District recommends construction-manager-at-risk for High School No. 8 after multiweek procurement

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Chief Financial Officer Ken Hicks and the selection committee recommended a construction-manager-at-risk (CMAR) team for High School No. 8 following an eight-week procurement with interviews and three short-listed firms; the committee emphasized fairness and extensive deliberation during selection.

Chief Financial Officer Ken Hicks presented the Governing Board with the procurement process and the recommendation of the CMAR selection committee for High School No. 8 (procurement code CMAR 25-19-27).

Hicks explained CMAR (construction manager at risk) as an alternative project delivery method that engages a general contractor early in the design process to help contain costs before the board approves a guaranteed maximum price (GMP). He said the district advertised the solicitation on March 13, received proposals by April 4, shortlisted three firms and conducted interviews and deliberations on April 11.

Hicks described the committee’s work as unusually thorough. He said reviewers spent many hours scoring proposals, interviewing finalists and deliberating — a process the CFO characterized as one of the most rigorous he has seen for CMAR selection. Hicks acknowledged committee members who contributed time, noted that members signed confidentiality agreements and confirmed that the panel complied with statutory rules for APDM selection committees (qualified membership, at least one district representative, at least one licensed contractor and a registered architect on the panel, no conflicts of interest).

Hicks said the committee recommended the selected team (referred to in the presentation as "the Chase building team" in the deliberation notes) and stood for questions. Board members thanked procurement and committee members for the time invested.

A motion to approve the committee’s recommendation was called and a roll-call vote followed. The roll call recorded two yes votes (Del Palacio and Chapman), two no votes (Doctor Luna Najera and Sun) and one abstention (Ortega Romero). The committee recommendation and board action were discussed during the meeting record; the board proceeded to subsequent agenda items after the roll call.