Liberty County moves ahead on new jail design, authorizes negotiations with DRG and solicits CMAR with revised selection weights

The Liberty County Commissioners Court on Nov. 5 authorized county purchasing to negotiate fees and terms with DRG, the highest‑scoring respondent to RFQ 25‑12 for architectural and engineering services for the design and construction of a new Liberty County jail. The court also approved soliciting a two‑step procurement for a construction manager at risk (RFQ 2603) and adopted a revised set of evaluation weights for selection.

Purchasing staff told the court that three firms responded to the architect RFQ and that an evaluation committee — which included Matthew Poston, Catherine McCarthy, Nathan Green, Billy Knott, Bob Grader and Dwayne Gott — ranked DRG highest. Commissioners voted to allow the purchasing department to finalize negotiations and prepare a project‑specific contract; the procurement is not a continuing services or master contract but is limited to the jail project.

Court members discussed the CMAR procurement at length. Staff explained the county will use a two‑step process: an initial qualifications review to create a short list (no more than five firms) followed by proposals from shortlisted firms that will include pricing and bonding information. Commissioners pressed to review the evaluation criteria before the solicitation was published so the public and bidders understand how scores will be assigned. Purchasing said the criteria and weighting will be published with the RFQ.

After extended debate about the relative importance of written qualifications, interviews, safety records and past performance, the court approved a revised weighting scheme that was presented at the meeting in shorthand as "10,10,10,15,15,15." Staff said that configuration yields a 75% weight for step 1 (qualifications and evaluation) and a 25% weight for step 2 (pricing and fee structures). Commissioners emphasized that the weights and evaluation process must be set before the solicitation is issued and cautioned against changing rules after bids are submitted.

Commissioners and staff also discussed budget and bond‑market considerations, with one commissioner noting that prior architect estimates had produced per‑bed price ranges that appeared achievable under current assumptions. Purchasing indicated the county will proceed next week with publishing the RFQ once final solicitation documents are circulated to commissioners for review.

The court's actions on the architect recommendation and the decision to solicit a CMAR seek to move the jail design and procurement process into the next phase; purchasing will return to the court for contract approval and any change orders or additional scope items that would alter the county's cost obligations.

Provenance: The committee presentation and DRG recommendation were introduced during the RFQ 25‑12 item; the CMAR solicitation discussion and final weighting decision appear later in the RFQ 2603 discussion.