HomeMy WebLinkAboutIR 8601 INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 8W,.
r' _ To the Mayor and Members of the City Council
a SUBJECT: COMPETITIVE SEALED PROPOSAL DELIVERY METHOD FOR
Y673 FACILITY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
Council approval of M&C G-13480 on January 03, 2002 delegated authority to the City Manager to determine
which of various construction contracting methods made allowable by Senate Bill 510 provides the best value to
the City of Fort Worth (**NOTE**: Senate Bill 510 only applies to vertical, facility/building type construction).
The purpose of this IR is to provide Council with some background information regarding Staff's intention to
begin using the Competitive Sealed Proposal (CSP) process as a facility construction delivery system.
The CSP method offers at least two significant benefits to the City:
1) It will allow the City to formally evaluate and make award to bidders on construction contracts based on
factors other than price alone. The intent is to award the contract to the bidder that offers the "best value'
to the City based on established evaluation criteria. Evaluation criteria would most likely include:
❑ Performance on previous City contracts;
❑ Reference checks;
❑ MWBE participation;
❑ Proposed construction schedule;
❑ The construction bid (the proposed price would still be the most heavily weighted factor [55% -
60%] but other important criteria can be explicitly considered);
❑ Additional criteria and weightings tailored to address project specific issues.
2) It will allow the City to enter into price negotiations with the tap-ranked bidder prior to awarding the
contract. If we can't reach agreement with the top-ranked contractor we can eliminate them from
consideration and enter into negotiations with lower ranked contractors, one at a time starting with
number two, until we reach an agreement. The ability to negotiate with bidders prior to making an award
can be extremely valuable when project budgets are very tight, or when all of the bids exceed the funds
available. In such a scenario with our traditional process, we would have to either: (a) reject all bids and
re-solicit or(b) enter into a contract with the lowest responsive bidder and then negotiate to try to reduce
the price. The CSP process will significantly increase our negotiating leverage by making award of a
contract to a given contractor contingent upon successful negotiations.
The CSP process will slightly lengthen the solicitation and award process and may increase the likelihood of bid
protests when the CSP process determines that the "best value" offeror is someone other than the low bidder.
Staff believes, that the benefits greatly outweigh these disadvantages and that the process can be designed and
executed to mitigate the potential and impact of any downside effects.
Staff has discussed our intent in this regard with a local representative of the Association of General Contractors
(AGC). The AGC endorses the use of the CSP and is very supportive of our plans to begin using it. Questions
about this can be directed to Greg Simmons, TPW Facilities Manager, at 392-7862.
a W. n'
City Ma alter
ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS