Hold

;C,i,;':; Fil2d) (ourtOf

Juri:r,dictioli

Art. 17.16. DISCHARGE OF LIABILITY; SURRENDER OR INCARCERATION OF PRINCIPAL BEFORE FORFEITURE. (a) A surety may before forfeiture relieve himself of his undertaking by:

(I) surrendering the accused into the custody of the sheriff of the county where the prosecution is pending; or

(2) delivering to the sheriff of the county where the prosecution is pending an affidavit stating that the accused is incarcerated in federal custody, in the custody of any state, or in any county of this state.

(b) For the purposes of Subsection (a)(2) of this article, the bond is discharged and the surety is absolved of liability on the bond on the sheriffs verification of the incarceration of the accused.

Acts 1965, 59th Leg., vol. 2, p. 317, ch. 722.

Texas Legislature Website: TX.gov

6

Page 41

CURRENT AFFIDAVIT TO GO OFF BOND -17.19

8,:.nd5n\~"n:' C:nnpk,t,,,,; F,>nn

Au.)ra:ng to :)t;~t\J!!i: «~ -;,;nds NGU;:ultk-n To /Ut,>rf1«Y Of Pec,)rd

Fik··:Lin Lld?htl"te

i'Jnri>d'ii5e)

7

Fil",dilo (vUlt

:i;l.o'i C'l5'?!

PlddltV)JlJdg~

"1' JiF1'l,,z'§

F',pre$ent",tiv2

\\.' .11 j .JI',t I ~ru",d

b" Judge

Surety Enn,H b W,;! r_~nt i 5 )21\',,(1 k,i.'N'dtng to

SH\tut(~

Art. 17.19. [285] [333] [321] SURETY MAY OBTAIN A WARRANT. (a) Any surety, desiring to surrender his principal and after notifying the principal's attorney, if the principal is represented by an attorney, in a manner provided by Rule 21 a, Texas rules of Civil Procedure, of the surety's intention to surrender the principal, may file an affidavit of such intention before the court or magistrate before which the prosecution is pending. The affidavit must state:

Page 43

(1) the court and cause number of the case;

(2) the name of the defendant;

(3) the offense with which the defendant is charged;

(4) the date of the bond;

(5) the cause for the surrender; and

(6) that notice of the surety's intention to surrender the principal has been given as required by this subsection.

(b) If the court or magistrate finds that there is cause for the surety to surrender his principal, the court shall issue a warrant of arrest or capias for the principal. It is an affirmative defense to any liability on the bond that:

(1) the court or magistrate refused to issue a warrant of arrest or capias for the principal; and

(2) after the refusal to issue the warrant or capias the principal failed to appear.

(c) If the court or magistrate before whom the prosecution is pending is not available, the surety may deliver the affidavit to any other magistrate in the county and that magistrate, on a finding of cause for the surety to surrender his principal, shall issue a warrant of arrest or capias for the principal.

(d) An arrest warrant or capias issued under this article shall be issued to the sheriff of the county in which the case is pending, and a copy of the warrant or capias shall be issued to the surety or his agent.

8

(e) An arrest warrant or capias issued under this article may be executed by a peace officer, a security officer, or a private investigator licensed in this state.

Acts 1965, 59th Leg., vol. 2, p. 317, ch. 722, eff. Jan. 1, 1966.

Amended by Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 1047, Sec. 2, eff. June 20,

1987; Acts 1989, 7lst Leg., ch. 374, Sec. 3, eff. Sept. 1,1989;

Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 1506, Sec. 3, eff. Sept. 1, 1999; Acts

2003, 78th Leg., ch. 942, Sec. 4, eff. June 20, 2003.

SECTION 2. Articles 17 .19(b) and (c), Code of Criminal Procedure, are amended to read as follows: (b) In a prosecution pending before a court, if [li] the court [or magistrate] finds that there is cause for the surety to surrender the surety's [fiis 1 principal, the comi shall issue a [warmnt of arrest or] capias for the principal. In a prosecution pending before a magistrate, if the magistrate finds that there is cause for the surety to surrender the surety's principal, the magistrate shall issue a warrant of arrest for the principal. It is an affirmative defense to any liability on the bond that: (1) the court or magistrate refused to issue a capias or warrant of arrest [or capic.s 1 for the principal; and (2) after the refusal to issue the capias or warrant of arrest. [or capias] the principal failed to appear. (c) If the court or magistrate before whom the prosecution is pending is not available, the surety may deliver the affidavit to any other magistrate in the county and that magistrate, on a finding of cause for the surety to surrender the surety's [fiis] principal, shall issue a warrant of arrest [or capias] for the principal.

Texas Legislature: TX.gov

9

Page 44

BEST PRACTICES COURT APPEARANCE MODEL

( ('Uil

( ,);·2 F>2 ;.~ t Dr

10

f "deli" \(, Ai:,p~Jr i.i:;'<10 uj:,n:;\;\0rY)'i') f'HWI;

B'A,:,f F -:'ll'litur", / '/ ,'n rimt Is $(10 d

,\qt,jln.,tiC: -::0

[,>,},/ [-j [-:·1 ;'1\~', ': ,.j-,<',;; {hi!

r,. ,'.,: -:.hlts "~""-'",,'-~~

Pr,;,bh?rn Unr8,~c,L'0d

Best Practices Model "Failure is not an Option"

When given the opportunity to help with the collaboration of designing a system that would be a benefit to the entire criminal justice process and the tax payer of Dallas County, we knew this would be no easy task but we're excited about the opportunity.

The first thing we felt we must do is identify the stakeholders and how this new system will affect each of them either positively or negatively.

As we identified earlier we believe the stakeholders are: 1) Defendant 2) Judiciary 3) Dallas County 4) Surety Companies or Bondsmen 5) Citizens or TaxPayer.

We wanted a system that is predicated on success and not incentivized by failure. We feel this is a must. After reading some of the articles and seeing that they were basing success on how well one county did over another by how well they handled their failures.

Our goal is to have a system that circumvents failure as often as possible and promotes the success of having the criminal defendant complete his or her case successfully. We found that when the defendant was unsuccessful we all became unsuccessful, there clearly were no winners. With that in mind, we identified the important topics, which were kept in mind as we built the "Best Practices Model".

1) Public Safety 2) Public Policy 3) Transparency 4) Accountability 5) Fiscal Oversight

Here are a few resources we used in gathering information to build our "Best Practices Model" titled "Failure is not an Option".

1) We have compiled and gathered information from Legal Scholars, Criminal Justice Experts and Attorneys. These professionals had experience in criminal defense, advising counties and bail bond boards across the state and together have more than 75 years of practical experience.

11

Page 46

2) We also used excerpts of other successful "Best Practices Models" we found working well in other counties. We used information from Harris, Tarrant, Collin, and Dallas counties as well as information from the award winning bail bond program printed in the Texas Association of Counties (TAC) newsletter from Nacogdoches County.

3) We also used recommendations from the (NGA Center) "National Governors Association Center for Best Practices to build this model.

Research Validated Best

i Practice

A program, activity or strategy that has the highest degree of proven effectiveness supported by objective and

_-t~comprehensive research and evaluatio.::.:n,,-. -------------1

, Field Tested

I Best

A program, activity or strategy that has been shown to work effectively and produce successful outcomes and is supported to some degree by subjective and objective data sources.

I Practice

Promising , Practice

A program, activity or strategy that has worked -~ithin on~ II

organization and shows promise during its early stages for I becoming a best practice with long term sustainable impact. A, I promising practice must have some objective basis for claiming I I effectiveness and must have the potential for replication among other or anizations.

As used in the (NGA Center) chart

4) We used our "Field Tested Best Practices" and practical experience as it relates to a defendant successfully completing their court cases. We used our model of: "Issues vs. Problems" - Solve the "Issues" before they become "Problems".

On any given day in Dallas County 15% of our case load of defendants required to appear in court are not reset the following day. After our Court Service Representatives (CSR) stmi to work on the "Issues" we will solve all but about Yo to J % ofthe cases in this category in just a few days. Thus, circumventing an "Issue" from becoming a "Problem" that is costly to all stakeholders.

5) We also explored the use of the latest technology and software to track all systems.

12

Page 47

THE COST OF F AlLURE

Consequences of a Failure to Appear

When a defendant fails to appear for a required proceeding, the presiding judge or magistrate generally issues a Bench Warrant for his or her arrest. The defendant

may remain a fugitive, or, as more likely, he/she may return to court either by surrender or apprehension.

If the defendant surrenders to the court, the court will recall the warrant, the

defendant will be re-booked, and a new proceeding may be held to re-determine the conditions of release. If the defendant is arrested, he will be booked and detained. Upon booking the defendant appears in court where a new determination

of release conditions will be made. A hearing may be held to determine whether the original bail bond, if there was one, is to be re-instituted or forfeited.

It is clear that a Failure to Appear (FT A) imposes additional costs on the taxpayers

and on the general population. Even if the individual surrenders there are additional process and detention costs. Re-arrest of a defendant imposes even greater costs on the taxpayer. If the defendant remains a fugitive all of the original

booking and hearing costs are wasted and the integrity of the criminal justice

system is fUliher compromised. Every defendant that remains a fugitive

undermines the crime control efforts of local government.

Costing the Consequences of Failure to Appear

In order to gain some appreciation of the magnitude of the costs that every failure

to appear imposes on taxpayers and on society in general, it is helpful to attach dollar values to both their relatively straight-forward budgetary (or fiscal) impacts as well as to their more difficult at assess social costs. In previous study of this

topic Steven Twist and Michael K. Block, PhD. Professor of Economics & Law University of Arizona, developed a rather detailed set of failure to appear cost estimates based on data they were able to obtain form LA County. A very brief summary of their estimates appear in the tables. In both cases the costs have been

re-indexed and expressed in current (Year 2010) dollars.

13

Page 48

Table 1 Table 1 presents the budgetary costs of a failure I Estimated Budgetary Costs of (FT A) to appear corresponding to the method by

which the defendant is returned to court. It I a FT A by Type of Eventual Return-- Current Dollars includes estimates of the additional budgetary

. Return Budgetary . costs attributable to an FT A if the defendant Method Cost eventually surrenders; if the defendant is arrested Surrender $572.21 on a Bench Warrant for the FTA, if the defendant

-is eventually rearrested for a new crime or ifthe Arrest on a $1,026.00

Bench defendant is never returned and remains a

i Warrant [ fugitive. In the latter case we consider that all

Arrest on a $3,330.35 costs before the defendant became a fugitive are

New Crime wasted once he/she becomes a fugitive. Hence,

Fugitive/No $2,639.71 all of the expenditure up to the time the defendant [

Return , failed to appear is considered a budgetary cost of I I this type of FT A.

Table 2 Estimated Average Budgetary and Social Costs of aFT A by Type of Release -

Current Dollars Type of Release Average

I Average Social I Average Total C~

Budgetary Cost Cost Surety Bond $1,361.36 $8,035.34 $9,396.69 RORICR $1,559.47 . $11,687.76 $13,247.24

-

In Table 2, under the column labeled "Average Budgetary Costs", we report the

results of taking the costs reported in table 1 and weighting them by the proportion of defendants who are returned by each method. This weighting generates an

estimate of the average budgetary cost of an FTA. Because Surety Bond releases

and ROR releases have different return profiles they have different estimated

budgetary costs.

Since counting only the budgetary cost of an FTA that ends with the defendant in fugitive status seriously underestimates the impact on society of that event, we also calculated a social cost of fugitive status. This social cost calculation (based again on the previous study of LA County) attempts to attribute to fugitive reduction in

crime control that result from their status and the increased costs of crime associated with that reduction in crime control. The previous study suggests that every fugitive costs society more than $36,524.25 in lost crime control benefits.

14

Page 49

I-Ience since the average FT A in these large urban counties has between a 22% and 33% chance of ending in fugitive status after 1 year, we estimated that the social cost is likely to be between $8,035.35 and $11,687.76 per FTA.

*For a more complete discussion of our methodology in calculating social cost see, Runaway Losses; Estimating the Cost of Failure to Appear in the Los Angeles Criminal Justice System.

Closing

As we see the true cost associated with a failure it is easy to recognize that it is not only our "Goal" but our "Role" and "Responsibility" to create a system with procedures that give the defendant his or her best opportunity to be successful in completing their obligation to the Judicial System, Dallas County, The Surety and the Tax Payer.

15

Page 50

Oallas County Bail Task Force

Second Letter of Recommendations

Mark A Monroe 257 South Riverlront Blvd Dallas, TX 75207 T 214.526.4272 F 214.741.3505 markm@de1taba:!.com WW'N.dellabaJ1.com

Page 51

Delta Bail Bonds

Required

Current Dallas County Inmate Information Currently, the most efficient \Nay to gather information about an inrnate in Danas County is through the use of the online

public access website. Vvith a few, substantial exceptions this website can provide the majority of intorrnation necessary

to complete a bond form. Although the critical iniormat:on is addressed,

·,.f·Al,..,'" '-' '''''''''''~

'" ", "," .... ,,-,'"'~ ~"".--

'=--,""" J"'-",_"~,,,,.,,

,~.,~-~",.

,,,..,.'x • ..,.,.

, .. -~' '" ,.,.,,' ",., ',." ,~,~.,. ..... ;;. ,",,,-,-~, , '" ,~~

bondsmen generaliy !ike to have more lnformation to assess risk.

The most commonly used access address is:

It contains a tuilitst of charges and important defend(.mt iniorrnaiion, i.e. name,

date of birth and book-in number. However it does not list the defendants address

information or emergency contact information.

A less common access point with more information portinent to bail bondsmen (specificaily. the defenciant's listed hOll',8

address) can be found at this 3clclress:

However the second listing roquiros a login/password to access. The

information regarding it existence is not actively given out to baiJ

bondsmen. ,\ljost bail !iC8nsee~3 use the public access pOint anej rely on

co-signors to give accurate !nfOnll3t\on about the cJejendant. it is strictly

pass along by 'word of mouth'.

Both of these system fail to update once a defendant is booked¥in and

arraigned, The systems do not olways accurately reflect the status of the

defendants INS standing. If a defendants bond ar-flount is cllanged tor

any reason it '-Nii! not be shown through this access point If any cllaroos

are dropped after a defendDnt !lns tjeen arraigned. they wiH not be

removed f!'On"! the wob listing. Ail of this results ill mDny CiJll~) to tll(:; jail

i"equesting iilforrnation ,J\)out tllB defendant Keep In rnind thai IS

8aii Task Face RecorniTlsndalions .. Letter 2

Page 52

Delta Bail Bonds

that a defendants family may call multiple bail bond companies. It is not uncommon for friends, co-conspirators, victims

and spouses to all work unbeknownst to the others, gathering information. The result can be hundreds of phone calls to

jail regarding one defendant. Bail bondsmen serve as a good gateway to disseminate information to loved ones. The

bondsmen usually keep a log regarding incoming calls to reduce duplicity in their workload also. If web access is

inaccurate or not working, the jail will immediately be overwhelmed with phone calls. The "on hold" times can quickly

exceed 1 hour and then the defendants family starts to call the jail directly, thinking that the bondsmen are not trying to

get the information.

Ouick list of required information:

DEFENDANT INFORMATION

NAME

DATE OF" BIRTH

ADDRESS

RACe:

GENDER

PICTURE

BOOK IN NUMBER

BOOK IN DATE

LIST OF REQUESTED INFORMATION

CONTACT PHONE NUMBER

Al-IAS INFORMATION

HEIGHT I WEIGHT

IOENTIFYING MARKS

CHARGE INFORMATION

TITLE/STYLE OF CHARGE

CASE NUMBER

ARRAIGNING JUDGE

BOND AMOUNT

FILING AGENCY

LIST OF DEFENDANTS PRIOR CONVICTIONS

INS STATUS! NONE I STILL.. INVESTIGATING I HOLD FOR INS

POL.ICE REPORT

The most important thing that needs to change is the way IT updates the status of current inmates. The present system

does not update the inmate status in real time, if at all. Additional information would helpful in asseSSing risk.

Dallas County Court Information

As a defendant moves from the jail system to the court system the information needed to track, update and process the

defendant becomes more complicated. In addition to identifying information, now the bondsmen need case information.

Although the weekly report generated by the county provides a great deal of the information needed, it is difficult to

process that data without an expensive conversion process. The burden undoubtedly falls on the bondsman to

manipulate that data as his business requires. If a bondman can not find the necessary information in the data he has

been given then it is safe to aSsume the he will contact the court clerks or the Sheriffs department trying to locate the

missing information. If an effort to reduce the burden on the county personnel, it is recommended that the county be

proactive in decimating as much information as possible to the bondsmen. This strategy will help move cases swiftly

through the courts system.

The current system has two main ways to collect information in additional to the county's weekly bail bond report.

Bail Task Force Recommendations - Letter 2

Page 53

2

:7',

>

;~

Delta Bail Bonds

Oallas County CrJmln~! Background Sstlrch SONic!)

::'

; ." ,',.

.. '~'~~,

" ": \:, 'S: ~,," ,~-

2) bltp:ilGoucleC.QlJl ..... cla1l8Scollnly orgL,ouyf

The first is by Bccessing the county web site and navigating through the

public records sections. TIilS '.vill generate J. case screen lIi8t appears to be

directly linked to Ule old FOFiBUS systeni. We have found !n10rr'(18tlon in this

system can be up to two \..veeks behind actual events and It is VC':JY cilfficult

for a novice to interact with. It is unrealistic to expect any company to use

this method to generate court dale not"lncations. However it 'IS useful in

90tting disposition Dnd helping defenejants ,n(li'JidllaHy track their cases.

Unfortunately, a case wi:! only appear in this system after it has ()8en Tiled by

the DA This makes it difficult to confirm if an older cases has been

dismissed or silnp!y never med on.

Another commonly used method of tracking criminal caSes is the new "On Base" systerrt It is much rnors usef frienclly

and the actual court documents are available for viewing. lllis system is Ilearly reaitime so i! carl be conSidered far illom

accurate than the prior source, It i:3 unclear whether (his system wiil remain avad8bie to ll'le public ane! it's (3xistence is not

made known to ali bail licensee.

3) 'Tile Printout' is a voluminous document made avaHable to nil

bondsmen. It IS given out weekly to each bondman according to

their license account number so that an individual bondsman can

only see information pertaining to his liab:lity. This printout is

supposed to contain all the bonds that a bondsman IS bein~J held

liable for. The information therein is i!sted alphabetically, riZlnlO, bond

number, court of record, case number, bond amount, elate posteci

and most recent court setting. All of this information is compilod

from the FORBUS system. FORBUS USGS the oid county computer

system cOnlmonly referred to as "the rnainframe,"

~lecentiy. Dailas County bElgan making this printout avai!alJ!e Via ernsi!.

Tllis new electronic version of the printout is derived tram tho AIS

ci~fi·;'~. ..::~j_" .ic;':'. ~"~·-"h,ll.ntUil"''''~.f''", lh<,~ """',.,.,....-'_"U"'~1r.C""""'&>_''''''It"-<'l

system, The content is relatively the SanlG as the FORBUS !nfOrIT18tion. However, the /\IS (J()le! ;]Iso contO!llS :nform8tlon

about evory court setting, warrant status and NISI status. The county emails tliis date). in an excel format, Hovv(:')vor Hl8

manner by '!vllie!! InionTlGtion is grouped makos it difficult to genero.te lJsable reports, Thorn is no correlation batyl/con tiilS

and FORBUS. We are relying on tho accuracy of the cied<s to scan and properly iabel the documents. The main Ilmiti.'ltion

'<vith On8ase IS itS failure to prolJide a chronological listing of court dates and rnore spncihcaliy, list up-commg COUI"t

ciates.

Bail Task Force Recommendations - L.ettt;( 2 3

Page 54

Delta Bail Bonds

Affidavit to Surrender Principal

Article 17.16

This refers to the Texas Code of Criminal Procedures, Chapter 17, Article 16: "Discharge of liability; Surrender or

Incarceration of Principal Before Forfeiture. '" This is a procedure by which a Bondsman may submit an affidavit

requesting to be relieved of liability while the defendant is in custody. If the document is acted upon immediately, an

additional hold will be placed on the defendant for the charge and a new bond must be posted. The most 'Important

aspect of this article is the immediate nature of the request. Dallas County has a procedure in place on felony bonds that

is ideal and should be a state standard. The misdemeanor procedure is completely different and could benefit greatly by

modeling the felony example,

.... _--

",,,,,,,, "M'.\1t1,"~rr"" .L ..... N"'" """ " ... ~'" o.l.IAIIlIJ ..... "M"LU',~I>U. (Jt

"1O><'''"L"U,>uIt""""n.u

:--- ............ _"' ...... -- ... -.""" .. ,., .. ~, .... ",<- ..... -."",--.... """" ... ...., ..... __ .. , .... ..,.-_ ........... 11<-... _-.... -.............. --... _ ......... ...

, ---- ,_ ... """'_ ...... _ .. _--t::;;=::--_""",~_;;---_.""_M<-.oo<~_ ..... -

" =;-;;;:=::"-.,...... .. /"--', .... _ ..... -... ..... ='.!. .. - .... :.....~.~-.--"

,,.. __ ..... _.,. .... _~ .. ""' ... .-_,T_"""'" ___ .. _____ .... _ ... Il0'l ........... _ .. --

..... ,-;;:;-, .. _ ....... , ........ , ....

C-''''''''''' -.... "..-......., ..... ~ ... -..,..--------~,'-" ......... ~---~..-. ...... .... ---- .... """" .... _ ........ -.. ...... _ ... ,------, ...... -... -... -- .. _ .... -..,,,--::._-_ .......... ".,"" ,-----

......... ""'._ .... ...,. ........................ ;.,';<,.:,:;:,.':'::!:.~.:;-.. "::' .. ";~.:. ."-..,.,---.n.., ....... , .... ,,_ ... ,,...- ... _. _ """..-.r""",_

',1,'1. 17,10, DISCH"IIlGE OF UMJILlTY, Sl'llll!\,\J)EH Oil /.\CAHCEH.\TI(),\ OF I'I\I.W:IP.\1. IlEFOI\l, VO!WEITIIIE,

(a) ;\ sUI'cty 1IIay ilefnre forfeiture I'dic\'!' himself of his undertaking hy:

(I; s1I1Tellderin!;, IIH' ,ICClISt't/ inlo tll(~ ('usloli.,!, of' IIH~ sher'ilf of the COllllty wilt'l'c Iht, Pl'os('cllliotl is pPIHling; 01'

{2) ddiH'f'ing to ! ht' slll'rill' of' the (,Ollll!Y \\"ht·l'(~ Ifll' pr-nS(·t'lIliot' is [It'llIling ,III 'Imel;!vi! slallng lilill t 11(' ,1('('11;;('(1 is

illcar('('ra!{'d ill It'dt'rnl (,lIstody. ill rht' clIstody or allY statt', or ill allY ('olltlly of' I his. :-ita!t'.

fh; For Ih(' purpOSI'S ufSuiJs('dinn ':<1)(2) ofrhis ,Irli('/e, rh(' bond is disdwq;('d :ll1d rht, SW'l'Iy is ahsolH'd ofliailililY 011 lilt' houd

t)1l tIlt' SIH·rirfS \,prificnrioll ortl$' illt'an'(','alitlll of lIlt' ;lenisI'd.

,\/'Is l!lfi5. 50th Lpg'., vol. 2, p .. ~ Ii, I'li. 722,

\I)u'udp,d by ;\cls 1$87. 70th I ,q;-" rh. IOtii. S('c, I. dl', Jllllj' '20, [~JH'i,

Bail Task Force Recommendations· Letter 2

Page 55

4

Delta Bail Bonds

Article 17.19

Article 17.9 is titied : "Surety May Obtain a Warrant:. This is the bail bondsman last resort in dealing with a defendant

who will not comply with requests made by the bondsman. These requests can be for anything from good contact

information to additional cosigners in the face of added risk. The Judge has limited authority to determine sufficiency of

the document.

In an effort to ease concerns over the use of 17.19, the county may wish to require that the bail bondsman to include

some confirmation of attorney notification. Included with this letter is an example of a 17.19 affidavit with language for

attorney notification. Dalias County may require that ali bondsmen use this forrn or one like it. The courts may choose to

reject a 17.19 not submitted using this language.

2 Art. 17.19. SUm~TY MAY OBTAIN A WARRANT, (a) Any surety, desiring to surrender his principal and after Ilotilying the

proincipal's attorney, if the principal is rcpl'cscntcd by an attorney, in n manner provided by Hule 21 Il, Texas Rules 01' Civil Proce

dure, of the surety's intention to surrender the principnl, may file an affidavit of such intention before the ('0111" or magisnalt'

before which the prosecution is pending. The affidavit must state:

(1) I'he court. and C!tllS(! numher of' tIl(! case; (2) the name of the defendant;

(3) trw offense with which the ddclldalit is charged; (4) tllt' date of tile bond;

(5) the cause ror t.he sUITcndc['j alld

(6) Ibllt noticc of the surcly's intention to slllTendc[,the principal h<ls been "riven as required by lhis subsection.

(b) lu a proseciltion penuillg belol'c a COUl'I, if the court (lnds thaI. there is {'.ause for the surety to SlllTclHlel' the

stU'ely's pl"ill(,j pu!, the ('ourt. shull issuc a capias ['or ~hc principal. [11 II pr'osccution pending bcfol"(:' a rnngisil'Hte, if thc magist ratt'

finds that. there is C<lUse fol' the surety to sllI'r('!Hler tbc surety's principal, the magistrate shall issue a WHf'I'anl ofarl'(~st for the

p"ill('ipnl. It is an nllinnalivc dcfcnse to allY liability 011 the bOlld thai:

(1) the COUl"t 01' mngistratc r'cfused to issue a capias or Warr<ml. of :IITesl for' the principal; and

(2) .,£'tet' the I'cfuwl to is~.;ue tlH! capias or warrant of arrest, the principal failed 10 apP{'Hr.

(e) Iftht, cour!. or mngisl.l·a\(~ hefor(' wholll thl' prosc{~lIlion is IWllding is 1\01 (lvailllhlp, the slll'ply may dt,tiwl' I lip

affidavit 10 any uthel' magistl'llt(' in thc coullty alld that magisll'at(', 011 a finding OfCHm(' for Ihe sun"Y til SIIlTC'IHlel' Iltt· slll'l'ly's

pr'incipal, shall issue a warrant of arrest for tlit' principal.

(tI):\1l arrest walTlIll1 01' capias issued 111111('1' this article shnll he issued 10 tilt, sllcritT of tlU' COUllt)' ill whirh Ih(' ('aSI'

is p('nding. and a cop)' ol'th(' W;IITalil or ("apias shall ht' issued 10 Ihe sUI'(~I)' or his <lHenl.

.:e;:\11 I\lT('slw(lITanl or ('apias issued 11lHI!'l' 'his lIl,tide rnay bt' I'xeclltl'd hy a peacl' onker, II sl'curily of1i('('I', 01' a

pl'i\'alt~ im'('Sligalor !icl'lised illlhis slat('.

Acts J!)()!), ~Dlh Leg., vol.~, p. 117, I'll, 722,

:\l!It'll(iI'd bY:\\'h 1!J8i. iOlh I.t'g-., I'll. lOft), Set'. 1. dI .lUllt' 2(), IDgi: Subs('('. (h; HIII<'l1Ih',1 hy.\<'t)O I!lll!), ilsl J.t'g .... h. '{71. SI'C. ·t,

I'll Sept. I. WHD; Suhsl't'. (a) ;1!1H'tlll('d h.\" \('1)0 I!JHH, 7nllr Lpg., ('II. 1:'iO(i, Set'.]. I'll: Sppl. I, I!)!)H; SlIhsl'{·. rh~ :lIlH'lld('d h.\ .\l"Is

20l.n, iXth Lq;., dL 012. SI'I'. 1, I'll', JUnt' 20, :wm: SUilSl'l'. it:) ;mH~'l(h'd hy :\t'ls :m:n, ii"lth Lq; .. cll. ~J.12, S(·('. 1. t'lf. .I III B' :20. 20m: Suhsl't'. ,:d) <l1lH'tHfcd h.\" ,.\cI:-. 2otn, iXtlt Lt'g" ('11. D·i2, St'('.·1. I'll: JIIIH~ :W, 20m; Suhst'!'. ((,1 ;1I1l(,t1dl'd h.V :\ds 2(Xn, iXI!! !.t'g .. ("11.

!l!i'1, Sf'\'.:\, I'll: .IUI\I' 20, 2tXn.

:\rnt'ndt'd by:

.\l"Is :!.O{)i, HOlh L{'g.,n.s .• CII. I:W'\, SI'('.l. ell'. St'ptt'!ldH'!" !. 100i.

Bail Task Force Recommendations - Letter 2

Page 56

5

Delta Ban Bonds

Grace Period

As we explore the pcocess and procedutes that constitute the l\fe of a bond in Dallas County we 'InevJabiy corne to the situation where a defendant misses a court date. At tll8t point it can be mgued that the bond is forfeited and the bonds .. mon roie in the case is complete. Or we can look closer at the circumstances involved and find that HlBre are many times when it unreasonable to expect the defendant or his attorney to appeaL It the movement of inforrnation wero absolute, then a defendant would always know about his court date and the court would always know \'\lhen a person is not (Nailable to appear. In reality, information never flol/vs as comprehensively as needed and mistakes arise. This is imponan! because the circumstances \vhere the civil process can be avoided and the criminal case resolved within days, S3V8 the county money, time and rr,anpowef. it also promotes fairness and moves the wheels of justice ';\lith less :nterruption, Currently the Judge exhibits his discretion in times of confusion and will reset a case, wherein the Judge recans the wurrant and sets aside the NiSI judgement; allowing the crimina! case to move fONJard vvithout iong hesitation or great expense to tho defendant, county or bondsmen.

In an effort to draw a common set of practices for all courts to use, Dallas County may vvisil to formali'z8 these policies so that all parties invoived understand how the system wiiJ II/ork moving forvvard. To that end, it makes sense to ailol;lJ the bondsmen to il8ve some period of 'Grace' to either collect the defendant or rectify the court setting, f<eeping in rnincl that the bondsman has a strong financial incentive to find the defendant and deliver him to court. However, the ccun!y also has a strong financial incentive to allow the defendant an opportunity to surrender himself or provide good caUGe lor his absence and rnove the case forward.

Based on 8 study in the 1990s by Steven Twist onci Michael 8!ocl< of the University of Arizona3. TIle cost associated \!I/!th with iJ missed court date anel subsequent forteitUl"e can be deceptively high. Any eHmt to r'educe the budgetary and social cost 01 this event will have substantial impact on the county budget and judiciary system.

The Bail Industry li8S a long history 01 working with the county and its officials, as parlners in the criminai justice systeni. The industlY comes under fire from t1me to time, as all industries do. Bail works so closely with the government that it 1s often regarcJecJ as improper to qenerate proij'ts, the opposite is true. f\ ba:'l cornpany that CCln

Surrender

Bench Warrant

New Crime

Fugitive

8483.16

81,156.88

$2,423.38

52,391.82

successfully return the largest number of defendants to couri, whiie cnaintaining a good reputation with it's customer· base. should profit. It shouid be rewarded. It is not the county's responSIbility to coddlE) bail bondsmen but it is the governments responsibility to make path for small business to succeed, That is vvhat we are doing here today.

3 Michael!<. 8!ock, r.)h D, and Steven J. TW1st "Rullaway Losses: EstimZltl1l9 tile Cost of Faiiure to .£l . .opear TI the Lo~) i\.n

ge!es Cnrninal Justice System" Ampric80 Le.Q.l.S.l.uliV.fLExc.LlangaGQUm::.iI - P.e.P.Ol1....C'.ar.cLOO...GIi1:ne, (t\Aay 1997) p22

Bail TJSk Force Recommendations· Letter 2 f3

Page 57

2012 0427 ORDER NO: _____ _

1 COURT ORDER

DATE:_~M~a~rc~h~6~,2~0~1~2~ _________ __

STATE OF TEXAS §

COUNTY OF DALLAS §

BE IT REMEMBERED, at a regular meeting of the Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas held on

the 6th day of March ,2012 on a motion made

by Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of District No.4, and seconded by

Jolm Wiley Price, Commissioner of District No.3, the following Order was adopted.

WHEREAS, the State Property Tax Code, Sec. 31.11, states that a refund in amounts over $5,000 for erroneous or excessive tax payments and/ or waiving penalty and interest is to be approved by the Commissioners Court of Dallas County; and

WHEREAS, the Tax Assessor / Collector has attached a list for which request for waiver of penalty and interest, and

WHEREAS, the Dallas County Auditor's Office has agreed that a special briefing is necessary for the waiver of penalty and interest for the taxpayer and

WHEREAS, the Dallas County Tax Assessor / Collector has complied with the requirements of the State Property Tax Code, Sec. 33.011 & Sec. 33.08. It is the desire of the Commissioners Court to approve the attached list of request for waiver of penalty and interest.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT ADJUDGED, DECREED AND ORDERED by the Dallas County Commissioners

Court that the list of tax payments attached for the period ending -'M=a=-rc"'h"--"6'-'-,-'2"'0""1"'2=-_____ _ ___ ________ is hereby approved for refund.

DONE IN OPEN COURT, this the ___ 6"-t"'h'--__ _ March

JUDGE

STRICT #3

Recommended by: s

For the period ending: March 6, 2012

ACCOUNT NUMBER

00151300B10300000

00000431406000000

28055910010010000

/)

);::~ "df IV '/"/..' .. ,':tf r ,'_ // j

"'-

DALLAS COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR

REFUNDS FOR ERRONEOUS OR EXCESSIVE TAX PAYMENTS

FOR AMOUNTS OVER $5000.00-FOR SPECIAL BRIEFING

TAXPAYER REQUESTING REFUND AMOUNT OF REFUND

MAGNESS SUE ANN $5,883.87

HAJOCA CORPORATION $31,103.56

DURABLE U.SA INC. $29,880.18

NO PENALTY AND INTEREST WAIVED

---, TOTAL $66,867.61

CHECK #

446524

446657

446687

~;-4L< , for the Dallas County Tax Assessor/Collector's Office I

~~''\ , for the Dallas County Auditor's Office

'J iI 1· 2 ORDER NO. ,.. U ----

DATE: March 6, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS

§ §

§ §

COURT ORDER

BE IT REMEMBERED, at a regular meeting of Commissioners' Court of Dallas County, Texas held on

the 6th day of __ .::cMa;:;:::r"'c:;::ch"--_____________ 2012, on motion made by

~D~r~,~E~1~b~a~G~,a~rbcJg~a4,~co~mm~·~ss~i~o~ne~r~o~f~Dllj~s~truj~c~t~N~Oh.~4~ ___________ , and seconded by

_J_o_lm_W_i_l~eY,--P_r_ic ___ e--,,_C_o,,-mm=i::..:ss=--i ___ o ___ ne ___ r ______ o=-f ___ D-=ic::.s"'tr:.:i:.::c.::.t-=N:.:.::0c.:.,_3=--____ , the following Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, the amended FY 2012 DSHS State Services Contract was discussed in Commissioners Court on February 28,2012; and

WHEREAS, the Department of State Health Services (DSHS) has submitted Amendment No. 001A to the FY 2012 DSHS - HIV Services (State Services) Contract, No. 2012-039164, which revises the contract term to September 1, 2012 through August 31, 2013, and amends the grant award to $1,467,622; and

WHEREAS, the DSHS State Services grant directly supports a regional indigent medical and mental health care network for those impacted by HIV/AIDS and is consistent with the Dallas County StrategiC Plan, Vision 2: Dallas County is a healthy community; and

WHEREAS, the signature of the County Judge is required on the Contract Amendment.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Court does hereby approve Program Attachment 001A to the FY 2012 DSHS - HIV Services (State Services) Contract, No. 2012-039164, in the amount of $1 ,567,622, with a contractterm of September 1, 2012 through August 31,2013, and authorizes the County Judge to sign the Amendment with the DSHS on behalf of Dallas unty.

Dr. Elba Garcia Commissioner, District No.4

/ Recommended by: ~,.(~£ :i--::;:s-'--"'-'-=:-:----;:;-_-;-;-;-_---;;:-----c:-

Zac'lary ThOliipson, ~ctor, Health and Human Services

DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES

Amendment To

The Department of State Health Services (DSHS) and DALLAS COUNTY (Contractor) agree to amend the Program Attachment # -ill2.L (Program Attachment) to Contract # 2012-039164 (Contract) in accordance with this Amendment No. 001A: HIV/STD Prevention and Care Branch State Services, effective

0210112012 .

The purpose of this Amendment is to extend the contract term to 8/31/2012 and to add funds to cover extended serVIces.

Therefore, DSHS and Contractor agree as follows:

The program attachment number is revised as follows:

PROGRAM ATTACHMENT NO.-OO+_CLQLA

The contract term is revised as follows:

TERM: 09/0112011 THRU: 03/31/201208/31/2012

SECTION II. PERFORMANCE MEASURES, Paragraph 2, is revised as follows:

Contractors shall use these funds to provide services in accordance with Contractor's approved supplemental performance measures (see attached Exhibit A), during the term of this Renewal Program Attachment FY2012-(09/1/2011 03/31/2012). (09/1/2011-08/31/2012).

SECTION II. PERFORMANCE MEASURES, Paragraph 4, is revised as follows:

Contractor shall utilize a standard quruterly reporting format, provided by DSHS Program, and shall require the same of the subcontractors via Contractor's contracts with those subcontractors. Contractor accepts responsibility and accountability for each subcontractor's compliance and timely submission of documentation required in the quarterly program report. Contractor shall submit quarterly program reports to DSHS on or before the 30th day of Octoser 2011 April and Jalluary LulY, 2012. The final report is due on Octoser May 30, 2012. Quarterly reporting format that must be used is found at http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/hivstd/fieWops/ServlcesReports.shtm. The repOlts shall be submitted by email to: [email protected] and other DSHS staff specified on the cover sheet of the report should be cc'd on that email.

The categorical budget and Exhibit A ru·e revised as attached.

Page - 1 of 1

All other terms and conditions not hereby amended are to remain in full force and effect. In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Contract and the telms of Ibis Amendment, this Amendment shall controL

Signature otA?uthori%~ial

Date: _____ '-" __________ _

Adolfo M. Valadez, M.D., M.P.H.

Assistant Commissioner for Prevention and Preparedness Services

1100 WEST 49TH STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS 78756

512.458.7111

adolfo,[email protected]

Contractor

Sign at)'''' of Authol'lzed OffiC?al

Date: March 6 2012

Name: Zacbarv Thompson M A

Title: pjrector

Address: 2377 N Sl-emIDoPs Freeway S+-e 600

DaJJas Texas 75207

Phone: 2J 4_819_21 OJ

Email: _--..Z:LTnblOQffiJllPPS."[email protected]]",a:!,sLCc",Q!ll11.Dn.l:t~Y...S2Ql:rgll-__ _

Page - 2 of2

DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES

1100 WEST 49TH STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS 78756-3199

CATEGORICAL BUDGET CHANGE REQUEST DSHS PROGRAM: HlV/STD Prevention and Care Branch State Services CONTRATOR: DALLAS COUNTY CONTRACT NO: 2012-039164 CONTRACT TERM: 09/01/2011 THRU: 08/31/2012 BUDGET PERIOD: 09/01/2011 THRU: 08/31/2012 CHG: 001A

. DIRECT COST (OBJECTCLASS CATEGORIES) . ..

Current Approved Budget (A) Revised Budget (B)

Personnel $0.00 $0.00

Fringe Benefits $0.00 $0.00

Travel $0.00 $0.00

Equipment $0.00 $0.00

Supplies $0.00 $0.00

Cohtractual $914.446.00 $1.567.622.00

Other $0.00 $0.00

Total Direct Charges $914,446.00 $1.567,622.00

lttDIRI::CTCQST .. . .... .

Base ($) $0.00 $0.00

Rate (%) 0.00% 0.00%

Indirect Total $0.00 $0.00

PROSRAtiij1Il1COtiijE· . .. . . . ...

Program Income $0.00 $0.00

Other Match $0.00 $0.00

I ncome Total $0.00 $0.00

UII\1Il"StRESTRI(mQ(!.[S . .

Advance Limit $0.00 $0.00

Restricted Budget $0.00 $0.00

StJlI\1tiijAlRY ...... .. .

Cost Total $914.446.00 $1,567.622.00

Performing Agency Share $0.00 $0.00

Receiving Agency Share $914.446.00 $1.567.622.00

Total Reimbursements Limit $914,446.00 $1,567,622.00

JUSTIFICATION· .

This amendment is to extend the contract term and to add funds.

.

Change Requested

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$653,176.00

$0.00

$653,176.00

$0.00

0.00%

$0.00 . . ..

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00 ..• . ......

$0.00

$0.00 .. . .

$653,176.00

$0.00

$653,176.00

$653,176.00

.

Financial status reports are due: 12/30/2011,03/30/2012,06/29/2012, 10/30/2012

.

. .

i

. .

, •

I

fORM E: BUDGET SUMMARY

Applicant Name: IDALLAs COUNtY HEALTH AND HUMANSERVICES --- Hum,

Total DSHS Funds Direct Federal Other State Local Funding Other

Cost Categories Budget Requested Funds Agency Funds* Sources Funds

(1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

Percentage of Funding 100% 8% 71% 16% 7% 0% A. Personnel $ 1,013,307.00 $ - $ 714,794.00 $ 259,912.00 $ 38.601.00 B. Frinqe Benefits $ 340,609.00 $ - $ 237,703.00 $ 86,946.00 $ 15.960.00 C. Travel $ 82,612.00 $ - $ 74,042.00 $ 7,820.00 $ 750.00 D. Equipment $ 28,058.00 $ - $ 27,485.00 $ $ 573.00 E. Supplies $ 31,900.00 $ - $ 29,500.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 600.00 F. Contractual $ 18,953,524.00 $ 1,567,622.00 $ 13,202,087.00 $ 2,811,261.00 $ 1,320,000.00 $ 52,554.00 G. Other $ 61,361.00 $ - $ 56,699.00 $ 3,011.00 $ 1,651.00 H. Total Direct Costs $ 20,511,371.00 $ 1,5 7,622.00 $ 14,342,310.00 $ 3,170,750.00 $ 1,378,135.00 $ 52,554.00 I. Indirect Costs $ - $ 282,772.00 $ 102,494.00 $ 34,265.00 J. Total (Sum of H and I) $ 20,511,371.00 $ 1,567,622.00 $ 14,625,082.00 $ 3,273,244.00 $ 1,412,400.00 $ 52,554.00

K. Program Income - Projected Earnings $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ --------------- I ...... --- ------

*Letters of good standing that validate the respondent's programmatic, administrative, and financial capacity must be placed after this form if respondent receives any funding from state agencies other than DSHS related to this project. If the respondent is a state agency or institution of higher learning, letters of good standing are not required. DO NOT include funding from other state agencies in column 4 or Federal sources in column 3 that is not related to activities being funding by this DSHS project.

FY 2011 State Services Application.Revised 1!l3/l012

I

1

, ,

FORM G: CATEGORICAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

Dallas County Health and Human Services Texas Department of State Health Services

FY 2011 - 2012 HIY Health and Social Services (SS) Twelve-Month Budget

Contract Term: 09/01111 - 08/31/12

Administrative Agency (AA) expenditures are not supported by this contract. As of April 1,2007, all AA administrative expenditures must be allocated to the AA contract.

A. Personnel $

B. Fringe Benefits $

C. StaffTravel $

D. Equipment $

E. Supplies $

F. Contractual $ 1,567,622

1. Dallas HSDA (Various Subcontractors) $ 1,504,792

Contracts for HIY services awarded through a renewal process.

2. Sherman/Denison HSDA - Your Health Clinic $ 62,830

Contract for IlIV services in Sherman-Denison awarded on a sole source process.

G. Other $

H. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $ 1,567,622

I. Indirect Cost $

J. TOTAL BUDGET $ .I,SCj7,622

Total for Direct Client Service Costs:

Dallas HSDA $ 1,354,313

Sherman/Denison HSDA 56,547

$ 1,410,860

Total for Subcontractor Administrative Costs:

Dallas HSDA $ 150,479 Sherman/Denison HSDA 6,283

$ 156,762

2/20/2012 U:\GMO lO0711\Y AMONICA\FY 2012\030612\ FY 2011 5S Budget Just Actual OLl7.12

I ..•.•. ExhibitA: SERVICES PRIORITIES, ALLOCATIONS AND OBJECTIVES BY.HIV SERVICE DELIVERY AREA ..........

Administrative Agency Dallas Health & Human Services HSDA: Dallas

Funding Stream: State Services Fiscal Year 2011-2012 HSDA Allocation: $1,504,792

Contractor must fulfill and execute all the obligations contained in the final, approved performance measures (Exhibit A). The table reflects the service allocations and service units and persons to be served with those funds. Columns 2 and 3 reflect the number of units to be delivered and persons to be served. Column 4 indicates the total allocation for that category; this includes service provider administrative costs. The total of all allocations equal the total for the HSDA's 55 allocation. Column 6 indicates

, the percentage of the total award that is allocated to that service category.

~"~ '!lVlA j ""U ALLOCATION FOR % OF TOTAL

SERVICE CATEGORY* OBJECTIVES

I Units II Persons II HSDA ALLOCATION

Outpatient! Ambulatory Medical Care 0.00%

AIDS Pharmaceutical Assistance (local) 1629 226 $J64,481.00 10.93%

Oral Health Care 0.00%

Early Intervention Services (Parts A and B) 0.00%

Health Insurance Premium and Cost Sharing Assistance 0.00%

Home Health Care 0,(10%

Medical Nutrition Therapy 0.00%

Hospice Services 0.00%

Home and Community-Based Health Services 0.00%

Mental Health Services 459 71 $20,565.00 1.37%

Substance Abuse Services - Outpatient 0.00%

Medical Case Management (including treatment adherence) 1745 399 $61,643.00 4.10%

Case Management (non-medical) 10341 J335 $313,046.00 20.80%

Child Care Services 15572 50 $166,932.00 11.09%

Emergency Financial Assistance 0.00%

Food Bank / Home Delivered Meals 34183 1554 $206,843.00 13.75%

DSHS Table 1 Revised 4-2-08

U, ""h Education / Risk Reduction NA NA $26,626,00 1.77%

Services 14268 93 $250,094.00 Hi li7 0k

ILegal Services 1124 160 $37,726.00 2.51%

r joo,,;,,;c Services 0.00%

, Services 689 1342 $242,500.00 16.12%

Services 0.00%

Support Services 0.00%

Referr"1 for Health Care / Supportive Services 0.00%

Services 0.00%

Remite Care 1935 9E $14,336.00 0.95%

Adherence r, 'w ~, ." 0.00%

~ 1 <flA "'92.00 100.00 07 •

The . rna not he funded with Ryan White Part B funds

"" .. / r, Services 0.00%

Child Welfare Services 0.00%

Client A". 0.00%

0.00%

Ppcli"trir Developmental Assessment and Early Services 0.00%

0.00%

Is to Clinical Research 0.00%

Other Direct Support Services (Attach a separate sheet d, ,iii services to be funded) 0.00%

Total Allocation $1.504.792.00 1 nn 01\07.

DSHS Table 1 Revised 4·2·08

Exhibit A: SERVICES PRIORITIES, ALLOCATIONS AND OBJECTIVES BY mv SERVICE DELIVERY AREA '.' .

Administrative Agency Dallas Health & Human Services HSDA: Sherman-Denison

Funding Stream: State Services Fiscal Year 12011-2012 HSDA Allocation: $62,830

Contractor must fulfill and execute all the obligations contained in the final, approved performance measures (Exhibit A). The table reflects the service allocations and service units and persons to be served with those funds. Columns 2 and 3 reflect the number of units to be delivered and persons to be served. Column 4 indicates the total allocation for that category; this includes service provider administrative costs. The total of all allocations equal the total for the HSDA's SS allocation. Column 6 indicates the percentage of the total award that is allocated to that service category.

E~nlVlAIEJ)

ALLOCATION FOR % OF TOTAL SERVICE CATEGORY* OBJECTIVES

I Units II Persons I HSDA ALLOCATION

Outpatient! Ambulatory Medical Care 81 26 $20,138.00 32.05%

AIDS Pharmaceutical Assistance (local) III 32 $11,166.00 17,77%

Oral Health Care 0.00%

Early Intervention Services (Parts A and B) 0.00%

Health Insurance Premium and Cost Sharing Assistance 0.00%

Home Health Care 0.00%

Medical Nutrition Therapy 0,00%

Hospice Services 0.00%

Home and Community-Based Health Services 0.00%

Mental Health Services 0.00%

Substance Abuse Services - Outpatient 0.00%

Medical Case Management (including treatment adherence) 0.00%

Case Management (non-medical) 499 74 $31,526,00 50.18%

Child Care Services 0.00%

Emergency Financial Assistance 0,00%

Food Bank I Home Delivered Meals 0.00%


Health Education / Risk Reduction 0.0091

w Services 0.00°1<

!Legal Services 0.0091

ina"i,tir Services 0.0091

Transportation Services 0.0091

Services 0.00%

'R1 Services 0.0091

for Health Care / Supportive Services 0.0091

::ltinn Services (1.O0%

Care 0.00%

Adherence r, eli, 0.00%

$62,830.00 ,,'0 Mm.

The W'W' 'rna not~ White Part B funds

IBuddy / ion Services 0.00%

Ic:hild Welfare Services 0.00%

IClient 0.00%

0.00%

, ..... Ula~l~ ..... Developmental Assessment and Early ,tinn Services 0.00%

, Phnn;,w 0,00%

Refpml, to Clinical Research 0.00%

Other Direct Support Services (Attach a separate sheet services to be 0.00%

Total An <"0 Q~O 00 lPn flO"'_


ORDER NO: 12

DATE: March 6, 2012

HA~)·\i} V''''~,l

COURT ORDER

STATE OFTEXAS §

COUNTY OF DALLAS §

BE IT REMEMBERED at a regular meeting of the Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas, held on the

day of 6th of March, 2012, on a motion made by

Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of District No. 4 and seconded by

Jolm Wiley Price, Corrnnissioner of District __ N-=o-=. __ 3 ___ , the following Order was adopted:

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

the Dallas County Commissioners Court was briefed on February 28, 2012, regarding the Juvenile Department's request for approval to execute the Amendment No.1 to the Project Addendum for Operation of the Juvenile Case Management System (JCMS); and

the Commissioners Court approved the Amendment No. 1 to the Project Addendum for Implementation and Enhancement of Juvenile Case Management System (JCMS) on March 6, 2012, which is intended to provide funds for the cost of operation of the Juvenile; and

the previously approved JCMS Project Addendum for Operation of JCMS included costs for operating the system through September 30, 2011; and

the proposed Amendment No.1 dated November 29, 2011 is intended to be replaced by the TechShare Resource Sharing Addendum which will be implemented as other counties choose to participate in the TechShare Juvenile program; and

the proposed Amendment No.1 to the Project Addendum for the Operation of the JCMS is intended to address operations cost pending approval and execution of a final Resource Sharing Addendum; and

the budget and funding required for the Cost of Operations and Cost of Maintenance for the period October 1, 2011 through March 31, 2012, is $646,160. Dallas County's share of the actual maintenance and operations cost for FY 2012 is $180,500; and

funding for these services is available from the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant, CJD II 1329212; and

the execution of Amendment No. I to the Project Addendum for Operation of the Juvenile Case Management System (JCMS) will confirm Dallas County's participation in JCMS for the period October 1, 2011, through March 31, 2012; and

this request conforms to the Dallas County Strategic Plan - Vision 1: Dallas County is a model interagency partner.

CCT JCMS Amendment No.1 to Project Addendum for Operations Page 2

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Commissioners Court of Dallas County authorizes the Dallas County Judge to execute the Project Addendum for Operation of the Juvenile Case Management System (JCMS) on behalf of Dallas County.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Commissioners Court of Dallas County authorizes payment in the amount of $180,500 to Texas Conference of Urban Counties for Dallas County's portion of the cost of operations for the JCMS through March 31, 2012.

2012.

~ Mike Cantrell, District #2

--...... -;r;mmended by:

Dr. E~~~~~14

,~, 7 ~ ~

'- . /' Dr. Terry S. Smith, Director Dallas County Juvenile Services

;t ~""<, TEXAS umierence of

Urban Counties

A. Purpose

Texas Conference of Urban Counties TechShare Program Project Addendum For Operation of

Juvenile Case Management System (JCMS) Amendment No.1

A.1. Each of the undersigned counties and the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission ("T JPC") is a signatory to the Interlocal Agreement For Participation In The Texas Conference of Urban Counties TechShare Program ("I LA").

A.2. Pursuant to the ILA, the undersigned counties, the T JPC, and the Texas Conference of Urban Counties ("Urban Counties") entered into the Texas Conference of Urban Counties TechShare Program Addendum for Operation of the Juvenile Case Management System (JCMS) (the "Addendum") with a term that ends September 30,2011.

A.3. The Addendum was intended to address operation of JCMS until such date as the Parties have executed a TechShare Resource Sharing Addendum or other similar agreement as contemplated by the ILA.

AA. Because the anticipated Resource Sharing Addendum has not been completed, and because the Parties desire to address operation and maintenance of JCMS after September 30, 2011, the Parties hereby adopt this Amendment No. 1 to the Addendum.

A.5. Except as specifically modified in this Amendment No.1, all terms of the Addendum shall remain in effect.

A.6. Effective December 1, 2011, the powers and duties of the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission transfer to the Texas Juvenile Justice Department in accordance with Title 12 of the Texas Human Resources Code. Thereafter, the rights and obligations of the ILA and the Addendum shall bind and benefit the Texas Juvenile Justice Department.

B. Definitions

B.1. Article 2 of the Addendum is amended by adding new subsections 2.8 and 2.9 to read as follows and renumbering subsequent sections accordingly:

2.8 Maintenance: Maintenance shall include the services required to analyze, program, test and deploy modifications to correct faults, improve performance or effect minor functional improvements.

2.9 Implementation Support: Implementation shall include support for T JPC's implementation of JCMS·Basic as specified in Section 3.10.

tcuc.ts.jcms.12. 015.b Page 1 of 15, November 29, 2011

""~, TEXAS COnlf.!ff3nr:e [)!

Urban Counties

C. Services Deliverable: Operation and Maintenance of JCMS and JCMS·Basic

C.1. The heading of Article 3 of the Addendum is amended to state:

3. Services Deliverable: Operation, Maintenance and Implementation Support of JCMS and JCMS·Basic

C.2. Article 3 of the Addendum is amended by deleting Sections 3.1 and 3.6 in their entirety and adding new Sections 3.1, 3.6, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10 and 3.11 to read as follows:

3.1 Urban Counties will provide or contract for services to operate and maintain the Production Version of JCMS in the Production Environment for the Participant Counties; and will provide or contract for services to operate and maintain the Production Version of JCMS-Basic in the Production Environment for counties accessing JCMS-Basic through separate agreement with T JPC.

3.6. Urban Counties will diagnose and correct defects in JCMS, JCMS-Basic and in the Production Environment in accordance with the following service levels:

3.6.1. Severity Level 1 - Critical, defined as a problem or outage that directly impedes a county's ability to carry out essential business functions.

3.6.1.1. Response provided within two (2) hours for all Severity Level 1 issues.

3.6.1.2. Resolution by continuous work until either problem resolved by either permanent fix or temporary fix that allows county to resume essential business functions.

3.6.2. Severity Level 2 - Urgent, defined as an issue or problem that hampers a county's use of a function, but does not prevent the county from carrying out essential business functions. Deemed a high priority item for attention.

3.6.2.1. Response provided within two (2) business days for all Severity Level 2 issues.

3.6.2.2. Resolution by continuous work during normal business hours until resolved with either a temporary fix or patch or permanent resolution that allows county to resume normal operation of essential business functions.

3.6.3. Severity Level 3 - Normal, defined as a defect or issue that, if corrected, would improve the use or functionality of the system. Deemed as a low priority.

3.6.3.1. Response provided with five (5) business days for all Severity Level 3 issues.

---.if TechShare --71 tcuc.ts.jcms.12. 015.b

Page 2 of 15, November 29, 2011

TEXAS Comerr.mce o{

Urban Counties

3.6.3.2. Resolution based on joint planning with the Participants to determine when to apply temporary fix or patch or permanent solution to address issue.

3.8. Urban Counties will provide Maintenance of JCMS and JCMS-Basic in the following areas:

3.8.1. Break/Fix and/or Warranty - change( s) resulting from defects identified as either Severity Level 1 or 2 as defined in Section 3.6, above.

3.8.2. Performance Improvements - changes(s) required to insure the software operates within the criteria described in Section 3.2, above.

3.8.3. Functional Improvements - change(s) resulting from defects identified as Severity Level 3 and defined in Section 3.9, below, and approved by the Oversight Board as additions or amendments to the software maintenance work plan.

3.8.4. State Reporting Changes - change(s) resulting from changes to State of Texas data collection and reporting requirements including, but not limited to, changes required to meet the Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) requirements published by the T JPC.

3.8.5. Caseworker Legacy Functionality - changes required to retire the Caseworker application in the remaining counties which are:

3.8.5.1 Creation of a Read Only Security Permission for use within counties, similar to what is in place for accessing data across counties.

3.8.5.2 Development of the capability to handle multi-jurisdiction environments known as "headquarter" county.

3.9. Functional Enhancements - change(s) required to implement new and/or improved business functions as approved by the Oversight Board as part of the software maintenance work plan. The initial version of the software maintenance work plan will include the new and/or improved business functions listed below as prioritized and approved by the Oversight Board.

Version 1.0 Additional Features, Design and Development

1

2

3

Description

Record Service Attempts and Outcomes

Approve Pre-Disposition Report

Generate Deferred Prosecution Contract


TEXAS Conlerence or

Urban Counties


I

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

I 14

I 15

16

17

I 18

19

_/!!ee;hShare --}I-

Description

Data Sharing - Audit Printing

I

Cross-County Search Audit Log

Automate Progressive Sanctions Calculation

Pre-Trial Services - report or queue identifying juveniles who need to be seen by Pre-Trial services

Intake Report for All Referral Types

Name and Address Formatting for Reports

Data Sharing - Log User Access

Court Orders - Part A

Court Orders - Part B

County-Configurable Dropdown Maintenance

View Juvenile Summary Screen

Search - Juvenile is not Found in System - LEA

Maintain Person Property at Arrest (LEA) - Part B

Maintain Juvenile Personal Property at Intake/Detention - Part A

Maintain Juvenile Personal Property at Intake/Detention - Part B

Process Detained Juveniles - Part B

tcuc.ts.jcms.12.015.b Page 4 of 15, November 29,2011

TEX/\S Con!f;>wnco OJ

Urban Counties


20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

Description

Process Juveniles Accepted from LEA

"For law Enforcement Use Only" Watermark ,

Receiving the Arrest and Associated Offense Report Electronically

Maintain Mediation Referral - Part B

Assign Prosecutor - Automatically

Run Automated Consolidation Process

Process Work Queue (Intake)

Intake: Referral Jurisdiction - this is an existing data field in JJIS, may need to add as a field to the JCMS Referral Record

Create Violation Of Probation ,

Defense Attorney at Offense Level

Intake Referral Roster (IR)

Referral History (RR)

Emergency Shelter Placement (ES & PE)

Long Term Placement List (LT & PA)

Active Placement by PO (AP & PA)

Detention Hearing Information (DH & PD)

Detention Population (DP)

tcuc.ts,jcms, 12, 015,b Page 5 of 15, November 29, 2011

TEXAS Conference oj'

Urban Counties


Description

37 Detention Roster (DD & DR) I

38 Mod Roster (MR & PM)

Record Multiple Victims for a Single Offense

40 Limit Programs that Can be Referred Through Master Referral

41 Add Clothing Size to Detention Record & Include on Roster

42 Display of System Generated Chrono Text for System Admin

43 Maintain Unit/Room Facility Details

44 Move Referral- system generated chrono

, modification

4S NO USE CASE - Ad-Hoc Reporting (B)

3.10. Urban Counties will provide implementation support for JCMS-Basic in the following areas:

3.10.1 Project Planning and Scheduling - assist the TJPC in planning for and scheduling implementation activities for new counties who are implementing the JCMS-Basic application.

3.10.2 Data Conversion - assist the T JPC in the conversion and validation of county-specific data from Caseworker to JCMS-Basic.

3.10.3 Technical Infrastructure and Security - assist the T JPC and the county with the planning, connecting and testing the technical infrastructure, telecommunications connectivity and security required to connect to the JCMS domain for the operation of JCMSBasic.

3.10.4 Training Materials - assist the TJPC with the development, modification and maintenance of materials necessary to train county staff in the use of JCMS-Basic.

Tech Share -==';:~~'


TEXAS C()ni0h~nre OJ

Urban Counties

D. Budget

3.10.5 County Specific Functions - assist the T JPC in defining and designing functions, improvements and enhancement to JCMSBasic to support implementation and operation of the system in additional counties. The specific changes to JCMS-Basic must be approved and prioritized by the Oversight Board.

3.10.6 EDI - assist the T JPC in verifying the operation and accuracy of the required data reporting as specified in the Electronic Data Interchange specifications.

3.11. If a Participant desires a unique maintenance or implementation plan beyond the maintenance services described in this Section 3, such individual plan will be the responsibility of that Participant.

D.1. Article 5 of the Addendum, including Sections 5.1 through 5.5, are deleted in their entirety and replaced with the following:

5. Budget and Project Funding

5.1. The budget and funding required for this Addendum for the period October 1, 2011 through March 31,2012 is as set forth in the following table:

Cost of Operations

Participant Contributions Dallas County Tarrant County TJPC ( See Section 5.3)

Total

Expense Production Data Center Subtotal

Total Operations Expense

Reserve

TechShare -==';'=='

October 1, 2011 through

March 31, 2012

58.000.00

43.000 .. 00

67.00000

$168.000.00

163.000.00

163.00000

$168.000.00

$0.00

tcuc.ts.jcms.12.015.b Page 7 of 15. November 29. 2011

TEXJ\S Come-renee of

Urban Counties

Cost of Maintenance

Participant Contributions Dallas County Tarrant County TJPC

Total

Expense

Other Expenses

Subtotal Total Expense

Reserve

Tech Share -===';: '===~

Consulting

Mgt. Services


March 31, 2012

12L50Q,QO

87.500.00

140.000.00

$350,000,00

194,00Q,00 COl1tr-act Programming

POltinns of four FT~ including the TechShare Development Center rv~anageL Duality Assurance Lead, Quality Assurance Analyst and Lead

156.000.00 JCMS Developer

350.000 GO

$350,000,00

$0,00

tCUc.ts,jcms, 12, 015,b Page 8 of 15, November 29, 2011

"" ".,,"' l;~L

"'~ TEX/\S COI1lf.Yl?nce a{

Urban Counties

Cost of Implementation Support

Participant Contributions TJPC

Total.

Other Expenses

Subtotal

Total Ex"ellse Reserve

Total Project Funding

Participant Contributions Dallas County Tarrant County TJPC (See Note, below)

Total


March 31, 2012

195160.00

$195.160.00

Portions of fOllr FTE including the T echShare ,Juvenile Resourc.e Manager, TechShare Development Center rvlanager Database Administrator. and

Mgt. Services 195.160.00 Quality Assurance lead

19516000

$195.160.00


March 31, 2012

180500.00

130.50000

335.16000

$£46.160.00

$0.00

Note: T JPC credited for Costs of Operations portion of this total.

5.2 Cost of Operations are based on actual costs incurred and to be incurred for the Operation of JCMS in the Production Environment for the period October 1, 2011 through March 31, 2012. For the period from October 1, 2011 through March 31,2012, forty percent (40%) of the total Cost of Operations will be provided by the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission from the funds provided to transfer the rights for JCMS-8asic to the agency in accordance with Section 9.3.7 of the Project Addendum for Implementation and Enhancement of the Juvenile Case management System approved by the Urban Counties Board of Directors on May 24, 2010 (the "Implementation Addendum"). The remaining sixty percent (60%) of the total Costs of Operations will be divided between Dallas and Tarrant Counties based on

Tech Share --===';~=

tcuc.ts.jcms.12. 015.b Page 9 of 15, November 29,2011

TEXAS Confer!+llt(! o{

Urban Counties

population using the 2010 federal census. Those divisions of Costs of Operations are reflected in the Cost of Operations table above.

5.3 In accordance with Section 9.3.8. of the Implementation Addendum, T JPC will be credited $140,000 for Cost of Operations through August 31,2012. A portion of the $140,000 credit was used to satisfy TJPC's obligation for Costs of Operations through September 30, 2011. The portion used was $10,596.83, leaving a balance remaining of $129,403.17. A portion of the balance remaining totaling $67,000 will be used to satisfy T JPC's obligation for the Costs of Operations for the period from October 1, 2011 through March 31,2012.

5.4 Cost of Maintenance are based on actual costs incurred and to be incurred for the Maintenance of JCMS and JCMS-Basic for the period October 1, 2011 through March 31,2012. For the period from October 1,2011 through March 31, 2012, forty percent (40%) of the Costs of Maintenance of JCMS and JCMS-Basic will be provided by the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission. The remaining sixty percent (60%) of the Costs of Maintenance will be divided between Dallas and Tarrant Counties based on population using the 2010 federal census. Those divisions of Cost of Maintenance are reflected in the Cost of Maintenance table above.

5.5 Costs of Implementation Support are based on the actual costs incurred and to be incurred to support the Implementation of JCMS-Basic by the T JPC. For the period from October 1, 2011 through March 31, 2012, one hundred percent (100%) of the Costs of Implementation Support will be provided by the T JPC. The specific costs are reflected in the Cost of Implementation Support table, above.

5.6 Each Participant's outstanding balance for Costs of Operations and Costs of Maintenance are due and payable on or before December 31, 2011.

5.7 In addition, TJPC will transfer $273,000 necessary to maintain and support the implementation of JCMS-Basic through August 31,2012 in antiCipation of the satisfactory adoption of a TechShare Resource Sharing Addendum. Any funds remaining as of August 31,2012 may be carried forward into the next fiscal year if T JPC has elected to participate in the TechShare Resource Sharing Addendum. If T JPC elects not to participate in the TechShare Resource Sharing Addendum, the balance remaining as of August 31, 2012 will be refunded to the T JPC and county use of the JCMS-Basic in the production domain operated and maintained by the Urban Counties will be terminated.

5.8 If a Participant uses grant or other funds subject to compliance with specific terms or conditions to pay any portion of its costs, that Participant is solely responsible for compliance with the applicable terms and conditions. The Participant shall, to the extent permitted by law, hold harmless the other Parties from the use of such funds. Payments made using such funds will not be refunded by Urban Counties in the event such payments are found to violate applicable terms or conditions.

tcuc.ts.jcms.12.015.b Page 10 of 15, November 29,2011

TEXAS Com('!(ence oi

Urban Counties

E. Term

5.9 The Participants will not be responsible for any costs in excess of those reflected in the budgets set forth in Section 5.1 unless those excess costs are approved by the Participants' governing boards.

E.1. Section 9.1 of the Addendurn is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

9.1. This Addendum will be in effect from the date it is approved and executed by the governing body of the first Party and Urban Counties, and will remain in effect until March 31, 2012, unless superseded by a TechShare Resource Sharing Addendum or other similar agreement between the Parties.

[Remainder of this page intentionally left blank]

II TechShare ~"/l tcuc.ts.jcms.12. 015.b

Page 11 of 15, November 29,2011

TEXAS Conrereno, of

Urban Counties

TEXAS CONFERENCE OF URBAN COUNTIES

By: Donald Lee, Executive Director

__ II TechShare -~-/l

Date


TEXJ\S Con/crena! of

Urban Counties

TEXAS JUVENILE PROBATION COMMISSION

By: Vicki Spriggs, Executive Director

Approved as to form:

Name:

Title:

Date:

Date

tcuc.ts.jcms.12. 015.b Page 13 of 15, November 29,2011

~ -< TEXAS Conii::mnct! oj

Urban Counties


Name: Clay Lewis Jenkins

Title: Dallas County Judge

Date: March 6, 2012

TechShare

March 6, 2012 Date

tcuc.ts.jcms.12. 015.b Page 14 of 15, November 29.2011

TEXAS Contfm:nre 0(

Urban Counties

TARRANT COUNTY

By: Date


Name: ____________________________________________________ _

Title:

Date:

Tech Share tcuc.ts.jcms.12. 015.b

Page 15 of 15, November 29, 2011

COURT ORDER

2012 0430 ORDER NO: ____ _

DATE: _____ rvl~a~rc~h~6~,~2~O~12~ ______ ___

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS

BE IT RErvlEMBERED, at a regular meeting of Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas, held on the

________ --'6"'th"---_______________ day of _________ "'M..,a"'-rc"'h"--______________ , 2012, on

a motion made by Dr, Elba Garcia, Commissioner of District No, 4 , and seconded by

_J_o_IID_W_l_'l_e-,y_P_r_i_c_e-,-, _C_o_mm_i_s_s_i.c.0_n.c-e_r_o'-f'--D.c.i"'s--'t"'r"'i-'-c-'-t_N_o'-,'--C3c.-___ , the following Court Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, the Purchasing Department briefed Commissioners Court on March 6, 2012 concerning the first extension of Bid No. 2011-028-5387, Annual Contract for the Purchase of Linen and Textiles as awarded to American Textile Systems, Tabb Textile Co., Inc., Bob Barker Company, Inc. and ICS Jail Supplies, Inc.; and

WHEREAS, the vendors have agreed to extend the contract for an additional twelve month period; and

WHEREAS, the term of this contract is March 8, 2012 through March 7, 2013; and

WHEREAS, this action supports Vision I, Strategy 1.3 of the Strategic Plan by providing a sound, financially responsible and accountable governance

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Court does hereby authorize the first twelve (12) month extension of Bid No. 2011-028-5387 Annual Contract for Linen and Textiles as awarded to American Textile Systems, Tabb Textile Co., Inc. Bob Barker Company and ICS Jail Supplies, Inc. for the period March 8, 2012 through March 7, 2013 and authorizes all documents/payments to reflect accordingly.

March


inda S. Boles, Purchasing Agent/ms

COURT ORDER

2012"0431 ORDERNO: ________ __

DATE: March 6, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS §

COUNTY OF DALLAS §


________ ~6~th~ ____________ dayof ____ ~~~ar~c~h~ ______________________ ,2012,on

a motion made by Dr. Elba Garcia. Commissioner of District No.4 , and seconded by

__ J_ol_ITI __ W_i_l_e-,-y __ Pr __ ic_e---"--, _C--'o'--mm'--'--i..cs--'s-=iccon-=e"'r=-o-=f=-Dcci=scct"'r=-ic=..t=-Nccooc.'---"3c--___ ., the following Court Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, the Purchasing Department briefed Commissioners Court on March 6, 2012 concerning the extension of Bid No. 2011-050-5490 Annual Contract for Vanishpoint Syringes as awarded to Practical A/R Solutions dba Topline Home Health Care Supplies; and

WHEREAS, the tenn of this contract is April 6, 2012 through April 5, 20l3; and

WHEREAS, the extension of this contract supports Vision 2, Strategy 2.1 of the Strategic Plan by providing exceptional disease prevention and health promotion to the citizens of Dallas County

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Court does hereby authorize the first extension of Bid No. 2011-050-5490 Annual Contract for Vanishpoint Syringes as awarded to Practical A/R Solutions dba Topline Home Health Care Supplies for the period April 6, 2012 through April 5, 2013 and authorizes all County documents/payments to reflect accordingly.

URT, this the __ "'-6t"'h"--______ day of ___ +'-'~""a""r"_'c"'h"'-________ q.... __ _


Linda S. Boles, Purchasing Agentlgt

COURT ORDER

2 ... 2 043~~ ORDER NO: U1

------

DA TE:_--",M",a:!!r~ch"-",6,,-,2,,,,O,,,,1::.2 _____ _

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS

BE IT REMEMBERED, at a rel,'1llaT meeting of Commissioners Conrt of Dallas County, Texas, held on the

______ ~6~ili _________ dayof ___ ~M~&~ch~ _______________________ ,2012,on

a motion made by Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of Distri ct No.4 , and seconded by

-,J"o",lm""-.!!W~il,,,es;y)C.-lPC.!r..Jj.!.c",e+, _C,-,OUJmmllllLlu· S",SiJiCLou:nLeecr:r'-QOLf_DU;Ju' s>lt:lr:Ji.Gcctt-~j)iIGG-.-_3~------, the following Conrt Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, Commissioners Court awarded Bid No. 2012-018-5813 Annual Contract for Lamps and Ballasts to various vendors through Court Order 2012-0176 dated January 31, 2012 for the period January 31,2012 through January 30,2013; and

WHEREAS, Commissioners Conrt was briefed on February 28,2012 concerning waiving the requirement for commercial automobile liability insurance under this contract with Competitive Edge; and

WHEREAS, the County's approved insurance policy does not require this type of coverage for goods shipped via common carrier; and

WHEREAS, this action supports Vision I, Strategy 1.3 by providing a sound, financially responsible, and accountable governance

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Conrt does hereby authorize the waiver of commercial automobile liability insurance under Bid No. 2012-018-5813 Annual Contract for Lamps and Ballasts as awarded to Competitive Edge and authorizes all County documents/payments to reflect accordingly.

DONE IN OPEN __ ~6~th~ _____ dayof_~~~ ___ ~~~_.

Mike Cantrell, Distlict #2

~ Dr. Elba Garcia, DistIict #4

Recommend€; _; J ,IU -rt lla S. Boles, Purchasing Agent/sc

COURT ORDER

2012·0433 ORDERNO: ____ _

DATE: ___ ..!:M~a!!!r..!:c.!!h.!!6,.., 2~O~1~2,----__ _

STATE OF TEXAS §

COUNTY OF DALLAS §


______ ~6~ili~ ________ dayof ____ ~M~ar~c~h~ __________ ,2012,on

a motion made by Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of Di stri ct No. 4 , and seconded by

-,::J:=.ol",m",-,W",i",l'oSe'-ly~P~r~i~ce,,-,-, -,C~o!!!mmll'.C!i,;;;s",sc!,il<on!!e",rL.!o",fL!,DCliJ;jscbtl,.rl,.ic[;.t!.-!NCilQ.L.~3L-_____ , the following Court Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, on November 21,2011, by authorization of the Commissioners Court, bids were received and opened for Bid No. 2012-019-5814, Annual Contract for Personal Hygiene Products; and

WHEREAS, eleven responses were received; and

WHEREAS, upon review and for clarification purposes, staff is requesting iliat the bid be cancelled and the specifications be revised and re-solicited; and

WHEREAS, this action supports Vision 1, Strategy 1.3 of the Strategic Plan by providing a sound, financially responsible and accountable governance

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Court does hereby authorize: 1) the cancellation of Bid No. 2012-019-5814, Annual Contract for Personal Hygiene Products, rejecting all bids received from award consideration, 2) staff to revise and re-solicit proposals for the service immediately and 3) all County documents to reflect accordingly.

Recommend'~Yf±kdl>,;s=J"=l")~J _______ _

COURT ORDER J

ORDER NO: 2012 0434 DA TE: ___ -'M~ar~c~h'_!6!l.,_=2C!!O~12"__ ___ _

STATE OF TEXAS §

COUNTY OF DALLAS §


_____ -'6'-"th"-_______ day of ___ -'M~ar'-"cgh ___________ , 2012, on

amotionmadeby Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of District No.4 , and seconded by

_J.-:o __ bn ____ .-:W=il=-e:::y'--.:P:..:r:..:i:.::c:.::e2'~Co=ll1Il1l=::· s::.::s::i:::o:.::n:.::e:::r~o=-f:..:D:::l::· s::.::t::r::i:.:::c:.:::tc...:::N:::o~. -'3"-___ , the following Court Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, specifications have been written seeking proposals from qualified firms for the modernization of approximately thirty-one elevators and eight escalators located in the following County facilities; Administration, Frank Crowley Courts, Health and Human Services aud Lew Sterrett North Tower Jail; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with Local Government Code 262.0256 and 262.0275 and due to the complexity and potential risk factors involved with this project, staff is requesting that the hid specifications include a mandatory pre-bid conference and a review of each firm's safety record for the past five years; and

WHEREAS, this action supports Vision I, Strategy 1.3 of the Strategic Plan by providing a sound, financially responsible and accountable governance

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that in accordance with Local Government Code 262.0256 and 262.0275, the Dallas County Commissioners Court does hereby authorize the bid specifications for the FY2012 Elevator Modernization Services to include a mandatory pre-bid conference and a review of each firm's safety record for the past five years.

6th day of -±!M"'ar"""ch"'-___ -I-__ _

strict #3 Dr. Elba Garcia, District #4

---.. _____ 'KeCOmmend~-~-"'~ ~2~ ____ _ ~S. Boles, Purchasing Agent

COURT ORDER

ORDER NO. 2(')12 0435 DATE: March 6, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS

BE IT REMEMBERED, at a regular meeting ofthe Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas, held on

the 6th ____ day of ______ ::M=a::r~c::h=_ ___________ , 2012, on motion made by

Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of District No.4 ___ , and secondcd by ~~~~~~-

~~~ Wiley Price, Commissioner of District No. 3 " ________ , the following order was adopted.

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

the matter set forth below was presented to Commissioners Court in briefing on February 28, 2012; and

Dallas County Public Works is soliciting applications ITom cities for tmnsportation infrastructure partnership projects that can be funded through the Sixth Call of the Dallas County Major Capital Improvement Program (MClP); and

now in its sixth cycle, the MCIP is a partnership "Funding Commitment" financing mechanism for County to provide up to half of the total project cost for transportation infrastructure improvements; and

occurring once every 2 to 4 years, this cycle of project selection allows Dallas County the flexibility to focus on high priority projects and to assure that these projects can be designed and constructed in a timely manner; and

under the MCIP funding mechanism, approximately 40 million dollars will be available annually FY 20l7-FY 2020, and as a result of this 50/50 funding partnership at least 320 million dollars of construction funding will be leveraged in Dallas County over this four year period; and

by execution of the attached Five Signature Letter, Commissioners Court will authorize the Sixth Call for Projects; and

evaluation and ranking of project submittals is to be completed by the Public Works Department by early 2013 for review by the County Commissioners; and

final selection of projects to receive funding commitments by Commissioners Court is anticipated to occur in 2013; and

Dallas County, in seeking to improve regional mobility and air quality by providing infrastructure improvements with our City partners, is consistent with the Strategic Plan, but in particular is directly fulfilling the following visions:

Vision 1.- Dallas County is a model interagency Partner Vision 4: Dallas County proactively addresses critical regional issues Vision 5: Dallas county is the destination of choice/or residents and businesses; and

the Director of Public Works recommends that the Five Signature Letter authorizing the Sixth Call for Projects for the Majo apitallmprovement Program be executed and sent to partner cities.

IT IS THEREFORE 0 DE ED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the attached Five Signature Letter authorizing the ixth Call for Projects for he aj r Cap tal Improvement Program be executed and se tettrpartner cities.

6th ._~_day of_*-__ Ms=r=-c=h"---____ ~'--,~c.,

d for Approval:

.


March 06, 2012

Re: Major Capital Improvement Program (MCIP) Transportation Funding Commitment -6 th Call for Projects

Dear Dallas County Partner:

Dallas County is soliciting applications from cities for transportation infrastructure partnership projects that can be funded through the Sixth Call of the Dallas County Major Capital Improvement Program (MCIP). Now in its sixth cycle, the MCIP is a partnership "Funding Commitment" financing mechanism for County to provide up to half of the total project cost for transportation infrastructure improvements. Occurring once every 2 to 4 years, this cycle of project selection allows Dallas County the flexibility to focus on high priority projects and to assure that projects can be designed and constructed in a timely manner.

Under this funding mechanism, approximately $40 million dollars will be available annually in FY 2017 through FY 2020. Through this 50/50 funding partnership program at least $320 million dollars of construction funding in Dallas County will be leveraged over this four year period. We are currently seeking nominations for projects to be funded for construction in FY 2017 and beyond. All nominations for funding during the FY 2013 program selection year must be submitted to Dallas County Public Works by 4 PM on September 28,2012. Evaluations of these submittals will be completed in early 2013. Each city will be provided with the preliminary rankings of its own projects at that time for comment and feedback. Final project approval is anticipated to occur in 2013, with notifications of project approval being sent after Court approval. Projects accepted in FY 2013 through FY 2014 will begin initial planning and design to allow award of the construction contract during Program Years 2017-2020.

In September 2007, Dallas County adopted its first Strategic Plan. The Plan puts into words, the principles of service to its citizens that Dallas County has been operating under since it was incorporated. In seeking to improve regional mobility and air quality by providing infrastructure improvements with our City partners, Dallas County is consistent with the Strategic Plan, but in particular is directly fulfilling the following Dallas County visions:

Vision 1 Vision 4 Vision 5

Dallas County is a model interagency Partner Dallas County proactively addresses critical regional issues Dallas County is the destination of choice for residents and businesses

To better facilitate attendance two alternate Partnering Workshops are being planned for early May 2012, with the same meeting content, to discuss application procedures. You will receive a

411 Elm Street Dal/as, Texas 75202 Phone 653-7327, Fax 653-7057

Call For Projects -- 2

To better facilitate attendance two alternate Partnering Workshops are being planned for early May 2012, with the same meeting content, to discuss application procedures. You will receive a workshop notice in mid-March, then a follow-up reminder one month prior to the workshop date you have confirmed to attend and another follow-up reminder one week prior to that date.

The e-application form will be available on-line beginning on March 06, 2012 and can be accessed on the Dallas County website at www.dallascounty.org/htmllcitizen-serv/pubwks/mcipprojects.htm!. The application form is supported by Microsoft Access 97 (or later) and may be downloaded for completion of both the electronic and printed copies. Applications will be submitted both on disk and five hard copies of the application and supporting information including a GIS file that specifies the project location and limits.

Public Works has provided the attached listing of the evaluation criteria that will be used to rate the proposals. Please note that local cost participation of at least 50% of the estimated project cost is a key element in the criteria. If your city qualifies as an economically distressed city please contact us for more information. If you have any questions about any aspects of the MCIP or the selection methodology, we encourage you to contact Dallas County Public Works

'1(214)653-7151. {Ju.-W ~= ~ . ;ine Dickey ~ Mike Cantrell

District 1 6 District 2

~~' LJ.d~ Dr. Elba Garcia

District 4

Call For Projects -- 3

EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR MCIP 6TH CALL FOR PROJECTS

ELIGIBILITY SCREENING

(a) A signed Master Agreement is in place? (b) City meets Orphan Road Policy Standards? (c) City is able to provide the 50% funding match (or) (d) City qualifies as economically distressed city (60% of land is 51 % low/med income) (e) The project is an eligible project type per Dallas County R&B Policy (f) The proposed project must enhance capacity (e.g. widen, extend, construct new roadway or

connect to transit) (g) Federal Functional Classification System (FFCS) of Collector or Greater (or) (h) listed in the Regional Veloweb or an urban multimodal pathway connecting to transit

STRATEGIC SCREENiNG (50 pOints)

(a) Interjurisdictional Project (crosses jurisdictions or funded by more than one city) (5 pts) (b) Regional Access (connects to community institutions e.g. hospitals, schools, etc.) (5 pts) (c) Underutilized Area (5 pts) (d) Economic Impact (5 pts) (e) Facility Type (5 pts) (f) Context Sensitive Solution (5 pts) (g) MultimodallTransit (quality of service/connectivity) (5 pts) (h) Is Project warranted in the near term?

(i) Accident Rate (5 pts) (ii) Degree of Congestion (5 pts)

(i) Air Quality (5 pts)

TECHNICAL SCREENING (50 points)

(a) Future Traffic Impacts Based on Results From Year 2035 Traffic Model (i) Traffic Volume (Future impact: Build vs No-Build) (5 pts) (ii) Traffic Volume Growth (Forecasted volume vs current volume) (5 pts) (iii) Projected Utilization (travel desire) (5 pts) (iv) Benefit/Cost Ratio (reduction in travel-time delay vs cost) (5 pts)

(b) Delivery Ratings (higher score indicates fewer barriers to project delivery) (i) Significant drainage improvements required (5 pts) (ii) Environmental challenges - remediation, historical buildings, etc (5 pts) (iii) Utility challenges (5 pts) (iv) Potential excessive ROW/easement/visibility obstruction costs (5 pts) (v) Percentage of ROW/easements already dedicated or purchased by the city (5 pts) (vi) Support level for project (5 pts)

NOTE: A COST PARTICIPATION MULTIPLIER OF 1.5 THROUGH 2.0 WILL BE USED FOR FUNDING COMMITMENTS OF 50% OR GREATER

ORDER NO. 2012 043G

DATE: March ~, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS

COURT ORDER \

BE IT REMEMBERED, at a regular meeting ofthe Commissioners Conrt of Dallas County. Texas. held on

tile 6th day of' March JOl2 t' d . __ • _ , on mown ma e

by Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of_D_l_' s_t_r_i_c_tc-N"'0e,._4 _________ • and seconded

by John Wiley Price, Commissioner of District No.3 , the following order was adopted:

WHEREAS, m connection with RFQ 2011-008-5282, Dallas County Purchasing Agent advertised and received Statements of Qualifications for Subsurface Utility Engineering Services as per the County AlE Two-Step Selection Policy; and

WHEREAS, UNA T, RAMEY & ASSOCIATES. INC., was selected as the best qualified finn for Subsurface Utility Engineering for an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity Contract for Districts 3 and 4, for a period of one year renewable two times; pursuant to Conrt Order 2011-472, dated March 8, 2011; and

WHEREAS, Work Order No, 2 authOlizes the pelformance of Subsurface Utility Engineering Services for the Bonnie View Road MCIP 30227 project (Wintergreen Road to Langdon Road);

WHEREAS, the improvements to Bonnie View Road will facilitate future development in the project area which is consistent with the Dallas County Strategic Plan, Vision 5 (Dallas County is the destination of choice for residents and businesses); and

WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works recommends that the aforementioned Work Order No.2 in connection with the Bonnie View Road MCIP 30227 project in an amount not to exceed $9,105.00 to be paid from Fund 196, Project 8201, be executed,

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DFXREED by the Dallas County Commissioners Court that the County Judge is authorized and directed to execute the attached Work Order No.2 with Lina T. Ramey & Associates, Inc. for Subsurface Utility Engineering in an amount not to exceed $9,105.00 to bc paid from Fund 196, Project 8201 for work in connection with Bonnie V' Road MCIP 30227.

lis the __ 6_t_h _______ day of l ___ ",M=a::::r.::ch",-_"7"'''''',f.c-_ _ -?L-_»f~

Mike Cantrell, District #

SUBSURFACE UTILITY ENGINEERING (SUE) SERVICES CONTRACT (INDEFINITE DELIVERY, INDEFINITE QUANTITY)

LINA T. RAMEY & ASSOCIATES, INC. (LTRA)

Work Order No.2

ProJect Number: 30227 (Bonnie View Road) Date: February 23, 2012

Pursuant to Commissioners Court Order Number 2011-472, authorizing the contract for Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) services (Indefinite Deliver/Quantity) (One Year), dated March 8, 2011, between Dallas County and Lina T. Ramey & Associates, Inc. (the Consultant):

I. The Consultant agrees to perform the following in compliance with this work order and the contract for Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) services: A. The Consultant shall perform SUE services Quality Level B (designate) along

the existing underground AT&T fiber optics line (located inside the street ROW) within the limits as identified on the proposal.

B. The Consultant shall perform SUE services Quality Level A (locate) on AT&T fiber optics line using test holes at three different locations as designated on the proposal.

C. The Consultant shall furnish Dallas County with a CD containing all CAD deliverables. All identified utilities shall be drawn in the same (x,y) coordinate plane as the project base map. CAD deliverables must be in Microstation V8 format.

D. The Consultant shall provide Dallas County with one set of scaled 22"x34" plan sheets depicting all identified utilities and features.

II. Dallas County has provided the Consultant with information received from AT&T within the project limits. Dallas County has also provided the following information to the Consultant: project base map, applicable seed file and the proj ect control infonnation.

III. The cumulative sum of all services requested under this work order shall not exceed $9,105.00 (Nine Thousand one hundred and five dollars and zero cents). The funds are to be expended from Fund 196, Project 8201.

IV. The Dallas County point of contact is: Om B. Gharty Chhetri, P.E.

411 Elm Street. 4th Floor Dallas. Texas 75202

Sr. Civil Engineering Designer Office: 214-653-6961 Fax: 214-653-6445 EmaiI9m.cbhetri(?ildallascounlv.0l:g

Office: (214) 653-7151 Fax: (214) 653·6445

Website: www.dallascounty.org

V. Signatures:

Accepted by the Consultant: Lina T. Ramey & Associates, Inc.

By: 0 d rxyy By:

Printed Name: :rO~ ~j:( W)IH~Lv I 7

Title: ~()G" flA)fL"Wl HI&V\, 1;1 r

Date:

Recommended for AP~

By: r2:zf~

Date:

Antonia! D. Irvin, P .E. Project Manager

2/23/12 ---'-

Date:

By:

Date:

March 6, 2012

oval:

a' ,P.E. .. Dlrector ofPub!ic Works

~h7/r2-I .

411 Elm Street, 4th Floor Dallas, Texas 75202 Office: (214) 653-7151 Fax: (214) 653-6445

Website: www.dallascounty.org

Una T. Ramey & Associates, (ne ..

Mr. Om Cbbetri, PE Dallas County 411 Elm Street, Dallas, TX 75202

RE: Subsurface Utility Engineering investigation BOlmie View Road

Dear Mr. Cbbetri:

Engineering Surveying

Subsurface Utility Engineering Construction Management

Februmy 22, 2012

Thmuc you for requesting this cost proposal for Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE), required on the above referenced project. Lina T. Ramey and Associates (LTRA) prepared this cost proposal based on a site visit and site plans provided.

SUE has emerged over the last two decades as a means to characterize the risks associated with utility mapping. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), in publication CI/ASCE 38-02, defines SUE as a branch of Civil Engineering that involves mapping existing snbsurface utilities and depicting those ntilities to certain quality levels. These different quality levels can be defined as follows:

• Quality Level "D": Information derived from existing records andlor oral recollections, • Quality Level "C": Information obtained by surveying and plotting visible above-ground

utility features and by using professional judgment in correlating this information to quality level D information.

• Quality Level "B": Infonnation obtained through the application of appropriate surface geophysical methods to determine the existence and approximate hOllzontal position of subsurface utilities (aka Designating).

• Quality Level "A": Precise horizontal and vertical location of utilities obtained by the actual exposure and subsequent measurement of subsurface utilities, usually at a specific point (aka Locating).

The scope ofthis pro;ect will provide utility mapping to Quality Levels "A" & "B" as specified below.

L TRA will use record information provided by the Dallas County and AT&T to help identify all known AT&T lines. LTRA will designate (Quality Level B) these lines between stations 25+00 to 82+00. LTRA will also vacuum excavate three test holes (Quality Level A) at stations 30+00, 36+00 and 80+50. Both Quality Levels "A" & "B" will be surveyed and tied to project control provided.

LTRA 's Responsibilities-• Designate AT&T lines within the project area • Survey designated lines and test holes • Provide CADD drawing of all lines designated in Microstation format • Provide Signed and Sealed SUE plait sheets

1349 Empire Central, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75247 & Phone (214) 979-1144. Fax (214) 979-2480

Dallas County's Responsibilities • Provide LTRA with Right of Entry to the locations, ({necessary • Provided any existing topographic and survey information in Microstation • Approve test hole locations

Schedule Begin work within one week after receipt of notice to proceed. Field work ~ one week (both Quality levels "A" & "B") Survey - two work days Office work - one week

Estimated Fees

See Attachment "A"

If you agree to this proposal, please sign and date below and fax back to this office. Your signature below will also serve as a written notice to proceed with the work. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me.

Sincerely,

Joseph A Murphy, PE SUE Program Manager

Accepted: 2012

(Company)

By: _______ _

(Authorized Signature)

Title: _______ _

1349 Empire Central, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75247. Phone (214) 979·1144. Fax (214) 979·2480

I I

SUBSURFACE UTILITY ENGINEERING (SUE) SERVICES CONTRACT Indefinite Delverable, Indefinite Quantity

Work Order No, :

Project Name:

Location:

I. DESIGNATE, QL"B"

Designate Quality Level B

Designating Crew

ATIACHMENTA

Lina T, Ramey and Associates

2 Bonnie View Road Wintergreen to Langdon Road

Estimated Quantity Authorized rate

5700 $1.15 $300,00

Il, LOCATE SERVICES, QL "A"

Test Hole Depth Estimated Qualtity Authorized rate

° -5' ($!Hole) 3 $850,00

5' - 1 n - 10' $1,120,00

10'-1"-15' $1,525,00

Over 15' - I" ($/HouriCrew $380,00

City of Dallas Pavement $500,00

Repair (4'x4')

lII. VISIBLE FEATURES SURVEY, QL "C"

Survey Task I Estimated Quantity Authorized rate

I $135,00

Unit

Linear Foot $!Crew Hour

TOTAL

Unit

each each each

Hour

each

TOTAL

Unit

$/Crew Hour

TOTAL PROPOSAL COST

Total Estiamted Cost $6,555,00

$0,00

$6,555,00

Total Estiamted Cost $2,550,00

$0,00 $0,00

$0,00

$0,00

$2,550,00

Total Estiamted Cost $0,00

$9,105,00

ORDER NO. 2012 {)43 DATE: March 6, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS

COURT ORDER

BE IT REMEMBERED. at a regular meeting of the Commissioners Conrt of Dallas County, Texas, held on

the 6th day March ,2012, on motion made

by Dr. Elba Garcia, Commissioner of District No.4

by John Wiley Price, Commissioner of District No.3

, and seconded

, the following order was adopted:

WHEREAS, pursuant to Court Order 2008-1264 dated July 1, 2008, an indefinite delivery and quantity contract for engineering services (RFQ 2007-116-3009) in District 4 between Dallas County and An-edondo, Zepeda & Brunz LLC (AZ&B LLC) is now in effect; and

WHEREAS, the need exists to perform certain preliminary engineering services for the Denton Drive Road Project MCIP Project 10217 B from 700 feet south of Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 feet north of Royal Lane; and

WHEREAS, the services to be performed are described in the attached Modification No.3; and

WHEREAS, it is estimated that $590,262.00 is sufficient to perfonn these services under the work order; and

WHEREAS, this project will improve County transportation and other infrastructure which is consistent with Vision 1: Dallas County is a model interagency partner; Vision 4: Dallas County proactively addresses critical regional issues; and Vision 5: Dallas County is the destination of choice for residents and businesses; and

WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works recommends executing Modification No.3 with An-edondo, Zepeda & Brunz LLC (AZ&B LLC).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the Dallas County Commissioners Court that the County Judge is authorized and directed to execute the attached Modification No.3 to the existing contract between Dallas County and Arredondo, Zepeda & Brunz LLC (AZ&B LLC). in an amount not to exceed $590,262.00, including $536,055.00 for Basic Services and $54,207.00 for Special Services to be paid from Fund 196, Project 8201.

DONE IN OPEN COU 6th day of IV"''4''" :7 q,

~. Blair, P.E., irector of Public Works

MODIFICATION NO.3 TO THE SCOPE OF SERVICES

DENTON DRIVEIHARRY HINES BOULEVARD MCIP PROJECT 10217 B BETWEEN

COUNTY OF DALLAS, TEXAS And

ARREDONDO, ZEPEDA AND BRUNZ

This Agreement is entered into this day of , 2012, to amend the Consultant Engineering Contract between Arredondo, Zepeda, & Brunz LLC (AZ&B LLC), (the "Engineer"), and the County of Dallas, Texas, (the "County"), for thc Denton Drive /Harry Hines Boulevard, MCIP Project 10217 B, (the "Project").

Whereas, pursuant to Court Order 2008-1264 dated 07/01/2008, ARREDONDO, ZEPEDA AND BRUNZ (AZ&B), LLC, hereafter known as ( "The Engineer"); was awarded a contract for the design engineering services for the DENTON DRIVE/HARRY HINES BOULEVARD PROJECT 10217 B, in an amount of$149,733.00 and amended by Modification No.1 and Modification No.2, to an amount of$169,441.10, and is hereby further amended by both parties.

NOW THEREFORE, by execution of this Modification No.3 the engineering services contract is hereby amended with respect to items and features described below:

1. PURPOSE:

A. To prepare Preliminmy Design Plans for the project as more fully detailed in Attachment A (Scope of Services)

B. Summary of Fees

II. EFFECT OF MODIFICATION:

By execution ofthis Modification to the Scope of Services No.3, the Original Contract as approved by Dallas County Commissioners Court Order 2008-1264 dated 07/01/2008 is amended hereby with respect to the sections described below. No other sections, provisions, clauses or conditions of the contract are waived or changed hereby, and they shall remain in full force and effect throughout the term of the Original Contract and any duly authorized extensions.

III. AMENDED PROVISIONS A. Article 11.2 (Basic Services) - This section is amended to include the Basic Services

Identified in Attachment A of this Modification No.3. B. Article II.3(Special Services) - This section is amended to include the Basic Services

Identified in Attachment A of this Modification No.3. C. Article III.! (Total Services Fee) - Total Services Fee in ARTICLE III. 1 "Total

Services Fee" of the Contract is now increased from One Hundred Sixty Nine

Thousand, Four Hundred Forty One Dollars and Ten Cents ($169,441.10) to Seven Hundred Fifty Nine Thousand, Seven Hundred Three Dollars and Ten Cents ($759,703.10).

Modification No.3 - Denton Drive (J 0217) 02-12

D. Article III.2 (Basic Services Fee): The COUNTY shall pay CONSULTANT Basic Services in the total amount not to exceed Seven Hundred Five Thousand, Four Hundred Ninety Six Dollars and Ten Cents ($ 705,496.10).

E. Article III.3 (Special Services Fee) - The COUNTY shall pay CONSULTANT Special Services fees in the total amount not to exceed Fifty Four Thousand, Two Hundred Seven Dollars and no cents ($54,207.00), provided, however, that modifications to the Scope of Services, or other conditions defined herein may necessitate a change of Fee and further provided that any additional fee is approved by the Commissioners Court in accordance with the terms of this Contract. Payment for Special Services fees may be

applied for after costs have been incurred, but no more frequently than monthly, based upon detailed invoices. CONSULTANT'S invoices to COUNTY shall provide complete information and documentation to substantiate CONSULTANT'S charges and shall be in a form to be specified by Director. All payments to CONSULTANT shall be

made on the basis of the invoices submitted by CONSULTANT and approved by Director. Progress payment requests shall be accompanied by digital files through the date of payment request in a form which can be checked as to manageability. Should additional backup material be requested by the Director, CONSULT ANT shall comply

promptly with such request. In this regard, should the Director determine it necessary, CONSULTANT shall promptly, but in no event later than thirty (30) days from the date of notice, make all its records and books related to this Contract available to COUNTY for inspection and auditing purposes.

IV. EFFECTIVE DATE:

This Modification No.3 shall be effective on the date the last duly authorized agent signs the Modification.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, by the signatures below of the duly authorized agents of the County of Dallas, Texas and Arredondo, Zepeda, & Brunz LLC (AZ&B LLC), hereby agree to append this Modification No.3 to the Scope of Services with no charges to any sections, provisions clauses or conditions of the original contract for the consulting engineering services as authorized by court order 2008-1264 dated 07/0112008, thereby increasing the amount not to exceed to $759,703.10 to be paid from the MCIP Fund 196.

Modification No. 3 ~ Denton Drive 002 17) 02-12

2

The County of Dallas, State of Texas, has executed this Modification No.3 to the scope of services pursuant to Commissioners Court Order Number 2012-0436 and passed on the 6th day of March ,201 .. L.

Printed Name

Title

Date: __ 1_-_8_/_2.--0_1 '2--_

Date: ___ --' _______ _

Approved as to form: Craig Watkins

D~~,:r~Y_;/1 L/ # 7 By. ~ ret-71, ~£ . h i Turner

Date: ______ _

*By law, the District Attorney's Office may only advise or approve contracts or legal documents on behalf of its clients. It may not advise or approve a contract or legal document on behalf of other parties. Our review of this document was conducted solely from the legal perspective of our client. Our approval of this document was offered solely for the benefit of our client. Other parties should not rely on this approval, and should seek review and approval by their own respective attorney(s).

Modification No.3 - Denton Drive (J02I71 02·12

ATTACHMENT A

Denton Drive Expansion- Segment 3 50% Design

DENTON DRIVE EXPANSION Dallas County, Texas

January 2012 Scope of Services

Scope of Services Dallas County

The following scope of services provides the County with a 50% design for implementing improvements on Denton Drive from 700 feet south of Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 feet north of Royal Lane, a distance of 7,226 feet (1.37 miles). The project, when constructed, will improve the roadway from an asphalt road with side ditches to a three-lane (2 - 15' travel lanes and one 14' left turn lane) concrete curbed street with an added 8-foot parking lane, minimum 10-foot wide sidewalks and other improvements such as transit oriented design features to be located at Royal and Walnut Hill; and consideration of sustainable design concepts in the design of the roadway.

The scope of services presented herein identifies major tasks that will need to be completed to provide the County with a set of 50% preliminary plans. Services identified in Sections I through IV are considered Basic Services and Special Services are identified in Section V. Special Services will be performed only with written authorization from the County. The following scope of services is formatted in a manner consistent with the County's "5 Phase Product Delivery System."

1-1 - Public Outreach Program (To Be Performed By County)

The Engineer will assist the County improve its coordination efforts with the City of Dallas, DART and other interested parties and agencies. The Engineer will participate in one initial Kick-off Meeting to be arranged by the County, and will participate in other project meetings described below.

a. Project Committee Participation - In order to gain project acceptance by the public and interested agencies, the Engineer will actively participate on three Teams:

Task Force Team - A total of four (4) monthly meetings will be held during Phase I of this project.

Matrix Team -It is anticipated there will be two (2) meetings of this Team.

Outreach Team - It is anticipated there will be one (1) outreach meeting and it will be conducted as a Preliminary Design Charrette (PDC). The PDC will be arranged and conducted by the County and will take place after preparation of the Preliminary Design exhibits. The Engineer will provide the County with Conceptual Design Exhibits for use during the PDC as described in Task 11-1 and will be available to answer questions during the PDC meeting.

Work in the Public Outreach Program task will not be invoiced separately, but will be invoiced under Task 11-2 Conceptual Design.

f'/O'_~ SoWN"", '!"'I""",. C""'''''"iI;' SON~aT""$im.,"!,,


Deliverables:

No deliverables this task. See Task 11-2 for deliverables used during meetings.

Schedule:


As directed by the County. The Task Force Team and Matrix Team meetings will take place during the Preliminary Conceptual Design Phase. The Preliminary Design Charrette, if necessary, will take place at the end of the Preliminary Conceptual Design Phase and will be the responsibility of the County.

Information reguired from the County:

• The County will perform all coordination and outreach with the individual stakeholders. AZB will attend the meetings identified in Section 1-1 a.

• The County will be responsible for arranging the members of the Outreach Teams. • The County will secure places for public outreach meetings. • The County will be responsible for taking and distributing notes from the meetings.

AZ&B will review draft meeting notes and provide comments for needed revisions prior to distribution.

Meetings:

As defined for Public Outreach Program in Section 1-1 a.

The Engineer will perform conceptual design for the various elements of the project and will include preparation of a Preliminary Design Report. The Engineer will utilize as much as possible all available resources and schematics prepared to date along with traffic studies, typical cross sections and boundary surveys. Specific Deliverables, Schedule, Meetings and Information required from the County are defined in section 1\-4.

11-1 Preliminary Design Report

Engineer will develop project specific design parameters in conjunction with County staff. The design parameters will define roadway geometry, sidewalk requirements, areas for transit oriented design, drainage criteria, right-of-way requirements and other criteria to be established for the project. The design parameters will be compiled in a Preliminary Design Report (PDR) and provided to the County. The PDR will document the design parameters identified above and will provide an executive summary along with brief narratives of existing conditions, proposed improvements, right-of-way, adjacent property ownership, and specific situations that will have special design considerations. The PDR will include exhibits showing the basic project design concepts such as the proposed typical cross-section. This document will be approximately 10 to 12 pages in length.

Key issues included in the PDR include:

• Project Description and Limits • Minimum design standards • Transit oriented design concepts and materials • Architectural treatments • Preliminary Water utility conflicts, betterments and relocations • Drainage concepts

-..:=-..=."::'.==..:§ :: .... '='...:;' ... ~.: ;;~ WfI!m! e ' .w

Pm,i<tWl ScM",",· 1,"-",,"", Con",,,,,", "N"'1T.x"S~,,""

Page 2 of 19 January 17, 2011


• Preliminary Electrical, Communication and Gas utility conflicts • Integration with DART facilities • Construction sequencing and traffic handling concepts • Sustainable project design options

11-2 Preliminary Roadway Design


Two (2) preliminary design exhibits will be prepared that provide information to understand the basic project design concepts. These exhibits will be:

1. Conceptual Roadway Design Exhibit

2. Conceptual Cross Sections

These exhibits will be roll plot exhibits that show the basic elements of the proposed roadway with minimal annotation and will include the following:

1. Conceptual Roadway Design Exhibit

The horizontal and vertical design elements will be shown and will include existing ground and proposed pavement profiles, horizontal alignment, curve data of centerline only, proposed pavement (type; thickness), traffic signals, culverts, easements, existing topography, and existing and proposed right of way. Cross street centerlines and reconstruction limits be included. Sidewalk improvements (seven feet wide) that extend to Harry Hines Boulevard along both sides of Royal Lane and Walnut Hill Lane will be shown. It is assumed that no modifications to the existing traffic/pedestrian signals at Harry Hines will be necessary. Preliminary typical sections previously developed will be used for the design of this project. Typical sections which represent both the existing and proposed conditions will be shown on the Conceptual Design Exhibit. The typical sections shall incorporate the pavement design specified by City of Dallas. Typical Sections shall include representations of the various conditions proposed, such as slopes, number of lanes, sidewalks, and right-of-way width.

2. Conceptual Design Cross Sections

In conjunction with the Preliminary Conceptual Design, preliminary design cross sections will be developed on 100' station intervals, at driveways and other critical areas using Geopak. The existing and proposed surface grades will be shown together with the right of way limits, side slopes, driveway slopes, pavement cross slopes, curbs and retaining walls. The cross sections will be presented in the form of a roll plot exhibit.

To support the Preliminary Roadway Design, additional documents will be prepared that include the following:

a. Driveway and Parking Modification Exhibits

To support the Preliminary Conceptual Design, individual exhibits will be prepared that will show the proposed driveway modifications and parking/traffic circulation impacts on the adjacent properties where right-of-way takes are needed. It is estimated that there will be 34 individual exhibits on 11" X 17" sheets.

i=-'¥~;~=i reel It z w

I'm~'dln~ $,",,~,", -1m""",,," ",mm",,>, Sm"'!1'''''S('''''.''



b. Utility Layouts


The County will lead utility coordination efforts including initiating and holding monthly utility meetings. Based on the information from the utility coordination process, review of as-built records and DIG-TESS markings, Engineer will prepare exhibits of existing utilities within the project limits and identify utility conflicts with the proposed paving and drainage improvements. Existing Utility Layouts and Proposed Utility Relocation Layouts will be prepared along with a construction cost estimate for relocating the utilities. The Engineer will not be required to attend all of the monthly utility meetings but will be available to attend up to an estimated six (6) utility related meetings when requested by the County. Attendance at meetings with each of the utility owners will be not be required. It is also understood that the County has a "zero relocation of relocations" policy that will be adhered to unless absolutely necessary.

c. Opinion of Probable Cost

The Engineer will prepare an opInion of probable construction cost for the Preliminary Conceptual Design. The opinion of probable construction cost shall include an allowance for irrigation and structural foundations.

11-3 Preliminary Drainage Design

A preliminary analysis and design of drainage features will be prepared that includes the tasks as follows:

a. Drainage Area Mapping

Delineate major drainage area boundaries for storm sewer trunk lines based on the roadway profile, aerial topography contours, USGS or other suitable topographic maps (if available).

b. HEC-RAS Models

Obtain available HEC-RAS model developed by Halff Associates for the West Fork of Joe's Creek located 1400 feet north of Walnut Hill Lane. Review the obtained model and update with available survey and as-built plans to create the pre-project geometry. Developed from scratch a new pre-project HEC-RAS model for the drainage ditch located approximately 165' north of Virgo Lane.

c. Calculate Discharges

Determine conveyance paths, channel slopes, time of concentration, and runoff coefficients/SCS curve numbers and other factors as required to determine frequency-discharge relationships using hydrologiC models. All discharge calculations for proposed storm sewers will be for the 1 ~O-year storm event unless a different storm event is identified at the beginning of the project. Any other return frequency calculations requested after drainage design initiation will be considered as additional services. The Rational Method will be used for drainage areas under 130 acres. A Unit Hydrograph method will be used for drainage areas greater than 130 acres. The FEMA Flood Insurance Study (FIS) flow rates (10-yr, 50-yr, 100-yr and 500-yr) used in the latest Halff Associates model for the West Fork of Joe's Creek will be used for the Denton Drive crossing analysis and new or additional discharges will not be calculated. Flow rates calculated for the drainage ditch crossing located 165' north of Virgo lane will also be the four FIS flow rates. All

:: .i ;::r .= : f; ;;: ~ .. _w.- ......... mm, • , m P""1diBo s,"",,", _!tr~ CWI",",,1y

S"""'gr""S/or"""'!J1

EllUl = -Page 4 of 19 January 17, 2011



calculations performed will conform to the City of Dallas Drainage Manual or the North Central Texas Council of Government's (NCTCOG) ISWM Manual, whichever is identified to be used at the beginning of the project.

d, Develop Alternative Drainage Schemes

Based on the results of the discharge calculations and water surface profile models, develop up to two (2) alternative schemes for the two crossings identified above (total of 4 alternatives combined) involving culvert sizes, roadway elevations and outfalls for cross culverts, and develop storm drain plan and profiles to alleviate potential drainage issues associated with the roadway construction, Culverts (other than the West Fork of Joe's Creek and the ditch north of Virgo) will be modeled using HY-8 or equivalent software. Storm Drains will be modeled using WinStorm. Ditches will be designed using Manning's equation,

e, County/City Coordination

The Engineer shall provide the hydrology and hydraulic HEC-RAS model information to the County and the City of Dallas as part of the Preliminary Drainage Report task described below, The Engineer provide support to the County with its efforts coordinating with the City of Dallas' Floodplain Management Department, but will not be responsible for coordination or negotiation between the County and City, Coordination and/or negotiations between the County and the City regarding the drainage design will be the responsibility of the County, The Engineer will not prepare documentation for FEMA coordination, Hydraulic models may include current effective models, corrections to reflect actual pre-construction conditions, and proposed conditions,

e, Culvert Sizing

Size each cross culvert to pass the 100-year storm while providing the required two (2) feet of freeboard or an approved lesser amount. City of Dallas Drainage Manual will be used to establish design controls. Applicable FEMA criteria will also be satisfied,

f. Storm Sewer Sizing

Size a network of storm sewers to collect inlet flows and route the discharge to the outfall locations selected in the alternative development stage. Two alternative horizontal pipe system configurations will be analyzed in this phase with stick diagrams and preliminary cost comparisons provided as support, Hydraulic data will be indicated on plan-view only exhibits for the selected alternative in this phase, Profiles and hydraulic data sheets will not be provided in this phase of the work. The design of the storm sewer system will be based on the County approved roadway alignment and profile. Any significant changes to the storm sewer design because of County initiated changes to the approved alignment or grades will be considered as additional services. Additional fees for significant design changes will be negotiated if and when the County directed changes are identified.

g, Identify Easement Requirements

The Engineer shall identify any proposed drainage easements needed to accommodate drainage facilities at discharge points along the route. Preparation of required easement documents is not included in this scope,

'Z



h. Preliminary Drainage Letter Report


Prepare a signed and sealed preliminary drainage letter report summarizing the findings and recommendations of the drainage analysis and hydraulic modeling. The report will document relevant site calculations, assumptions, calculations, exhibits and supporting documents. Any other report format beyond than a letter report will be considered as additional services.

11-4 Preliminary Transit Oriented Design

The Engineer shall perform Preliminary Transit Oriented Design services and present the design on 11" x 1T' exhibits that provide typical conceptual layouts of TOD elements. The exhibits will include the following:

• Conceptual design of pedestrian and roadway lighting pole locations and conduit runs using standard city light fixtures. Does not include the aesthetic pole enhancement designs previously developed with the community;

• Conceptual design of pedestrian paving including enhanced/specialty paving (design to include layout concepts and selection of enhanced specialty paving materials);

• Conceptual design of vehicular paving enhancements at roadway intersections and cross walks (design to include layout and selection of paving materials)

• Conceptual design of screening walls or fencing along the DART line (shall include wall layouts and typical elevation);

• Conceptual design of banners pole locations.

Deliverables:

Task 11-1 Preliminary Design Report: • Five copies of the draft PDR; • Five copies of the final Preliminary Design Report

Task 11-2 Preliminary Conceptual Design: • 3 copies the Conceptual Roadway Design Exhibit in the form of a 1 "=40' color plan and

profile roll plots; • 3 copies the Preliminary Cross Sections Exhibit in the form of a roll plot; • Existing Utility Layout sheets for the length of the project limits in an 11 "x1T' format; • Utility Relocation Layout sheets for the length of the project limits in an 11 "x1T' format; • Opinions of Probable Construction Cost; and • Electronic CADD files of the Preliminary Roadway Design, Preliminary Cross Sections

Exhibits and utility exhibits burned to CD.

Task 11-3 Preliminary Drainage Design: • Two copies of a DRAFT Preliminary Drainage Letter Report will be rnade available to the

County for comment; • Five copies of the Final Preliminary Drainage Letter Report; and • PDF file of the Preliminary Drainage Report burned to CD.

Task 11-4 Preliminary Transit Oriented Design: • 3 copies - 11" x 1T' TOD conceptual design exhibits; and • Electronic CADD files of the TOO conceptual design exhibits burned to CD.

~~~~mw~~~~~~~~~~~~~p~a~ge~6~Of~1~9~~~~~~~~~~J~an~u~~~'Y~1~ =':'~E;~=i 7ft' • " " P"v!4no S_oo, -!m_1Og Commv,/tJ

S.",","T,,~'Sl''''',"81



Meetings:

One (1) Design Parameter Conference

One (1) PDR review meeting

Four (4) Conceptual Design progress and review meetings

SChedule: It is anticipated this task will require four (4) months to complete

Information reguired from the County:

The County will provide authorization regarding what Transit Oriented Design elements identified as "Special Services" will be designed under this contract.

Review Comments of conceptual designs.

111-1 Right-af-Way Analysis

a. Right-of-way requirements. As part of a preliminary assessment of the project previously provided to the County by AZB, preliminary right-ot-way information was collected for the project. For this contract, specific right-of-way requirements will be defined. Based on agreed roadway requirements for streets, bike paths, sidewalks, drainage and other requirements, define the roadway lateral ROW requirements. In coordination with the drainage engineer, determine the need for drainage easement at drainage crossings and possibly for long parallel channels. Easement preparation is not included in this scope of work.

b. Ownership Data

Property ownership data will be provided by the Engineer to the County along the entire project. Engineer will provide the County with DGN File(s) and Excel spreadsheet showing current ownership, addresses and Volume/Page to owners' deeds. Ownership will be based on County Appraisal District Records. It is understood that the County will be responsible for preparing title commitments for the parcels to be acquired including the identification of encumbering easements. The Engineer will review record drawings provided by the County for easements that will be affected by proposed ROW acquisitions. The Engineer will not be responsible for researching county records for easements not shown on record drawings provided.

c. Permission to Enter Private Property

The County will be responsible for securing permission to enter private properties (right-of-entry permits) for survey purposes. This task is not included in the Engineer's scope of work.

d. Survey ROW

The Engineer shall Survey existing ROW. The Engineer need only survey enough existing right of way to help them develop their Design Plans, along with the new proposed centerline. If the need for additional drainage or temporary easements is identified during the design process, the Engineer will supply the pertinent information (DGN files, traverses) to the County.

~ '6

~.i_;.\=;~~ • 1111'"_ ......... wew, ,. y W

P'""'«"QS'i"IiMS'"""""in9G<>mo"",,,"o/ S,fVifI,r,,.,$mce """

:: ELL Page 7 of 19 January 17, 2011



e. Parcel Descriptions and Exhibits

The Engineer shall prepare one individual parcel description and exhibit for each of an estimated 31 private properties where the design requires acquisition of rights on personal property. The documents will include the following:

• Survey the individual private properties sufficient to establish property lines adjacent to the ROW take and crossed by the ROW take.

• Establish the limits of the parcel on the ground and monument the corners. • Prepare a survey plat of the parcel (Exhibit) depicting the required information

for the ROW take. • Prepare a property description for each individual parcel including the

required information for the ROW take. • Provide a closure calculation sheet for each parcel confirming the parcel

configuration and area.

Deliverables:

• Three (3) copies of the ROW Report • Three (3) copies of Parcel Descriptions, Closure Reports and Exhibits

SChedule:

The ROW will be completed within three months of the Notice to Proceed. The ROW parcel takes will be completed after approval of Final Conceptual Design.

Information from the County:

County to provide utility record drawings.

It is understood that the County may provide ownership/property information to streamline the data gathering process.

111-2 Field Surveying and Photogrammetry

The Engineer will perform field and aerial design survey for Denton Drive project from 700 feet south of Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 feet north of Royal Lane, a distance of 7,226 feet (1.37 miles). This task will implement the following:

a. Establish horizontal and vertical controls from "H-points" set for the prior aerial flight. The existing aerial controls shall be densified as needed to complete the stated survey tasks.

b. Establish a benchmark circuit as needed throughout the project. Should any new control points be established, Engineer will supply this data to the County.

c. Controlled Photography

d. Ties shall be made on the existing streets and driveways within the project area. Ties shall include X, Y & Z ties to the gutter, back of curb, centerline, top of rail, drainage structures and obvious grade breaks on intersecting streets and driveways. Ties shall extend a distance of 250 feet from the existing right of way for intersecting streets, and for 75 feet for driveways. Driveway ties shall also include ties to the gutter and back of curb along parking lots. Shots shall be taken at obvious grade

~;.-:",.=:t4 ~~ 1III_lil'_'" ..... JIII Em, e oN « ""'O'iii'l S"M'"" ·imp""mg C''''mooi<r $,,,*,",,,,",=,,",

Page 8 19 January 17, 2011



breaks, curb returns, and at 50-foot intervals for intersecting streets and 25-foot intervals for driveways and parking lots

e. Provide cross-sections of the existing roadway with shots being taken at the ROW, ditch line and centerline, if aerial flight does not provide sufficient data.

I. Provide flow lines, inside top of slab elevations, top of road profile and structural dimensions on all culverts.

g. Locate existing features along the project to supplement the obscured areas of the aerial topography, including but not limited to, manholes, water valves, other utilities, structures, and fences. Tie in all surface utility structures.

h. Provide four (4) cross sections of the West Fork of Joe's Creek and 4 cross sections of the drainage ditch located approximately 165' north of Virgo Lane. Cross sections will be provided at the following locations: upstream and downstream of existing structure and at the east and west ROW.

i. Prepare a final design/topographic drawing in digital format showing all features located in the field, an ASCII coordinate file of all pOints located in the field and a hard copy of the coordinates and feature descriptions. (Field Notes and Sketches)

Deliverables:

Survey Report

Schedule:

The Field Surveying and Photogrammetry will be completed within three (3) months of the Notice to Proceed.


Permission to access properties that are not part of the existing right-of-way.

111-3 Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) Coordination

The Engineer will coordinate with DIG-TESS and DWU to have the location of utilities marked in the field prior to field topographic survey. Utilities to be marked include water, wastewater, telephone, fiber optic cable, FAA lines, gas and electric. The Engineer will prepare and provide electronic files of the survey basemap to the County for its use in performing SUE services. The Engineer will provide locations to the County for necessary Level A SUE potholing. The Engineer will not be responsible for researching or obtaining record drawings of utilities in the project corridor.

Levels D, C, B and A SUE services will be provided by the County as needed. Acquisition of street cut and lane closure permits for utilities under existing roadways will be the County's responsibility. The County will provide electronic files of the underground utilities identified in the SUE process to the Engineer for use in its designs.

Deliverable(s)

Survey base electronic file for County SUE use.

Locations for Level A SUE potholing


County to provide utility record drawings.

~~~~~~~m~'~~~~~~~~P~a~ge~9~"O~f~1~9~~-~~-~~-~~~~J~an~u~~~~-~17~,~20~1~1 =.:.-:;:;,..=--:~;;:.~ "'_v_.a ...... "em!PtY. P,"''''''" So""',, -'''''1''''''''11 ,""mm",it' s,,,,,,,,,,-.,,,",,,,, ""


County to provide SUE Level D, C, B and A services.


County to provide electronic file of underground utilities upon completion of SUE effort.

111-4 Geotechnical - Soil Core Hole Drilling

It is our understanding that the desired scope of services will consist of the following major tasks:

• Perform a geotechnical field investigation and laboratory testing program to provide the basis for the design of new pavement.

• Provide a pavement design for the new road construction to provide pavement life expectancy of 40 years. Use of rigid pavement is contemplated. Pavement design methods will be consistent with those of the City of Dallas Pavement Design.

The field investigation will include 6 soil samples.

The field and laboratory programs will be developed to classify soils, determine engineering properties of soils, and to evaluate strength and swell properties by method Tex-124-E. The Engineer will obtain the data necessary to support design and analysis of subgrade support, stabilization, and required depth of cover to minimize post-construction movements. Tests will be performed to develop optimum stabilization materials and application rates.

Pavement designs will be prepared in accordance with the City of Dallas procedures, and appropriate AASHTO methodologies

In our proposal we included labor, equipment, and materials to provide:

• Attendance at design team meetings when specifically requested • Site reconnaissance and staking of borings • Utility clearance • Coordination of drilling activities with City of Dallas • Coordination of boring survey with the team surveyors • Backfilling boring locations • Locating and drilling test borings in accordance with City of Dallas standards of practice • Laboratory testing in accordance with City of Dallas standards of practice • Geotechnical engineering analyses and pavement design report.

Deliverables:

Three (3) copies of a Geotechnical Report

Schedule:

The Engineer plans to initiate the field investigation within ten working days of receipt of noticeto-proceed and anticipate that four to five working days will be required to complete the field investigation (weather conditions permitting). The laboratory studies will require approximately two weeks. The County will receive the final report approximately seven to eight weeks following receipt of the signed authorization to proceed. If the County requires a delivery time frame other than that presented above, please advise us at the time of completing the agreement so that the Engineer may make the appropriate adjustments in the schedule to accommodate the County's needs.

p""""'"S,/<6""-lmp"""'ngC"n",'~'" ""m',gf,..,S,,,.,,,,





Access to property that is currently not in the ROW, but necessary to provide sufficient information for the Geotechnical Report.

The Engineer will prepare 50% Plans for the proposed improvements based on the approved preliminary exhibits. The 50% Plans will provide enough information to demonstrate that the project can be constructed as proposed. Annotation and callouts will be minimized on the 50% Plans, but enough information will be displayed to understand the design. Deliverables for the 50% plans are presented at the end of this section. All plans will be prepared on 22" x 34" plan sheets.

IV-1 50% ROADWAY PLANS

Based on the approved preliminary design exhibits, further develop horizontal, vertical, and cross-sectional design elements for all roadways. All design shall be City of Dallas Public Works compliant, as applicable.

a. Typical Sections

Prepare Typical Section Plans for all roadways. Typical sections shall include representations of the various proposed conditions, such as pavement materials and thickness, cross-slopes, side slopes, number of lanes, lane widths, retaining wall locations, shoulder widths, clear zones, border width, sidewalk locations, and rightof-way width. It is understood that the typical cross section developed during previous work will be used for this project with no significant changes.

b. Project Layout/Control Data Sheets

Prepare a set of sheets showing the layout of project with sheet break information and horizontal and vertical control information. Coordinates, stations, and elevations of key alignment features and benchmarks shall be noted.

c. Paving Plan and Profile Sheets

Using the approved preliminary geometric layout as the base drawing, prepare planprofile sheets for each roadway at 1" = 20' horizontal scale (1" = 6' vertical scale), unless otherwise directed. Grading information at street intersections will be shown on the Paving P&P's and no separate intersection details will be provided other than cross-street profiles. Street and pedestrian light pole base locations will be shown on the Paving Plan and Profile sheets along with the conduit runs serving each location. Separate series of sheets for street light base and pedestrian light base locations will not be provided.

d. Intersection Layouts

Prepare intersection layouts at 1"=10' showing detailed proposed intersection geometry, grading and tie-ins to existing pavement for the intersections with Royal lane, Walnut Hill Lane and Merrell Road.

~~~_~,:-~_~.:_~~~_:=~~=~TI~~~~~E~~~~~;:a~;;~e~1~!1~oYf~19~~,~~~w~~~~~~~Ja~n~ua:r~Y~17~,~2~o~17 f='f,_vi;;l ""I'i""~ s_,,.· rrrm"Wn~ em"",""itj

S.,"~~T".,$~" ,OM



-

e. Side Road Profiles

Develop profiles for the outside curbs of each side street. Delineate the limits of construction necessary to develop a suitable profile.

f. Demolition Plans

Provide demolition plans at 1" = 40' scale that show removals of pavement, sidewalk, walls, fences, inlets, culverts, etc.

g. Roadway Cross-Sections

Provide design cross-sections at a 1" = 1 0', 1" = 20' or other scale as directed, on 22" x 34" plan sheets or roll plots as directed by the County. Original ground line, design subgrade line and finished grade line shall be shown. The Engineer will provide one cross-section volume report at the design subgrade line. The cross sections will be provided at even 100-foot stations, at driveways and at street intersections. Driveway grades will be annotated on the cross sections and no separate driveway profiles will be provided.

h. Signing and Pavement Marking Layouts

Prepare signing and pavement marking layouts at 1 "=40' on 22" x 34" plan sheets in accordance with City of Dallas design standards and the Texas Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (TMUTCD) showing proposed permanent signs and pavement markings.

i. Signal Layout(s)

The Engineer shall design the traffic signals required for the currently signalized intersections at Walnut Hill Lane, Royal Lane and Merrell Road. This work will include general notes and specification data sheet, layout sheets (1" = 40' scale), conduit diagrams, quantity summary tables, phasing diagrams and construction detail sheets. Interconnect details and temporary signal layouts will not be provided. Existing and proposed signal pole layouts will be shown on the same plan sheet. Elevation drawings will not be provided. It is assumed that illumination will be attached to the signal poles located at these intersections. Traffic signal design at currently non-signalized intersections is not included. If new signal or stop sign locations are desired, warrant study and designs will be done as Special Services.

j. Retaining Walls (Low Height)

1. Low height retaining walls are anticipated and therefore are included in this scope of work. Retaining wall plans will indicate the horizontal locations and the top-ol-wall and top-ol-Iooting elevations. Standard City 01 Dallas retaining wall details will be utilized. Design of non-standard walls is not included.

2. The Engineer will discuss retaining wall options with the County Project Manager if necessary.

k. Traffic Control Plans

The Engineer will provide detailed traffic control plans showing the entire limits 01 the project with proposed traffic handling measures. Up to three (3) phases of work will be included. Plans showing general/typical traffic control measures will be provided as follows:

E'f:. =- .-S"..s ==..s ::.:!'W~ ... ".;;;.: sm, ,. 7 =

"""""'¥ s~'"''''"" ./mp"",'ni Comm",'D' s,,,,,,,,,,,,,;m,,,'M'

X.1fJJ = Page 12 of 19 January 17, 2011


1. Construction Phasing Summary (1 Sheet)


A narrative of the sequence of work including proposed phases will be provided.

2. Traffic Control/Sequence of Work Layouts

Prepare layouts (1" = 40') showing the travel lanes and construction area for each phase of construction. Included in the layouts will be temporary detour pavement, signing and pavement markings, channelization devices, and barricades. Sheets will include typical cross sections for each phase. (12 Sheets)

3. Intersection Phasing

Develop typical intersection phasing layouts for typical intersections. Develop custom intersection phasing layouts only for special conditions. (2 Sheets)

4. For detour routings on existing streets, roads, or highways, provide layouts of proposed routing, showing '1rail blazing" signs at intersections. (1 Sheet)

I. Quantities

Compute and Tabulate Quantities using locally preferred bid items and summarize in the plans.

m. Estimate

Prepare a construction cost estimate using locally preferred bid items and estimated unit prices.

n. General Notes

All General Notes and will be provided by the County for inclusion in the plan set.

0. Construction Contract Time Determination

Prepare a Construction Contract Time estimate.

p. Erosion Control Layouts

Prepare erosion control layouts for the entire limits of the project showing locations for placement of erosion control devices such as: seeding (temporary and permanent), sodding, sediment control fences, rock filter dams, soil retention blankets, riprap slope protection and other devices as required. (8 sheets)

IV-2 50% DRAINAGE DESIGN

a. Sub Area Mapping/Inlet Sizing

Subdivide the major drainage areas into sub-areas and calculate the discharge directed to each proposed inlet. Analyze inlet capacities and adjust inlet locations and sub-areas as needed to obtain acceptable ponding widths. Prepare drainage area maps identifying all sub-areas.

b. Storm Sewer Plans and Profiles

Prepare storm sewer plan sheets and profile sheets depicting storm sewer, inlets and manholes necessary to drain the facility and convey the 1 DO-year runoff to the designated discharge points. The storm sewer plans and profiles will be consistent with the hydraulic computations developed using Winstorm or other approved method, and the City of Dallas Drainage Manual or NCTCOG's ISWM Manual

- Z& -Page 13 of 19 January 17, 2011



identified for use. Only inlet laterals that cross other utilities, drain a sag or are longer than 12 feet in length will be profiled. Hydraulic data including flow rate, hydraulic slope, and velocity for each pipe run will be indicated in the profiles. No separate hydraulic data sheets will be provided in this phase of the work. Inlets, manholes and junctions will be in accordance with City standard details. Prepare sheets at 1" = 20' horizontal and 1" = 6' vertical scales unless otherwise directed.

c. Culvert Layouts

Prepare culvert crossing layout sheets for each cross drainage structure in accordance with the City of Dallas Drainage Manual, standard city or TxDOT details, and the hydraulic computations developed utilizing HEC-RAS or other approved method. Prepare layouts at 1" = 20' horizontal and 1" 6' vertical unless otherwise directed.

d. Bridge Classification Culvert

The Engineer shall provide design calculations, layout sheets, quantities, and estimates for the culverts of sufficient size to be classified as a bridge. Design will be based on standard City of Dallas or TxDOT details. If non-standard designs are necessary, it will be considered as additional services.

e. County/City Coordination

The Engineer shall provide the hydrology and hydraulic HEC-RAS model information to the County and the City of Dallas. The Engineer will not prepare documentation for FEMA coordination. Hydraulic models may include current effective models, corrections to reflect actual pre-construction conditions, and proposed conditions.

f. Hydraulic Data Sheets

Update Hydraulic Data Sheets to reflect final bridge and/or culvert designs. Provide hydraulic data for storm sewers.

g. Summary of Drainage Quantities

Compute quantities and summarize in the plans and prepare a bid item list and estimated prices for all drainage facilities.

IV-3 50% Transit Oriented Design

The Engineer shall further develop the Transit Oriented Design begun in the preliminary phase and prepare 50% Design Plans that will include the following:

• Plans of pedestrian and roadway lighting pole foundations and conduit runs using standard light fixtures. Light poles and conduit runs will be shown on the paving plans;

• Enhanced/specialty paving plans for pedestrian and roadway intersections (design to include layout and details of selected architectural paving materials);

• Screening wall and fencing plans (shall include wall layouts and typical elevation); • Banner pole foundation plans and details. Banner pole locations will be shown on the

paving plans;

w w .&1 a;;;;;:::

Page 140119 January 17, 2011


Phase IV Deliverables:


Two full size (22"x34") sets of 50% Plans and three 11 "x1?" sets will be delivered. A CD version of the 50% Plans will also be provided. The plan set is anticipated to include the following sheets at the noted scales:

Sheet

Cover Sheet

Index Sheet

General Notes Sheet

Quantity Summary Sheets

Project Layouts

Project Control Data Sheets

Typical Sections

Demolition Plans

Construction Sequence & Staging Summary

Traffic Control Plans

Paving Plan & Profiles

Intersection Layouts

Side Street Profiles

Retaining Wall Layouts

Drainage Area Maps

Hydraulic data Sheets

Bridge Class Culvert Layout

Culvert Layout

Storm Sewer Plan & Profiles

Channel & Esmt. Grading Plans

Outfall Structure Details

Signing and Pavement Marking Layouts

Traffic Signal Layouts

Erosion Control Typical Plans

Special Utility Details

Miscellaneous Structural Details

Hardscape Layout Plans

Hardscape Details

No.

1

1

1

4

2

2

2

4

1

16

15

3

2

3

5

5

1

1

28

2

1

4

6

8

1

2

15

2

Scale/layout

1 "=40' double stacked


1 "=1 0' Horiz.


Narrative Sheet

Typical Sections and Details

1 "=20' Horiz., 1 "=6' Vert.

1" = 10'

1"=20' Horiz., 1"=6' Vert.

1 "=20' Horiz., 1 "=6' Vert.

1"=100'

1"=10' Horiz., 1"=6' Vert.

1"=10' Horiz., 1"=6' Vert.

1"=20' Horiz., 1"=6' Vert., One system on each side

1 "=20' Horiz., 1 "=6' Vert.


1"=20',2 per signalized intersection

1"=20'




Screen Wall Layouts/Elevations

Cross Section Sheets

5

18 1"=10' Horiz., 1"=2' Vert., 8 per sheet

Total Sheet Count 161

Schedule:

The 50% Construction Drawings will be submitted within six (6) months of authorization by the County to begin the 50% Design Phase;

Information required from the County:

Comments on the 50% Construction Drawings.

Meetings:

The Engineer will participate in eight (8) monthly design/progress review meetings with Dallas County.

The Engineer will participate in one (1) plan review meeting with Dallas County following the 50% plan review.

Special Services identified in the section will be provided if authorized by the County.

V-1 Preliminary Transit Oriented Design

The Engineer shall perform Special Preliminary Transit Oriented Design Services and present the design on 11" x 17" exhibits that provide typical conceptual designs of architectural/ornamental TOO elements. The exhibits may include some or all of the following:

• Conceptual design of pedestrian and roadway lighting pole, fixture, pole foundations and conduit runs using the aesthetics previously developed with the community;

• Pocket park design at strategic intersections (shall include grading, hardscape, planting, site furnishings and pedestrian lighting);

• Conceptual planting and irrigation design; • Conceptual design of gateway monuments; • Selection of street furniture (benches, trash cans and bike racks); • Conceptual design of traffic signals "skins"(shall include design of architectural skin

around a standard traffic signal, will also include electrical effect lighting associated with the architectural skin); and

• Conceptual design of street signage (shall include design of a custom street sign blade, pole and support arm that identifies the Asian District)

Deliverables:

3 copies - 11" x 17" TOO conceptual design exhibits; and

Electronic CADD files of the TOO conceptual design exhibits burned to CD.

~"'~~~~~~~~®~~~~~~pa~g~';~1~6~O~f1~9~~~~~~~~~~m;~a~n~Ua~rY~17~,~2~ ::.;.=-.=":~;;;;;.~ III!'_"''''''''_ a_ill rn, .. l! fi

Fro~'"~gS,Mfon'·Im"",,,,,c.,,"m""'Y $"""".x,,$Io,,""


V-2 50% Transit Oriented Design


The Engineer shall further develop the architectural/ornamental TOO elements begun in the preliminary phase and prepare 50% Design Plans that may include some or all of the following:

• Architectural pole and fixture details using the aesthetics previously developed with the community;

• Pocket park plans at strategic intersections (shall include grading, hardscape, planting, site furnishings and pedestrian lighting);

• Planting and irrigation plans; • Gateway monument plans and details; • Street furniture layouts and details (benches, trash cans and bike racks); • Traffic signals architectural "skin" plans (shall include design of architectural skin

around a standard traffic signal, will also include effect lighting associated with the architectural skin); and

• Architectural street signage plans (shall include details of a custom street sign blade, pole and support arm that identifies the Asian District)

Deliverables:

Electronic CADD files of the TOO conceptual design exhibits burned to CD.

Two full size (22"x34") sets of 50% Plans and three 11 "x1?" sets will be delivered. A CD version of the 50% Plans will also be provided. The plan set is anticipated to include the following sheets at the noted scales:

Architect. Lighting Enhancements 1

Architect. Signal Enhancements 2

Architect. Street Sign Details 1

Street Furnishing Layouts 4 1 "=40' double stacked

Street Furnishing Details 2

Gateway Monument Plans 1 1"=51

Monument Electrical Details 2

Landscaping Plans 5 1"=20'

Landscaping Details 4

Irrigation Plans & Details 4 1 "=40' double stacked, details as needed

Total Special Services Sheets 26

Additional Services to be performed by Engineer, if authorized by County, which are not included in the above described as follows:

a. Preparation of Final, sealed Construction Drawings and specifications.

:;;.i;;::;, __ :~ ;;;;;."; 111'_'1/1''-_ .. _. %'I""t'3 Pow"'''' SOl";,", -lmp",,'1n(} C'"""utJI)'

S'MO~ To", Sin« """

Page 17 19 January 17, 2011



b, Field layouts or the furnishing of construction line and grade surveys other than the monumentation described in Basic Services,

c, GIS mapping services or assistance with these services,

d, Providing renderings, model, and mock-ups requested by the County,

e, Making revisions to designs, drawings or other documents when such revisions are: 1) inconsistent with approvals or instructions previous given by the County, or 2) due to causes not solely within the control of the Engineer.

f. Preparing applications and supporting documents for government grants, loans or planning advances and providing data for detailed applications,

g, Providing shop, mill, field or laboratory inspection of materials and equipment. Observe factory tests or equipment at any site remote to the project or observing tests required as a result of equipment failing the initial test.

h, Preparing Operations and Maintenance Manuals or conducting operator training,

i. Preparing data and reports for assistance to the County in preparation for hearings before regulatory agencies, courts, arbitration panels or any mediator, giving testimony personally or by deposition, and preparations therefore before any regulatory agency, court, arbitration panel or mediator.

j, Assisting the County in defense or prosecution of litigation in connection with or in addition to those services contemplated by the Agreement. Such services if any shall be furnished by the Engineer on a fee basis negotiated by the respective parties outside of an in addition to this Agreement.

k, Providing environmental support services including the design and implementation of ecological baseline studies, environmental monitoring, impact assessment and analyses permitting assistance, and other assistance required to address environmental issues,

L Design, contract modifications, studies, or analysis required to comply with local, State, Federal or other regUlatory agencies that become effective after the date of this agreement.

m, Providing basic or additional services on an accelerated time schedule, The scope of this service include cost for overtime wages or employees and consultations, inefficiencies in work sequence and plotting or reproduction costs directly attributable to an accelerated time schedule directed by the County,

n, Preparing statements for invoicing or other documentation for billing other than for the standard invoice for services attached to these professional service agreement

0, Task force meetings that exceed the number of meeting identified in Task 1,3,

p, More colored exhibits than the number identified as the deliverables for Task 2,

q, More public participation meetings than the one meeting identified in Task 3,

r. ADT counts, Level of Service Analysis and Traffic Analysis,

s, Modeling of existing storm sewer systems and design of offsite improvements,

\. TDLR submittal for ADA review,

u, Structural design other than drainage or specifically included in the proposal.

i"~,;,,":;~=i z'S'" • Z .. P",\'i,,," so,'vw,", -'mp"'~t;g Comm",,'y

setv"", ,""" £'n<' "'81




v. Performing Jurisdictional Determination to determine the presence of Waters of the U.S. and any coordination with or submittals to the USACE.

w. Electrical engineering designs.

x. Construction sequence layouts.

y. Structural retaining wall design.

z. FEMA studies or submittals, detailed hydraulic studies/reports, Final Drainage Reports and additional modeling beyond that described above.

aa. Bridge layouts and bridge design.

bb. Levels D, C, B and A Subsurface Utility Engineering.

cc. Utility record drawing research and acquisition.

dd. Research for unknown easements.

ee. Acquisition of street cut and lane closure permits.

ff. Acquisition of right-of-entry permits.

gg. Coordination with the City of Dallas regarding drainage design.

;.i ...... .=-.-f; ;;;;;.~ "_'11"_ ... __ • .. M, • ey W 1''''''"'"9 s,M~", . ,~"",Ing ComlllU<iIJ'

swmOr"os,,",,,,,'''M

-Page 19 of 19 -January 17, 2011

SUMMARY OF FEES DENTON DRIVE - SEGMENT 3

Alternative 1 - 50% Construction Plans

50% Plans %of Phase Proposal Construction

Amounts Cost

50% Construction Documents $536,055 5.58%

Baseline Fee Snbtotal $536,055 5.58%

Special Services Subtotal** $54,207 0.56%

Total Fee (incliliding Special Services) $590,262 6.15%

** -If authorized by County

SUMMARY OF FEES DENTON DRIVE - SEGMENT 3

Alternative 2 - 100% Construction Plans

100% Plans Phase Proposal

Amounts

100% Construction Documents* $670,794

Construction Phase Services* $11,137

Baseline Fee Snbtotal* $681,931

Special Services Subtotal* ** $87,207

Total Fee* (including Special Services) $769,138

* -Preliminary estimated fees are for planning purposes only. ** - If authorized by County

%of Conslrnclion

Cost

6.99%

0.12%

7.10%

0.91%

8.01%

Proposal Section

-- II-I

II-2 II-3 III-I ill-2 ill-3 III-4 IV-I IV-2 IV-3 IV-4 IV-5 IV-6 V-I

DENTON DRIVE - SEGMENT 3 FEE BREAKDOWN

Description Total Baseline

Preliminary Roadway Design Preliminary Drainage Design Preliminary Transit Oriented Design ROW Analysis Field Survey and Photogrammetry Subsurface Utility Engineering Coordination Geotechnical Report 50% Roadway Plans 50% Drainage Design 50% Transit Oriented Design Final Roadway Design* Final Drainage Design * FIllaI Transit Oriented Design* Construction Engineering*

Baseline Fee 'fotals*

Total Estimated Construction Cost % of Total Construction Cost

Special Services* **

Totalli'ec (including Special services)* **

% of Total Construction Cost

* -Preliminary estimated fees are for planning purposes only. ** - If authorized by County

Fee

$101,855 $46,071 $15,225

$106,222 $70,241 $1,394

$11,244 $112,748 $38,704 $32,351 $82,379 $32,281 $20,079 $11,137

$681,931

$9,600,000 7.10%

$87,207

$769,138

8.01%

Basic Drainage

Engineering Services

Design

$101,855 $46,071

$112,748 $38,704

$82,379 $32,281

$296,982 $117,056

3.09% 1.22%

$296,982 $117,056

3.09% 1.22%

Transit Surveying

Utility Construction Oriented Coord., Phase Design

Services SUE, & Services

$15,225 $106,222 $70,241

$1,394 $11,244

$32,351

$20,079 $11,137

$67,656 $176,463 $12,638 $11,137

0.70% 1.84% 0.13% 0.12%

$87,207 $0

$154,863 $176,463 $12,638 $11,137

1.61% 1.84% 0.13% 0.12%

Fee Proposal

Dentol) Drive from 700 feet south of Wilinut nill IAllnc to 1200 feet north of Royall,lInc AZ&B Engin~eriog & Survcying· MANIIOUR BREAKDOWN PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES

A Work nt',w:,.!!.'f;'''' (Labor Rmc,)

IT-1 Preliminary Roadway Design

U-2 Preliminary DrJinage DeHign

JI-3 Prcl\minMy Transit Oriented Dcsign

0 0 0

III-I ROW Analysis 18 [11-2 Field Survey and Ph(lto£r~ll1mct,y 0 HI-J SUE 0 1lI-4 Gcotcchnkal 0 lV~1 50% Ro~dway Plam 0 IV-2 50% Drainagc Plans 0 TV-3 50% Transit Oriented De~igH 0

TOTAL AZ&n DIRECT LABOR COST 18 % of Total Hours by Labor Classifkntioll 0.51%

AZ&B ~ TOTAL LABOR COST WI OIl $378,675

AZ&B· TOTAL PROJECT INDfRRCFCo<;TS Printing and Rcpro,luctio~ SI,600

Travel S2,400 Plats, Decds, and Zoning Maps $0

TdcphollC, Fax. & Misc. $0

Photos & Mi~ccl1ancou~ $150

TOTAL AZ&R INDIRECT COSTS $4,150

SUBCONTRACTS" TOTAL PROJECT

HNTB $44,000 TOD N~\hon McirC(Jn~ultan1S $79,000 Drainage

SUE $0 Geolech $10,000

Aeromrlnc $20,230 Aerial Topo

TOTAL SUBCONTRACT COST $153,230

[ -·-PROJ).:CTCOST SURTOTAL - $536,0551

SPECIALSEHVrCESSURTOl'AL $54,2071 SPECIAL SEHVrCES ~

TOTALPROJ ECT COST $590.262 1

Estimaled Construction Costs

Percent of Conwuc!ion Co~! wlo Spfi:inl services Percent of COll$lrtlction Cost with Special servjc~s

$9,600,000

5.58% 6.15%

B

124

0 4

165 23

89

8

427 12.13%

A&dondo, Zep('{la BruHZ, LLC

SUl\-JJ\URY

MANHOURS C

315

16 4

440 92

271 20

lIn

33.29%

D E

285 230 0 0 0 0

310 60 56 180

0 0 4

358 377 0 0 0 0

1013 851 28.77% 24.17%

AZ&B OH Multiplier '" AZ&B Profit

Dallas County

F

40 1.14%

0 0 0 0

40 0 0 0 0 0

167.71% 15.00% #1

TOTAL ffRS

954 16

993 391

10 10

1095 28 16

352J

3.08 DIRECT DIRECf LABOR LAB,OH COSTS PROFIT

$33,003 101,605 $608 S 1,871 $349 $ 1,075

$34,015 S 104,722

$15,952 S 49,111 $437 $ 1,344 S371 S 1,144

$36,411 $ 1l2,09E $1,154 $ 3,554

$699 2,151

$123,000 $378,675

"Ellginceri~" Lnhor Calcg01ics" A '" Principal

B '" Project Manager C '" Design Engincer D '" Design Tc.chIEIT E '-' CADDfDmfting F '" Clerical

"SurVeY (aMr Calc~Clri~~" A = Proje{".t Manage

B =RPLS C '" Senior Techllici D '" Survey Technician E '" Survey Crew 2 F "" Survey Crew 3

Refer to >lttached "A5~\lmrli(JllsfExcl\l,ion~" for i~formil.!ion qll~lifying our scope of ~ervices

Page I

111712012

Fee Proposal Arredondo, Zepeda Bnmz, LLC

Denton Drive frolll 700 feet south of Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 feet north of Royal Lane

AZ&B Engineering & Surveying * MANI-IOUR BREAKDOWN PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES

H* 1 Prcliminll!I Roadway D('sign MANHOURS Sheet A B C D

Task Count Work Description (Labor Rates) $ 61.42 $ 49.35 $ 37.98 $ 25.00

IT-I Preliminary Design Report 0 10 40 0 0-1 Concc-Jltual Roadway Design 0 20 80 60 IT-I Conceptual Design Cross Sections 0 10 40 50 II-I Driveway and Parking Exhibits (34) 0 20 60 90 IT-I Existing Utility Layouts 0 5 20 20 IT-I Utility Relocation Layouts 0 10 20 40

II*1 Preliminary Constmction Sequence 0 5 20 15 IT-I Preliminary Signing and Pavement Marking Design 0 5 15 5 II-I Opinion of Probable Cost 0 15 20 5 IT-I Attend Public Ou1reach Meetings (6 estimated) 0 12 0 0 II-I Attend Utility Coordination Mectings (6 estimated) 0 12 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL AZ&B D]RECT LABOR 0 124 315 285

AZ&B Engineering & Surveying - INDIRECT COSTS Printing and Reproduction $100 Travel $100

Plats, Deeds & Zoning Maps $0 Telephone, Fax & Misc Communications $0 Photos & Miscellancous $50

TOTAL AZ&B INDIRECT COSTS $250

SUBCONTRACTS -HNTB $0 included ill Preliminary TOD

Nathan Meir Consultants $0 included in Preliminary Drainage Design SUE $0

Geotechnical $0

TOTAL SUBCONTRACT COST $0

P"f"climiliiry Alignment I Profile $101,855

Page 2

111712012

Dallas County

DIRECT DIRECT E F TOTAL LABOR LAB,OH

$ 33.89 $ 21.65 HRS COSTS PROFIT

0 0 50 $2,013 $6.196

60 0 220 $7,559 $23,271

30 0 130 $4,279 $13,175

70 0 240 $7,888 $24,285

40 0 85 $2,862 $8,811

20 0 90 $2,931 $9,023

10 0 50 $1,720 $5,296

0 0 25 $941 $2,898

0 0 40 $1,625 $5,002

0 0 12 $592 $1,823

0 0 12 $592 $1,823

0 0 0 $0 $0

0 0 0 $0 $0

0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 SO

230 0 954 $33,003 $101,605

"Engineering Labor Categories" A =: Principal B := Project Manager

C = Design Engineer D "" Design TechlEIT E:;:: CADDJDrafting F;::: Clerical

Fee Proposal Arredondo, Zepeda Brunz, LLC

Denton Drive from 700 feet south of\Valnut Hill Lane to 1200 feet north of RoyaJ Lane AZ&B Engineering & Surveying - MANlIOUR BREAKDOWN PLANNING, CONSTRU(."'110N PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS Al\j1) F.:-;TlMATES

Task.

ll-2 ll-2 II-2

1I-2

11-2 II-2

TI-2

11-2 Prelim Drainage Design Sheet Count Work Description (Labor Rates)

Coordination for the following: Drainage Area Mapping Calculate Discharges Develop HEC-RAS Model of Channels Develop Alternative Drainage Schemes Identify Easement Requirements Prepare Drainage Report Preliminary Stann Sewer Design

TOTAL AZ&B DIRECT LABOR

AZ&B Engineering & Sun'cying- INDIRECT COSTS Printing and Reproduction $100 Travel $100 Plats, Deeds & Zoning Maps $0 Telephone, Fax & Mise Communication,: $0 Photos & Mi!>cellancous $0

TOTALAZ&B INDIRECT COSTS $200

SUBCONTRACTS

HNrrB $0 Nathan Meir Consultant." $44,000

SUE $0 Geotechnical $0

TOTAL SUnCONTRACT COST $44,000

Prciiminary Drainage Design $46,071

A $ 61.42

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0

0

MANHOURS B C D

$ 49.35 $ 37.98 $ 25.00

0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 16 0

Page 3

E F $ 33.89 $ 21.65

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0

Dallas County

TOTAL HRS

2 2 2 2 2 2 4 0 0 0 0

16

DIRECT LABOR COSTS

576 576 $76 $76 $76 $76

$[52 $0 $0 $0 $0

$608

DIRECT LAB, on PROFIT

5234 5234 5234 5234 $234 $234

$468 $0 $0 $0 $0

$1,871 $1,871

1117/2012

"Engineering Labor Categories" A - Principal B "" Project Manager C "" Design Engineer D = DeSign TechlEIT E =: CADD/Drafting F= Clerical

Fee Proposal Arredondo, 7..epeda Brunz, LLC

Denton Drive from 700 feet south of Walnut 11m Lane to 1200 feet north of Royal Lane

AZ&B Engineering & Surveying 0 MANHOUR BREAKDOWN PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTL\lATES

Task

IT-3

II~3 Concelltual Transit Oriented Design Sheet

Count Work Description (Labor Rates)

Coordination of Transit Oriented Design

Note: no field archaclogical is included


AZ&B Engineering & Surveying - INDIRECT COSTS Printing and Reproduction $0 Travel Plats, Deeds & Zoning Maps

Telephone, Fax & Mise Communications Photos & Misce\J;meons

TOTAL AZ&H INDIRECT COSTS

SUBCONTRACTS -

$100 $0 $0

$50

$150

HNTB $14,000 Nathan Meir Consultants $0



IConceptnal '!'raTlsit Oriented Design -------=l;15,2i5]

lSPffiiTSCr\ices* - - ------------- -$20-:476]

$ A 6].42

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

o

B

$ 49.35

4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4

Basic Services ($4,000)

$

MANHOURS C

37.98

4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4

D E $ 25.00 $ 33.89

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

o

Special Scrviccs* $18,000

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

o

Dallas County

F TOTAL $ 21.65 HRS

0 8 0 0 0 0

0 0

0 0 0 0

0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

o 8

* -As defined in the Scope of Services

* - As defined in the Scope of Services

Page 4

1117/2012

DIRECT DIRECT LABOR LAB,OH COSTS PROFIT

$349 $1,075 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$349 $1,075

---------- -"Engineering Labor Categories" A _ Principal

B ;;;: Project Manager

C ;;::: Design Engineer

D:::: Design Teeh/EIT E", CADDlDrafting

F=Clerical


Denton Drive from 700 feet south of Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 feet north of Royal Lane

AZ&n Engineering & Surveying - MANHOUR BREAKDOWN PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTL\iATES

III-l ROW Analysis A

MANHOURS B C D E Sheer

Task fd2J.ml Work Descrintion (Labor Rates) $ 52.88 "' "W.OI -I' -I' """."" -I' ... 't.vv

Ill-I Deed and Ownership Research / ROE Letters Prepare Deed Mosaic

Set ROW Comers

Prepare Prelim Plats and Descriptions for Review (max. 31) Finalize Parcel Plats and Descdptions (max. 31)


AZ&B Engineerillg & Surveying ~JNDJREcr COSTS Printing and Reproduction

Travel PlaLs, Deeds & Zoning Maps

Telephone, Fax & Misc Communications

Photos & Miscellaneous

TOTAL AZ&B INDIRECT COSTS

SUBCONTRACTS -

$500 $1,000

$0

$0 $0

$1,500

HNTB $0 Nathan Meir Consultant" $0



fROW AnalYsiS -$106,222 I

18

o o o 8

10 o o o o o o o o o

165

5 40 20 0 20 80 60 0 20 60 10 60 60 160 160 0 60 100 m 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

440 310 60

PageS

111712012

Dallas County

DIRECT DIRECT F TOTAL LABOR LAB,OH

$ 59.25 HRS COSTS PROFIT

0 65 $2,144 $6,602 0 160 $5,217 $16,063

0 150 $5,847 $18,002 0 388 $12,715 $39,146 0 230 $8,091 $24,910 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 $0 $0

0 993 $34,015 $104.722

"Engineering Labor Categories" A = Project Manager

B:::: RPLS C = Senior Technician

D :::: Survey Technician E ::: Survey Crew 2 F:::: Survey Crew 3


Denton Drive from 700 feet south of Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 fcet north of Royal Lane AZ&B Engineering & Surveying w MANHOUR BREAKDOWN PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECITICA TIONS AND ESTIMATES

Ill-2 Field Survey and Photogrammefrv Sheet

Task Count Work Description (Labor Rates)

Additional Topo and Design Survey 2 Establish Survey Project Control 3 Locate Existing Monumcntation 4 SUE Survey Support Services for 30 Potholes 5 TIe Geotechnical Bore Holes

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

TOTAL AZ&B DIRECT LABOR AZ&B Engineering & Surveying -INDIRECT COSTS

Printing and Reproduction Travel Plats, Deeds & Zoning Maps Telephone, Fax & Mise Communicntions Photos & Miscellaneous


SUBCONTRACTS

$300 $600

$0 $0

$0

$900

Hl\"TB $0 Nathan Meir Consultants $0


Aerometric $20,230


ptie1d Survey-aDd Photogrammetry -S70J?IT]

A

$ 52,88

0

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

o

MANHOURS B C D

$ 40,87 $ 35,50 $ 26.00

15 60 40 2 8 0 0 10 0 4 10 12 2 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

23 92 56

Page 6

111712012

Dallas County


$ 44.00 $ 59.25 fIRS COSTS PROFIT

80 10 275 $7,896 $24,308 0 30 40 $2,143 $6,598

50 0 60 $2,555 $7,866

40 0 79 $2,590 $7,975

10 0 20 $768 $2,364

0 0 0 $0 $0

0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0

0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0

180 40 474 $15,952 $49,111

"Engineering Labor Categorie~ A = Project Managcr

B =RPLS C "" Senior Technician

D "" Survey Technician E :;;;: Survey Crew 2 F"" Survey Crew 3

Fee Proposal Arredondo, Zepeda Brunz, U.C 1/17/2012

Denton Drive from 700 feet south of Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 feet north of Royal Lane AZ&B Engineering & Surveying. MANHOUR BREAKDO\\'N PLANNING~ CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES

TII-3 SUE Coordinalion

Dallas County

MANIIOURS DIRECT DIRECT Sheer ABC D E F TOTAL LABOR LAB,OH

Task Count Work Descrirtion (L,bor Rates) $ 61.42 $ 49.35 $ 37.98 $ 25.00 $ 33.89 $ 21.65 HRS COSTS PROFIT

IU-3 SUE Coordination with County


AZ&B Engineering & Surveying -INDIRECT COSTS Printing and Reproduction

Travel

Plats, Deeds & Zoning Maps

Telephone, Fax & Mise Communications

Photos & Miscellaneous

TOTAL AZ&n INDIRECT COSTS

SUBCONfRACTS -

$0 $50

$0

$0 $0

$50

HNTB $0 Nathan Meir Consultants $0



ISUE Dctcrlliination $i;39<q

0 5 5 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0

o 5 5

Page 7

0 0 0 10 $437 $1,344 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0

0 0 0 10 $437 $1,344

"Engineering Labor Categories" A - Principal

B '" Project Manager

C ;;;; Design Engineer

D =- Design TechlEIT

E =- CADDlDrafting F=Clerical

Fee Proposal Anoedondo, Zepeda Brunz, LLC

Denton Drive from 700 feet south of Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 feet north of Royal Lane AZ&n Engineering & Surveying ~ MANHOUR BREAKDOWN PLANNlNG, CONSTRUCTION PLANS. SPECIFIC\. nONS AND ESTIMATES

III·4 Geotechnical Report MANHOURS

1/1712012

Dallas County

DIRECT DIRECT Sheet ABC D E F TOTAL LABOR LAB,OH

Task Count Work DescriDtion (Labor Rates) $ 48.50 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 31.00 $ 39.37 $ 21.65 HRS COSTS PROFIT

llI·4 Geotechnical Report Coordination


AZ&B Engineerillg & Surveying -INDIRECT COSTS

Printing and Reproduction $0 Travel Plats, Deeds & Zoning Maps

Telephone, Fax & Mise Comm1mieations Photos & Miscellaneous


SUBCONTRACTS -

$100

$0 $0 $0

$100

HNTB $0 Nathan Melr Consultants $0

SUE $0 Geotechnical $10,000


l¥0tcciillkifRepoii-- --~;244]

0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

o 4

PageS

4 0 10 $371 $1,144 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0

4 0 10 $371 $1,144

"Engineering Labor Categories"

A = Principal B '" Project Manager

C =RPLS D '" Survey Technician E=o Survey Crew2 F ""Clerical

Denton Drive from 700 fed south of Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 feet north of Royal Lane AZ&B Engineering & Surveying ~ MANHOUR BREAKDOWN PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS Aj\j1) T~STTMATES

IV-l 50% Roadway Design

Dallas County

MANHOllRS DIRECT DIRECT

Shed ABC D E F TOTAL LABOR LAB,OU Task Count Work DQcription (Labor Rates) $ 61.42 $ 49.35 $ 37.98 $ 25.00 $ 33.89 $ 21.65 HRS COSTS PROFIT

50% Plans 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 IV~ln 3 Cover Sheet, Index, General Notes 0 0 2 6 10 0 18 $565 $1,739 rV-ll 4 QuantifY Summnry Sheets 0 2 4 4 5 0 15 $520 $1,601 IV-Ib 2 Project Layout Sheets 0 1 2 8 10 0 21 $664 $2,045 IV-Ib 2 Project Control Plans 0 1 2 S 10 0 21 $664 $2,045 IV-Ia 2 Typical Sections 0 0 1 2 7 0 10 $325 $1,001

IV-If 4 Demolition Plnns 0 1 5 20 20 0 46 $1,417 $4,363 IV-Ik 16 Traffic Control Plans 0 10 30 60 70 0 170 $5.505 $16,949 IV-Ie 15 Paving Plan & Profiles 0 10 30 40 70 0 150 $5,005 $15,409

IV-lh 4 Signing and Pavement Marking Plans 0 5 10 10 15 0 40 $1,385 $4,264 IV-Id,e 3 Intersection Layouts 0 5 10 20 30 0 65 $2,143 $6,598

IV-lj 3 Retaining Walllayoms 0 2 20 30 10 0 62 $1,947 $5,995 IV-Ii 6 Traffic Signal Plans 0 10 60 30 30 0 130 $4,539 $13,974 IV-lp 8 Erosion Control Plans 0 5 10 40 40 0 95 $2,982 $9,181 IV-Ih 2 Miscelhncous, Structural & Special Utility Details 0 2 10 20 20 0 52 $1,656 $5,099 fV-lg 18 Cross Section Sheets 0 10 20 50 30 0 110 $3,520 $10,836

QAlQC Review 0 15 25 0 0 0 40 $1,690 $5,202 Construction cost estimate 0 10 30 10 0 0 50 $1,883 $5.797

92 TOTAL AZ&B DIRECT LABOR 0 89 271 358 377 0 1095 $36,411 $112,098

"!J!bor Categories" A;=: Principal

AZ&B Engineering & Surveying -INDIRECf COSTS B ;=: Project Manager Printing and Reproduction $400 C;=: Project Engineer Travel $200 o = Design TechlEIT Plats, Deeds & Zoning Maps $0 E::;: CADDlDrafting Telephone, Fax & Misc Communicatiom $0 F = Clerical

Photos & Miscellaneous $50


SUBCONfRACTS HNTB $0

Nathan Meir Consulumts $0 SUE $0

Geotechnical $0


Roadway Final Dc-sign Elcmcnts-iij}-(]Controls $i'i2';74s- I Page 9

Denton Drive from 700 fectsouth of Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 feet north of Royal Lane

AZ&B Engineering & Surveying ~ MANHOUR BREAKDOWN PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES

Task

lV-2 lV-2 lV-2 IV·2

rV·2 lV-2 lV-2 IV-2

lV-2 lV-2

Sheet

{jJlml

5

30 2

2

5 2

48

IV·2 50% Drainage Dl.'sign

Work Dcscriptir>n (Labor Rates)

Coordination of: SubArea M;lpping Stann Sewer Sizing Stann Sewer Plan and profile

Culvert Layouts Outfall Structure Details Channel and EasemenfGmding Miscellaneious Drainage Details

Hydraulic Data Sheets Summary of Drainage qmmtitics As~cmhlc Applicable Stand;)fds

TOTAL AZ&B DIRECr LABOR AZ&B Engineering & Sur,eying -INDIRECT COSTS

hinting :lnd Reproduction Travel Plats, Deeds & ZoningMaps Telephone, Fax & Misc Communications Photos & Misccllancous


SUBCONTRACTS

HNTB Nathan Meir Consultants

SUE Geoteclmical

TOTAL SUBCONTRACT COST

$100 $50

$0 $0

$0

$150

$0 $35,000

$0 $0

$35,000

JFllh1f~DeSigil- --$3S,'iif4J

A

$ 61.42

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0

MANHouRS BCD E F

$ 49.35 $ 37.98 $ 25.00 $ 33.89 $ 21.65

I 2 2

I 0

I 0 0

0

8

Page 10

2 4

4

2

2

2

20

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0

Dallas County

TOTAL

HRS

3 6 6 3

I

3 I

2 2

28

DIRECT LABOR COSTS

DIRECT LAB,On PROFIT

$125 $386 $251 $772 $251 $772 $125 $386

$38 $117

$125 $386

$38 $117

$76 $234

$87 $269

$38 $117

$1,154 $3,554

"Labor CategOlies" A:= Principal B ",-Project Manngcr C = Design Engineer D ;;;; Design TechiEIT

E ;::: CADD/Drafting

F"" Clerical

Denton Drive from 700 fed south ofWlllnllt Hm Lane 10 1200 feet north of Royal Lane AZ&n Engint.'ering & Surveying. MANHOUR BREAKDOWN PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES

Task

IV-S

Sheet Count

o

IV-) 50% Transit Orienll'd Dl'sign

Work Descriprion (Labor Rates)

50% Trallsit Orierued Design

Note: no field archaelogical is included

TOTAL AZ&H DIRECT LAHOR

AZ&B Engineering & Surveying ~ I.NDIRECT COSTS

Printing and Rcproduction $100 $100 ,0

$0 $0

Travel Plats, Deeds & Zoning Maps Telephone, Fax & Mise Communications

Photos & Miscellancous

TOTAL AZ&E INDIRECT COSTS

SUBCONFRACTS -

$200

HNTB $30,000 Nnthan Meir Consultants $0



ITransit Oriented Design - - --------=--$32,~5U

ISpedal Services* $33,73:0

A

$ 61.42

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

o

MANHOURS B C D

$ 49.35 S 37.98 $ 25.00

8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8 8 0

* - As defined in the Scope of Services

Page 11

Dallas County


$ 33.89 $ 21.65 fIRS COSTS PROFIT

0 0 16 $699 $2,151 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 SO $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 SO $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 SO $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0

0 0 16 $699 $2,151

"Labor Catcgori7 A_Principal B =: Project Manager C =: Design Engineer 0= Design TechfElT E = CADDlDraCLing F=Clerical

Denton Drive from 700 feet south of Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 feet north of Royal Lane AZ&B Engineering & Surveying - MANHOUR BREAKDOWN

PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION ('LANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES

Construction Documents L!:uture Contract}

Sheet A

Task Count Work Description (Labor Rates) $ 61.42

100% Plans Cover Sheet, fudex, General Notes 0 Quantity Summary Shcets 0 Project Layout Sheets 0 Project Control Plans 0 Typical Sections 0 Demolition Plans 0 Traffic ContI'ol Plans 0 Paving Plan &. Profiles 0 Sidestreet profiles 0

Retaining Wall layouts 0

Traffic Signal Plans 0

Erosion Control Plans 0

Miscellancous, Stmctural & Special Utility Details 0

Cross Section Sheets 0

QAlQC Review 0 Construction cost estimate 0 Specifications 0

0 TOTAL AZ&B DffiECT LABOR 0

AZ&B Engineering & Surveying -INDIRECT COSTS

Printing and Reproduction $500

Travel $200

Plats, Deeds & ZOlling Maps $0 Telephone, Fax & Misc Communications $0

Photos & Miscellaneous $0


SUBCONTRACTS HNTIl $0

Nathan Meir Consultants $0

SUE $0 Geotech $0


!Construction Documc~~s $82,379 1

B $ 49.35 $

0

2

0

0

0 2 10

!O

2

2

0

2 5

20

20

5

81

Page 12

Dallas County

MANHOURS DIRECT DIRECT C D E F TOTAL LABOR LAB,OH 37.98 $ 25.00 $ 33.89 $ 21.65 HRS COSTS PROFIT

2 2 12 0 16 $533 $1,640 8 15 10 0 35 $1.116 $3,437 5 5 14 0 24 $789 $2.430 5 5 14 0 24 $789 $2,430

2 6 0 9 $291 $897 8 15 15 0 40 $1.286 $3,959

20 20 20 0 70 $2,431 $7,484 34 50 40 0 134 $4,390 $13,517 4 15 5 0 25 $746 $2.296

10 20 20 0 52 $1,656 $5,099 40 30 10 0 82 $2,707 $8,333

20 20 20 0 60 $1,937 $5.965 !O 20 20 0 52 $1.656 $5,099 20 20 25 0 70 $2,354 $7,246 20 0 0 0 40 $1,747 $5,377

10 0 0 0 30 $1,367 $4.208 10 0 0 5 20 $735 $2,262

227 239 231 5 783 $26,531 $81,679

"LabQr Categories"

A "" Principal B = Project Manager C ;;:;: Design Engineer

D "" Design TechlEIT

E"" CADDlDrafting F= Clerical

Denton Drive from 700 feet south of Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 [eet north of Royal Lane AZ&n Engineering & Surveying w MANHOUR BREAKDOWN PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES

Final Drainage Design (Future Contract) Sheet

Task Count Work Description (Labor Rates)

IV-2

IV-2

IV-2

IV-2

JV-2 IV-2

IV-2

JV-2 IV-2

JV-2

5

30 2

2

1 5 2

48

SubArea Mapping

Stonn Sewer Sizing

Stonn Sewer Plnn and Profile

Culvert Layouts

Outfall Structure Details Channel and EasementGraJing

Misccllancious Drainage Details

Hydraulic Data Sheets Summa[~y of Drainage qmUltities

Assemble Applicable Standards

TOTAL AZ&B DIRECT LABOR AZ&B Engineering & Surveying -INDIRECT COSTS

Printing and Reproduction

Travel

Plats, Deeds & Zoning Maps

Telephone, Fax & Mise Communications

photos & Miscellaneous


SUBCONTRACTS HNTB

Nathan Meir Consultants

SUE Geotechnical


$100 $100

$0

$0 $0

$200

$0 $30,000

$0 $0

$30,000

IFillal Drainage Desi_gn ---$32JUI]

A

$ 61.42

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0

0

MANIIOURS B C D E F

$ 49.35 $ 37.98 $ 25.00 $ 33.89 $ 21.65

0 0 0 0 0 0

2 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6 10 0 0 0

Page 13

Dallas County

TOTAL HRS

2

2

3 2

2

2

o

16

DIRECT LABOR COSTS

DIRECT LAB,OH PROFIT

$87

$87 $125

$87

$87 $38

$38 $38 $87

$0

$676

"Labor Catego!les"

A=: Plincipal

B "" Project Manager C =: Design Engineer

D :::; Design TechlEIT E ::: CADDlDrafting F = Clerical

$269 $269 $386

$269 $269 $117 $117 $117 $269

$0

$2,081

Denton Drive from 700 feet south of Walnut Hill Lme to 1200 feet north of Royal Lane AZ&B Engineering & Surveying w MANHOUR BREAKDO""N PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES

Final Transit Oriented Design (Illtllre Contract} Sheet A

Task Count Work Descrimion (Labor Rates) $ 61.42

N~5 Final Transit Oriented Design 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 Note: no fieJd archadogical is incllld{"--d

0 TOTAL AZ&B DIRECT LABOR 0

AZ&B EngilICcring & Surveying -INDIRECT COSTS Printing and Reproduction $100 Travel $100 Plats, Deeds & Zoning Maps $0 Telephone, Fax & Mise Communications $0 Photos & Miscellaneous $0


SUBCONTRACTS -F/NTB $18,500

Nathan Meir Consultants $0 SUE $0

Geotechnical $0


,'transifOricnted Design $20,079 I

ISpeciaCSerVlCes* $33,000 I

B

$ 49.35 $

6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0

6

Page 14

Dallas County

MANHOURS DIRECT DffiECT C D E F TOTAL LABOR LAB,OH 37.98 $ 25.00 $ 33.89 $ 21.65 HRS COSTS PROFIT

4 0 0 0 10 $448 $1.379 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0

4 0 0 0 10 $448 $1,379

"Labor Categories"

A::::: Principal B ::;: Project Manager

C = Design Engineer

D :;;:: Design TechlEIT

E ::;: CADDlDrafting F= Clerical

Denton Drive from 700 feet south or Walnut Hill Lane to 1200 feet north of Royul Lune AZ&B Engineering & Surveying ~ i\IAI"'JHOUR BRE.lliillOWN PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES

Task

V~l.l

V-1.2

V-1.3 V-l.4 V~l.5

V-1.6 V-I.7

Sheet Count

Construction Engineering {Future Contruct)

Work Description (Labor Rates)

Prepare Bid item list Attend Pre-ConstmctionlPartnering 11eeting

Review Shop Drawings (4 max.) Prepare Change Orders (2 max.) Onsite Observations of Construction as requested (4 site visits)

Post-construction Plans (Record Drawings) Construction contract lime detenninalion

TOTAL AZ&n DIRECT LABOR

AZ&B Engineering & Surveying -INDIRECT COST'S Printing and Reproduction Travel

Plats, Deeds & Zoning Maps Telephone, Fax & Mise Communications

Photos & Miscellancous

TOTAL AZ&B l1\'DllECT COSTS

SUBCONTRACTS

$50 $100

$0 $0 $0

$150

HNTB $1,600 Nathan Meir Consultants $1,800

SUE $0 Geotech $0


IConstmciion Enginl'ering $11,137]

A $ 61.42

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

o

B

$ 49.35 $

2 4 4 2 8

0 4

24

Page 15

MANROURS C D E F 37.98 $ 25.00 $ 33.89 $ 21.65

12 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

28 o o 10

Dallas County

TOTAL HRS

22 4 8 8 16 0 4

62

DIRECT DIRECT LABOR LAB, OR COSTS PROFIT

$728 $2,240 $197 $608 $349 $1,075 $294 $905 $699 52,151

$0 $0 $197 $608

$2,464 $7,587

"L1bor Cateo-oties" A =: Principal

B "" Project Managcr C = Design Engineer D = Design Teeh/EIT E =: CADDlDmfting F= Clerical

ORDER NO. :2008 COURT ORDER

u~ r ;

\ '':.,~> '..

DATE JULy 1, 2008

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS

BE IT REMEMBERED, at a regular meeting of the Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas, held on the 1st day of July __ ,2008, on motion made by

John WHey Price, Commissioner of District No.3 Hike Cantrell, Commissioner of District No.2 by

adopted:

, and seconded , the following order was

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

Denton Drive MCIP Project 10217 from Webb Chapel Connection to Dallas North City Limit, which is located within tbe city boundary of Dallas and Road and Bridge DistrictNo. 1, was selected in the fomtb call forprojects for the Major Capital Improvement Program (MelP) and is scheduled for letting in Program Year 2011; and

D,e City entered illto a MASTER AGREEMENT GOVEIL'iING TRfu"lSPORTATION MAJOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS pursuant to Court Order 2001·814 dated April 2001, and as tile project is scheduled to let in Program Year 20 II, it is necessary to begin preliminary design efforts ilm11eciiat.ely; and

executing this Preliminary Consultant Engineering Contract is consistent with the County's Strategic Plan in that DaU.il£ Countv prQ-,~ctivelv addr~sses critical regional issues.c Vision 4) Implementing programs and conducts services to address Dallas County Transportation" Also (Vision 5) Dallas County is the destinati.on of choice for residents and business, Improving and Maintaining DaLlas County as a driver of economic development, as well as Coordinatingltmdertaking programs and services to improve the County quality oflife. A model interagency partner (Vision 1) Providing friendly and professional support to the efforts of City partners via Commissioners Court leadership and vision; and

Arredondo, Zepeda & Brunz (AZ&B, LLC) was selected through RFQ 20()7·116·3()09 for the Denton Drive project and have proposed to provide preliminary engineering for the project for an amount not to exceed $149,733 which will be paid from MCIP Fund 196, Project 8201; and

the Director of Public V/orks recOlmnelJds that a Prei1millary Consultant Engineering Contract in the amount of $149,733_00 be executed with AZ&B, LLC for the Denton Drive Project

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the Dallas County Commissioners Court tile County Judge is hereby authorized and directed to execute a Preliminary Consultant Engineering Contract willi AZ&B, LLC in the amount of $J49, 733.00 to be paid from Project Fund 196, Project 08201,

DONE IN OPEN CURT, this the

1/' '1'-~ ! ~..:.--- -. ,--L.; ~'

A:Jtltr""Foster, County Judge -'! / .------

1st h-~-~-da:_-+---'>!.bbh:l--_,,-L-~~~~~~~~0~8 ____ _

Ma ·'ne Dickey, District

/ /1' ....-// '/

( /

Obn Wiley Jpric istrict 3 Redo. ended for

L/'proval: flt2f 1Va~ Donald R. Holzwarth, P_E., Director of Public Works

DALLAS COUNTY

CONSULTANT ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT

THE STATE OF TEXAS §

COUNTY OF DALLAS §

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, this Contract is made and entered into as of the ___ day of , 2008, by and between the COUNTY OF DALLAS (hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY") acting by and through the Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas, and Arredondo, Zepeda & Brunz, LLC, (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT") with offices located at 11355 McCree Road Dallas, Texas 75238.

WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, COUNTY intends to contract with a professional engineering firm for professional

services hereinafter referred to as "SERVICES", needed for the design and construction of the Denton

Drive MCIP Project 10217 from Webb Chapel to Dallas North City Limits, hereinafter referred to as

the "PROJECT"; and

WHEREA.S, pursuant to the Texas Govemment Code Chapter 2254, the COUNTY requested

qualifications from professional Consultants willing to assist the COUNTY by providing engineering

services; and,

WHEREAS, the COUNTY has determined that CONSULTANT is the best qualified provider of

preliminary engineering services for the PROJECT; and,

WHEREAS, COUNTY and CONSULTANT have agreed upon the fair and reasonable negotiated

price for the Preliminary Design Services, to be accomplished; and,

WHEREAS, the COUNTY has determined that the services of professional Consultants are for the

benefit ofthe COUNTY; and,

kfCIPlENG1NEEflING SERVICES CONTlIACI. L'VICIP 1Vo. 10217 Denton Drive

WHEREAS, COUNTY desires to contract with CONSULTANT for complete Preliminary

Engineering Services, as detailed herein; and

WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has agreed to provide professional engineering services as provided

herein and as may be mutually agreed in the future with regard to the PROJECT.

NOW, THEREFORE, COUNTY AND CONSULTANT, in consideration of the terms, covenants and

conditions herein contained, Ten and 001100 Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable

consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged and confessed, do hereby

agree and contract as follows:

ARTICLE I. DEFINrrrONS 1.1 BASIC SERVICES shall mean all professional engineering services and other professional

services required for Preliminary Engineering Services. Such services shall include, but not be limited to, the collection and analysis of engineering data to be used to develop roadway aligrnnent/typical section, drainage, and bridge alternatives; the performance of a conceptual design study; and the preparation of a general summary report, whose conclusions and recommendations will assist in determining the feasibility of further project development, as more fully detailed in Attachment A, Scope of Services, incorporated for all purposes herein as if reproduced word for word.

1.2 SPECIAL SERVICES shall mean those services not included in Basic Services and specifically listed in the Contract, which are surveying services, surveying expenses, title research/abstracting, expert or witness preparation and testimony, preparation of exhibits and appearance at public meetings, traffic control plans, geotechnical soil analysis, fees and other costs such as American Disabilities Act requirements in plans by State of Texas, and blueprinting and other copying required in addition to the Basic Service requirements, 'as more fully set forth in Attachment A, Scope of Services.

1.3 PREUMINARY DESIGNIPREUMINARY ENGINEERING shall mean all professional engineering services required to produce the deliverables as more fully detailed in Article N, Deliverables, and Attachment A, Scope of Services. These include, but are not limited to mean all professional engineering services required to produce a right of way aligrnnent study with recommendation of the most economical aligrnnent, preliminary engineering study and report indicating clearly the potential problems and alternate solutions available. "PRELIMINARY DESIGN" and "PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING" are used interchangeably in this document and both have the same meaning.

1.4 PRIMARY/FINAL DESIGN shall mean all professional engineering services required to produce Phase II, Primary/Final and complete plans satisfactory for the construction of the PROJECT.

MCJPIENGlNEERING SERVlCE,,' CONTI/ACT ldCI? No, 10217 DeJUon.Drive 2

These include, but are not limited to mean all professional engineering services required to prodnce all right of way documents and plans, standard details, special specifications, contract documents, cross sections and special provisions.

1.5 COST shall mean total not to exceed amount paid for Basic Services and Special Services. COUNTY shall not be liable for any amount, penalty or damage in excess of the Cost.

1.6 COUNTY shall mean the County of Dallas, State of Texas.

1.7 COMMISSIONERS COURT shall mean the Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas, inclusive of the County Judge and the Commissioners of each of the four Road and Bridge Districts as elected by the people ofthe County of Dallas.

1.8 CONSULTANT shall mean an engineering firm that is registered as a Texas Registered Professional Consultant (P.E.) in good standing or a Texas Licensed Engineer (P.E.) in good standing with the Texas Board of Professional Engineering.

1.9 EFFECTIVE DATE shall mean the date of the signature of the last person necessary for this Contract to become effective.

1.10 PROJECT(S) shall mean the road improvement that has been included by the COUNTY in the Transportation Major Capital Improvement Program as approved by the County Commissioners Court, City of Dallas and any applicable STAKEHOLDERS.

1.11 RIGHT OF WAY (ROW) shall mean that real property, (either existing, or required in fee and! or easement) identified by COUNTY, CITY, or other project STAKEHOLDER as necessary for the construction of the PROJECT. Such right-of-way shall include both the existing street, road, drainage or other CITY or COUNTY real property ownership and all additional real property to be utilized for the PROJECT.

1.12 SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT shall mean an agreement subsequent to this document which is entered into after formal approval of CONSUlTANT and Commissioners Court to establish the contractual rights and responsibilities of the CONSULTANT and COUNTY as it relates to the PROJECT.

1.13 DIRECTOR shall mean the Director of Dallas County, Texas Public Works.

ARTICLE II. SCOPE OF SERVICES

II.I CONSULTANT: CONSULT ANT, as an Independent Contractor and Professional Consultant in its relationship with the COUNTY, covenants and agrees to perform all professional services required to complete the Preliminary Design Services of County Capital Improvement Project 10217, Denton Drive, from Webb Chapel Road to north City of Dallas limits, Dallas County, Texas.

II.2 BASIC SERVICES: The work tasks and activities to be performed and deliverables to be provided by the CONSUlTANT shall be in accordance with requirements contained in this Contract and as shown on Attachment A, Scope of Services, for the fees shown in Attachment B, Fee Calculation, incorporated herein for all purposes as if reproduced word for word, including modifications to the Basic Services as mutually agreed to by COUNTY and

MC1!'IENGINEEIUNG SERVICES CONTRACT klCIPNo.10217-Demon Drl~e _____ . __

CONSULTANT in accordance with the provisions ofthis Contract.

II.3 SPECIAL SERVICES: The Special Services listed in Attachment A, Scope of Services, shall be provided by CONSULTANT. Said services shall not be rendered prior to written mutual agreement between CONSULTANT and COUNTY as to the service to be rendered and the cost thereof. These Special Services are not included as a part of Basic Services and shall be paid for by the COUNTY in addition to payment for Basic Services as set forth in Attachment B, Fee Calculation.

ARTICLE III. COMPENSATION

III.1 Total Services Fee: The fee to be paid to the CONSULTANT under this Contract for all Phase IA services shall not exceed One hundred forty-nine thousand, seven hundred thirty-three and no/hundredths ($149,733.00) Dollars, provided however, that modifications to the Scope of Services, or other conditions defined herein may necessitate a change of fee and further provided that any additional fee is approved by the Commissioners Court in accordance with the terms of this Contract.

III.2 There are three tasks delineated in Attachment A, a preliminary right of way study, an analysis of Joe's Creek and a review of options for improving Denton Drive at Lombardi Lane. The COUNTY shall pay CONSULTANT progress payments for actual work performed no more often than monthly, based upon invoices for actual work performed for the period, provided that the work is progressing in accordance with the approved Project Schedule and Scope of Services, at an amount not to exceed 90% of the approved basic services fee. The remaining 10% shall be paid upon final acceptance by COUNTY of Preliminary Basic Services. Progress payment requests shall be accompanied by digital files through the date of payment request in a form which can be checked as to manageability. Should additional backup material be requested by the Director, CONSULTANT shall comply promptly with such request. In this regard, should the Director determine it necessary, CONSULTANT shall promptly, but in no event later than thirty (30) days from the date of notice, make all its records and books related to this Contract available to COUNTY for inspection and auditing purposes. An example of the form required for invoicing is displayed as Attachment C, Sample Invoice, incorporated herein for all purposes as if reproduced word for word.

III.3 Fees: A sample invoice is provided in Attachment C.

IlIA Partial payments will be authorized on a percentage of actual work completed provided proper invoices with attached documentation, as required by COUNTY's Director and the COUNTY Auditor, are submitted. The form required for invoicing is displayed as Attachment C, Sample Invoice.

IH.5 No deduction shall be made from CONSULTANT's compensation solely on account of penalty, liquidated damages, or other sums withheld from payments to Construction Contractor.

III.6 No addition shall be made to CONSULTANT's compensation based upon construction contract claims, or delays in construction whether paid by COUNTY or denied.

UI.7 COUNTY reserves the right to correct any error that may be discovered in any invoice that

MClPIENGINEERfNG SE'RVIClc",S CONTRACT MCfP No. I02l7 - Demon Drive

may have been paid to CONSULTANT and to adjust the subsequent payments to meet the requirements of the Contract. Following approval of invoices by Director and approval by County Auditor, COUNTY will endeavor to pay CONSULTANT promptly, i.e., within thirty days of COUNTY approval of invoice. Under no circumstances shall CONSULTANT be entitled to receive interest on amounts due.

ARTICLE IV. DELIVERABLES

IV.1 Progress Schedule: Within fifteen days of receipt of the "Notice to Proceed" from the COUNTY, the CONSULTANT shall submit for approval a breakdown of the major tasks ofthe Phase IA Preliminary Design as a percent of the total phase. A design progress form and bar chart shall be prepared on Microsoft Project Management Software (latest version) in an approved format and updated and submitted to the COUNTY once per month. The form and bar chart shall show progress including percentage complete of the various tasks and shall be the basis for determining partial payments to the consultant. The form and bar chart must correspond to the design schedule set forth by Contract.

IV.2 Phase IA Preliminary Design Preparation of Plans:

IV.2.1 CONSULTANT is also required to attend additional conferences that may be necessary and scheduled by the COUNTY to complete the preliminary plan preparation and review discussions for the project (a minimum of five.)

IV.2.2 CONSULTANT shall meet with the City and other agencies to determine the extent of any previous plans and studies, and to obtain zoning, subdivision information, and land use requirements. CONSlJLTANT shall submit to COUNTY written documentation of the results of such consultation.

IV.2.3 CONSULTANT shall prepare a right of way (ROW) alignment study where necessary to determine the most economical location of the ROW consistent with good engineering practices and submit maps showing the proposed location of street improvements, including existing ROW, curb lines, medians and driveways. Sufficient preliminary engineering investigation and consideration must be given to the effect on adjacent properties (development), inclusive of all private or public facilities, due to the additional ROW as well as the proposed roadway improvements, including proposed curb grade, fill and cut slopes and/or retaining walls. All alignment stationing shall progress from south to north or west to east. The maps shall contain sufficient detail for presentation to County officials andlor to the public and shall, as designated by COUNTY, be on either a 24" x 36" plan sheet with a scale at 1" = 20' or a 11" x 17" plan sheet with a scale at 1" = 40'.

IV.2.4 CONSULTANT shall prepare a general summary report and preliminary schematics in sufficient detail to indicate clearly the problems involved and the alternate solutions available to the COUNTY.

IV.3 Within ten (10) davs of approval of Phase IA, Preliminary Design by COUNTY, CONSULTANT shall deliver to Director all originals, three (3) copies and electronic files of preliminary schematics. The "Dallas County Performance Evaluation of Design Consultants" and "Evaluation of Dallas County" evaluation process shall be performed

YfClPIENGINEERlNO SERVICES CONTRACT jlfel? No. 10217 - Denton Drive 5

at this time and repeated at the end of the Contract.

IVA It is specifically understood and agreed that the CONSULTANT shall not authorize nor undertake any work, which work would require the payment of any fee, cost, expense or reimbursement in addition to the fee stipulated in this Contract, without having fIrst obtained specifIc written authority therefor from the COUNTY. The written authorization for additional work shall be in the form of a "ModifIcation to the Scope of Services". Such modifIcation shall clearly defIne the additional scope of services and the negotiated fee. The modifIcation shall be approved by the CONSULTANT and recommended by the Director. The Director may approve the modifIcation in accordance with Article XXIII, Amendments, Section 5. In the event that the total amount of the modifIcation exceeds the amount the Director is authorized to approve, or if the Director shall determine that Commissioners Court's approval is necessary or convenient, the Director shall submit such modifIcation to the Commissioners Court for its consideration.

IV.S In addition to the paper/mylar copies specifIed above, CONSULTANT shall deliver requested work to the COUNTY in digital form which is electronically downloadable and able to be manipulated by COUNTY's computers. These fIles shall include all reference fIles, and cell libraries, and shall be created in compliance with TxDOT specifIcations in regard to level structure, line type, and line weight. AilY corrupted fIles shall be replaced by CONSULTANT at no additional cost to COUNTY. The CONSULTAl\TT shall provide all plats and maps to the COUNTY in digital fIles generated using Microstation brand computer aided drafting software, version 8, or the release currently used by Dallas County. In addition to these electronic fIles, hard copies shall be supplied or in such other formats as instructed by the COUNTY herein.

IV.6 All survey work shaH be performed by the CONSULTANT using Electronic Distance Meters and Electronic Data Collectors compatible with the COUNTY's similar equipment unless other methods and equipment are approved in advance by the COUNTY. All personnel, surveying equipment, and transportation of survey personnel shall be furnished by the CONSULTANT at its sole cost, expense and liability. The CONSULTANT shall be responsible for securing property owners' permission to enter upon their property for the purpose of performing work required by this Contract. The CONSULTANT shall reference all work to a system of Geographical Positioning System (GPS) points on the ground and/or to the Texas Plane Coordinate System. The CONSULTANT shall download all digital data to the COUNTY's computer equipment daily. Photocopies of all written work (e.g., fIeld book sketches, and other hard copy materials) will be transmitted to the COUNTY as generated. When requested by the COUNTY in the applicable Contract, the daily download of digital data shall be accomplished by use of a modulator-demodulator device (Modem) over a dial-up telephone line in order to minimize cost. The CONSULTANT shall furnish all hardware and software, which is 100% compatible with COUNTY system for reception of such information, at no cost to the COUNTY. The COUNTY shall furnish one telephone line on its end at the COUNTY's sole cost.

IV.7 CONSULTANT shall also conform to the following survey requirements: MCll'lENGINEERlNG SERVK'ES CONTRACT MelT' No, ]0217 - Dmton DriVe _____ .. 6

IV. 7.1 RIGHT OF WAY All work performed under this category shall conform to the requirements of Dallas County Requirements For SurvevingServices Of Public Projects. Right Of Way Mapping, Right Of Way Document Preparation. January 2003 except -as otherwise provided herein or when such is inapplicable, in tbe sole opinion of the COUNTY. This work shall include, but not be limited to, on the ground observations and abstracting title records in sufficient depth to determine the present property owners of record, researching title records of municipalities_ The State of Texas, the County of Dallas and The Dallas Central Appraisal District to determine present property ownership, including easements, and property line monumentation, if any.

IV.7.2 TOPOGRAPHIC All work performed under this category shall be such that the COUNTY can construct a digital map model of the area under consideration and shall include, but not be limited to, all access points and improvements on private properties and existing right of way and vertical and horizontal locations of all public and private utilities and sufficient research of public and private utility company records to determine existing topography shall be entered into an electronic data collector using the current edition of Dallas County list of Descriptor Codes.

IV.7.3 CONSTRUCTION All work performed under this category shall be as directed by the COUNTY and shall include, but not be limited to, staking centerline (CL) points, CL offset points, reference points, use of horizontal and vertical eontrol points (bench marks) and otber work normally required for construction of roads, streets, culverts, storm sewers and bridges.

IV.7.4 BOUNDARY All work performed in this category shall be as directed by the COUNTY and shall include, but not be limited to, preparation of plats and legal descriptions of lands to be bought or sold by the COUNTY.

IV.7.S MISCELLANEOUS The CONSULTANT shall perform miscellaneous survey work as indicated in this Contract or subsequent Contract Amendment( s) to include but not be limited to staking and referencing routes and project alignments; locating and marking property corners or right of way lines; flagging proposed right of way tracts during acquisition negotiations; and installing and determining the adjusted elevation (NGVD 1927) following performance of a bench mark loop.

IV.7.6 The CONSULTANT shall provide all field work to the COUNTY in digital f01111 which is electronically downloadable to the COUNTY's computers using Tripod Data Systems, Inc., file transfer software Survey Link version 7.03 or the version currently used by Dallas County, supplemented by such written data as is necessary to readily use the digital data (e.g., sketches of instrument set-up points used in radial data acquisition). In addition, all work delivered in digital form shall be accompanied by at least one printout or listing of files, with descriptive titles, or a plot of the data, as applicable. Such printouts or plats shall be constructed so as to demonstrate the usability of tbe digital files. Any corrupted files shall be replaced by the CONSULTANT at no additional cost to the COUNTY.

IV.7.7. PARTIAL submittals are discoura~ CONSULTANT shall be responsible for the quality of the deliverables. CONSULTANT shall have written quality control procedures in place which have been approved by Director. CONSULTANT shall provide one original and three (3) copies of the final Preliminary Sununary Report to

lVIClPIENWNEERING SERrlCES CONTRACT "ili'lcl!l.Cd.Jt:.P:l.N~o~. 1.;10!!.;2[£1.L7;:;:lD!§e'!J.nt1fJ.o'!J.Il.1DIJ.'niv'g,e ____________ • ___________ 7

COUNTY upon resolution of all comments. An electronic copy of the complete report, including exhibits, shall also be provided as a final deliverable.

IV.7.S In the event that the CONSULTANT's team is materially changes, experiences a change in subconsultant, has a change of address or name, CONSULTANT shall provide notice of said changes to COUNTY as soon as practicable. Documentation supplied to COUNTY for CONSULTANT's team shall remain as accurate as at time of proposal.

IV.7.9 CONSULTANT shall provide, at no expense to COUNTY, reasonable minor revisions to any phase, whether previously approved and accepted, as may be required to satisfy the scope of services established by this Contract. Approval of any phase constitutes COUNTY's acceptance of the design presented. After acceptance of each phase of the Project, any revisions, additions, or modifications made at COUNTY's request which constitute a change in the Scope of Services shall be subject to additional compensation to CONSULTANT as agreed upon by COUNTY.

ARTICLE V. CONSULTANT'S SERVICES

V.I ENGINEER'S SEAL. The CONSULTANT shall place his or her Texas professional seal of endorsement on all engineering documents and engineering data prepared under the supervision of the Engineer in the performance ofthis Contract.

V.2 PARTNERING. The COUNTY shall encourage participation in a partnering process that involves the COUNTY, CONS1JLTANT and his or her sub consultants, the Project's host City(ies), and other supporting jurisdictions and/or agencies. This partnering relationship shall begin at the Pre-Design Charrette and continue for the duration ofthis Contract. By engaging in partnering, the parties do not intend to and do not create a legal partnership, or additional contractual relationships, nor in any way alter the legal relationship which otherwise exists between the COUNTY and the CONSULTANT. The partnering effort shall be structured to draw on the strengths of each organization to identify and achieve reciprocal goals. The objectives of partnering are effective and efficient contract performance and completion of the PROJECT within budget, on schedule, in accordance with the Scope of Services, and without litigation. Participation in partnering shall be totally voluntary and all participants shall have equal status.

V.3 PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS. CONSULTANT warrants to the COUNTY that all services provided by CONSULTANT in the performance of this Contract shall be provided by personnel who are appropriately licensed or certified as required by law, and who are competent and quali.fied in their respective trades or professions. Further, CONSULTANT agrees that any replacement of personnel on project team shall be with the express written approval of COUNTY.

V.4 OUALITY CONTROL. The CONSULTANT agrees to maintain written quality control procedures, approved by COUNTY. If a situation arises which is not addressed by the written quality control procedures, CONSULTANT shall utilize additional quality control procedures as appropriate and consistent with good engineering practices. CONSULTAt'lT's failure to put forth a good faith effort in quality control will be considered in the Consultant Evaluation,

MClPIENOlNEERfNG SEl/neE'S CONTRACT MCJI'No~H)..2jZ::-j2entl;n D'd'IU'iJ!!ve,-' ______________________ _

which may have an impact on future services.

V.5 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF DESIGN CONSULTANTS. Detailed in Attachment E, incorporated herein for all purposes as if reproduced word for word, is the regular evaluation of performance of design consultants in providing engineering services. The attached forms also provide an opportunity for the CONSULTANT to evaluate the Dallas County performance of project management practices and procedures in Attachment F, incorporated herein for all purposes as if reproduced word for word. Unsatisfactory evaluations may result in suspension from COUNTY design contracts for a designated period oftime.

V.6 All plans and drawings will be prepared and submitted by CONSULT ANT to COUNTY for approval on either 11" x 17" or 24" x 36" plan sheets, as designated by COUNTY, with all lettering processed in ink or pencil and clearly legible. CONSULTANT may submit plans and drawings on 24-inch by 36-inch drafting sheets only with prior approval by COUNTY. All drawings are to be produced in accordance with Article N, Deliverables, of this Contract, and copies of electronic files will be provided to C01JNTY after the completion or termination of the proj ect.

V.7 All CONSULTANT's designs and work product under this Contract including, but not limited to, Tracings, Drawings, Estimates, Specifications, Investigations, Studies, and other Documents, completed or partially completed, shall be the property of COUNTY to be used as COUNTY desires, without restriction. Copies may be retained by CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT shall be liable to COUNTY for any loss or damage to such documents while they are in the possession of, or while being worked upon by CONSULTANT or anyone connected with CONSULTANT, including agents, employees, consultants or subcontractors. All documents so lost or damaged shall be promptly replaced or restored by CONSULTANT without cost to COUNTY.

ARTICLE VI. COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITIES

Vr.! COUNTY shall desiguate representatives authorized to act in its behalf. All submissions shall be to the COUNTY Assistant Director of Engineering and Construction or the Project Manager responsible for the Project. Such Project Manager shall be responsible for transmission of the submission to the COUNTY Assistant Director of Engineering and Construction or Director. COUNTY shall examine documents submitted by CONSULTANT and render decisions pertaining thereto promptly to avoid unreasonable delay in the orderly progress of CONSULTANT's work. CONSULTAl~T shall fumish COUNTY full documentation of all services performed at each Phase IA milestone. Milestones shall be agreed between the parties and documented as a part ofthe project schedule.

Four (4) weeks shall be adequate review time for all parties. Failure to timely review any document shall not cause a damages for delay claim and CONSULTANT's only remedy shall be an extension of time reasonable for performance. Submittals found to be incompl.ete shall not be counted against COUNTY's allotted time for review.

VI.2 COUNTY shall assist CONSULTANT with utility contacts and available COUNTY data,

MClP/ENGiNEERING SERVICES CONTRACT ~Jl~CdL£P~~~~~.£10~2~lL7~--~D~e~n~w~n~D~r~w~e __________________ " __________________________ ~9

samples and standards.

VI.3 CONSULTANT shall be entitled to reasonably rely on the accuracy of the information, reports, and materials which COUNTY furnishes.

VI.4 If COUNTY or CONSULTANT observes or otherwise becomes aware of any fanlt or defect in the Project or construction of the Project, it shall give prompt written notice thereof to the other.

ARTICLE VII. CONSULTANT'S ACCOUNT RECORDS

Records of CONSULTANT or CONSULTANT expenses pertaining to services on the Project and records of account between COUNTY and CONSULTANT shall be kept on a generally recognized accounting basis, shall be maintained in Dallas. County for a minimum of four (4) years from the termination date of this Contract and with full and inunediate access allowed to authorized representatives ofthe COUNTY upon request for any purpose including, but not limited to, evaluating compliance with this and other provisions of this Contract. COUNTY or its authorized representative, shall have the right to make copies of any and all documents, electronic files, books, backup documents, or other items either included in the records of account or supporting such records at COUNTY's cost.

ARTICLE VIII. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR

The CONSUI"TANT at all times shall be an independent contractor. The CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible for all acts and omissions of its employees, subcontractors, and their suppliers, and shall be specifically responsible for sufficient supervision and inspection to insure compliance in every respect with the contract requirements. There shall be no contractual relationship between any subcontractor or supplier of the CONSULTANT and the COUNTY by virtue of this Contract. No provision of this Contract shall be for the benefit of any party other than the COUNTY and CONSULTANT.

ARTICLE IX. TERiYIINATION, TIME OF THE ESSENCE

IX.l Termination: IX.I.1 County Termination

IX.1.1.l If in the sole determination of COUNTY the CONSULTANT has failed to comply with any of the terms, conditions, covenants, warranties or provisions of this Contract, COUNTY shall give written notice of such failure to CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT shall fully comply with all items within thirty (30) days of the date of such notice. In the event that CONSULTANT shall, in the sole determination of COUNTY, fail to cure each and every item within the thirty (30) day period, COUNTY shall have the right to immediately terminate this Contract.

",IX=,l""""1.,,,2c-__ COUNTY may immediately terminate this Contract due to insufficient

IrlClPIENG1NEERING SERVlCES CONTRACT .~~~C~[~PLN~~~.~10~2~1~7~-~D~e~"~to~n2Dflr~iv~e _______________________________________________ 10

funding.

IX.1.l.3 COUNTY may terminate this Contract without cause upon seven (7) days notice.

IX.1.2 Consultant Termination If in the sole determination of CONSULTANT the COUNTY has failed to comply with any of the terms, conditions, covenants, warranties or provisions of this Contract, the CONSULTANT shall give written notice of such failure to COUNTY. In the event that COUNTY fails to cure each and every item within the thirty (30) day period, CONSULTANT shall have the right to temlinate this agreement upon thirty (30) days notice to the COUNTY.

IX.2 In the event of termination by the County, Consultant shall cease all work upon receipt of notice of termination. CONSULTANT shall invoice COUNTY for all work satisfactorily completed and shall be compensated in accordance with the terms of this Contract for all work accomplished prior to the receipt of notice of termination. No amount shall be due for lost or anticipated profits. All plans, field surveys, maps, cross sections, all electronic information, and files in accordance with Article N, Deliverables, of this Contract, and other data, design and work related to the Project shall become the property of COUNTY in accordance with Article Xl,2 upon the termination of this Contract, and shall be promptly delivered to COUNTY in a reasonably organized form without restriction on future use. Should COUNTY subsequently contract with a new Consultant for continuation of services on the Project, CONSULTANT shall cooperate in providing information and shall be released or saved harmless from any acts of negligence of others in use of said data.

IX.3 If the termination of this Contract is due to the failure of the CONSULTANT to fulfill its obligations:

• [he COUNTY may take over the project and prosecute the work to completion by contract or otherwise. In such case, the CONSULTANT shall be liable to the COUNTY for any additional cost the COUNTY may incur, and

• The cost to the COUNTY of employing another firm to complete the required work, the time required to do so and other factors which affect the value to the COUNTY of the work performed to the date of default may, at the sole discretion of the COUNTY, be offset against the amount of compensation, if any, to be paid to CONSULTANT.

IX.4 Nothing contained in this Article IX shall require COUNTY to pay for any work which is unsatisfactory as determined by Director or which is not submitted in compliance with the terms of this Contract. CO'lJNTY shall not be required' to make any payments to CONSULTANT when CONSULTAt'JT is in default under this Contract, nor shall this Article constitute a waiver of any right, in law or in equity, which COUNTY may have if CONSULTANT is in default, including the right to bring legal action for damages. Default shall include, but not be limited to, the failure to complete CONSULTANT's work in accordance with the performance schedule.

MClPlENG1NEERlNG SERVK'ES CONTRACT klC1P /'V'n. J () 217 -- /)pntf)h Dript> t1

IX.S TIME OF THE ESSENCE: CONSULTANT understands and agrees that time is of the essence and that any failure of the CONSULTANT to complete the Services of this Contract within the agreed Project Schedule shall constitute material breach of this Contract. The CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible for any delay or for failures to use diligent effort in accordance with the terms of the Contract by CONSULTANT, its consultants or subconsultants, surveyors or other parties employed by CONSULTANT. Where damage is caused to the COUNTY due to the CONSULTANT's failure to perform in these circumstances, the COUNTY may withhold, to the extent of such damage, CONSULTANT's payments hereunder without waiver of any of the COUNTY's additional legal rights or remedies. Neither the CONSULTANT nor the COUNTY will be responsible for delays associated with review periods by the COUNTY and/or a participating city(ies) in excess of the agreed Project Schedule.

IX.6 At the termination of the Contract, CONSULTANT shall furnish to COUNTY within ten (10) days of receipt of the notice of termination a listing of any subconsultants, all project records pertaining to outstanding obligations, or other records or information required by the Contract or requested in writing by COUNTY in either printed or electronic format or both. CONSULT A..l\IT agrees to fumish such infonnation in an electronic form which is compatible with the COUNTY's computer system and/or the computer system of any subsequent vendor or contractor of COUNTY selected for continuation of the services. CONSULTANT agrees to cooperate with any subsequent vendor or contractor of COUNTY and to use its best efforts to insure a transition of services without interruption or degradation of service. This provision will survive the termination of this Contract and shall be a continuing obligation until the transition of services is complete. All items listed or required in this provision shall be furnished by CONSULTANT to COUNTY without additional cost or expense to COUNTY.

ARTICLE X. SUSPENSION

X.1 Should the COUNTY desire to suspend the work but not terminate the Contract, the CUUNTY will issue a written order to stop work setting out the terms of the suspension. The CONSULTANT will stop all work and cease to incur costs during the term of the suspension.

X.2 The CONSULTANT will resume work when notified to do so by the COUNTY in a written authorization to proceed. Suspension of work does not automatically extend the date of performance for the contract period. If additional time is required to complete the work because of the suspension, a mutually agreed contract amendment will be executed in accordance with Article XXIII (Amendments).

X.3 If CONSULTANT is delayed by the COUNTY due to a suspension of work, or otherwise, the CONSULTANT's sole and exclusive remedy for delay shall be the right to a time extension for completion of the Contract and not damages.

ARTICLE XI. DOCUMENTS

MC1PIENGlNEElI..1NG SERVICES CONTRACT iliJf~Cd.l~PLN~o~'L10~2ulL7~1~)e~n~WwnuD~r~il~'e~ ____________________________________________ 12

XI.I All plans and drawings will be prepared and submitted by CONSULTANT to COUNTY for approval on either II" x 17" or 24" x 36" plan sheets, as designated by COUNTY, with all lettering processed in ink or pencil and clearly legible, CONSULTANT may submit plans and drawings on 24-inch by 36-inch drafting sheets only with prior approval by COUNTY. All drawings are to be produced in accordance with Article IV (Deliverables) of this Contract, and copies of electronic files will be provided to COUNTY after the completion or termination of the project.

XI.2 All CONSULTANT's designs and work product under this Contract including, but not limited to, Tracings, Drawings, Estimates, Specifications, Investigations, Studies, and other Documents, completed or partially completed, shall be the property of COUNTY to be used as COUNTY desires, without restriction, Copies may be retained by CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall be liable to COUNTY for any loss or damage to such documents while they are in the possession of, or while being worked upon by Consultant or anyone connected with CONSULTANT, including agents, employees, consultants or subcontractors, All documents so lost or damaged shall be promptly replaced or restored by CONSULTANT without cost to COUNTY,

XI.3 CONSULTANT shall maiutain, for a minimum of four (4) years from the termination date of this Contract all project information and data including but not limited to items listed in this section, with full and immediate access allowed to authorized representatives of the COUNTY, innnediately upon request, for any purpose, COUNTY or its authorized representative, shall have the right to make copies of any and all documents, books, backup documents, electronic data or files, or other items designs and work product under this Contract including, but not limited to, Tracings, Drawings, Estimates, Specifications, Investigations, Studies, and other Documents, completed or partially completed or supporting or utilized to produce such items at COUNTY's cost.

ARTICLE XII. GENERAL, SUPPLEMENTARY AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

This Contract shall be administered on behalf of COUNTY by its DIRECTOR, and Consultant shall fully comply with any and all instructions from said DIRECTOR. The DIRECTOR shall act as referee in all disputes under the terms of this Contract between the parties hereto, The DIRECTOR and the CONSULTANT shall negotiate in good faith toward resolving such disputes, In the event the DIRECTOR or the CONSULTANT are unable to reach an acceptable resolution of disputes concerning the work to be performed under this Contract, the DIRECTOR shall present unresolved disputes arising under the terms of this Contract to the Connnissioners Court, The decisions of the Commissioners Court as it pertains to umesolved disputes shall be final and binding, Violation or breach of contract terms by the CONSULTANT may be grounds for termination, Any additional or increased cost arising from the termination shall be paid by the CONSULTANT,

ARTICLE XIII. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE

MClPIENWNEER!NG SERHCES CONTRACT !!iCTpNo,]O;; 17 - Denton Drive 13

XIII.1 Approval and acceptance of CONSULTANT's work by the COUNTY shall not constitute nor be deemed a release of the responsibility and liability of the CONSULTANT, its employees, subcontractors, agents and consultants for the accuracy and competency of their work; nor shall such approval and acceptance be deemed to be an assumptiou of such responsibility by the COUNTY for any defect, error or omission in the work prepared by the CONSULTANT, its employees, subcontractors, agents or consultants. In this regard, the CONSULTANT shall defend, hold harmless aud indemnify the COUNTY for damages resulting from such defects, errors or omissions and shall secure, pay for and maiutain in force during the term of this Contract sufficient Professional Liability or Errors and Omissions insurance in an amount of not less than One Million and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000,000.00) single limit with certificates of insurance evidencing such coverage to be provided to the COUNTY. Such certificates of insurance shall specifically name the COUNTY as a loss payee in full compliance with the terms and conditions as hereinafter set out.

XIII.2 CONSULTANT agrees to indemnify and hold harmless COUNTY, County Commissioners, County Judge, the COUNTY's elected officials, director, employees, agents and representatives, (hereinafter referred to as "Indemnities") against all claims, demands, actions, suits, losses, damages, liabilities, cost and/or expense of every kind and natnre (including, but not limited to court cost, litigation expense and attorneys fees), paying same as they accrue, and all recoverable interest thereon, incnrred by or sought to be imposed on Indemnities because of injury (including death) or damage to property (whether real, personal or inchoate), arising (Jut of or occasioned by or caused by consultant's negligent act, error, or omission of consultant, any agent, officer, director, representative, employee, consultant or subconsultant of consultallt, and their respective officers, agents, employees, directors and representatives while in the exercise of performance of the rights or duties under this AGREEMENT of or in auy way related (whether directly or iudirectly, causally or otherwise) to: (1) the performance of, attempted performauce of, or failure to perform, operation or work uuder this Contract by CONSULTANT, its subcontractors and/or any other person or entity, other than COUNTY; (2) the condition of the real property, including any improvements, on which said operations or work are being performed; (3) the selection, provision, use or failure to use, by auy person or entity, of auy tools, supplies, materials, equipment or vehicles (whether owned or supplied by CONSULTANT, or auy other person or eutity excluding COUNTY) in connection with said work or operations; or (4) the presence on COUNTY real property, including any improvements located thereon, of Consultant, its subcontractors, employees, suppliers, vendors or any olther person acting on behalf of CONSULTANT. This indemnification shall apply, whether or not any such injury or damage has been brought on any theory of liability, including negligence, intentional wrong doing, strict product liability or breach of non-delegable duty. CONSULTANT further agrees to defend at its sole cost aud expense (at the election of any Indemnitee) against allY claim, demand, action or suit for which indemnification is provided hereunder, paying all costs as they may accrne.

The indemuity provided for in this paragraph shall not apply to any liability resulting from the negligence of COUNTY, its officers or employees, in instances where such negligence causes personal injury, death, or property damage. IN THE EVENT

:lfClPIENOlNEERING SERVICES CONTRACT AiCl? Nt). If}217 - f)p"wIO'h nl"lw' IA

CONSULTANT AND COUNTY ARE FOUND JOINTLY LIABLE BY A COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION, LIABILITY SHALL BE APPORTIONED COMPARATIVELY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, WITHOUT, HOWEVER, WAIVING ANY GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY AVAILABLE TO COUNTY UNDER TEXAS LAW AND WITHOUT WAIVING ANY DEFENSES OF THE PARTIES UNDER TEXAS LAW.

XIII.3 Without in auy way limiting or restricting the indemnification and defense agreement stated above, CONSULTANT agrees that it is the intention of the parties hereto that Consnltant and its insurers bear the entire risk of loss or iujury to any of CONSULTANT's employees, "borrowed servants", agents, representatives, subcontractors, vendors, material men, or auy other person present on the premises or performing any other act or service ou CONSULTANT's behalf or at its request, without seeking any contribution therefor from any indemnitee or its insurers.

XIIIA INSURANCE. The CONSULTANT, at CONSULTANT's sole cost, shall additionally purchase and maintain in force the following minimum insurance coverage during the term of this Contract. Such insurance shall be in the amounts and in full compliauce with the following terms and conditions:

XIIIA.1 Within ten (10) days after the Effective Date of this Contact, COUNTY requires and CONSULTANT agrees that the following insurance coverage will be met and in effee! for the life of the awarded Contract and any renewal or extension, prior to any delivery of any service and/or perfonnance of work. All policies shall be issued by an insurance company acceptable to County and authorized to do business in the State of Texas, having a rating of A or better by A.M.Best Co. CONSULTANT will submit verification of coverage to the Dallas County Public Works Department, showing Dallas County as the certificate holder, within ten (10) days after the Effective Date of this Contact and prior to and as a condition precedent to the commencement of any work or delivery. Dallas County will neither be responsible for nor authorize payments for services rendered without having the applicable certificates on file. Ail insurance cost including any deductibles, which shall not exceed ten percent (10%) of the coverage shall be paid in full by CONSULTANT without cost to or contributions from Dallas County. The following minimum insurance coverage is required:

XIIIA.I.1 Workers' Compensation Insurance in the amount and in compliance with the provisions as provided for by Texas Law as established by the Texas Workers Compensation Act, Title 5, Subtitle A, Texas Labor Code for all of his employees assigned to operate or work under this Contract. In the event the Consultant elects to sublet any work, Consultant shall require subcontractors to provide Workers' Compensation Insurance for all of the latter's employees unless such employees are afforded protection by the Consultant.

This insurance must be endorsed with a Waiver of Subrogation Endorsement, waiving the carrier's right of recovery under subrogation or otherwise from the County.

XUI.4.1.2 Comprehensive General Liability Insurance, including Contractual Liability - Commercial General Liability Insurance coverage shall carry limits of One Million and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for bodily injury and property damage per occurrence with a general aggregate of One Million and

MOP/ENGlNEERING SERVICES CONTRACT A1el? Nt). 10217 Denton .Drive ______________ ~I.5

00/100 Dollars ($1,000,000.00), and a products and completed operations aggregate of One Million and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000,000.00). There shall not be any policy exclusion or limitations for contractual liability covering the Contractor's obligations herein; personal injury/advertising liability; medical payments; fire damage, legal liability; broad form property damage, and/or liability for independent contractors.

XIIIA.1.3 Comprehensive Automobile Liability - Comprehensive Auto Liability insurance covering all owned, hired and non-owned vehicles used in connection with the work performed under the Contract with limits of liability not less than Five Hundred Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($500,000.00) each person and One Million Five Hundred Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($1,500,000.00) each accident for bodily injury and Five Hundred Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($500,000.00) each occurrence for property damage for a combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage liability of not less than Two Million and 00/100 Dollars ($2,000,000.00)

XIIIA.1.4 Professional Liability - Insurance Requirements - Consultant shall iudemnify County for damages resulting from defects, errors or omissions and shall secure, pay for aud maiutain in force during the term of the Contract and thereafter for an additional five (5) years from date the project is accepted as complete by the Commissioners Court, sufficient errors and omissions insurance in an amount of not less than One Million and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000,000.00) single limit, with certificates evidencing such coverage.

XIIIA.2 CONSULTANT agrees that, with respect to the above referenced insurance, all insurance contracts will contain following required provisions:

XIIIA.2.1 Name Dallas County and its officers, employees and elected representatives as additional insured(s) (as the interest of each insured may appear) as to all applicable coverage.

XIIIA.2.2 Provide for forty five (45) days notice to the COUNTY for cancellation, non-renewal or material change which notice must be accompanied by a replacement Certificate of Insurance to maintain uninterrupted coverage.

XIIIA.2.3 Provide for an endorsement that the "other insnrance" Clause shall not apply to Dallas County where COUNTY is an additional insured on the policy.

XIIIA.2.4 Provide for notice to the COUNTY at the address shown below by registered mail.

XIIIA.2.5 CONSULT ANT agrees to waive subrogation against Dallas County, its officers and employees for injuries, including death, property damage or any other loss.

XIUA.2.6 All Insurance Coverage shall be Oill an occnrrence basis unless specifically approved in writing and executed by the County's Director and Risk Manager.

X1UA.3 In addition to any other remedies COUNTY may have upon CONSULTANT's failure to provide and maintain any insurance or policy endorsements to the extent and

iI1C1PIENG1NEEJUNG SER"VICES CONTRACT lvlClP No.1 0217 - Bellum Drive

within the time herein required, COUNTY shall have the right to order CONSULTANT to stop work hereunder, and/or withhold any payment(s) which become due to CONSULTANT hereunder until CONSULTANT demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof. A stop work order given to CONSULTANT by COUNTY in accordance with this Article shall not constitute a Suspension of Work.

XIII.4.4 It is agreed that CONSULTANT's insurance shall be deemed primary with respect to any insurance or self insurance carried by COUNTY for liability arising out of operations under this Contract.

XIII.4.5 CONSULTANT shall advise COUNTY in writing within 24 hours of any claim or demand against COUNTY or CONSULTANT known to CONSULTANT related to or arising out of CONSULTANT's activities under this AGREEMENT.

XIII.4.6 The provisions of this section are solely for the benefit of the parties hereto and not intended to create or grant any rights, contractual or otherwise, to any other person or entity.

XIII.4.7 Approval, disapproval or failure to act by the COUNTY regarding any insurance supplied by CONSULTANT shall not relieve CONSULTANT offull responsibility or liability for damages and accidents as set forth herein. Neither shall bankruptcy, insolvency or denial of liability by any insurance company exonerate the CONSULTANT from liability.

XIII.4.S Acceptance of the final plans by COUNTY shall not constitute nor be deemed a release of the responsibility and liability of CONSULTANT, its employees, associates, agents or subcontractors for the accuracy and competency of their designs, working drawings, specifications or other documents and work; nor shall such acceptance be deemed an assumption of responsibility or liability by COUNTY for any defect in the designs, working drawings, specifications or other documents and work prepared by said CONSULTANT, its employees, subcontractors, and agents.

XIII.4.9 Standard of Care: Services provided by CONSULTANT under this Contract will be performed in a manner consistent with that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the same profession currently practicing under similar circumstances.

XIII 4.10 Nothing herein contained shall be construed as limiting in any way the extent to which CONSULTANT maybe held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property resulting from CONSULTANT's or its subcontractors' performance ofthe work covered under this Contract.

ARTICLE XIV. NONDISCRIMINATION.

As a condition of this Contract, CONSULTANT will take all necessary action to insure that, in connection with any work under this Contract, it will not discriminate in the treatment or employment of any individual or groups of individuals on the grounds ofrace, color, religion, national origin, age, sex or physical handicap unrelated to job performance, either directly, indirectly or through contractual or other arrangements.

ARTICLE XV. ENFORCEMENT, VENUE, GOVERNING LAWS AND NOTICES

XV.I This Contract shall be enforceable in Dallas Connty, Texas, and if legal action is necessary by either Party with respect to the enforcement of any or all of the terms or conditions herein, exclusive venue for same shall lie in Dallas County, Texas. Notwithstanding any 'provisions contained in this agreement and any supplemental amendment to the contrary, this Contract shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws and court decisions of the State of Texas and is expressly subject to Dallas County's Sovereign Immunity and Title 5 of the Texas Practice and Civil Remedies Code.

XV.2 All notices and correspondence to COUNTY by CONSULTANT shall be mailed or delivered as follows:

Dallas County Public Works Donald R. Holzwarth, P .E., Director Administration Building 411 Ehn Street, ¢'h floor Dallas, Texas 75202

XV.3 All notices and correspondence from COUNTY to CONSULTANT shall be mailed or delivered as follows:

Mr. Victor Zepeda, P.E., President AZ&B,LLC 11355 Mc Cree Road Dallas, Texas 75238

ARTICLE XVI. TERM

This Contract becomes effective when fully executed by both parties (hereinafter, the called the "EFFECTNE DATE"), unless termination occurs as otherwise provided herein and expires on the completion of all obligations by the parties set forth herein. The CONSULTANT will not begin work or incur costs until authorized in writing by the COUNTY to proceed with the work, as more fully set forth herein.

ARTICLE XVII. FINANCIAL INTEREST PROHIBITED: CONFIDENTIALITY

XVII.1 CONSULTANT covenants and represents that CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents, consultants, and subcontractors will have no financial interest, direct or indirect, in the purchase or sale of any product, materials or equipment that will be recommended or required for the construction of the Project.

XVII.2 CONSULTAl'\[T nnderstands that no officer or employee of COUNTY shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in any contract with COUNTY, or be financially interested,

i1fClPIENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT ~Jf~C~ILP£N~~.~luO~2L17L-~·~D~~illlt~OJ~'~D~r~iv~e ____________________________________________ ~f8

directly or indirectly, in the sale to COUNTY of any land, materials, supplies, or services, except on behalf of COUNTY as an officer or employee. Any violation of this prohibition, with the express knowledge of the person or corporation contracting with COUNTY shall render the contract involved voidable by the Commissioners Court.

XVII.3 CONSULTANT's reports, evaluations, designs, drawings, data and all other documentation and work developed by CONSULTANT hereunder shall not be disclosed to any third parties without the prior written approval of Director.

ARTICLE XVIII. REPORT

XVIII.! The CONSULTANT shall promptly advise the COUNTY in writing of events which may have significant impact upon the Contract, including but not limited to:

XVIII. 1. 1 Problems, delays or adverse conditions which will materially affect the ability to meet time schedules or goals or preclude the attainment of proj ect work units by established time periods. This disclosure shall be accompanied by a statement of any action taken, or contemplated, and any COUNTY assistance needed to resolve the situation.

XVIII.1.2 Favorable developments or events which enable the CONSULTANT to meet time schedules and goals sooner tban anticipated or to produce more work units than originally projected.

XVIII.2 The CONSULTANT shall coordinate all work with the Director of the Department of Public Works or with such other person as may be designated by him in writing.

Kynr.3 The CONSULTANT shall report progress on work undertaken to the designated Dallas County point-of-contact at not greater than monthly intervals.

ARTICLE XIX. CONSULTANT RESOURCES

The CONSULTANT warrants that the CONSULTANT and each subconsultant, specifically including, but not limited to surveyors, has adequate qualified personnel in its employment and all required transportation, equipment, materials, supplies and any and all other goods and services for performance of services required under this Contract, or will be able to obtain such personnel, transportation, equipment, materials, supplies and any and all other goods and services from sources other than the COUNTY. Unless otherwise specified, the CONSULTANT for the compensation received shall fumish all personnel, transportation, equipment, materials, supplies and any and all other goods and services required to perform the work authorized herein at its sole cost and expense. All employees of the CONSULTANT or of any subcontractor shall have all required licenses, knowledge and experience as will enable them to perform the duties assigned to them. CONSULTANT contracts and agrees that any employee of the CONSULTANT or any subcontractor who, in the opinion of tlle COUNTY, is incompetent or whose conduct becomes detrimental to the work or whose conduct reflects adversely on the COUNTY shall immediately be removed from association with the project.

MOPIENG1NEERING SERVICES CONTRACT MC[PNo. 10217 -Denton Drive 19

ARTICLE XX. SUBCONTRACTS

XX.I The CONSULTANT shall not subcontract, sell, assign, pledge, or otherwise transfer any portion of the work authorized by the COUNTY without prior approval in writing by the COUNTY. Any attempt to sign, transfer, pledge, conveyor otherwise dispose of any part of or all of CONSULTANT's rights, title, interests or duties under this agreement without the written approval of County is void and shall confer no rights upon any third party. Violation of this provision shall constitute a material breach of this agreement and may be grounds for termination at the sole discretion of County. Under no circumstances shall the CONSULTANT subcontract more than fifty percent (50%) ofthis Contract.

XX.2 Subcontractors shall comply with the provisions ofthis Contract. No subcontract will relieve the CONSULTANT of its responsibility under this Contract.

ARTICLE XXI. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS

The COUNTY and the CONSULTANT each binds itself, its successors, executors, administrators, assigns and subcontractors in respect to all covenants of this Contract.

ARTICLE XXII. INCORPORATED DOCUMENTS AND ORDER OF PRECEDENCE

XXI!.1 The followiug documents are incorporated herein as if reproduced herein word for word: XXII.1.1 CONSULTANT's submission of the Minority/Women Specifications for SOQ's.

XXII.1.2 Dallas County Unified Policy for Selection of Architect/Engineers as set forth in Commissioners Court Order No. 92-393.

XXII.1.3 North Central Texas Council ofGovemments Specifications, latest edition.

XXII.1.4 The Texas Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Construction of Highways, Streets and Bridges, 2004 edition or latest version at Effective Date.

XXII.1.S The Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, latest version at Effective Date.

XXn.1.6 The Dallas County Design Manual, latest version at Effective Date.

XXII.1.7 The Dallas County Guidelines and Checklist for Preparation of R.O.W. Legal Descriptions. Parcel Plats, and Maps, dated February 2006 or latest version at Effective Date.

XXII. 1. 8 Standards, Specifications, Codes, Ordinances, Regulations of City or Cities in which the proj ect is located.

XXII.2 In the event of any inconsistency between the provisions of this agreement, the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: (1) this Contract; (2) the RFQ and (3) County Unified Policy for Selection of Architect/Engineers and (4) Consultants response to RFQ, inclusive of all data and documentation as furnished.

iV1C1PIENG1NEERING SERVICES CONUIACT MOP No. I112} 7 -- DeniM Drive 21)

ARTICLE XXIII. AMENDMENT~

XXIII.1 Modification - Either the CONSULTANT or the COUNTY may initiate a written request for a Contract Modification when, in the opinion of the requesting party, the needs and conditions of the project warrant a modification. Upon receipt of a request by either party, the CONSULTANT and the COUNTY shall review the conditions associated with the request and determine the necessity of a modification. When both parties agree that a modification is warranted the CONSULTANT and the COUNTY shall negotiate the specific modification(s) and any changes in the Cost, total not-to-exceed amount for the contract, unit prices for any item not previously agreed upon or completion dates resulting from the modification.

XXIII.2 Fee/Time Increases - Any other provision of this Contract notwithstanding, it is specifically understood and agreed that the CONSULTANT shall not be authorized to undertake any services pursuant to this Contract, or any modification to the Contract or amendment hereto requiring the payment of any amount in excess of Cost stipulated in Article ill, Compensation, requiring or extension of time of completion without first obtaining specific authorization from the COUNTY in the form of a formal order of the Dallas County Commissioners Court authorizing a Modification and a written authorization to proceed from the Dallas County Department of Public Works.

XXIII.3 Phase IE and Phase II Amendment In the event that the County shall exercise its option for Phase IE andlor Phase II services and a mutual agreement is reached between the parties, that agreement shall be reduced to writing, incorporated in the terms of this agreement, and shall amend this agreement to the extent of the agreed provisions there in.

XXIII.4 Approval of a modification shall be in the form of a written Modification which clearly defines the changes to the previously approved provision of this Contract. Said written modification shall be approved by the CONSULTAi'JT, authorized by the Dallas County Commissioners Court by a formal order except as provided in Section 5 of this Article and a written notice to proceed will be issued by the Dallas County Department of Public Works.

XXUI.5 The Department of Pnblic Works may issue a written modification without prior approval of the Commissioners Court to exteud the maximum completion date, not to exceed ten (10) days and when the modifications are to be accomplished within the previously authorized total not-to-exceed amount of the Contract and within an amonnt not more than $50,000.00 above the previonsly approved amount, and when the modifications do not materially or substantively alter the overall scope of the project or the services provided by the CONSULTANT.

ARTICLE XXIV. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS

The CONSULTANT shall be familiar with and at all times shall comply with all Federal, State and local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations and the orders and decrees of any courts or administrative bodies or tribunals in any matter affectiug the performance of this Contract, including, without limitation, workers' compensation laws, minimum and maximum salary and wage statutes and regulations, licensing laws and regulations, non-discrimination laws and regulations, and safety regUlations. When required, the CONSULTA.1\fT shall furnish the COUNTY satisfactory proof of compliance therewith.

MCll'lENGINEEl1lNG SERViCES CONTI/ACT Jl1C1P No. ]D217 - Denton Drive 21

ARTICLE XXV. NON-COLLUSION

The CONSULTANT warrants that it has not employed or retained any company or persons, other than bona fide employees working solely for the CONSULTANT, to solicit or secure this Contract and that it has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT, any fee, commission, percentage,. brokerage fee, gifts or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Contract. For breach or violation of this warranty, the COUNTY shall have the right to annul this Contract without liability or to deduct, at its discretion, from the Contract price or compensation, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or contingent fee.

ARTICLE XXVI. SIGNATORY WARRANTY

The undersigned signatory for the CONSULTANT hereby represents and warrants that he or she is an officer of the organization for which he or she has executed this Contract and that he or she has full and complete authority to enter into this Contract on behalf of the firm and that the execution thereof is the act of the CONSULTANT and has been delivered and, subsequent to execution by COUNTY, constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of the CONSULTANT, its successors and assigns and shall inure to the benefit of the executing parties and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns.

ARTICLE XXVII. MISCELLANEOUS GENERAL PROVISIONS

XXVII.l Entire Agreement. This Contract, including all exhibits and addendum, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties hereto and may not be modified except by an instrument in writing executed by the parties as herein provided.

XXVII.2 Severability. If any provision of this Contract shall be held invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions hereof shall not be affected or impaired, and such remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect.

XXVII.3 DefaultlWaiver/Mitigation. It is not a waiver of default if the non-defaulting party fails to declare immediately a default or delays in taking any action. Pursuit of any remedies set forth in this Contract does not preclude pursuit of other remedies in this Contract or provided by law. CONSULTANT shall have a duty to mitigate damages.

XXVII.4 Federal or State of Texas Fuuding. In the event that any Project or part thereof is funded by State of Texas or U. S. Goverrnnent federal funding and any statute, rule, regulation, grant, contract provision or other State of Texas or U.S. Goverrnnent law, rule, regulation or other provision imposes additional or greater requirement(s) than stated herein, CONSULTANT agrees to timely comply therewith without additional cost or expense to COUNTY.

XXVII.S Headings. The titles which are used following the number of each paragraph are only for convenience in locating various provisions of this Contract and shall not be deemed to affect the interpretation or construction of such provision.

XXVII.6 Number and Gender. Words of any gender used in this Contract shall be held and construed to include any other gender; and words in the singular shall include the plural and vice versa,

MCIPIENGINEElI.lNG SERViCES CONTRACT

unless the text clearly requires otherwise.

XXVII.7 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in mUltiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.

XXVII.S Fuuding. Notwithstanding any provisions contained herein, this Contract is expressly contingent upon the availability of funding for each item and obligation contained herein for the term of the agreement and any extension thereto. CONSULTANT shall have no right of action against the County of Dallas in the event that the County of Dallas is unable to fulfill its obligations under this Contract as a result of lack of sufficient funding for any item or obligation from any source utilized to fund this Contract or failure to budget or authorize funding for this Contract during the current or future fiscal years. In the event that County of Dallas is unable to fulfill its obligations under this Contract as a result of lack of sufficient funding or if funds become unavailable, County of Dallas, at its sole discretion, may, provide funds from a separate source or terminate this Contract.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE COUNTY OF DALLAS has caused this Contract to be signed by its County Judge, duly authorized to execute the same in its behalf by Court Order No. 2008-1264 _____ " approved by the Commissioners Court on July 1 , 200JL, Arredondo, Zepeda & Brunz, LLC, signing by and through its duly authorized representative, thereby binding the parties hereto, their successors, assigns and representatives for the faithful and full performance of the terms and provisions ofthis Contract.

DALLAS COUNTY

ATTEST:

Approved as to Form:

Bob Schell Chief Civil Division Assistant District Attorney

ARREDONDO, ZEPEDA & BRUNZ, LLC

ATTEST:

,/

Corporate Seal

*8y Jaw, the District Attorneys' Office may only advise or approve contracts or legal documents on behalf of its clients. It may not advise or approve a contract or legal document on behalf of other parties. Our review of this document was conducted solely from the legal perspective of our client. OUf approval of this document was offered solely for the benefit of our client. Other parties should not rely on this approval, and should seek review and approval by their own respective attorney(s).

MCll'lENGlNEEll1NG SERVICES CONTRACT /vfC1P No. ](J217 .. · DelllollDr;ve 24

ATTACHMENT A

Scope of Services

Dallas County Denton Drive Assessments &

Right-of-Way Survey

The purpose of this proposal is to conduct an analysis of Denton Drive especially at Lombardy Drive to provide a recommended strategy for improving traffic flow at this intersection and to identify bridge options for Joe's Creek. In addition to this analysis, AZB will conduct a right-of-way survey of the entire project area, which is Webb Chapel to the northern City of Dallas boundary. -AZB staff will be available to provide support and attend public meetings on the roadway project. -

-Task 1 - Preliminary Right-of-way determination

- Prepare a Preliminary map of the existing right of way to be used as the basis for determining where additional right of way may be necessary for the plan roadway improvements. - Roadway widths, including sidewalks will vary depending on thelocation. In the area south of Walnut Hill to north of Royal, the right~of~\vay \vidth \-viiI be 74 feet where there will _be a focus on transit oriented design. The width for the

-- remaining portions of the roadway is 64 feet.

A preliminary right of way map is a composite of limited deed research, field work and analysis to re-establish right of way lines as originally located on the ground and documented at the time fee title was acquired by the City, County or State. This work effort requires specialized experience and knowledge with respect to re-establishing

- -1inear--booncl.aries--as..{).PIJOsed -to-trapezQi.dal--boundari.gs-. -Th<l-ba&iG -&t~ps -in-l*~paring- a preliminary right of way map are as follows:

Establish a Base Map for determining ROWrequirements

AZB will prepare a base map for evaluating the roadway for right-of-way needs and for the purpose of identifying conflicts with the existing right of way and proposed roadway design. The assumed roadway widths are presented above. AZB will utilize DART's boundary as the eastern most portion of the roadway, with the exception of the area around the LombardylDenton Drive intersection. The map will encompass the entire project area, from Webb Chapel to the City's northemboundary.

Research

Research will consist of obtaining any relevant project information from the County, current ownership from the County Tax Appraisal County, public records from the County Clerk's office and when applicable from the City of Dallas. Survey Vault.

Project Control

Recover, verify and identify existing . horizontal and vertical control and resolve/report any discrepancies. AZB will establish project control in conformance with the County's standards.

Limited Corner Recovery and Analysis

Recover existing right of way monuments, property corners and occupation lines intersecting the right of way. Analyze found corners with respect to record location. This work effort is limited; a more complete comerrecovery and analysis will be required to complete the right oJway map.

Preliminary Right of Way Map

The map will illustrate the marriage of record information and physical evidence recovered in the field. The preliminary map will illustrate; existing right of way lines, private property lines adjoining the right of way, record ownership information, areas, planimetrics and recovered monumentation.

Deliverables

• Four copies of a map illustrating planned and possible ROW acquisitions given width .... .ass.umptlons~_ .... _ .. _._~. __ .~ ...... _ .... --.--. - --"".-.. -- ----• Four copies of the same map using colored lines on aerial topography • Four sets of previously generated cross sections showing clearly proposed .ROW

widths and possible slope easements. • ROW parcel and cost estimate without structures

Timeframe'

It is projected this task will require four months from the notice to proceed.

Assumptions

The preliminary right of way map is based on limited corner recovery and analysis. The map is subject to revision and refinement as the right of way map is finalized. Additional corner· recovery, research an d analysis is necessary to finalize the right of way map.

Task 2 - Joe's Creek Bridge . .

D"nton Drive, at the location of Joe's Creek is within the 100 year floodplain. To construct a new roadway and bridge at this location will require a full-scale flood study and ultimately pennitting to construct in the flood plain areas .. The purpose of this preliminary study is to detennine the specific areas that are currently in the floodplain using current data; identify pennitting requirements; and detennine up to two roadway and bridge construction options that can be constructed andpennitted.

Three options will consider bridge alignment and hydraulics and Lombardy intersection alignment impacts to ROW. This scope of services will include the preparation of a hydraulic report containing recommendations for the Denton Drive bridge over Joe's Creek. This work will 'include hydrologic review, creation of a HEC-RAS model utilizing City' sexisting model, evaluation of up to three alternatives, and preparation of a report and schematics. . . .

Data Collection

AZB will collect all the necessary infonnation required to complete the project. This will include currently available hydrologic and hydraulic models and existing plans from the City of Dallas and DART. Existing cross sections will be obtained from the existing hydraulic model input. The proposed profile and horizontal alignment of Denton Drive at Joe's Creek will be. generated from input

cintoiheJnodeL -Contours_ and proposed roacLwa.yaligmnents -Wi.II-be-]xQ¥ided-and. . reviewed. AZB will prepare a base map for the project.

Hydrologic Review

AZB will review the most currently available hydrologic model for Joe's Creek. Previously devdoped discharges from the most current study conducted by the City of Dallas will be used and no further hydrologic analysis will be perfonned as a part of this study.

Baseline Hydraulic Model

AZB will convert the existing hydraulic model for the proj ect reach from WSP to HEC-RAS 3.1.3. The project reach consists of the portion of Joe's Creek from

. Northwest Highway to Brockbank Drive. NDMCE will add the latest DART. improvements to the model, as well as any additional cross sections deemed necessary for this analysis, and will review the Manning's "n" values to ensure that they are consistent with current field conditions. This will be the baseline model for alternatives.

Hydraulic Analysis

AZB will analyze up to furee bridge alternatives for a 70' wide bridge with a low chord elevation at least 2' above the ultimate 1 DO-year water surface elevation. The effect of the bridge approaches. on the 1 DO-year water surface elevation will . also be evaluated. The non-bridged portions of Denton Drive may remain below the 1 DO-year ultimate water surface elevation.

Hydraulic Report

AZB will prepare a letter report surnmanzmg the fmdings· of the hydraulic analyses and attend up to 2 meetings with the City of Dallas to present and discuss the results to the hydraulic analysis.

Concept Plan and Cost Estimate

Based on the acceptance of the hydraulic analysis, AZB will develop a concept plan layout for up to two preferred alternatives. 1'1cluded in t,~e assessment of options will be an aSsessment of bridge configurations, roadway dimensions on both sides of the bridge· and estimated floodplain ultimately impaGted by roadways.· It is assumed that the bridge will be designed so it is not in the floodplain, but .roads can be .located in the floodplain. Cost estimates for each option will be presented. The cost .estimatewill include the cost of bridge design, construction, roadway improvements associated with the bridge and any right-ofway that would have to be acquired ..

Deliverables .

A preliminary report with findings. The report will include a presentation of fmdings related to existing conditions, bridge options including schematics showing ROW impacts, post-development construction conditions and a costestimate Jor the bridge and adjoining roadway improvements.

Timeframe

The tasks defined above will be completed within five months from the notice to proceed

Task 3 - LombardylDenton Drive Intersection

No work on task 3 shall be embarked on before the results of task 1 and 2 have been determined and accepted by Dallas County. Based on a meeting with the County staff, DART and City of Dallas staff, there is an option to utilize land that is currently owned

',. '.' ...... ", .' '.',', ", .' : .. .'" ...... " .' .

by DART at the northeast corner of the intersection that could be provided to the County for the purpose of improvirigthe intersection at Lombardi and Denton Drive. The purpose of this task is to evaluate the intersection and make recommendations on changes that will improve traffic flow, not affect the Letot School and be consistent with recommendations for the bridge option selected by Task 2.

Specific tasks that will be performed include

1. Collect and analyze data obtained from DART to determine what land is available for a relocated Denton Drive segment limited to the Denton Lombardy intersection

2. Identify up t02 options for improving the intersection including ROW impacts and elevations.

3. Review bridge information that will be generated from Task 2 to determine roadway elevations at the intersection .

. 4. Finalize options for improving the intersection, illc1uding the results from Task 2

Deliverables

Exhibits - .One set (at a scale yet to be determined) of a map(s). illustrating planned and possible ROW acquisitions and including possible additional ROW impacts considering Joe's Creek Bridge, the Lombardy intersection, and possible slope easements given width and elevation assumptions from task 1 and cross section infonmation. '" -OnaseLoLtbe-same map-using -aeliallopGgr"pRY -

Timeframe

It is projected this task will require three months from authorization from Dallas County.

Meetings,

AZB will attend monthly task force meetings for the duration of the project at the offices of Dallas County Public Works. Progress reports and project concerns will be readily available for discussions with County staff.

AZB will attend one meeting with the City of Dallas Flood Plain Manager at the request of Dallas County to discuss bridge alignment alternatives and the findings of the hydraulic study.

ADDITIONAL SERVICES

Additional services, not included in the Scope of Services, will be provided as requested by the County. Any additional services desired can be provided on an hourly basis. These additional services could include, but are not limited to:

1. . Additional meetings with the County. 2. Additional hydraulic analyses, beyond those described in the scope of

. services. 3. Modeling of survey data. 4. Final hydraulic models and any permit activities. 5. Additional services related to the ROW task is to conduct a project-wide

utility easement analysis of the proj ecl. .

Total Project Fee.

The total project fee for the services defined in this scope of services is:

F P I ee roposa Task Description Fee Estimated

hours Task 1 . Right-ai-Way $ 34,884 334

Assessment Task 2 Joe's Creek Drainage . $ 99,719 931

- --' -.- -. - - - -arrdi5ridge-kssessment _. . ~ ---~-.- . .. - ~ - -- . - - -.

. Task 3 Denton/Lombardi Options $15,130 134 . -

Total $149,733 1399

ATTACHMENTB

DALLAS COUN]YPUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

DENTON DRIVE! IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT

,

ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING SERVICES ,

AZ&BLLC

APRIL 2008

Cost Estimate iArredondo, Zepeda Brunz, LLC. 5130/2008

Dallas County Denton Drive from Webb Chapel to just north offfi-635

AZ&B Engineering & Surveying :.l\-L-\NlIOUR BREAKDOWN Sr1l1MARY

PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PlANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES

3.08 ENGINEERING MANROURS DIRECT DIRECT

A I B C D E F TOTAL LABOR LAB. OR Work Description $ 31.58 $ 24,39 $ 21.57 $ HRS COSTS PROFIT (Labor Rates) $ 61.42 $ 49.35 OJ> ....... "'0 OJ> .... 't ..... .::>,) ... 1-.':>1 ,) l-I.~"I .o.u'U.J ~V,.;1...... LL .. ..,L' ......

Planning & Preliminary Investigations 6 Drainage & Hydraulic Analysi:; 56

TOTAL AZ&B DIRECT LABOR COST 62 % of Total Hours by Labor Classification 6.62 %

46 I 240

286 ~ 30.52%

30 36 292 230

322 266 34.36% 28.39%

SURVEYING MANllOURS C J)

16 0 89 0

lOS 0 11.21 % 0.00%

E F Work Description

ROW Surveying. Preliminary Investigations

A ~ B (Labor Rates) $ 48.50 39.37 'l> "";.t.W ~ "tJ..;:l... ~ .;H.W ~ .1 {. --44

TOTALAZ&BDIRECTLABORCOST 20 % of Total HQurs by Labor Classification 5.99%

TOTALAZB--ENGINEERING+-SlJRVEYING

AZ&B - TOTAL LABOR COST WI ORI $147,109 I

AZ&B - TOTAL PROJECT INDJRECTCOSTS Printing and Reproduc1ion

Travel Plats, Deeds, and Zoning Maps

Telephone, Fax, & Misc. Photos & Miscellaneous

$1,450 $275

$0 $0

$800

TOTAL AZ&B INDIRECT COSTS I $2,525]

HNTE $0 Nathan Meir Consultants $0

TEB (for SUE) $0 David De?ll International $0

S1L Laboratories (geotechnical) $0

TOTAL SUBCONTRACT COSTI $0 i TOTAL rr::~-'f49;ill.531

20 i 40

40 11.98%

9 30 195 2.69% 8.98% 58.38%

II Engineering Labor Categories" A = Sr. Proj"ect Manager B = Project Manager C "'" Design Engineer D = Design TechlEIT E "" CADDiDrafting F "" Clerical

Page 1

40 11.98%

6 0

#

6 $4,809 931 $32,034

937 $36,843

DIRECT TOTAL LABOR

HRS COSTS 334 10,974 $

334 $10,974

1271 $ 47,817 0 $

"Surveying Labor Categories'1

A = Survey Crew3 B = Survey Crew2 C=SurveyPM D=RPLS E = Sr Survey Tech F = Clerical

AZ&B OR Multiplier AZ&BProfit

$14,805 $98,619

$113,425

DIRECT LAB,OR PROFIT

33,784

$33,784

147,209

-167.70% 15.00%

CostE~timate

Denton Drive from Webb Cbapel rojust north ofnI~635 AZ&B Engineering & Surveying ~ MA.1IillOUR BREAKDOWN PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES

Sheet Task Counr

o

Drainage & Hydraulic Analysis

Work Description

Joe's Creek. Hydraulics o. Data collections b. Hydralic review c. Baseline hydraulic model d Hydraulic analysis e. Concept plan and cost estimate f Project coordination/meetings g. Draft Report h. Final Report

TOTAL AZ&B DlRECT LABOR

AZ&B Engineering & Surveying-INDIRECT COSTS Printing and Reproduction Travel Computer & CADD Telephone, Fax & lVlisc Communications Photos & Miscellaneous

TOTALAZ&B INDIRECT COSTS

TOTAL AZ&B FEE

SUBCONTRACTS


TOTAL COSTS

lINTB }Tathan Meir ConsultMts

TBE (for SUE) David Dean International

STI Laboratories (geotechnical)

(Labor Rates)

$500 $100

$0 $0

$500

51,100

$99,719

SO $0 $0 $0 $0

$0

$99,719

~l.4t u 4 4 4 8

12 0 12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56

Arredondo, Zepcda Brunz, Inc.

MANHOUJRS B C D

$ 49-.35 $ 31.58 $ 24.39

0 0 0 16 20 0 40 80 50 40 40 50 40 40 40 40 40 50 24 32 0 30 30 30 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

240 292 230

Page 1

5/30/2008

Dallas County

DIRECt DIRECT E F TOTAL LABOR LAB,OR

$ 21.57 $ 17.44 HRS CO,sTS PROffIT

0 0 0 SO $0 0 0 40 $1,667 $5,132 0 0 174 $5,966 $18,365 0 0 134 $4,702 $14,477 0 0 128 $4,704 $14,482

20 0 162 $5,625 $17.317 24 0 104 $2,713 $8,351 30 0 132 $4,544 $13,988 15 0 57 $2.114 $6,507 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0

89 0 931 $32,034 $98,619

"Engineering Labor Categories" A - Sr. Project Manager B = Project Manager C "" Desi~ Engineer D = Design TechIEIT E = CADDlDrafting F= Clerical

CostEslimate

Deuton Drive from Webb Chapel to just nortb (If IH-635 AZ&B Engineering & Surveying ~ MANHOURBREAKDOWN PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION PlANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES

ROW Surveying - Preliminary Investigations Sheet

Task Coum

o

Work Deseripcton

Right of Way Deterwination o. Research b. Preliminary ROW/Deed Plot c. Project Control d. Comer Recovery and Anolyjzotion e. Preliminary Right-aI-way mop f. Preliminary Dr:sign Surveys


AZ&B EngineE-ring & Surveying-INDIRECT COSTS Printing and Reproduction Travel Computer ~ CADD Telephone, Fax & Misc Communications Photos & Mscellaneous

TOTALAZ&B INDlRECT COSTS

TOTAL AZ&B FEE

SUBCONTRACTS

(Labor Rates)

$800 $100

$0 $0

$200

$1,100

$34,884

lINTB $0 Nathan Meir ConsultlUlts $0

TEE (for SUE) $0 David Dean International $0

STL Llboratories (geotechnical) $0


TOTAL COSTS $34,884

A..·-W:!D:,::l~, Zepeda Bnmz, Inc.

I MANHOURS

A4~.50 B C D $ $ 39,37 S 49.00 S 41.52

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 20

20 0 2 0 0 40 2 5 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

20' 40 9 30

hgel

5!}Q,'200S

Dallas County

DIRECT DffiECf E F TOTAL LABOR LAD,OR

$ 31.00 $ 17.44 lIRS COSTS PROFIT

0 0 0 $0 $0 0 40 40 $698 $2,148

150 0 175 $5,725 $17,626 5 0 27 $1,223 $3,765

20 0 67 $2.500 $1,698 20 0 25 $828 $2,548

0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 D D $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 $0

195 40 334 $10,974 $33,784

Survexing Labor Catee:ories. A""' Survey Crew3 B "" Survey Crew2 C=SurveyPM D""RPLS E "" Sr Survey Tech F = Clerical

ATTACHMENT C

"ATTACHMENT C"

INVOICE MUST BE ON LETTERHEAD

Name of Contract (Job) Nwnber of Contract (Job) Limits of Contract (from - to)

Court Order Nwnber Authorizing Contract Date of Court Order

Amount of Original Contract

Court Order Nwnbers & Dates Authorizing Amendments

Revised Total Contract Amount

Basic Engineering Maximwn. Amount $ Amount of Previous Payments $ Amount of this Invoice $

Special Services Maximuni Amount $ Amount of Previous Payments $ Amount of this Invoice $

TOTAL PAYMENT REQUEST = $

Today's Date Invoice nwnber

Period Invoice Covers

Please note that second page of invoice must detail all requests for payment, e.g., Personnel x hours or invoice x %.

Signature of Consultant Project Manager Title Date

ATTACHMENT D

"ATTACHMENT D"

DALLAS COUNTY PERFORMANCE EV ALUATXON OF DESIGN CONSULTANTS

Project No. Project Name Dallas Co. Proj. Mgr

Project Description

Project Limits

Award Date

Court Order No.

Negotiated Term of Contract Actual Completion of Contract No. of Days Extended by Contract Amendment

CONTRACT AMENDMENTS

Amendment No.

TYPE OF EVALUATION

D INTERIM ('t6 Complete)

TYPE OF CONTRACT

D DESIGN

CONTRACT PHASE

Reason

D TERMINATION

D ENGINEERING SERVICES

D PRELIMIN.A,.~Y (PHASE I) D PRIl\1ARY (PHASE II)

PROJECT COMPLEXITY

D DIFFICULT D ROUTINE C:191f!F:~(P}:~E~~?EXPL~):

OVERALL EVALUATION

D Excellent o Above Average D Average

Amount

D FINAL

D OTHER

o Below Average

Evaluation Date

Total to Date

D Poor

IS THIS CONSULTANT RECOMMENDED FOR FUTURE CONTRACTS? DYes 0 No

l:'lea,~ee](jJlain: ....

NAME, TITLE, AND OFFICE OF EVALUATOR:

TELEPHONE:

. EMAIL:

. DATE:

SIGNATURE

DISTRIBUTION:

ADDITIONAL REMARKS:

NAME, 1rITLE, AND OFFICE OF REVIEWER:

TELEPHONE:

EMAIL:

DATE:

SIGNATURE

ATTACHMEN'T E

"ATTACHMENT En

DALLAS COUNTY MBEIWBE PAYMENT REPORT

Project Number Project Title Invoice # Work Order Date Job #

Prime/General Contractor ~~ .. ~~-----~]

List each MBElWBE business ilia! you plan to use on iliis initiative. Deletion of firms must be approved by Dallas County prior to fmalization.

I -------

Name ofMBEIWBE Firm NCT Certification # Planned Amonnt Amount of Amt Pd to Date % to Date Gender Ethnicity Invoice

- -" ~ .. --.. --.-.- _ .. _---, , ~.~ .... . ~.~ .. . .. , ---- - ----- - ----

Note: This form must be completed and submitted with each payment request.

Any (significant) deviation from planned should include attached explanation.

The information listed ahove is certified to be correct: Reviewed by:

Printed Name of OfficerlDirector Signatnre of OfficerlDireclor Date Danas County Project Mgr Date

70F7

COURT ORDER

ORDER NO: 2(}12

DATE: March 2012

STATE OF TEXAS'

COUNTY OF DALLAS'

BE IT REMEMBERED, at a regular meeting of the Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas, held on the 6th day of

March, 2012, on motion made by Dr, Elba Garcia, District 114 and seconded by

John Wiley Price, District 113 , the following Order was adopted:

WHEREAS, Commissioners Court was briefed on March 6, 2012, regarding the Secretary to Civil Service Commission request to disband the Special Civil Service Commission, effective March 7, 2012 and re-create the regular Civil Service Commission, effective March 8, 2012; and disband the regular Civil Service Commission, effective April 6, 2012 and re-create the Special Civil Service Commission, effective April 9,2012 to hear the last three pending grievances; and disband the Special Civil Service Commission, effective April 13, 2012 and re-create the regular Civil Service Commission, effective April 16, 2012; and

WHEREAS, The actions requested will facilitate the timely scheduling of civil service matters that fall under the jurisdiction of the Dallas County Civil Service Commission and allow the grievances of terminated deputy constables to be heard by the Special Civil Service Commission; and

WHEREAS, This recommendation is consistent with the Dallas County Strategic Plan, Vision I, Strategy 1.3, Dallas County provides Sound, Financially Responsible, and Accountable Governance.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Dallas County Commissioners Court hereby approve the Secretary to Civil Service Commission request to disband and re-establish both the Special Civil Service Commission and the Dallas County Civil Service Commission with the effective dates outlined above.

Recomm ded by:

T this the 6th day of March, 2012.

,--""",,,,u1rine Dickey Commissioner District # I

Mike Cantrell Commissioner Distri #2

Dr. Elba Garcia Commissioner District #4

Ma\:!):eauldin-Taylor, Ph.D., Dire';f'r Human e ources/Civil Service Depaptment

K:\Court Orders 2012\Re·establishmcnt - Civil Service Comm - Dallas County - 03-06-2012.doc

COURT ORDER

ORDER NO. 2012 ,0439 DATE: March 06, 2012

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS

BE IT REMEMBERED, at a regular meeting of the Commissioners Court of Dallas County, Texas, held on

the ____ 6_t_h ______ day of _____ M_a..cr_c"h _________ _ , 2012, on motion made by

_D--,r,,-,-, _E=l=cb=ca=--"G=a=r~c=i=a'_',____'C'_'o"'mm=i __ s __ s_cl""· o __ n""e~r __ o",f",--,D.,.l=· .,.s'ct=r=i"'c"t~N"o"_',____'4'___ _________ ._, and seconded by

_J=-o=-lc:m=-=.:.W=i=l:.:ec.Y,--P=-r=i=c=e:.:,,--C=-o=-mm=""i=s=i=o,,n .. e~r"--o=f-"D:=i=sC'to'r~l,,' c'c'ct-",N"o"-"~3"--_____ ,, the following order was adopted,

WHEREAS,

\VHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS~

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

WHEREAS,

the matter set forth below was presented to Commissioners Court in briefing on March 6, 2012; and

North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) is preparing applications for submittal under the fourth round of Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Discretionary Grant Program for the following projects:

• IH 35E trom IH 635 to US 3g0lTIFIA Loan, $20,000,000.00 (requested) • Beltline Road Depression in downtown Carronton in conjunction with IE 35E improvements, $30,000,000.00

(requested); and

these proposed projects were endorsed by the Regional Transportation Council (RTC) during the February 9, 2012, RTC meeting; and

applications are due to be submitted to United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) by March 19, 2012; and

it is anticipated that USDOT wi!! announce funding awards in summer of2012; and

Dallas County has been serving on the SB 1420 Project Committee for the IE 35E project since Fa112011 (Court Order #2011-1863); and

the Belt Line Road project was selected in 2004 during the Third Call for Projects; and

by execution of the attached Five Signature Letter, the Commissioners Court endorses these two project submittals for TIGER Discretionary Grant Program funding; and

there is no additional financial impact beyond our current MCIP funding commitment of $4,000,000.00 for the Belt Line Road project in Carrollton which was reaffirmed by Court Order #20 11-1863; and

Dallas County, in seeking to improve regional mobility and air quality by providing infrastructure improvements with our City partners, is consistent with the Strategic Plan, but in particular is directly fulfilling the following visions:

Vision J: Dallas COllnty is a model interagency Partner Vision 4: Dallas County proactively addresses critical regional issues Vision 5: Dallas county is the destination of chOice/or residents and husinesses; and

the Director of Public Works recommends that Commissioners Court sign the attached Five Signature Letter authorizing participation in the TIGER IV Discretionary Grant Program for IE 35E from IH 635 to US 380 and Belt Line Road Depression.

IT IS THEREFORE ORD ,:' ED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the attached Five Signature Letter authorizing participation in the TIGER IV Discretionary Grant Pro rat for lH 35E from IE 635 to US 380 and Belt Line Road Depression for Projects for the Major Capital Improvement Program be executed.

___ 6_t_h.-r-:--__ day of;-c----\;~=-----7""

Recommended for Approval:

__ .L~~~-.~ ~jJ.-Albelfa"LI3lair, P.E., Direct~P~ks


March 6, 2012

The Honorable Ray LaHood Secretary of Transportation U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington, DC 20590

Dear Secretary LaHood,

Dallas County continually strives to improve mobility and air quality by partnering with cities and regional transportation agencies on delivering regional transportation improvements for its citizens. The following two projects that the North Central Texas Council Of Governments (NCTCOG) is submitting for TIGERfTlFIA funding would improve transportation infrastructure for Dallas County and the region:

• IH 35E Managed Lanes Project - IH 635 to US 380 • Belt Line Road Depression Project - Downtown Carrollton

Please note that Dallas County has and continues to be fully supportive of any and all opportunities to secure additional funding for the much needed mobility improvement to be provided by the IH 35E Managed Lanes Project. During the engineering and financial feasibility planning stage of this project, Dallas County passed Court Order #2011-1863 confirming our involvement on the project committee and also re-affirming our specific financial commitment of $4 million in County funding for the Belt Line Road Depression Project that directly connects to the IH 35E Managed Lanes Project.

Dallas County appreciates the opportunity to express support for these vital projects and looks forward to a successf pplication process.

411 Elm Street Dallas, Texas 75202

Mike Cantrell District 2

Dr. Elba Garcia District 4

Phone 653-7327, Fax 653-705'7