HomeMy WebLinkAboutBack-Up from Law DeptMunicode Page 1 of 3
Sec. 18-86. Competitive negotiations/competitive sealed proposals.
-� (a) Conditions for use.
(1)
(2)
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.
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 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:
https://library.municode.com/print.aspx?h=&clientlD=1093 3 &HTMRequest=https%3 a%2... 9/16/2014
Municode Page 2 of 3
(1)
Request fdr. 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 I#Q, 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 18-8:5 (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
proposerss 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 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.
https : //library.municode. com/print. aspx?h=&clientlD=1093 3 &HTMReque st=https%3 a%2... 9/16/2014
Municode
Page 3 of 3
(7)
to the successful proposer.
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
After reviewing the city manager's recommendation, the city commission may:
I. 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
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)
https://library.municode. com/print. aspx?h=&clientlD=10933 &HTMRequest=https%3 a%2... 9/16/2014