AgdaPkt 2009-08-24 clsd and reg - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7A Page 34 ATTACHMENT 2 alternative, and the reason for the proposed exception or alternative. Proposers may submit suggested changes in the Collection Agreement language related to the exception or altenlative, and the specific dollar change in each of the affected cost items, as proposed by the Proposer in response to this RFP, that would take place if the exception or alternative was accepted by the Member Agency. Proposers should note that if exceptions are taken, all required information as set forth above !llllli be submitted. Exceptions taken or alternatives provided, without providing the required information will not be considered." Despite a follow-up request from the collection services RFP Evaluation Committee, Allied Waste Services of San Mateo County failed to provide the information required to have its alternative proposal comply with the RFP submittal requirements. The SBWMA detennined that Allied's alternative proposal resulted in a complete abandonment of the competitive RFP process initiated by the SBWMA for both the collection contracts and the Shoreway facility operations. Lastly, in light of the fundamental incompatibility between the alternative proposal and the contract process envisioned in the two RFPs, and the lack of any detailed explanation of how the compensation arrangements in the collection contracts would actually operate (despite providing Allied ample opportunity and encouragement to provide this information), the Evaluation Committee could have omitted any reference to the Allied alternative proposal in its report to the Selection Committee. However, the Evaluation Committee did address the alternative proposal, noting that: . Allied did not provide a cost estimate for the Recycle Bank program. . Allied had not provided any detail about how the key compensation provisions in the collection contracts would have to be rewritten to accommodate the plan suggested in the alternative proposal. Following legal review, it was det.ennined that the SBWMA had no legal obligation to evaluate the Allied alternative proposal as submitted. 3. As a 'condition of participation, proposers had to agree not to appeal decisio1Js. Response: (Respondent disagrees with this Finding.) This statement is incorrect. The only conditions on participation by proposers in the RFP process were related to the submittal requirements specified in the RFP that included attending the pre-proposal conference, making a public presentation, facilitating site visits upon request and submitting the required documen t5. In fact, the RFPs were silent on the issue of an appeal process because appeals are not standard practice for procurements of this type. A survey of 42 other California jurisdictions that issued similar RFPs in recent years revealed that only two had bid protest provisions in their RFP. Again, the SBWl\{A RFP was silent on the issue of protesting the process. However, since no binding recommendation would arise from the RFP process, it was clear from the beginning that any proposer choosing to protest the process would have ample opportunity when the SBWtvIA Board and individual Men1ber Agencies considered the reconunendation resulting from the RFP process. SBW1viA Grand Jury Response_Addendum l.doc Page 2 of9