Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 01-26-2010 Regular — reading text

approval of the petition. 3. 12. 4. The City Manager shall review and either approve or disapprove the Purchasing Division' s recommendation on the petition, employing any reasonable means to reach the decision. The protesting party will be provided written notice of the final decision. 3. 12. 5. Decisions made by the City Manager may be appealed to the City Council by submission to the City Clerk of a written request for a hearing within five ( 5) business days from the date of the City Manager' s decision. 3. 12. 6. The written request for appeal. must state the grounds for the appeal and the action requested by City Council, 3. 12. 7. In the event of a timely protest and/ or appeal, the City shall not proceed with award unless the City Manager justifies the award in order to protect public health, welfare, and safety. 3. 12. 8. A final decision under this section shall be conclusive and shall represent the position of the City. 13. Contract Preparation 3. 13. 1. The Purchasing Division shall work, in conjunction with the City Attorney, to draft a contract for the award of a competitive solicitation or other purchase, when applicable. 3. 13. The Purchasing Division shall be responsible for all negotiations ith vendors. 3. 13. 3. At 0 time shall a City employee, other than authorized in this P fic. , egotiate with a vendor regarding contract terms. 3. 13. 4. The user partment shall coordinate with the Purchasing Division the expect 1 s of the contract. 3. 13. 5. Upon approval the contract by all parties, the user department shall generate a ppur ase requisition. 3. 13. 6. The purchase order wi e forwarded by the Purchasing Division to the vendor and the P c a *. Division will secure an acknowledged copy of the purchase order, dicating agreement to the Purchase Order Terms and Conditions. 3. 14. Contract Extensions 3. 14. 1. Did awards may be made for a term of e ( 1) year, with additional renewal options following the end of the ' tial one ( 1) year term, when applicable. 3. 14. 2. When additional renewal options exist in a con t the following responsibilities exist: 3. 14.2. 1. The Purchasing Division shall notify the user de rnent of the pending expiration of the contract at least 45 da prior to the expiration date and inquire whether the er department desires to exercise the renewal option.  Pagel of Robert Mearns From: Brandy Wunker Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 1: 13 PM To: ' Toni Craig' Cc: William Worlds; Robert Mearns Subject: FW: Council meeting From: Rick Bowers [ mai Ito: Rick. Bowers@cardnotbe. com] Sent* Tuesday, January 12, 2010 9: 57 AM To: William Worlds Cc: Craig Snyder; Steve Howarth; Roger Register; Angela Huggins; Jim Allen Subject: Request of Formal Inquiry for the FINAL EVALUATION FOR RFQ 10- 002 GENERAL CONSULTING. SERVICES Mr. Worlds, Cardno TBE respectfully resubmits our December 24, 2009 inquiry below for formal evaluation by the City of Fort Walton Beach, including a third observation: 1) Section 6.4 of the RFQ states "The average of the Total Weighted Ratings assigned by the Evaluation Committee members will be used." It does not appear averages were used in the presentation score computation. Instead, it appears the scores were merely summed. Please explain. 2) It is unclear in the RFQ how the proposal scores (on a. 0- 5 scale) and presentation scores (on a 0- 10 scale) will be combined. The assigned weights would suggest the intention was for the proposal to be 75% and presentation to be 25% of the Total Final Weighted Score. It would not appear appropriate to simply add the section scores without adjustment, since they are on different scales. Please explain. 3) Section 6. 3 SHORT LIST of the RFQ states, " After review of all proposals and rating by the Evaluation Committee, the committee will rank, in order of preference, a short list of at least five ( 5) top proposers." Selecting the top 5 proposers for presentation is common when awarding contracts to the top three (3) firms after presentation. The December 10, 2009 Selection Committee meeting minutes state, Because of the tightness of the scoring between the top (9) proposals, they will each be scheduled to Selecting nine (9) firms to present when only provide a presentation to the evaluation committee." awarding three (3) firms a contract is uncommon. Based on the City' s presentation scoring method and overall ranking method by adding the written submittal and presentation scores together, most every team that submitted had a mathematical opportunity to be ranked in the top three, making the nine firms selected for presentation subjective. We believe our inquiry may affect the final ranking of the firms and therefore request your careful review of our inquiry. We have noted other municipalities resolve these type of discrepancies and those raised by the Selection Committee during the December 22 meeting by simply increasing the number of selected firms for contract, such as increasing to four firms. The intent of our inquiry is a strong commitment to the City of Fort Walton Beach in providing local support and cost effective services to meet your project needs. We appreciate the City evaluating and considering our formal request of inquiry. Regards, Rick Bowers, PE, GISP Director of GIS/Asset Management 380 Park Place Blvd, Suite 300 1/ 14/ 2010 0  Page 2 of 2 Clearwater, FL 33759 Phone :727, 531. 3505 Fax :727.539: 1294 airect:727.431. 1544 XTNA 544 Mobil e: 813.267. 6206 Email :Rick.Bowers@CardnoTBE.com Web :www.CardnoTBE.com Please Note: Unless othorv4se indicated or obvious from its nature. the information in this transmittal is confidential and is intended solely forthe use of the individual( s) named above. If you. the reader of this message, are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or forwarding of this transmittal is strictly prohibited, If you have received this transmittal in error, please advise the sender immediately and destroy the accompanying transmittal. Thank you. 1/ 14/2010  January 26, 2010 Discussion - Direction - Action Direction Regarding the City' s position with the CGI Group Customers Synopsis: Staffrequests direction from Council on closing this issue Agenda Item Number: 9. 2  CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM Office of the City Manager DATE: January 21, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members FROM: SUBJECT: Robert T. Mearns, City Manager CGI Communications, Inc. Customers e 1. Background 1. 1 Having reviewed the attached memorandum from PIO Cam Johnson, and also having heard from Basil Bethea of Realty House and Christine Stewart with Air Conditioning Engineering, it is apparent that this issue remains unresolved from the perspective of the customers regarding the City' s involvement. 1. 2 Between the time the staff had approved the contract and the time the City Council rejected it, at least four (4) customers agreed to, and paid for, a service in which CGI represented that the City would provide a link on its website the customer' s video advertisement. At least two customers paid $ 7, 000 and $ 5, 996 each for their advertisements. Two others are believed to have paid for the advertisements; however the city has no way of knowing who they are or how much they paid. 1. 3 When the City did not provide that link, the customers turned to CGI for a refund of their money. CGI' s response was that they were prepared to perform their end of the bargain, but the City was not. CGI has refused to refund the customer' s money stating that they should " ask the city ". 2. Discussion 2. 1 To resolve this matter there are at least four (4) options available to the City: 2. 1. 1 The City will write the script and shoot the video. The link will appear on the City' s website to the video and run them for the original term of the agreement, two years. 2. 1. 1. 1 The City will likely receive additional requests for airing ads and will have to reject them, resulting in ill will toward the City as it is running some ads and not others. 2. 1. 2 The City could re- establish the contract with CGI and permit as many links to ads as CGI could sell. 2. 1. 2. 1 The City would be opening its webpage to any advertiser as if it were a commercial site which the City Council had previously rejected. 151-  2. 13 The City will pay CGI' s customers the amount paid for the ad. 2. 1. 3. 1 The City was not part of their contract with CGI to whom the money was paid, thus it has no responsibility for payment of any kind. 2. 1. 4. The City will do nothing and assert that the issue was a legal one in which the customers would have to bring suit against CGI to recoup their investment. 2. 1. 4. 1 The City could be brought in to the lawsuit as a co- defendant, resulting in legal expenses to the City. 3. Recommendation 3. 1 It : is staffs recommendation, in conjunction with the City Attorney' s recommendation, that the City take no action. The City' s contract was with CGI, not the advertisers. The Council had the right to terminate the contract. No further