Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-07-12 - Minutes• GROUP: DATE: PRESENT: ADVERTISING & PROMOTION COMMISSION July 12, 1993 Coy Kaylor Joe Fennel Fred Hanna Fred Vorsanger Woody Bassett Steve Ward Marilyn Johnson Ben Mayes Susan Stirewalt ABSENT: Bill Clodfelter, Jim Waselues OTHERS PRESENT: John Kalagias, Jerry Rose, Rusty Garrett, Ron Wood, Dan Dwyer, Tom Pearson, Carl Collier, Dan Bennett, and Kirby Estes. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairman Coy Kaylor at 2:00 p.m. at City Hall, Room 326. MONTHLY REPORTS: MINUTES: Motion by Fennel, second by Vorsanger to approve the minutes as mailed. Motion carried. FINANCIAL: Ben Mayes presented the financial report. HMR collections increased 2.27% over 1992 with collections of $57,092 in June. Year to date increase is up about 6%. Budget total expenses to date are $308,729. Lights of the Ozark funding support will be moved from Special Projects to Festival Support category. Bassett requested Ben Mayes to trace HMR collected funds in relation to paying off CEC bonds. Uses of HMR collected funds was discussed by Jerry Rose. ACTIVITY REPORT: Marilyn Johnson reported on the following: 1) June 800# calls increased again over last year. 150 more calls were received in the office. Year to date total is 3397 calls. 2) Convention activity included providing information packets for conventions in town, finalizing giveaways for U of A freshman orientation sessions, and providing information for July Statesman issue on convention and visitor development. 3) Convention and Visitor Development Director assisted with the following: SWEPCO with Central and South West Division meeting, Mid -South Summer School, Community Development Society, and a German documentary film crew. 4) Ribbon cutting and grand opening of Super 8 motel. • • • a 5) Received Clinton brochure and Presidential Cities literature. CHAMBER REPORT TO COMMISSION (SECOND QUARTER) - Marilyn Johnson recapped activities completed in second quarter relative to the Chamber of Commerce contract with the A & P Commission. Steve Ward acknowledged the progress of the Chamber in accomplishing goals of the A & P Commission. Motion by Vorsanger, second by Fennel to approve Chamber Report to Commission. Motion carried. BLACKWOOD MARTIN AGENCY REPORT - Susan Stirewalt reported for the agency that they are gearing up for fall ad placement. The Clinton brochure, the NATA ad and co-op ad were completed in June. They are starting the evaluation of publications in preparation for next year. Motion by Vorsanger, second by Fennel to accept Agency report. Motion carried. OLD BUSINESS: • AKANSAS AIR MUSEUM - John Kalaglias reported on the War Birds. He said 7,000 people viewed the war birds. Advertising was fantastic. Plans are underway for another static display next year. He thanked the A & P Commission for purchase of the fuel and identified others who had sponsored. SLO-PITCH SOFTBALL REPORT - This report was postponed pending receipt of figures from the national office. NEW BUSINESS: LEGISLATIVE CHANGES FOR A & P COMMISSIONS - Marilyn Johnson reviewed changes passed in the last state legislative session that affected the A & P Commission. These included the makeup of the A & P Commission and Allowing HMR taxes to be used for maintenance of convention centers. HMR ORDINANCE - Jerry Rose reviewed the history of the HMR tax in Fayetteville. He stated that he would recommend that before the City Council pass the changes recommended by the A & P Commission that they get an opinion from bond counsel, check with the city finance department about the administration of a separate tax, and think about the definitions of those affected by the ordinance such as delis, concession stands, etc. He stated that there was a rational for collecting the present tax on businesses offering on -premise consumption. • • There was no rational for exclusively take-out restaurants. He recommended that the city finance department determine which restaurants fall under the present tax. Motion by Vorsanger, second by Hanna that the Mayor and city staff administratively enforce the present ordinance. Motion carried. TROLLEY FEASIBILITY STUDY - Marilyn reported on her research into a trolley for Downtown, Dickson St, and the U of A. Vorsanger moved to apply for a trolley feasibility planning grant from the state Highway Department, second by Fennel. Motion carried. DICKSON STREET RENOVATION - Richard Shewmaker presented a proposal for the A & P Commission to use the Reserve Funds for completion of the Dickson Street Renovation. The project would include purchasing land for parking lots to provide 300 additional parking spaces. The Dickson Street Improvement District will pay $52,000. Discussion followed. Bassett mentioned the perception of giving a lot of money to a special interest project and ignoring other capital improvement needs. Fennel requested that the Commission go slowly and not push this through. Motion by Vorsanger, second by Bassett to have a public hearing regarding the Dickson Street project and ideas of community needs which would qualify for HMR funds. Motion carried. August 2 at 6:00 p.m. was selected pending approval o f absent commissioners and availability of room. OTHER BUSINESS: COLLECTION OF ANTIQUITIES - Mayor Hanna shared a letter o ffering a collection of antiquities if the city will provide a location to display them together (approximately 10,000 sq. ft). The Mayor said the county might have room in the old courthouse for a city/county museum after they move into the new courthouse. He asked that ideas of how we might take advantage of this o ffer be given to him. FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR CONVENTION CENTER - Marilyn Johnson reported that a part of the budget was allocated for a feasibility study for a convention center. She will have ready within the next two weeks the Request for Proposals for the Study. It was decided that the City Professional Selection Policy would be followed. Discussion followed regarding who would serve on the selection committee. It was the concensus that the entire A & P Commission and a representative of the city staff would comprise the selection committee. HOGFEST - Coy Kaylor suggested an idea of a new festival for 1 • Fayetteville with Harley motorcycles - The Hogfest. This would be similar to the festival in Sturgis, South Dakota. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Marilyn Johnson Director Convention and Visitor Development • • • 1.0 BACKGROUND The Fayetteville Advertising and Promotion Commission is requesting proposals for Professional Services for a feasibility/planning study to determine the need for an exhibition hall and convention center. The entire proposal process will be governed by the city of Fayetteville Administration Policy & Procedure # PUR- 13, dtd June 27, 1990. A copy of this policy is available from the issuing department by calling 521- 1710. 1 1.1 ISSUING DEPARTMENT This request for proposal is issued by the Advertising and Promotion Commission of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas. Vendor questions regarding this proposal shall be addressed to Marilyn Johnson, 521-1710. 1.1.1 SELECTION COMMITTEE Representatives of the Advertising and Promotions Commission and a representative of the city of Fayetteville shall compose the committee designated to review each proposal. The city purchasing manager and the director of convention and visitor development shall be ex -officio members of the committee. 1.2 SELECTION PROCESS In evaluating the qualifications of each firm, the selection committee shall review the following: 1.2.1 Qualifications in Relation to Specific Project to be performed: Information reflecting the qualifications of the firm. Indicate specialized experience and technical competence of the firm in connection with the type and complexity of the services used. 1.2.2 Experience, Competence, and Capacity for Performance: Information reflecting the names, titles, and qualifications of the major personnel assigned to this project. List references of clients for like services • performed. 1.2.3 Proposed Method of Doing Work: A proposed work plan indicating methods and schedules for accomplishing the work 1.2.4 Past Performance: Previous evaluations (as set forth in PUR-13.08) shall be considered a significant factor. If previous evaluations with this commission or city are not available, the firm's past performance records with others shall be used, including quality of work, timely performance, diligence, ability to meet past budgets, and any other pertinent` information. 1.2.5 Price: Vendors are to quote an estimated price for completion of each phase of project in 1.4 SCOPE OF WORK. Actual project cost will be determined at the time of bid negotiation. • 1.3 PROPOSAL EVALUATION 1.3.1 In evaluating the qualifications of each firm, the review Committee shall consider the following (assigning point ranges for each element from 15% to 40%, so that the total for the five elements combined equals 100%) 1.3.1.1 Qualifications in relation to specific project to be performed 15 points; 1.3.1.2 Experience, competence, and capacity of performance 15 points; 1.3.1.3 Proposed method of doing work 30 points; 1.3.1.4 Past performance 15 points; and 1.3.1.5 Price Estimation 25 points. 1.3.2 The review committee shall evaluate all submittals and may conduct interviews with each firm submitting a proposal. The method of selection shall be for each committee member to rate the firms based on the points established in the RFP so that so that each member selects three (3) firms, rated 1,2,3. The firm with the highest number of first place votes shall be selected (if a tie occurs, the firm receiving the highest number of first and second place votes shall be selected. If a tie still exists, the Committee shall hold further discussions and a re -vote shall occur.) 1.3.3 The review committee or its designee shall then negotiate a contract for the services to be rendered, at compensation which the review committee, or its designee, determines to be fair and reasonable to the City, subject to the approval of the Advertising and Promotion Commission. 1.3.4 Should the review committee, or its designee, be unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract with the firm considered to be most qualified, at a price determined to be fair and reasonable to the City, negotiations with that firm shall be formally terminated. The review committee, or its designee, shall then undertake negotiations with the second most qualified firm. Should the review, or its designee, be unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract with any of the selected firms, then the review committee shall reevaluate the services including the scope and reasonable fee requirements. 1.3.5 After negotiations and review by the City Attorney, Internal Auditor, Accounting Supervisor, and Purchasing Manager, the selection committee will recommend the most advantageous contract to the Advertising and Promotions Commission for awarding. 1.4 SCOPE OF WORK • The selected firm will be expected to perform the following services: 1.4.1 An analysis of present convention facilities. 1.4.2 Determination of need for a convention center, including analysis of state and regional conventions and exhibitions. 1.4.3 Proforma for convention center including but not limited to architectural program, project cost estimate, 5 year operating/maintenance and revenue budget forecast. Architectural program should address the following, areas: •convention center and exhibition hall, multi- purpose space, banquet facilities and parking. • • 1.4.4 Siting of convention center. 1.4.5 Economic impact projection of convention center. 1.4.6 Funding of the construction of convention center. 1.5 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR PROPOSERS 1.5.1 Vendors must submit ten (10) signed copies of the complete proposal.. Any descriptive literature or other materials submitted with the proposal response must be included with all copies. 4 1.5.2 The proposal and all copies must be signed by an official authorized to bind the vendor to resultant contract - 1.5.3 The vendor's response to this proposal will become part of any resulting contract. 1.5.4 The city reserves the right to award a contract or reject a proposal for any or all line items of a proposal received as a result of this Request for Proposal. Proposals may be rejected for one or more reasons including but not limited to the following: 1.5.4.1 Failure of the vendor to submit his proposal on or before the deadline date. 1.5.4.2 Failure of the vendor to respond to a requirement for oral or written clarification. 1.5.4.3 Failure to supply vendor references. 1.5.4.4 Failure to sign an official proposal document. 1.6 BID FORMAT 1.6.1 Any statement in this document which contains the words "must" or "shall" means that compliance with the intent of the statement is mandatory, and failure by the proposer to satisfy that intent will cause the bid to be rejects. • • • 1.6.2 The proposer must respond to each item in PROPOSAL EVALUATION 1.3.1 paragraph and SCOPE OF WORK 1.4 of this proposal in sequence. 1.7 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION 1.7.1 Proprietary information submitted with this proposal will be processed in accordance with applicable City of Fayetteville, Arkansas procurement procedures. 1.7.2 Proposals, and documents pertaining to this proposal become the property of the City and shall be open to public inspection subsequent to bid opening. 1.8 RESERVATIONS 1.8.1 This proposal does not commit the Advertising and Promotion Committee and/or City to award a contract, to pay cost incurred in the preparation of a bid in response to this request, or to procure or contract for services or supplies. 1.9 PROPOSAL OPENING DATE AND LOCATION • • 1.9.1 To be considered, proposals must be received prior to the time and date specified below at the following address: TIME: DATE: LOCATION: 10:30 AM August 31, 1993 Fayetteville Advertising and Promotion Commission c/o Chamber of Commerce P.O. Box 4216 26 W. Center Suite 215 Fayetteville, AR 72702-4216 S