AgdaPkt 2008-09-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

78 Page 3 . Responses to correspondence issued by the SBWMA on June 12, 2008 and due back by June 19, 2008 requesting clarifications and information pertaining to the companies litigation history. . One hour oral interviews held at the SBWMA offices on April 21-22, 2008. . Site visits conducted as follows: - May 19,2008 - Norcal (San Bruno Disposal, San Bruno, CA) - May 21,2008 - Republic (Richmond Sanitary Service, Richmond, CA) - May 21, 2008 - BEST (Garden City Sanitation, San Jose, CA) - June 5,2008 - Allied (Allied Waste Services, Phoenix, AZ) . Other information submitted by proposers in response to requests by the Evaluation Team. . Information gathered from reference checks, litigation history research, and other publicly available sources. . Proposer presentations held on May 29th at which time each of the four proposers was provided with 30 minutes to provide the Selection Committee information about their firm and their proposal. The Evaluation Team followed the prescribed process to evaluate the four proposals submitted in response to the RFP. Each Evaluation Team member reviewed and scored the proposals based on a maximum score for each evaluation criteria as set forth in Section 6.1 of the RFP and also included in the attached Selection Committee Report (Table 1). At the August 28, 2008 Board meeting the SBWMA Board received the Selection Committee report and listened to comments from three of the four firms that submitted proposals; Allied Waste Services, BEST, and Norcal. It is important to note that neither Allied or BEST raised any issues that caused the Board to question the Selection Committee's recommendation. In fact, neither BEST or Allied criticized the process or the reasoning contained in the Selection Committee's recommendation to the Board that Norcal be selected as the future waste hauler. At the conclusion of the public comments the Board then voted 9-0-1 (Burlingame abstained while Atherton and East Palo Alto were absent) to approve the Selection Committee's recommendation. Analysis The attached report from the SBWMA Selection Committee (Le., SBWMA Collection Services Selection Committee Report: Evaluation and Scoring of Proposals) provides the evaluation and scoring results for the four companies that submitted proposals in response to the SBWMA Collection Services RFP issued on November 1, 2007. The report details the Selection Committee evaluation of each company's qualifications, technical proposal, cost proposal and other considerations. Pages 6-9 of the report provide a high level summary of the evaluation results. In addition, the major findings for each company can be found in Tables 4 - 7 on pages 11-19 of the report. The Selection Committee believes that Norcal is the clear choice and provides the best value in comparison to the other proposers for these primary reasons: . The entirety of Norcal's responses (Le., original proposal, written answers to 3