Admin Order 44-23-01-F -- Final Public Contracting Rule 2022

Home Browse Search

Exhibit A to Administrative Order No. 44-23-01-F City of Eugene Public Contracting Rules 2022 – Part 2 Page 115 8) Prior Review of Draft Findings. State Contracting Agencies shall submit draft Findings to their Contract Review Authority for review and concurrence prior to advertising the public hearing required by ORS 279C.335(5). State Contracting Agencies shall also submit draft Findings to the Department of Justice for review and comment prior to advertising the public hearing. 9) [Refer to Part 1, Section 12 of the City of Eugene Public Contracting Rules] Related State Statutes: ORS 279A.065, 279C.335 137-049-0640. Competitive Proposals; Procedure Contracting Agencies may utilize the following RFP process for Public Improvement Contracts, allowing flexibility in both Proposal evaluation and Contract negotiation, only in accordance with ORS 279C.330 to 279C.337, 279C.400 to 279C.410 and OAR 137-049-0600 to 137-049-0690, unless other applicable statutes control a Contracting Agency's use of competitive Proposals for Public Improvement Contracts. Also see the subdivision of rules in this division 49 entitled “Formal Procurement Rules,” 137-049-0200 to 137-049-0480, and RFP related rules under the Alternative Contracting Methods subdivision at 137-049-0640 to 137-049-0660. For ESPCs, the following RFP process as further specified in 137-049-0645, 137-049-0650, 137-049-0660 and 137-049-0680 shall be utilized, if a Contracting Agency desires the Procurement process to be exempt from the competitive bidding requirements of ORS 279C.335. The RFP process for the Alternative Contracting Methods identified in 137-049-0600 to 137-049-0690 includes the following steps: 1) Proposal Evaluation. Factors in addition to price may be considered in the selection process, but only as set forth in the RFP. Proposal evaluation shall be as objective as possible. Evaluation factors need not be precise predictors of future costs and performance, but to the extent possible such evaluation factors shall: a) Be reasonable estimates based on information available to the Contracting Agency; b) Treat all Proposals equitably; and c) Recognize that public policy requires that Public Improvements be constructed at the least overall cost to the Contracting Agency. See ORS 279C.305. For ESPC Proposal evaluations, the Contracting Agency may provide in the RFP that qualifications-based evaluation factors will outweigh the Contracting Agency's consideration of price-related factors, due to the fact that prices for the major components of the Work to be performed during the ESPC process contemplated by the RFP will likely not be determinable at the time of Proposal evaluation. For CM/GC Services Proposal evaluations, the Contracting Agency must comply with ORS 279C.337. 2) Evaluation Factors. a) In basic negotiated construction contracting, where the only reason for an RFP is to consider factors other than price, those factors may consist of firm and personnel experience on similar projects, adequacy of equipment and physical plant, sources of supply, availability of key personnel, financial capacity, past performance, safety records, project understanding, proposed methods of construction, proposed milestone dates, references, service, and related matters that could affect the cost or quality of the Work. b) In CM/GC contracting, in addition to (a) above, those factors may also include the ability to respond to the technical complexity or unique character of the project, analyze and propose solutions or approaches to complex project problems, analyze and propose