{"MatterId":14641,"MatterGuid":"504380EB-E38D-4544-95BD-2964424D1B58","MatterLastModifiedUtc":"2026-05-19T17:11:26.997","MatterRowVersion":"AAAAAADLVYY=","MatterFile":"O-26-1","MatterName":null,"MatterTitle":"Amending The City Code Of Ordinances Relating To The Preparation Of Reports, Plans, Technical Documents And Drawings By The City Council Services Department (Grout)","MatterTypeId":1,"MatterTypeName":"Ordinance","MatterStatusId":9,"MatterStatusName":"Withdrawn","MatterBodyId":1,"MatterBodyName":"City Council","MatterIntroDate":"2026-01-05T00:00:00","MatterAgendaDate":null,"MatterPassedDate":"2026-05-18T00:00:00","MatterEnactmentDate":null,"MatterEnactmentNumber":null,"MatterRequester":null,"MatterNotes":null,"MatterVersion":"1","MatterCost":null,"MatterText1":null,"MatterText2":null,"MatterText3":null,"MatterText4":null,"MatterText5":null,"MatterDate1":null,"MatterDate2":null,"MatterEXText1":"CC 5/4/26 (tm)\r\n\r\nBrief Summary: This Ordinance amends the City Code of Ordinances to:\r\n•\tAuthorize the Director of City Council Services to prepare and/or issue contracts for \r\nconsulting engineers, architects, and landscape architects through the Selection Advisory Committee Process. The services to be included in the contract may include reports, and 30% plans, drawings and technical documents. These Contracts shall be prepared and negotiated by the Director of City Council Services. The final contract shall be signed by the Director of City Council Services, the Chief Administrative Officer and the City Attorney.\r\n•\tThe contract may also include services for plans, drawings and technical documents \r\nbeyond thirty percent (30%) if the contract is for a project designated through a resolution adopted by the City Council. \r\n•\tThe ordinance also requires that a City Department managing any phase of the \r\ndesign of an Architectural, Engineering, or Landscape Architecture project shall brief the sponsoring project’s Councilor, or their representative, on the status of the design process a minimum of every 30 days. The span of time between briefings may only be adjusted with consent of the sponsoring Councilor.\r\n\r\nAnalysis: \r\n•\tInfrastructure projects a City Councilor wishes to conduct usually start with a Design \r\nAnalysis Report (DAR) executed by the City Department. The Design Analysis report (DAR) includes research on the issue driving the need for a project, potential recommendations and the feasibility and cost to implement the recommendations. Depending on the scope and complexity of the project the DAR can comprise from 5% to 30% of the design process.  \r\n•\tCouncilors use the DAR to make an informed decision on the policy direction of the \r\nproject including if a project should proceed to full design and implementation, and how it should be phased so that the design process is coordinated with the funding effort to construct the project. \r\n•\tThe DAR, depending on the scope and complexity of a project, historically is \r\ncompleted by the overseeing Administration Department within a month to several months. In the past 7 years that timeline has often required much longer time to complete. This has resulted in the issue to be addressed languishing in front of the public, causing the cost to build a project to experience price inflation over time, which can further delay the project as additional funding raised. The long delays also leave Councilors waiting for required information on how to prepare their capital investment program for District projects and having to continually explain to their constituents why the project has not made progress. \r\n•\tCurrently the direction of the recommendations in the DAR is at the discretion of the \r\nCity Department overseeing the effort and they can exclude the Councilor and the members of the public from meaningful input on the direction of a project they requested and initiated. This can cause a project to proceed through the expense of a design process only to be delayed or cancelled due to public opposition.\r\n•\tThe proposed Ordinance authorizes the Director of City Council Services to contract \r\nfor and manage DAR’s conducted by qualified and certified professionals. The intent is that a decision on proceeding to the full design of a project could be determined much more rapidly, the Council or a Councilor could ensure that recommendations are consistent with both City and neighborhood goals, and the impact of cost inflation of the project could be mitigated by having the project proceed at quicker pace.\r\n•\tThe proposed Ordinance authorizes the Council to pursue full design of a project if \r\nexecuting the project is designated a policy of the City through Council Resolution. This was included in the legislation for the following reasons: \r\n•\tThere are small projects that, the funding required to build the project and the \r\ncontext and direction of a project cannot be determined until full design is completed. Therefore, the design process becomes the process for public outreach and developing the policy to guide the project. By allowing Council Services to oversee design of the project in concert with a DMD project manager allows the Councilor to participate in the complete policy development process pertaining to the issue.\r\n•\tIf there is not a consensus on the nature and scope of the project between the \r\ninitiators of the project and the Administration, a Resolution provides a vehicle for the City Council to publicly debate the direction the project should proceed and to forge a consensus or at least establish a direction that was decided upon through the City’s policy-making process. A project that does not have the support of the Administration could nevertheless continue to full design, including the public outreach process associated with design. This would provide both the Administration and the Council with additional information and direction to come to a consensus on the project before reaching full funding or the construction phase.\r\n\r\nFGO Report: The Ordinance passed FGO unanimously with Recommendation. Though the FGO committee asked that the sponsor and the Administration meet to address several concerns expressed by the Director of DMD. The Sponsor of the Legislation, Council Services Staff, the DMD Director and the Director of Governmental Affairs held a meeting and the sponsor decided to request a deferral of the legislation. In the interim the Director of DMD sent the following E-mail as an alternative to the ordinance. The E-mail would stand as the official document for the agreement. It read as follows:\r\n\r\n“For projects fully funded through Council set aside or where full funding was secured by the Councilor from state capital outlay (“Council sponsored projects”), at the request of the Councilor, the applicable City Department shall meet with the Councilor and appropriate staff to discuss available funding, project scope, the design schedule, and project staffing prior to beginning design or engaging a design consultant. For Council sponsored projects, the Councilor and applicable Department Director shall develop a plan for project staffing from conceptual design through construction documents including  whether Council staff will manage design of the project; which, if any consultant, shall design the project; the participation of both the applicable Department and Council staff in project meetings; and the frequency of project updates. The Councilor and applicable Department Director shall memorialize the plan in writing. In the event that the Department Director and Councilor cannot agree on who will manage design for a Council sponsored project, subject to compliance with all applicable legal requirements, Council staff shall manage design, with Department staff invited to all project meetings.”\r\n\r\nCC 4/20/26 (tm)\r\n\r\nBrief Summary: This Ordinance amends the City Code of Ordinances to:\r\n• Authorize the Director of City Council Services to prepare and/or issue contracts for \r\nconsulting engineers, architects, and landscape architects through the Selection Advisory Committee Process. The services to be included in the contract may include reports, and 30% plans, drawings and technical documents. These Contracts shall be prepared and negotiated by the Director of City Council Services. The final contract shall be signed by the Director of City Council Services, the Chief Administrative Officer and the City Attorney.\r\n• The contract may also include services for plans, drawings and technical documents \r\nbeyond thirty percent (30%) if the contract is for a project designated through a resolution adopted by the City Council. \r\n• The ordinance also requires that a City Department managing any phase of the \r\ndesign of an Architectural, Engineering, or Landscape Architecture project shall brief the sponsoring project’s Councilor, or their representative, on the status of the design process a minimum of every 30 days. The span of time between briefings may only be adjusted with consent of the sponsoring Councilor.\r\n\r\nAnalysis: \r\n• Infrastructure projects a City Councilor wishes to conduct usually start with a Design \r\nAnalysis Report (DAR) executed by the City Department. The Design Analysis report (DAR) includes research on the issue driving the need for a project, potential recommendations and the feasibility and cost to implement the recommendations. Depending on the scope and complexity of the project the DAR can comprise from 5% to 30% of the design process.  \r\n• Councilors use the DAR to make an informed decision on the policy direction of the \r\nproject including if a project should proceed to full design and implementation, and how it should be phased so that the design process is coordinated with the funding effort to construct the project. \r\n• The DAR, depending on the scope and complexity of a project, historically is \r\ncompleted by the overseeing Administration Department within a month to several months. In the past 7 years that timeline has often required much longer time to complete. This has resulted in the issue to be addressed languishing in front of the public, causing the cost to build a project to experience price inflation over time, which can further delay the project as additional funding raised. The long delays also leave Councilors waiting for required information on how to prepare their capital investment program for District projects and having to continually explain to their constituents why the project has not made progress. \r\n• Currently the direction of the recommendations in the DAR is at the discretion of the \r\nCity Department overseeing the effort and they can exclude the Councilor and the members of the public from meaningful input on the direction of a project they requested and initiated. This can cause a project to proceed through the expense of a design process only to be delayed or cancelled due to public opposition.\r\n• The proposed Ordinance authorizes the Director of City Council Services to contract \r\nfor and manage DAR’s conducted by qualified and certified professionals. The intent is that a decision on proceeding to the full design of a project could be determined much more rapidly, the Council or a Councilor could ensure that recommendations are consistent with both City and neighborhood goals, and the impact of cost inflation of the project could be mitigated by having the project proceed at quicker pace.\r\n• The proposed Ordinance authorizes the Council to pursue full design of a project if \r\nexecuting the project is designated a policy of the City through Council Resolution. This was included in the legislation for the following reasons: \r\n• There are small projects that, the funding required to build the project and the \r\ncontext and direction of a project cannot be determined until full design is completed. Therefore, the design process becomes the process for public outreach and developing the policy to guide the project. By allowing Council Services to oversee design of the project in concert with a DMD project manager allows the Councilor to participate in the complete policy development process pertaining to the issue.\r\n• If there is not a consensus on the nature and scope of the project between the \r\ninitiators of the project and the Administration, a Resolution provides a vehicle for the City Council to publicly debate the direction the project should proceed and to forge a consensus or at least establish a direction that was decided upon through the City’s policy-making process. A project that does not have the support of the Administration could nevertheless continue to full design, including the public outreach process associated with design. This would provide both the Administration and the Council with additional information and direction to come to a consensus on the project before reaching full funding or the construction phase.\r\n\r\nFGO Report: The Ordinance passed FGO unanimously with Recommendation. Though the FGO committee asked that the sponsor and the Administration meet to address several concerns expressed by the Director of DMD. The Sponsor of the Legislation, Council Services Staff, the DMD Director and the Director of Governmental Affairs held a meeting and the sponsor decided to request a deferral of the legislation. In the interim the Director of DMD sent the following E-mail as an alternative to the ordinance. The E-mail would stand as the official document for the agreement. It read as follows:\r\n\r\n“For projects fully funded through Council set aside or where full funding was secured by the Councilor from state capital outlay (“Council sponsored projects”), at the request of the Councilor, the applicable City Department shall meet with the Councilor and appropriate staff to discuss available funding, project scope, the design schedule, and project staffing prior to beginning design or engaging a design consultant. For Council sponsored projects, the Councilor and applicable Department Director shall develop a plan for project staffing from conceptual design through construction documents including whether Council staff will manage design of the project; which, if any consultant, shall design the project; the participation of both the applicable Department and Council staff in project meetings; and the frequency of project updates. The Councilor and applicable Department Director shall memorialize the plan in writing. In the event that the Department Director and Councilor cannot agree on who will manage design for a Council sponsored project, subject to compliance with all applicable legal requirements, Council staff shall manage design, with Department staff invited to all project meetings.”\r\n\r\nCC 4/6/26 tm\r\n\r\nBrief Summary: This Ordinance amends the City Code of Ordinances to:\r\n•\tAuthorize the Director of City Council Services to prepare and/or issue contracts for \r\nconsulting engineers, architects, and landscape architects through the Selection Advisory Committee Process. The services to be included in the contract may include reports, and 30% plans, drawings and technical documents. These Contracts shall be prepared and negotiated by the Director of City Council Services. The final contract shall be signed by the Director of City Council Services, the Chief Administrative Officer and the City Attorney\r\n•\tThe contract may also include services for plans, drawings and technical documents \r\nbeyond thirty percent (30%) if the contract is for a project designated through a resolution adopted by the City Council. \r\n•\tThe ordinance also requires that a City Department managing any phase of the \r\ndesign of an Architectural, Engineering, or Landscape Architecture project shall brief the sponsoring project’s Councilor, or their representative, on the status of the design process a minimum of every 30 days. The span of time between briefings may only be adjusted with consent of the sponsoring Councilor.\r\n\r\nAnalysis: \r\n•\tInfrastructure projects a City Councilor wishes to conduct usually start with a Design \r\nAnalysis Report (DAR) executed by the City Department. The Design Analysis report (DAR) includes research on the issue driving the need for a project, potential recommendations and the feasibility and cost to implement the recommendations. Depending on the scope and complexity of the project the DAR can comprise from 5% to 30% of the design process.  \r\n•\tCouncilors use the DAR to make an informed decision on the policy direction of the \r\nproject including if a project should proceed to full design and implementation, and how it should be phased so that the design process is coordinated with the funding effort to construct the project. \r\n•\tThe DAR, depending on the scope and complexity of a project, historically is \r\ncompleted by the overseeing Administration Department within a month to several months. In the past 7 years that timeline has often required much longer time to complete. This has resulted in the issue to be addressed languishing in front of the public, causing the cost to build a project to experience price inflation over time, which can further delay the project as additional funding raised. The long delays also leave Councilors waiting for required information on how to prepare their capital investment program for District projects and having to continually explain to their constituents why the project has not made progress. \r\n•\tCurrently the direction of the recommendations in the DAR is at the discretion of the \r\nCity Department overseeing the effort and they can exclude the Councilor and the members of the public from meaningful input on the direction of a project they requested and initiated. This can cause a project to proceed through the expense of a design process only to be delayed or cancelled due to public opposition.\r\n•\tThe proposed Ordinance authorizes the Director of City Council Services to contract \r\nfor and manage DAR’s conducted by qualified and certified professionals. The intent is that a decision on proceeding to the full design of a project could be determined much more rapidly, the Council or a Councilor could ensure that recommendations are consistent with both City and neighborhood goals, and the impact of cost inflation of the project could be mitigated by having the project proceed at quicker pace.\r\n•\tThe proposed Ordinance authorizes the Council to pursue full design of a project if \r\nexecuting the project is designated a policy of the City through Council Resolution. This was included in the legislation for the following reasons: \r\n\tThere are small projects that, the funding required to build the project and the \r\ncontext and direction of a project cannot be determined until full design is completed. Therefore, the design process becomes the process for public outreach and developing the policy to guide the project. By allowing Council Services to oversee design of the project in concert with a DMD project manager allows the Councilor to participate in the complete policy development process pertaining to the issue.\r\n\tIf there is not a consensus on the nature and scope of the project between the \r\ninitiators of the project and the Administration, a Resolution provides a vehicle for the City Council to publicly debate the direction the project should proceed and to forge a consensus or at least establish a direction that was decided upon through the City’s policy-making process. A project that does not have the support of the Administration could nevertheless continue to full design, including the public outreach process associated with design. This would provide both the Administration and the Council with additional information and direction to come to a consensus on the project before reaching full funding or the construction phase.\r\n\r\nFGO Report: The Ordinance passed FGO unanimously with Recommendation. Though the FGO committee asked that the sponsor and the Administration meet to address several concerns expressed by the Director of DMD. The Sponsor of the Legislation, Council Services Staff, the DMD Director and the Director of Governmental Affairs held a meeting and the sponsor decided to request a deferral of the legislation. In the interim the Director of DMD sent the following E-mail as an alternative to the ordinance. The E-mail would stand as the official document for the agreement. It read as follows:\r\n\r\n“For projects fully funded through Council set aside or where full funding was secured by the Councilor from state capital outlay (“Council sponsored projects”), at the request of the Councilor, the applicable City Department shall meet with the Councilor and appropriate staff to discuss available funding, project scope, the design schedule, and project staffing prior to beginning design or engaging a design consultant. For Council sponsored projects, the Councilor and applicable Department Director shall develop a plan for project staffing from conceptual design through construction documents including  whether Council staff will manage design of the project; which, if any consultant, shall design the project; the participation of both the applicable Department and Council staff in project meetings; and the frequency of project updates. The Councilor and applicable Department Director shall memorialize the plan in writing. In the event that the Department Director and Councilor cannot agree on who will manage design for a Council sponsored project, subject to compliance with all applicable legal requirements, Council staff shall manage design, with Department staff invited to all project meetings.”\r\n\r\nCC 2/18/26 (tm)\r\n\r\nBrief Summary: This Ordinance amends the City Code of Ordinances to:\r\n• Authorize the Director of City Council Services to prepare and/or issue contracts \r\nfor consulting engineers, architects, and landscape architects through the Selection Advisory Committee Process. The services to be included in the contract may include reports, and 30% plans, drawings and technical documents. These Contracts shall be prepared and negotiated by the Director of City Council Services. The final contract shall be signed by the Director of City Council Services, the Chief Administrative Officer and the City Attorney.\r\n• The contract may also include services for plans, drawings and technical \r\ndocuments beyond thirty percent (30%) if the contract is for a project designated through a resolution adopted by the City Council. \r\n• The ordinance also requires that a City Department managing any phase of the \r\ndesign of an Architectural, Engineering, or Landscape Architecture project shall brief the sponsoring project’s Councilor, or their representative, on the status of the design process a minimum of every 30 days. The span of time between briefings may only be adjusted with consent of the sponsoring Councilor.\r\n\r\nAnalysis: \r\n• Infrastructure projects a City Councilor wishes to conduct usually start with a \r\nDesign Analysis Report (DAR) executed by the City Department. The Design Analysis report (DAR) includes research on the issue driving the need for a project, potential recommendations and the feasibility and cost to implement the recommendations. Depending on the scope and complexity of the project the DAR can comprise from 5% to 30% of the design process.  \r\n• Councilors use the DAR to make an informed decision on the policy direction of \r\nthe project including if a project should proceed to full design and implementation, and how it should be phased so that the design process is coordinated with the funding effort to construct the project. \r\n• The DAR, depending on the scope and complexity of a project, historically \r\nrequired from a month to several months to complete. In the past 7 years that timeline has often required much longer time to complete. This has resulted in the issue to be addressed languishing in front of the public, causing the cost to build a project to address an issue to experience price inflation over time. These long delays also leave Councilors waiting for required information on how to prepare their capital investment program for District projects and having to continually explain to their constituents why the project has not made progress. \r\n• Currently the direction of the recommendations in the DAR is at the discretion of \r\nthe City Department overseeing the effort and they can exclude the Councilor and the members of the public from meaningful input on the direction of a project they requested and initiated. This can cause a project to proceed through the expense of a design process only to be delayed or cancelled due to public opposition.\r\n• The proposed Ordinance authorizes the Director of City Council Services to \r\ncontract for and manage DAR’s conducted by qualified and certified professionals. The intent is that a decision on proceeding to the full design of a project could be determined much more rapidly, the Council or a Councilor could ensure that recommendations are consistent with both City and neighborhood goals, and the impact of cost inflation of the project could be mitigated by having the project proceed at quicker pace.\r\n• The proposed Ordinance also authorizes the Council to pursue full design of a \r\nproject if executing the project is designated a policy of the City through Council Resolution. This was included in the legislation for the following reasons: \r\n There are projects that, though the direction or context of the project can \r\nbe determined through a DAR, the actual funding required cannot be known until full design is completed. This information is required for a funding and phasing plan to be completed so that a decision on proceeding or not proceeding with a project can be finalized.\r\n If there is not a consensus on the nature and scope of the project between \r\nthe initiators of the project and the Administration, a Resolution provides a vehicle to publicly debate the direction the project should proceed and to forge a consensus or at least establish a direction that was decided upon through the City’s policy-making process. A project that does not have the support of the Administration could nevertheless continue to full design, including the public outreach process associated with design. This would provide both the Administration and the Council with additional information and direction to come to a consensus on the project before reaching full funding or the construction phase.\r\n\r\nFGO 1/12/26: O-26-1 passed unanimously at the 1/12/26 Finance and Government Operations Committee Meeting. \r\n\r\n\r\nFGO 1/12/26 (tgm)\r\n\r\nBrief Summary: This Ordinance amends the City Code of Ordinances to:\r\n•\tAuthorize the Director of City Council Services to prepare and/or issue contracts \r\nfor consulting engineers, architects, and landscape architects through the Selection Advisory Committee Process. The services to be included in the contract may include reports, and 30% plans, drawings and technical documents. These Contracts shall be prepared and negotiated by the Director of City Council Services. The final contract shall be signed by the Director of City Council Services, the Chief Administrative Officer and the City Attorney\r\n•\tThe contract may also include services for plans, drawings and technical \r\ndocuments beyond thirty percent (30%) if the contract is for a project designated through a resolution adopted by the City Council. \r\n•\tThe ordinance also requires that a City Department managing any phase of the \r\ndesign of an Architectural, Engineering, or Landscape Architecture project shall brief the sponsoring project’s Councilor, or their representative, on the status of the design process a minimum of every 30 days. The span of time between briefings may only be adjusted with consent of the sponsoring Councilor.\r\n\r\nAnalysis: \r\n•\tInfrastructure projects a City Councilor wishes to conduct usually start with a \r\nDesign Analysis Report (DAR) executed by the City Department. The Design Analysis report (DAR) includes research on the issue driving the need for a project, potential recommendations and the feasibility and cost to implement the recommendations. Depending on the scope and complexity of the project the DAR can comprise from 5% to 30% of the design process.  \r\n•\tCouncilors use the DAR to make an informed decision on the policy direction of \r\nthe project including if a project should proceed to full design and implementation, and how it should be phased so that the design process is coordinated with the funding effort to construct the project. \r\n•\tThe DAR, depending on the scope and complexity of a project, historically \r\nrequired from a month to several months to complete. In the past 7 years that timeline has often required much longer time to complete. This has resulted in the issue to be addressed languishing in front of the public, causing the cost to build a project to address an issue to experience price inflation over time. These long delays also leave Councilors waiting for required information on how to prepare their capital investment program for District projects and having to continually explain to their constituents why the project has not made progress. \r\n•\tCurrently the direction of the recommendations in the DAR is at the discretion of \r\nthe City Department overseeing the effort and they can exclude the Councilor and the members of the public from meaningful input on the direction of a project they requested and initiated. This can cause a project to proceed through the expense of a design process only to be delayed or cancelled due to public opposition.\r\n•\tThe proposed Ordinance authorizes the Director of City Council Services to \r\ncontract for and manage DAR’s conducted by qualified and certified professionals. The intent is that a decision on proceeding to the full design of a project could be determined much more rapidly, the Council or a Councilor could ensure that recommendations are consistent with both City and neighborhood goals, and the impact of cost inflation of the project could be mitigated by having the project proceed at quicker pace.\r\n•\tThe proposed Ordinance also authorizes the Council to pursue full design of a \r\nproject if executing the project is designated a policy of the City through Council Resolution. This was included in the legislation for the following reasons: \r\n\tThere are projects that, though the direction or context of the project can \r\nbe determined through a DAR, the actual funding required cannot be known until full design is completed. This information is required for a funding and phasing plan to be completed so that a decision on proceeding or not proceeding with a project can be finalized.\r\n\tIf there is not a consensus on the nature and scope of the project between \r\nthe initiators of the project and the Administration, a Resolution provides a vehicle to publicly debate the direction the project should proceed and to forge a consensus or at least establish a direction that was decided upon through the City’s policy-making process. A project that does not have the support of the Administration could nevertheless continue to full design, including the public outreach process associated with design. This would provide both the Administration and the Council with additional information and direction to come to a consensus on the project before reaching full funding or the construction phase.","MatterEXText2":"Tom Menicucci","MatterEXText3":null,"MatterEXText4":null,"MatterEXText5":null,"MatterEXText6":null,"MatterEXText7":null,"MatterEXText8":null,"MatterEXText9":null,"MatterEXText10":null,"MatterEXText11":null,"MatterEXDate1":null,"MatterEXDate2":null,"MatterEXDate3":null,"MatterEXDate4":null,"MatterEXDate5":null,"MatterEXDate6":null,"MatterEXDate7":null,"MatterEXDate8":null,"MatterEXDate9":null,"MatterEXDate10":null,"MatterAgiloftId":0,"MatterReference":"27","MatterRestrictViewViaWeb":false,"MatterReports":[]}