HomeMy WebLinkAboutBack-Up from Law DeptSec. 18-86. Competitive negotiations/competitive sealed proposals.
(a) Conditions for use.
(1) Competitive negotiations/competitive sealed proposals shall be used
in those circumstances in which it is both practicable and advantageous for
the city to consider a range of competing plans, specifications, standards,
terms and conditions so that adequate competition will result and award be
made not principally on the basis of price, but to the respondent whose
proposal contains the most advantageous combination of price, quality or
other features. All contracts shall be signed by the city manager.
(2) A contract may be entered into by use of the competitive
negotiation/competitive sealed proposal methods when:
a. The chief procurement officer determines that the complex
specialized nature or technical details of a particular procurement
make the use of competitive sealed bidding either not practicable or
reasonable, or not advantageous to the city; or
b. Specifications or scope of work cannot be fairly or objectively
prepared so as to permit competition in the invitation for bids; or
c. Technology, electronic, software, and system applications are
available from a limited number of sources; or
d. Qualifications and the quality of the service to be delivered
can be considered more important than price.
(3) Competitive negotiations/competitive sealed proposals shall be used
in the procurement of personal and professional services except for:
a. Professional services as defined in Florida Statute § 287.055,
as amended from time to time.
b. Legal services.
c. Services related to the cultural, educational, recreational or
park activities provided by non-profit organizations within city parks.
These services may be awarded without competitive negotiations if
the city manager makes a written finding, supported by reasons, to
the city commission that competitive negotiation methods are not
practicable or advantageous. Such finding must be ratified and the
award approved by an affirmative vote of four -fifths of the commission
after a properly advertised public hearing.
d. Maintenance agreements to support proprietary software
applications.
(b) Competitive negotiations method. Where the contract does not exceed
$50,000.00, at least three written proposals shall be sought and the city shall enter
into competitive negotiations to determine which proposal is most advantageous to
the city. The written proposals received and the results of the evaluation shall be
449280
maintained as a public record. The contract may be awarded by the city manager
upon certification of compliance with competitive negotiations method by the chief
procurement officer. The city manager shall submit to the city commission on a
monthly basis a list of contracts awarded by the city manager.
(c) Competitive sealed proposal method. Where the contract exceeds
$50,000.00, the city may utilize the following competitive sealed proposal method:
(1) Request for proposals (RFP) or request for letters of interest (RFLI)
or request for qualifications (RFQ) setting forth the terms and conditions of the
professional or personal services sought, including but not limited to, scope of
work and evaluation factors, shall be issued. The RFP, RFLI or RFQ, as
applicable, may, in the exercise of the reasonable professional discretion of
the city manager, director of the using agency, and the chief procurement
officer, include a five percent evaluation criterion in favor of proposers who
maintain a local office, as defined in section 18-73. In such cases, this five
percent evaluation criterion in favor of proposers who maintain a local office
will be specifically defined in the RFP, RFLI or RFQ, as applicable; otherwise,
it will not apply.
(2) Mailing lists. Lists of prospective proposers/respondents may be
compiled pursuant to section 18-85 (competitive sealed bidding).
(3) Public notice. Adequate public notice in a newspaper of general
circulation shall be provided pursuant to section 18-85.
(4) Pre -proposal conference. A pre -proposal conference may be
conducted to explain the requirements of the proposed procurement and shall
be announced to all prospective proposers known to have received an RFP,
RFLI, or RFQ. Conferences should be held long enough after the RFP, RFLI,
or RFQ has been issued to allow prospective proposers to become familiar
with the proposed procurement, but sufficiently before receipt of proposal to
allow consideration of the conference results in preparing their proposals.
Nothing stated at a pre -proposal conference shall change the RFP, RFLI, or
RFQ unless a change is made by written addendum, which shall be supplied
to all those prospective proposers known to have received an RFP, RFLI, or
RFQ. All pre -proposal conferences shall be recorded, and, if a transcript is
made, such transcript shall be a public record.
(5) Receipt of proposals. Sealed proposals must be received by the city
clerk no later than the time and date specified for submission in the request for
proposals or request for letters of interest or requests for qualifications. The
name of each proposer shall be recorded by the city clerk or its designee, and
the record and each proposal, to the extent consistent with applicable state
law, shall be open to public inspection.
(6) Proposal evaluation. An evaluation committee shall be appointed by
the city manager for the purpose of evaluating proposals based upon the
449280
criteria contained in the RFP, RFLI or RFQ. No other factors or criteria shall be
used in the evaluation. As may be provided in the RFP, RFLI or RFQ,
proposers may be invited to make oral presentations regarding their
Proposals. The recommendations of the evaluation committee shall be
submitted to the city manager.
In the event only one proposal is received, the evaluation committee may
proceed with the evaluation, or request the city manager to reject all proposals,
whichever is in the best interests of the city.
a. After reviewing the evaluation committee's recommendation, the city
manager may:
1. Approve the recommendation of the evaluation committee,
written notice of which shall be provided to all proposers, and the city
manager shall then submit his or her recommendation to the city
commission;
2. Reject the evaluation committee's recommendation and
instruct the evaluation committee to re-evaluate and make further
recommendations;
3. Reject all proposals; or
4. Recommend that the city commission reject all proposals.
(7) Award. Award shall be made to the responsive and responsible
proposer whose proposal is most advantageous to the city as determined by
the city commission in accordance with the evaluation criteria contained in the
RFP, RFLI or RFQ.
b. After reviewing the city manager's recommendation, the city
commission may:
1. Approve the city manager's recommendation and authorize
contract negotiations;
2. Reject all proposals;
3. Reject all proposals and instruct the city manager to reissue a
solicitation; or
4. Reject all proposals and instruct the city manager to enter into
competitive negotiations with at least three individuals or firms
possessing the ability to perform such services and obtain information
from said individuals or firms relating to experience, qualifications and
the proposed cost or fee for said services, and make a
recommendation to the city commission.
The decision of the city commission shall be final. Written notice of the award
shall be given to the successful proposer.
449280
Threshold amounts referenced herein shall include the values associated
with potential options of renewal. Awards made by the city manager or by the city
commission shall include authority for all subsequent options of renewal, if any. The
aforementioned options of renewal shall be exercisable at the option of the city
manager if, after review of past performance under the contract, the city manager
determines in his/her sole discretion that exercise of the option of renewal is in the
best interest of the city.
(Ord. No. 12271, § 2, 8-22-02; Ord. No. 13275, § 2, 7-14-11)
449280