ADS_CC_-_Shortlist_Interviews_Meeting_Minutes.pdf

Marion County Public School Facilities Architect Design Services Continuing Contract

Shortlist Interviews

Meeting Information 8:00 a.m. on May 28, 2025 Facilities Conference Room, 1105 S.W. 7th Road, Ocala, FL 34471

Meeting Agenda I. Opening Remarks & Roll Call

The meeting was called to order at approximately 8:00 a.m. by Nick Hill, procurement lead with JBPro for the Marion County Public Schools (MCPS)

Facilities Department. A roll call was conducted, confirming the presence of all current Selection Committee members.

II. Bhide & Hall Architects P.A. Shortlist Interview

At approximately 8:05 a.m., representatives from Bhide & Hall Architects, P.A.

were invited into the interview room. The firm began its presentation at 8:07 a.m.

Following the presentation, a member of the Selection Committee inquired about the firm’s approach to value engineering. The representative explained that the process involves early collaboration with trusted suppliers and consultants, thorough evaluation of alternatives to reduce life-cycle costs, and the provision of accurate, timely recommendations to support informed decision-making and minimize costly changes.

No further questions were posed. The firm concluded its interview and exited the room at 8:32 a.m.

III. Brame Heck Architects Inc. Shortlist Interview

At approximately 8:40 a.m., representatives from Brame Heck Architects, Inc.

were invited into the room. The firm began its presentation at 8:45 a.m.

Upon conclusion of the presentation, the Selection Committee was invited to pose questions. No questions were asked. However, representatives from the firm proceeded to provide additional context regarding several projects featured in their presentation.

The interview concluded, and the firm exited the room at 9:08 a.m.

Shortlist Interviews Meeting Minutes for MCPS – Arch. Design Services | Page 2

IV. BRPH Shortlist Interview

Shortly before their scheduled interview time, a representative from BRPH informed Mr. Hill that one team member was delayed due to traffic. The remaining two team members arrived in person and Mr. Hill arranged a virtual connection for the delayed participant. The interview began at approximately

9:30 a.m.

Upon conclusion of the presentation, the Selection Committee posed the following questions:

A committee member inquired about the firm’s familiarity with conditions in

Marion County. A representative responded that the firm customizes its approach to ensure thoughtful and context-sensitive solutions.

Another member asked for the location of the firm’s office. The team stated that they maintain several offices, with relevant staff based in Orlando and Melbourne.

The interview concluded and the firm exited the room at 9:52 a.m.

V. DLR Group Shortlist Interview

At 10:00 a.m., the Selection Committee welcomed representatives from DLR

Group to the interview room. The presentation began at 10:02 a.m.

After the presentation concluded, the following questions were posed by the

Selection Committee:

One member inquired about how the firm planned to balance the demands of large-scale projects with those of a continuing contract. A representative responded that the firm regularly projected staffing needs and assigned dedicated personnel to each contract, adjusting resources as necessary.

Another member asked where the firm’s primary office was located. The representative confirmed the location as Orlando.

In response to a final question, Mr. Modupe Arthur stated that he would serve as the District’s primary point of contact.

The firm exited the room at approximately 10:32 a.m.

Shortlist Interviews Meeting Minutes for MCPS – Arch. Design Services | Page 3

VI. PBK Shortlist Interview

Due to traffic-related issues, the team from PBK (formerly of Harvard Jolly) arrived for their scheduled 10:40 a.m. interview at 10:55 a.m. Prior to beginning, the interview team was warned that their time would be limited to ensure the shortlist interview schedule remains on time. At 10:57 a.m., the PBK team began their presentation.

Following the presentation, the Selection Committee was invited to ask questions. One committee member inquired about the location of the team’s primary office. A PBK representative responded that the interview team is based out of the Orlando office, but staff from any of their Florida offices can be available in Ocala as needed.

The interview team left the room at 11:15 a.m.

VII. Monarch Design Group, LLC Shortlist Interview

Interviewees from Monarch entered the room at 11:22 a.m. and began their presentation at 11:25.

Upon conclusion of the presentation, the Selection Committee proceeded with questions. One committee member asked the team to describe how their firm differentiates itself in building and maintaining long-term client relationships. A representative from Monarch responded that the firm is committed to supporting the District with whatever services are needed, regardless of a project’s size or scope. They emphasized their goal of becoming a trusted, long-term partner to the District.

To illustrate this commitment, the team highlighted that some of their strongest references were provided by school principals within the District—demonstrating that their firm had cultivated meaningful, dependable relationships across all levels of the organization.

The interview team left the room at approximately 11:45 a.m.

VIII. Rowe Architects, LLC Shortlist Interview

Representatives from Rowe Architects were invited into the interview room at

12:00 p.m. At 12:03 p.m., the firm began their presentation.

Following the presentation, the Selection Committee proceeded with questions.

One committee member asked about the firm’s use of sub-consultants. The team explained that they had not pre-selected any sub-consultants, as they prefer to

Shortlist Interviews Meeting Minutes for MCPS – Arch. Design Services | Page 4 assemble project-specific teams tailored to the unique requirements of each assignment. They added that they maintain several long-standing partnerships, which they intend to leverage for future continuing contract work in Marion

County.

Another committee member inquired about the location of the firm’s office. The team confirmed that Rowe Architects is based in Tampa.

A third committee member asked how the firm balances cost efficiency with design innovation. A representative responded that their approach is flexible and driven by the specific goals of each project, the available budget, and the needs of the end users.

The interview team left the room at approximately 12:30 p.m.

IX. Walker Architects Shortlist Interview

Walker Architects was invited into the interview room at 12:40 p.m., and the firm began its presentation at approximately 12:42 p.m.

Following the presentation, the Selection Committee was invited to ask questions. One committee member inquired about the firm’s approach to selecting sub-consultants. The representatives explained that sub-consultants would be chosen based on the specific needs of each project, allowing them to assemble a team best suited to the assignment.

Another committee member asked about the firm’s staffing capacity. The team noted that they currently have 25 staff members in their Gainesville office and an additional 6 based in Atlanta.

A third committee member asked who would serve as the primary point of contact for the District. The firm responded that this is typically determined on a case-by-case basis, but in most instances, it would be Ken.

The interview concluded shortly after 1:00 p.m.

X. Wannemacher Jensen Architects, Inc. Shortlist Interview

At approximately 1:20 p.m., representatives from Wannemacher Jensen

Architects were welcomed into the interview room. The team began their presentation at around 1:22 p.m.

Following the presentation, the Selection Committee posed several questions.

One committee member asked whether the firm had completed any additional

Shortlist Interviews Meeting Minutes for MCPS – Arch. Design Services | Page 5 high school projects in Marion County beyond the one featured in their presentation. The team responded that they had not; their most relevant experience was with high school projects in Citrus and Alachua counties.

Another committee member inquired about which office would be responsible for servicing the District. The representatives confirmed that their St. Petersburg office would lead the work, with Arturo serving as the primary point of contact.

When asked about staffing at that location, the team stated that approximately

40 employees are based in the St. Petersburg office.

The interview concluded, and the team exited the room at 1:50 p.m.

XI. Scoring Reminders

Mr. Hill reminded the Selection Committee that the shortlist interview scoring meeting would take place at 3:00 p.m. in the Facilities Conference Room. He instructed members to have their scores entered into the VendorLink system before attending the scoring meeting.

Mr. Hill reiterated that scores should be assigned based upon the firm's alignment with the scoring criteria outlined in Form 2 (Selection Committee

Evaluation) after participating in the shortlist interviews this morning.

Mr. Hill then asked if any member of the Selection Committee wished to discuss any of the shortlist firms' alignment with these criteria. No member of the

Selection Committee wished to provide comments.

Additionally, Mr. Hill emphasized that the cone of silence remained in effect, prohibiting committee members from discussing the contents of the interviews or their scores outside of the meeting room during the break.

Mr. Hill formally adjourned the meeting at 2:00 p.m.