4.20.040 Competitive sealed proposals.
A. Conditions for Use. When the purchasing agent determines, in writing, that the use of competitive sealed bidding is either not practicable or not advantageous to the city, the city may procure supplies, professional services, general services or construction by competitive sealed proposals as outlined in this section.
B. The request for proposals shall be prepared by the using department. The purchasing agent shall solicit competitive sealed proposals by issuing a request for proposals. The request for proposals shall state, or incorporate by reference, all specifications and contractual terms and conditions to which a proposer must respond, and shall state the factors to be considered in evaluating proposals and the relative importance of those factors.
C. Proposals shall be received at the time and place designated in the request for proposals, and shall be opened so as to avoid disclosing their contents to competing proponents during the evaluation, discussion, and negotiation process. Notwithstanding Chapter 2.40 BMC, the names of the responding firms, contents of the proposals, tabulations and evaluations thereof shall be open to public inspection only upon city council approval of a contract award. However, the purchasing agent shall issue a notice of intent to award to all responding proposers at least seven (7) business days prior to the city council approval.
1. Competing proponents may make written request to view their proposal or competing proposals prior to city council consideration of a contract. All such reviews must be in person and under the supervision of the purchasing agent. The review by a competing proponent is to assure reasonable access and opportunity to request a debriefing from the purchasing agent prior to council action on the proposed award.
D. In the manner provided in the request for proposals, the purchasing agent may enter into discussions with those responsible proponents whose proposals are determined by the purchasing agent to be most reasonably responsive to the request for proposals (short-listed firms). The purchasing agent may issue an interim notice to the remaining firms that a qualified list has been established for discussion purposes. No disclosure of the short-listed firms, contents of proposals, tabulations or evaluations thereof shall be made in accordance with subsection C of this section. Discussions shall be used to clarify and ensure full understanding of the requirements of the request for proposals. The purchasing agent may permit those short-listed firms to revise their proposals after submission and prior to award to obtain best and final offers. Proponents deemed eligible for discussions shall be treated equally regarding any opportunity to discuss and revise proposals. However, if during the discussions it is evident that the proposals, as submitted, will exceed the available funding, and/or other changes in the terms, conditions, or requirements are needed to clarify or fulfill the requirements of the city, the purchasing agent shall issue a written modification to those short-listed firms with an established date and time for the firms to respond. The failure of a short-listed firm to respond or to notify the purchasing officer of a needed time extension may be just cause to remove the proposer from further consideration. In conducting discussions or requesting revisions, neither the purchasing agent nor any other city officer or employee shall disclose any information derived from other competing proposals.
E. If fair and reasonable compensation, contract requirements and contract documents can be agreed upon with the most qualified proposer, the contract shall be awarded to that firm.
F. If fair and reasonable compensation, contract requirements and contract documents cannot be agreed upon with the most qualified proposer, the purchasing agent shall advise the proposer of the termination of negotiations within five (5) business days of the determination. If the proposals were submitted by one (1) or more other proponents determined to be qualified, negotiations may be conducted with such other proposers in the order of their respective rankings. The contract may be awarded to the proposer then determined to be most advantageous to the city.
G. When the service is routine and repetitious, costs of the anticipated service shall be considered during evaluation of proposals. This subsection shall not apply to a qualifications-based selection process.
1. When the source selection is for architectural and/or engineering services, a qualifications-based selection process shall be used. Price will not be a sole factor in the selection of the architect or engineer during the evaluation process.
2. Notwithstanding subsection (G)(1) of this section, the purchasing agent may include price as an added factor in selecting architectural and engineering services when, in the judgment of the purchasing agent, the services required are repetitious in nature, and the scope, nature, and amount of services required are thoroughly defined by measurable and objective standards to reasonably enable firms or persons making proposals to compete with a clear understanding and interpretation of the services required.
3. Except as otherwise required by state law in particular situations, this section shall apply to all procurements of architectural and engineering services by the city. [Ord. 14-27 § 4.]