Brentwood committee recommends preferred communications vendor, defers branding decision

Speaker 1, the city staff presenter, told the Brentwood communications committee that five firms responded to the city’s request for proposals and that the review panel recommends a firm listed in the proposals as Ref Telus (transcript contains variant spellings) as the preferred vendor for the city’s communications work.

"After reviewing all of the applications or the proposals, we came to the conclusion that the company, Ref Telus, is the company that we will recommend that we go with," Speaker 1 said. Committee members said they were broadly satisfied with the selection but raised questions about optional add-ons and budget timing.

Why it matters: the contract would provide the city a consolidated set of communications services the committee says are needed to modernize outreach ahead of events such as Brentwood Days and to reduce inconsistent branding across departments.

What the committee heard: Speaker 1 said the panel received five bids — two from Texas, one from North Carolina and two local firms — and that references for the recommended firm were favorable. Committee members questioned why a higher-priced, midrange bid was recommended over a local firm called Creative Entourage. Speaker 1 explained that Creative Entourage’s pricing was largely hourly and per-person, making final costs uncertain, which weighed against them despite prior municipal work.

Optional branding work: the recommended vendor’s base bid covers the core communications services the committee prioritized. Several members pressed to include a logo and style guide now; Speaker 1 said the staff recommendation is to proceed with the base bid only and "not recommend any of those three additional options" at this time. Committee discussion referenced an estimated additional cost (participants cited the figure $66,231 during the meeting) for branding and style-guide work if the city elects to purchase it later.

Budget and timing: committee members and Director Rivera Smith confirmed the vendor said it could work on flexible timelines and that the city can spread work or payments across two fiscal years if the budget process requires it. Committee members discussed the option of reserving budget capacity for later branding work and asked staff to include any needed amounts in upcoming budget deliberations.

Next steps: the committee did not take a formal vote. Instead, members directed staff to gather case studies and examples of the recommended vendor’s municipal work and return to the committee in August with those materials; the group discussed forwarding a base-bid recommendation to the full board for consideration on or around Sept. 3 if the committee chooses to do so.

What was not decided: No formal contract award or board approval occurred at the meeting. The committee left open whether to include the optional logo and style-guide work now or to budget for it later, and it did not set a final procurement schedule pending review of the vendor’s examples and the city budget process.

Key quote: Speaker 3 summarized a common view when discussing brand consistency: "If it's worth doing, it's worth doing correctly," urging the committee to balance fiscal responsibility with the long-term need to unify city branding.

The committee adjourned old business after confirming staff would provide the requested examples and further documentation before any recommendation goes to the full board.