Mayor & Commission Meetings

The meeting will be streamed live and available on-demand through YouTube (www.youtube.com/accgov), the YouTube app, and www.accgov.com/videos, as well as on- demand through the ACCGov Roku channel. WORK SESSION AGENDA UNIFIED GOVERNMENT OF ATHENS-CLARKE COUNTY, GEORGIA Wednesday, November 12, 2025 – 12:00 PM City Hall Commission Chamber I. Call to Order (12:00 p.m.) Mayor Kelly Girtz II. Items for Future Consideration A. Fire Pay Plan/ Collective Bargaining .................................................. Vicki Casella Agreement Human Resources Director B. Capital Projects Service Delivery Plan .............................................. Josh Hawkins Update Capital Projects Director III. Adjourn NOTE: All reports are draft. No final action is taken at this work session. The Work Session is open to the public; however, public comments are not received. Classification & Compensation Study for Athens-Clarke County Fire Dept  Inception of the Fire Classification & Compensation Study • Per the first Collective Bargaining Agreement signed 06/06/2024, Article 13. Wages / Promotions, Section 13.1. Wages: The Employer will, within ninety (90) days of July 1, 2024, undertake a Class and Compensation Study during which Union officers and members will have a meaningful opportunity to present their ideas, opinions, suggestions, and concerns related to pay plan structure and departmental operations to help improve the study outcomes and quality. The mutual goal of the parties will be to have the study completed before beginning CBA negotiations during the first quarter of calendar year 2025. • August 1, 2024: RFP issued. An RFP evaluation committee including ACCGov HR, ACCFD, and IAFF Local 2795 union leaders selected consultant AutoSolve. On 2/12/25, Mayor Girtz signed the contract. • March – July 2025: AutoSolve conducted the classification & compensation study and delivered a final study report in June. • July 2025: Final study was updated by AutoSolve to include FY26 pay increases. Implementation Costs & Considerations  Budget Impact of Proposed Fire Pay Study Implementation Projected Costs for Implementation & 5 Subsequent Years Implementation Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Salary Amount $12,290,000 $12,570,000 $12,800,000 $13,100,000 $13,260,000 $13,500,000 Projected Classification & $687,500 $280,200 $224,600 $228,600 $232,700 $237,000 Compensation Cost of Changes Projected Pension Additional Annual $130,000 $160,000 $170,000 $220,000 $240,000 $300,000 Required Contribution (ARC) Total Projected $817,500 $440,200 $394,600 $448,600 $472,700 $537,000 Budget Impact  Public Safety Pay Plan Differences Current Public Safety Step Pay Plans Proposed Fire Step Pay Plan for Police, Sheriff, Corrections, Probation, and DA/Solicitor Plan features a total of 7 steps, with step increases the first 6 years, Plan features a total of 20 steps and annual step increases occurring at 2-year intervals through Step 4 177 Fire employees would receive step increases on their Department hire 412 employees receive step increases in either the January or June date anniversary immediately following their Department hire date anniversary Since the Public Safety Step Pay Plan implementation in 2021, these Departments have received additional pay increases based on market studies and/or equity adjustments: • DA/Solicitor General (8 employees) – October 2021 • Probation (17 employees) – May 2022 177 Fire employees would be eligible to receive a pay adjustment based • Sheriff (109 employees) – April 2023 on the current Winter 2025 market pay study • Sheriff (109 employees) – July 2025 • Corrections (40 employees) – July 2025 • Probation (17 employees) – July 2025 Note: Police (235 employees) has not requested an additional pay adjustment or market study since June 2021  Summary Report Classification and Compensation Study for: Athens-Clarke County Unified Government, GA Fire Department Collective Bargaining Group June 2025 1 Table of Contents Study Introduction .............................................................................................................. 3 Study Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 3 Study Methodology Diagram ..................................................................................................... 5 Study Summary Findings ........................................................................................................... 8 Study Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 9 Recommended Proposed Pay Plans ........................................................................................................... 10 Recommended Pay Grade Assignments .................................................................................................... 13 Proposed Salary Ranges Compared to Peer Market Salary Ranges ..................................................... 14 Recommended Implementation Option ....................................................................................................... 19 Compensation Management System and Periodic Maintenance ...................................... 20 Conclusion.................................................................................................................................. 20 2 Study Introduction From April 2025, through June 2025, AutoSolve, Inc. conducted a comprehensive classification and compensation study for Athens-Clarke County Fire Department The study focused on 174 employees and 9 classifications / job titles. The goal of this study was to create and improve compensation system that would aid the AccGov in the following ways. • Attract and retain qualified employees. • Ensure positions performing similar work with essentially the same level of complexity, responsibility, and knowledge, skills, and abilities are classified together. • Provide salaries commensurate with assigned duties. • Provide justifiable pay differential between individual classes. • Maintain a competitive position with other comparable government entities within the same geographic areas. Study Methodology To achieve the study’s goals AutoSolve utilized both quantitative and qualitative tools to assess the AccGov’s current internal and external equity to provide the most appropriate recommendations. Communication, Interaction, and the Kickoff Call As illustrated in the Study Methodology Diagram, AutoSolve started off the study with a project kickoff call. The kickoff call allows AccGov management to learn more about the project, ask questions, and allows AutoSolve to request the appropriate data that we will need to complete the project effectively. AutoSolve emphasizes open communication throughout the project by holding weekly touchpoint meetings to discuss the project and review the workplan, providing weekly updates on the progress of the project, scheduling as need meetings with department heads, incorporating the AccGov’s Project Team feedback throughout the project, and working alongside the AccGov’s project team during all phases of the project. Current Pay Plan/Philosophy Evacuation AutoSolve assessed the current pay plan structure at the beginning of the study. This analysis provides the starting point for any recommendations AutoSolve proposes. 3 Compensation Evaluation External Competition AutoSolve performed an external market survey reaching out to a selected group of organizations that were deemed by both AutoSolve consultants and the AccGov’s project team to be direct competitors with the AccGov. AutoSolve reached out to the selected peers to collect classification pay range data and benefit data. The results from the market survey were utilized in the development of the recommended compensations system. Classification Grading AutoSolve consultants provided a “rank’ to each of the classifications that were a part of the study. The rank is based off the classification’s duties, responsibilities, and impact within the AccGov. The ranks assist in AutoSolve’s assigning new classification grades. Employee Compensation Management System with Implementation Options The concluding recommendations and proposed compensation system were provided based on the synthesis findings of the overall study and the AccGov’s compensation philosophy. The recommendations were accompanied with multiple different ways to implement the proposed compensation system along with the estimated cost for each. AutoSolve also provided the AccGov project leadership team with an Employee Compensation Management System. The system is an excel spreadsheet that is designed aid the AccGov in implementing and maintaining the proposed compensations system derived from this study. 4 Study Methodology Diagram Project Initiation Kick Off Current Pay Plan / Philosophy Evaluation Compensation Evaluation External Competition External Salary Survey Updated Job Descriptions Classification Grading Employee Compensation Management System with Implementation Options Final Report, System Training, & On-Going Support 5  Market Peers Peer Name Cost of Living Index COLI Factor Athens-Clarke, GA 96.90 City of Woodstock, GA 99.50 0.974 Cobb County, GA 104.80 0.925 DeKalb County, GA 103.10 0.940 Macon-Bibb County, GA 94.90 1.021 Barrow County, GA 93.30 1.039 City of Alpharetta, GA 112.50 0.861 City of Atlanta, GA 112.50 0.861 City of Gainesville, GA 96.50 1.004 City of Johns Creek, GA 112.50 0.861 City of Roswell, GA 112.50 0.861 City of Sandy Springs, GA 112.50 0.861 City of South Fulton, GA 112.50 0.861 Clayton County, GA 90.30 1.073 Forsyth County, GA 104.80 0.925 Gwinnett County, GA 98.50 0.984 Hall County, GA 96.50 1.004 Rome-Floyd County, GA 92.30 1.050 Walton County, GA 94.40 1.026 6 Study Summary - Proposed Compensation System Study Summary is the aggregate of the analysis and findings discovered in this study. The combined findings were utilized to create the following recommendations. 7 Study Summary Findings Client Specified Issues, Needs, and Compensation Philosophy The AccGov’s project team expressed their desire for the AccGov’s compensation philosophy to consist of taking into consideration the employee’s tenure with the organization and provide market average compensation relative to their operating market. Review of the Current Pay Plan System: The first step in the study was reviewing the internal equity of the organization. The AutoSolve team performed a deep dive into the current compensation structure utilized by the AccGov. This detailed analysis provided the foundation for AutoSolve’s recommendations. Listed below are the summary findings from Section One. - The AccGov Fire Department utilizes a Public Safety step plan that has inconsistent increases between each of its grades and inconsistent step progression between and within each grade. - The pay plan illustrates best practices regarding tenure and quartile correlation. - 0 employees are below their grade minimum. - 0 employees are above their grade maximum. - 9 employees fall -5% or more below their expected hire year salary. - 17 employees have a salary between 95% and 100% of their supervisor’s salary. Compensation Evaluation – Market Survey: The Market Survey is a comprehensive examination of the AccGov’s compensation and benefit structure. The organization’s external equity was evaluated by comparing AccGov’s salary ranges and benefits to selected peer organizations. Listed below are the summary findings gathered from Section Three. - AccGov is 2.88% below the market minimum. - AccGov is 11.87% below the market midpoint. - AccGov is 18.34% below the market maximum. 8 Study Recommendations Based on the combined findings found from each section of this study and the compensation philosophy for AccGov Fire Department, AutoSolve recommends the following to addresses and resolves recruitment, retention, and compression issues: - Recommended Implementation date of January 1st, 2026. - Assigned the Corporal Classification to its own grade. - Brought the proposed grade minimums to the market average. - Brought all the grades’ range spreads from 30.00% to 40.00%. - Increased the number of steps from 7 to 20, allowing for more instances of pay increases which will assist in combating compression. - Proposed the Implementation Option: Hire Year Parity This implementation option aims to align an employee's salary within their recommended new paygrade range based on their overall tenure with the organization. This is calculated on a 30-year career basis. For example, if an employee has 15 years of experience with the organization, that employee will be placed at the midpoint of their new paygrade range. This implementation option was chosen to correct the pay “leap frogging” that has been occurring in the organization and to reward employees for their years of service with the organization. 9 Recommended Proposed Pay Plans The following chart found in FIGURE S3.1 is the recommended proposed pay plan for AccGov’s Fire employees. The proposed pay plan was created to be at the market average relative to the AccGov’s market peers. (The AccGov’s market peers utilized for this study are found in FIGURE S2.1 on page 6). The proposed pay plans characteristics are as follows: Fire Step Pay Plan - Number of Pay Grades: 9 - Number of Steps: 20 - Average Range Spread: 40.00% - Smallest Minimum: $44,000.00 - Largest Maximum: $142,754.33 - Number of Departments: 1 - Employees Assigned: 174 10  Figure S3.1A Proposed Fire Step Pay Plan Proposed Proposed Proposed Range Min Grade Step Grade Min Midpoint Maximum Spread Progression Progression F1 – Recruit $44,000.00 - - F2 – Firefighter $52,360.00 $62,832.00 $73,304.00 40.00% 19.00% 1.79% F3 – Fire Corporal $56,548.80 $67,858.56 $79,168.32 40.00% 8.00% 1.79% F4 – Fire Sergeant $61,072.70 $73,287.24 $85,501.79 40.00% 8.00% 1.79% F5 – Fire Lieutenant $67,179.97 $80,615.97 $94,051.96 40.00% 10.00% 1.79% F6 – Fire Captain $73,897.97 $88,677.57 $103,457.16 40.00% 10.00% 1.79% F7 – Battalion Chief $81,287.77 $97,545.32 $113,802.88 40.00% 10.00% 1.79% F8 – Division Chief $91,042.30 $109,250.76 $127,459.22 40.00% 12.00% 1.79% F9 – Deputy Fire Chief $101,967.38 $122,360.85 $142,754.33 40.00% 12.00% 1.79% Figure S3.1B 11  Proposed Fire Step Pay Plan Grade 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 F1 – Recruit $44,000.00 F2 – Firefighter $52,360.00 $53,295.51 $54,247.73 $55,216.96 $56,203.51 $57,207.69 $58,229.80 $59,270.18 $60,329.15 $61,407.04 F3 – Fire Corporal $56,548.80 $57,559.15 $58,587.54 $59,634.32 $60,699.79 $61,784.30 $62,888.19 $64,011.80 $65,155.49 $66,319.61 F4 – Fire Sergeant $61,072.70 $62,163.88 $63,274.55 $64,405.06 $65,555.77 $66,727.05 $67,919.24 $69,132.74 $70,367.92 $71,625.17 F5 – Fire Lieutenant $67,179.97 $68,380.27 $69,602.00 $70,845.57 $72,111.35 $73,399.75 $74,711.17 $76,046.02 $77,404.72 $78,787.69 F6 – Fire Captain $73,897.97 $75,218.29 $76,562.20 $77,930.12 $79,322.49 $80,739.72 $82,182.29 $83,650.62 $85,145.19 $86,666.46 F7 – Battalion Chief $81,287.77 $82,740.12 $84,218.42 $85,723.14 $87,254.73 $88,813.70 $90,400.51 $92,015.68 $93,659.71 $95,333.11 F8 – Division Chief $91,042.30 $92,668.94 $94,324.63 $96,009.91 $97,725.30 $99,471.34 $101,248.58 $103,057.56 $104,898.87 $106,773.08 F9 – Deputy Fire $101,967.38 $103,789.21 $105,643.59 $107,531.10 $109,452.34 $111,407.90 $113,398.40 $115,424.47 $117,486.74 $119,585.85 Chief Figure S3.1C Proposed Fire Step Pay Plan Grade 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 F1 – Recruit F2 – Firefighter $62,504.19 $63,620.94 $64,757.64 $65,914.65 $67,092.34 $68,291.06 $69,511.21 $70,753.15 $72,017.28 $73,304.00 F3 – Fire Corporal $67,504.53 $68,710.61 $69,938.25 $71,187.83 $72,459.73 $73,754.35 $75,072.10 $76,413.40 $77,778.66 $79,168.32 F4 – Fire Sergeant $72,904.89 $74,207.46 $75,533.31 $76,882.85 $78,256.50 $79,654.70 $81,077.87 $82,526.47 $84,000.96 $85,501.79 F5 – Fire Lieutenant $80,195.38 $81,628.21 $83,086.65 $84,571.14 $86,082.15 $87,620.17 $89,185.66 $90,779.12 $92,401.05 $94,051.96 F6 – Fire Captain $88,214.91 $89,791.03 $91,395.31 $93,028.25 $94,690.37 $96,382.18 $98,104.22 $99,857.03 $101,641.16 $103,457.16 F7 – Battalion Chief $97,036.40 $98,770.13 $100,534.84 $102,331.08 $104,159.41 $106,020.40 $107,914.65 $109,842.74 $111,805.27 $113,802.88 F8 – Division Chief $108,680.77 $110,622.55 $112,599.02 $114,610.81 $116,658.53 $118,742.85 $120,864.40 $123,023.86 $125,221.91 $127,459.22 F9 – Deputy Fire $121,722.47 $123,897.26 $126,110.90 $128,364.10 $130,657.56 $132,991.99 $135,368.13 $137,786.73 $140,248.54 $142,754.33 Chief 12 Recommended Pay Grade Assignments Utilizing both the external market survey and AutoSolve’s proprietary ranking analysis conducted on each classification. AutoSolve is proposing the following pay grade assignment for each classification. AutoSolve’s proposed pay grade assignments ensures each classification is compensated competitively and fairly, externally within AccGov’s operating market, and internally taking into consideration each classifications required duties, responsibilities, and experience relative to the other classification utilized by the AccGov. FIGURE S3.2 illustrate the proposed recommended pay grade for each classification within the proposed Fire Step Plan. Figure S3.2 General Pay Plan Grade Assignments Classification Proposed Grade Firefighter Recruit F1 Firefighter F2 Fire Corporal F3 Fire Sergeant F4 Fire Lieutenant F5 Fire Captain F6 Battalion Chief F7 Division Chief F8 Deputy Fire Chief F9 13 Proposed Salary Ranges Compared to Peer Market Salary Ranges Below AutoSolve provides comparison charts between the nine classifications proposed salary ranges and the peer market average salary ranges. Each chart is broken into three sections, Min, Mid, and Max. Each section will have two bars one representing the proposed plan’s Min, Mid, and Max and the other bar represents the peer market average Min, Mid, and Max All classification’s proposed minimums will be at or right above the market minimum. All classification’s midpoints and maximums will be slightly below the market midpoints and maximums. This is consistent with AccGov’s compensation philosophy of brining the classification minimums to market and keeping the raising the range spread from approximately 30.00% to 40.00%. Figure S3.3A Proposed Vs. Market Fire Recruit $80,000.00 $75,000.00 $70,000.00 $65,000.00 $60,000.00 $55,000.00 $50,000.00 $45,000.00 $40,000.00 $35,000.00 $30,000.00 Min Mid Max Proposed - Firefighter Recruit EMT Market - Firefighter EMT Recruit 14  Figure S3.3B Proposed Vs. Market Firefighter $80,000.00 $75,000.00 $70,000.00 $65,000.00 $60,000.00 $55,000.00 $50,000.00 $45,000.00 $40,000.00 $35,000.00 $30,000.00 Min Mid Max Proposed - Firefighter EMT Market - Firefighter EMT Figure S3.3C Proposed Vs. Market Fire Corporal $90,000.00 $85,000.00 $80,000.00 $75,000.00 $70,000.00 $65,000.00 $60,000.00 $55,000.00 $50,000.00 $45,000.00 $40,000.00 Min Mid Max Proposed - Fire Corporal Market - Fire Corporal 15  Figure S3.3D Proposed Vs. Market Fire Sergeant $95,000.00 $90,000.00 $85,000.00 $80,000.00 $75,000.00 $70,000.00 $65,000.00 $60,000.00 $55,000.00 $50,000.00 $45,000.00 $40,000.00 Min Mid Max Proposed - Fire Sergeant Market - Fire Sergeant Figure S3.3E Proposed Vs. Market Fire Lieutenant $100,000.00 $95,000.00 $90,000.00 $85,000.00 $80,000.00 $75,000.00 $70,000.00 $65,000.00 $60,000.00 $55,000.00 $50,000.00 Min Mid Max Proposed - Fire Lieutenant Market - Fire Lieutenant 16  Figure S3.3F Proposed Vs. Market Fire Captain $115,000.00 $110,000.00 $105,000.00 $100,000.00 $95,000.00 $90,000.00 $85,000.00 $80,000.00 $75,000.00 $70,000.00 $65,000.00 $60,000.00 Min Mid Max Propsoed - Fire Captain Market - Fire Captain Figure S3.3G Proposed Vs. Market Battalion Chief $130,000.00 $125,000.00 $120,000.00 $115,000.00 $110,000.00 $105,000.00 $100,000.00 $95,000.00 $90,000.00 $85,000.00 $80,000.00 $75,000.00 $70,000.00 $65,000.00 $60,000.00 Min Mid Max Propsoed - Battalion Chief Market - Battalion Chief 17  Figure S3.3H Proposed Vs. Market Division Chief $140,000.00 $135,000.00 $130,000.00 $125,000.00 $120,000.00 $115,000.00 $110,000.00 $105,000.00 $100,000.00 $95,000.00 $90,000.00 $85,000.00 $80,000.00 $75,000.00 $70,000.00 $65,000.00 $60,000.00 Min Mid Max Proposed - Division Chief Market - Division Chief Figure S3.3I Proposed Vs. Market Deputy Fire Chief $160,000.00 $155,000.00 $150,000.00 $145,000.00 $140,000.00 $135,000.00 $130,000.00 $125,000.00 $120,000.00 $115,000.00 $110,000.00 $105,000.00 $100,000.00 $95,000.00 $90,000.00 Min Mid Max Propsoed - Deputy Fire Chief Market - Deputy Fire Chief 18  Recommended Implementation Option AutoSolve is recommending the implementation option: Hire Year Parity. This implementation option aims to align an employee's salary within their recommended new paygrade range based on their overall tenure with the organization. This is calculated on a 30-year career basis. For example, if an employee has 15 years of experience with the organization, that employee will be placed at the midpoint of their new paygrade range. This implementation option was chosen to correct the pay “leap frogging’ that has been occurring in the organization. This recommendation rewards employees for their tenure with AccGov Fire Department. Experience outside the AccGov Fire Department was not applicable. The total recommended implementation cost for Hire Year Parity is $687,498.92. The implementation will affect all 174 employees. FIGURE S3.4 illustrates a cost breakdown of the recommended implementation option. Figure S3.4 Hire Year Parity Implementation Cost Number Of Average Average Implementation Options Cost Employees Change Per Percent Affected Employee Increase Hire Year Parity $687,498.92 174 $3,951.14 5.17% This implementation costs can be split out over two implementation periods, if the AccGov is unable to allocate enough resources at one time to complete the implementation at one time. The estimated implementation option cost would then be $343,749.46 in period one and $343,749.46 in period two. FIGURE S3.5 illustrates the two-period implementation. Figure S3.5 Two Period Implementation Implementation Period Period 1 $343,749.46 Period 2 $343,749.46 19 Compensation Management System and Periodic Maintenance The proposed twenty step pay plan system is designed to allow one step increase for every employee each year, with the option to increase more than one step for high achieving employees. When promoting an employee into their next classification and grade, leadership will determine if the employee maintains their step with each promotion or if they will fall back a step with each promotion. Accompanying our recommendations, is an Employee Management System that will assist the AccGov in the implementation and maintenance of the new compensation system. This management system will provide per employee implementation cost estimates. It will also aid in implementing and estimating cost for future pay plan increases. The proposed system will need periodic maintenance over the next two to three years. Without maintenance, the competitiveness of the system will decrease, and the same retention/recruitment pitfalls will increase once again. AutoSolve strongly recommends the AccGov to perform a complete compensation and classification study at least every three years. Conclusion This concludes the Comprehensive Compensation and Classification study for the AccGov Fire Department performed by AutoSolve, Inc. AutoSolve proposed a new compensation system that addresses and resolves the retention, recruitment, and compression issues found within the AccGov’s current compensation system. The proposed compensation system was created to be competitive relative to the AccGov’s operating market, which will allow the AccGov to recruit and retain the best talent possible. 20 Capital Project Delivery Process Mayor & Commission Work Session November 12, 2025 In this Presentation Recent history Recommendations Accept categories of public engagement impact and endorse a tailored approach to projects based on their conditions. Accept roles & responsibilities between the governing authority, the oversight committee, and management. Amend the ACAC ordinance What’s Next? Recent History Work Session August 12 • Staff presented existing conditions and practices. • M&C offered consent to develop significant changes. Retreat discussion September 20 • Staff offered areas of potential action • No notable objections expressed Today: Work Session November 12 • Staff presents recommended changes and action items Next: Jan 6 M&C vote • With implementation plan on active projects  Implementing public engagement categories on active projects Category 1: Inform Category 2: Inform + Consult Category 3: Involve Sometimes referred to as “outreach,” this form of engagement Actively seek commentary or feedback in a limited capacity using Public influence in aspects of the project is more important than is often designed as one-way communication but with clear high efficiency techniques. Formal organizations and other project delivery speed. Invest significant time and money into ways for people to find out more for those that want to know BACs, where appropriate, should be asked to participate. Staff public engagement techniques designed to bring people together, more. makes a commitment to listen and acknowledge with the to solicit feedback, and to incorporate preferences into project understanding that feedback may or may not be reflected in the features, as appropriate. Primary Toolkit: project. • Written reports, fact sheets, or short video updates Customize an engagement plan to be implemented primarily in the available on the web Primary Toolkit: pre-design phase using various tools in the Community • Digital media posts • Category 1 tools Engagement Playbook including surveys, workshops, public • Presence at existing community events • In-person open house style meetings meetings, or focus groups. • Post card mailers on projects with limited geography • Small group site visits on request Example projects that might be Category 1 in an Example projects that might be Category 2 in an implementation Example projects that might be Category 3 in an implementation implementation plan: plan: plan: E911 upgrades Bear Hollow Zoo & Holland Youth Sports Complex Jackson Street Art Walk Airport Improvements Parks Facilities Improvement Facilities Space Modernization Athens West Park & Community Enrichment Facility Facilities Equipment Systems Public Transit Operations Tallassee Rd Connector East Athens Youth & Community Enrichment Facility Traffic Signage replacement Traffic Safety Improvements Renewable Energy Live Stream Pipe replacement Public Safety Vehicles Electrify the Fleet Fire Department Equipment Animal Shelter Improvements Consider the content of Welcome Center Access Master Plans and studies Any project that already has an approved concept or priority list (in design phase). commissioned by ACCGov  Roles & Responsibilities Governing Authority Oversight Committee Management & Staff Legislative actions: The Oversight Committee serves as a liaison Production Control: Drive the process. Keep it • Intergovernmental Agreements between staff, elected officials, and the community. moving. • Budget amendments, including external The intent of the Committee’s work is to improve funding sources (grants) transparency, accountability, & communication. Quality Control: Ensure that the process and the • Zoning decisions end product meet quality expectations. The responsibilities are: Procurement decisions: 1. To be fully aware of capital project-related Periodic communication • real estate acquisition, including right-of-way activities Weekly Manager’s Update • construction contracts over $250k 2. To actively promote SPLOST and TSPLOST in the Quarterly Oversight Committee Reports • any new contract over $200k community Annual Capital Project Roundup, • contract change orders over $50k scheduled in May in consideration of the Annual • on-call professional services selection Members are asked to pay particular attention to: Operating and Capital Budget • vehicle additions 1. Are public engagement activities sufficient for the Small group meetings, as appropriate designated level of impact? Sales tax referendum-related decisions: 2. Speed of delivery - Are we on track? Efficient and effective public communication • Pre-referendum Final Project list and consistent with the assigned level of impact. Budgets If more attention is due in a particular area or on a • Post-referendum Program Implementation particular project, the committee can flag it for the Administer required M&C agenda items Plan including budgets, tiering, public staff liaison. engagement Fill any Oversight Committee vacancies Potential new activities outside of quarterly briefings, at the discretion of the committee: Project field visits Volunteer to help with public engagement  Roles & Responsibilities – changes for the Governing Authority Governing Authority agenda items *old* Governing Authority agenda items *new* Project Concept or Priority List Management task Preliminary Plan or Schematic ADD content in the Manager’s Weekly Legislative actions: Legislative actions: update to keep elected officials well • Intergovernmental Agreements • Intergovernmental Agreements informed on project progress and • Budget amendments, including • Budget amendments, including milestones. This would also be a application of earned interest and application of earned interest and highlighted opportunity for feedback. external funding sources (grants) external funding sources (grants) • Zoning decisions • Zoning decisions With more effective public engagement techniques and highly informative updates, Procurement decisions: Procurement decisions: these milestones will require less editing • real estate acquisition, including right- • real estate acquisition, including right- and intervention by the governing authority. of-way of-way • construction contracts over $250k • construction contracts over $250k • any new contract over $200k • any new contract over $200k • contract change orders over $50k • contract change orders over $50k • on-call professional services selection • on-call professional services selection • vehicle additions • vehicle purchases Sales tax referendum-related decisions: Sales tax referendum-related decisions: • Pre-referendum Final Project list and • Pre-referendum Final Project list and Budgets Budgets • Post-referendum Program • Post-referendum Program Implementation Plan including Implementation Plan including budgets, tiering, public engagement budgets, tiering, public engagement categories categories  Roles & Responsibilities – changes for the Oversight Committee Oversight Committee *old* Oversight Committee *new* The Committee is charged to ensure that the SPLOST Program Projects The Oversight Committee serves as a liaison between staff, elected officials, and remain within their prescribed budgets, are feasible, and fulfill the Initial the community. The intent of the Committee’s work is to improve transparency, Project Statements identified within the referendum. accountability, & communication. Vote to verify that a proposed project concept meets the intent of the The responsibilities are: project statement. 1. To be fully aware of capital project-related activities 2. To actively promote SPLOST and TSPLOST in the community Recommend budget adjustments for specific projects or funding adjustments within the SPLOST Program Members are asked to pay particular attention to: 1. Are public engagement activities sufficient for the designated level of impact? 2. Speed of delivery - Are we on track? If more attention is due in a particular area or on a particular project, the committee can flag it for the staff liaison. Monthly meetings with a formal role in the delivery of individual projects Receive a robust quarterly report from staff to the committee (and the public) that includes a review of all project milestones, public engagement activities, procurement activities, and overall financial condition. Content should also include select highlights and an outlook of what to expect in the coming months. *consider a trial run of the first quarterly briefing in March. Potential new activities outside of quarterly briefings, at the discretion of the committee: Project field visits Volunteer to help with public engagement  Roles & Responsibilities Governing Authority Oversight Committee Management & Staff Legislative actions: The Oversight Committee serves as a liaison Production Control: Drive the process. Keep it • Intergovernmental Agreements between staff, elected officials, and the community. moving. • Budget amendments, including external The intent of the Committee’s work is to improve funding sources (grants) transparency, accountability, & communication. Quality Control: Ensure that the process and the • Zoning decisions end product meet quality expectations. The responsibilities are: Procurement decisions: 1. To be fully aware of capital project-related Periodic communication • real estate acquisition, including right-of-way activities Weekly Manager’s update content • construction contracts over $250k 2. To actively promote SPLOST and TSPLOST in the Quarterly Oversight Committee Reports • any new contract over $200k community Annual Capital Project Roundup, • contract change orders over $50k scheduled in May in consideration of the Annual • on-call professional services selection Members are asked to pay particular attention to: Operating and Capital Budget • vehicle additions 1. Are public engagement activities sufficient for the Small group meetings, as appropriate designated level of impact? Sales tax referendum-related decisions: 2. Speed of delivery - Are we on track? Efficient and effective public communication • Pre-referendum Final Project list and consistent with the assigned level of impact. Budgets If more attention is due in a particular area or on a • Post-referendum Program Implementation particular project, the committee can flag it for the Administer required M&C agenda items Plan including budgets, tiering, public staff liaison. engagement Fill any Oversight Committee vacancies Potential new activities outside of quarterly briefings, at the discretion of the committee: Project field visits Volunteer to help with public engagement  M&C Work Session Project Concept SPLOST Oversight Committee Review Single Project Process – ROW & Easement Acquisition but No M&C Approval Project Concept Grants or Site Selection Process (Similar for Architectural Projects) M&C Award A/E Contract Manager Approval to Release for Bid (See assumptions below) Manager Appoints User Group M&C Work Session Preliminary Design M&C Award Construction Contract User Group Kick-off Meeting M&C Approval Preliminary Design Notice to Proceed Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4 Pre-Design Phase Assumptions for Pre-Design: Pre-Design Phase Pre-Design Phase ~ 426 Days 426 days  Single Project – Bucket Projects have additional M&C Approvals & Public Engagement Develop: Develop: 180 days Project Concept Development  User Group Appointed by Manager; • Project Goals (Needs & • Project Goals (Needs &  User Groups can meet sufficiently to meet schedules; Purpose); 60 days Public Engagement - Project Concept Purpose);  Use of On-Call A/E Designers (RFP Process adds 120 days, depending on when done); • Project Concept; and, • Project Concept; and, 54 days M&C Approval Cycle Project Concept  A/E Selection could occur before Project Concept but may not change the overall timeline; • Schedule & Budget • Schedule & Budget 60 days A/E Advertisement & Selection Process  Project Concept by User Group and Public Engagement; Parameters. Parameters.  Public Engagement may start before M&C Work Session; Secure: 57 days M&C Approval Cycle A/E Selection Secure:  M&C approvals within regular monthly cycle; and, • Approvals • Approvals 45 days A/E Contract Execution  No Grant Funding (Potentially adds 2-5+ years to the process). Design Design Phase Phase 590 days Design Phase ~ 590 days Develop: Develop: 210 days Preliminary Design ••Building BuildingProgram ProgramTasks; Tasks; Design Assumptions for Design: Assumptions for Land Acquisition: Documents; and, Bid 60 days Surveying & Utility Locates Design Documents; and,  No Site Selection Process;  Land Acquisition - Assumes use of Eminent Domain as Documents. Bid Documents.  Continue with same Designer; 60 days Public Engagement - Preliminary Design an option; ••Meet Meetwith withImpacted Impacted Property  Permitting reviews provided with complete 52 days M&C Approval Cycle Preliminary Design  Using on-call land agents; Owners. Owners. Property comments; 140 days Final Design  No Site Selection Process; and, ••Secure: Secure:Permits; Permits;and, Land; and,  M&C approvals within regular monthly cycle; and,  No protracted negotiations. necessaryapprovals necessary approvals  No Grant Funding. 60 days Permitting 210 days Land Acquisition Assumptions for Procurement & Construction: 224 days Bid & Award Phase Bid & Award Phase  Traditional Design, Bid, & Build approach (other methods are longer but could possibly start earlier, since there is no Land Acquisition); 60 days Contract Review - Prebid • Contract Reviews;  Contract Reviews and Procurement within stipulated times; 60 days Bidding & Evaluation • Receive Bids;  M&C approvals within regular monthly cycle; • Award Project; and, 80 days M&C Award Cycle  Utility coordination and relocates are not extensive nor delayed by Utility Companies; • Contract Execution. 64 days Construction Contract Execution  Generic 1 Year Construction Time Frame; and,  No Grant Funding. • Monitor Schedule, 365 days Construction Phase ~ Generic 1 Yr. Construction Phase Total 1,605 Calendar Day Process = 4.4 Years Cost, and the work. 120 days Third Party Utility Relocates Construction Starts = 3.4 Years after Pre-Design Amend the Athens Cultural Affairs Commission ordinance Next: Jan 6th vote 1. Accept the public engagement impact categories 2. Accept the assigned roles & responsibilities 3. Adopt ACAC ordinance amendment 4. Fill Oversight Committee vacancies