a? SHIELDS MOTT LUND LLOYD N. SHIELDS m. ATTORN EYS AN COU LLORS AT LAW Mayl7, 2013 VIA FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION Mr. Richard F. Cortizas New Orleans City Hall, Fifth Floor 1300 Perdido Street 5E03 New Orleans, Louisiana 70112 Re: City of New Orleans RFP #5001?01241 Curbside Management and Enforcement Our Ref.: 98310-01 Dear Mr. Cortizas: As you know, we represent Xerox State Local Solutions, Inc. (?Xerox?) concerning the captioned RFP. On January 22, 2013, Xerox submitted its protest of the City of New Orleans?s (?City?) decision to negotiate a contract with SP Plus Municipal Services Plus?) for two items in the captioned RFP Items?): 1) on-street parking ticket processing (?Tickets?); and 2) meter operations (?Meters?). Also on January 22, 2013, Xerox notified the City that it intended to supplement its protest once the City responded to Xerox?s January 14, 2013 public records request. On January 31, 2013, the City noti?ed Xerox that documents responsive to the public records request were available. We received the documents on February 4, 2013. The City?s response to Xerox?s public records request remains incomplete. Notably absent are the City?s required evaluation forms for meter processing, any notes by committee members, and the written reasons required to award any portion of the referenced RFP by Executive Order As such, Xerox requests that the City review its ?le and produce a_ll documents responsive to Xerox?s public records request. If no responsive documents exist, please certify, as required by the Louisiana Public Records Act, that no responsive documents exist. Once received, Xerox will review the documents and supplement its protest. Additionally, on March 18, 2013, Xerox submitted another public records request for the required evaluation forms, notes, score sheets, and meeting minutes for the collections aspect of the RFP. As you know, the Louisiana Public Records Act requires that reSponsive documents be provided in three days. We recently received the City?s response and are reviewing the documents. We will further supplement Xerox?s protest once our document review is complete. 650 POYDRAS STREET. SUITE 2600 NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA 70130 FACSIMILE (504)581?4440 ALSO ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN MISSISSIPPI. NEW YORK. TEXAS SHIELDS MOTT LUND Mr. Richard F. Cortizas May 17, 2013 Page 2 Since Xerox submitted its January 22, 2013 protest, two developments concerning Xerox and Duncan Solutions (?Duncan?) provide further support that the City must reject Duncan?s bid (as well as SP Plus?s bid) and that Xerox is the only qualified bidder that responded to the RFP. Duncan Failed to Meet the Minimum Quali?cations to Submit a Bid RFP Attachment entitled ?Minimum Qualification, Certi?cation? provides ?ve minimum requirements that bidders must meet to be eligible to propose and receive the Tickets RFP Item contract. Requirement 2 states: The proposer must currently process tickets for at least three (3) cities that issue a minimum of 300,000 parking tickets per year. Xerox?s January 22, 2013 protest to the City established that one of the four cities that Duncan relied on to meet the 300,000 minimum ticket processing requirement, Pittsburgh, did not issue 300,000 Tickets in 2011. Xerox also notified the City that Detroit, Michigan (?Detroit?), another City that Duncan relied on to meet the 300,000 minimum ticket processing requirement did not issue 300,000 tickets. Attached as Exhibit is Detroit?s response to Xerox?s FOIA request concerning the number of tickets that Duncan processed for Detroit in 201 1. Detroit only issued 264,000 tickets; accordingly, Duncan could not have processed 300,000 tickets for Detroit. As such, it is established that neither Detroit nor Pittsburgh meet the minimum requirements. Duncan failed to comply with the required RFP attachment Additionally, Xerox?s January 22, 2013 protest noted that a third city that Duncan relied on to meet the City?s 300,000 minimum ticket processing requirement, the Inglewood, California Consortium (?Consortium?) is not responsive to what the City required to establish the minimum requirement. As you know, the Consortium is a combination of cities issuing or processing tickets through one group. Thus, the Consortium is not responsive to Requirement No. 2 because the number of tickets certified by Duncan are not ?for a city but for multiple cities. Duncan did not offer a breakdown of the tickets written by each city in the Consortium. Nonetheless, while it is true that one city in the Consortium, Berkeley, California, did issue over 300,000 tickets, Berkeley has chosen Xerox as its provider. Please see below. Duncan only provided one city for which it processes over 300,000 tickets per year Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Because Duncan does not meet Attachment J?s minimum requirements to submit a bid or be considered for a bid, Duncan?s bid must be rejected. SHIELDS MOTT LUND m. Mr. Richard F. Cortizas May 17, 2013 Page 3 Neither Duncan nor SP Plus meet the minimum requirement to even propose the RFP. Yet, both represented to the City that they did meet the minimum - - that each processed over 300,000 tickets for at least three cities. Ticket and meter processing are complex industries that require great detail, experience, and coordination to successfully perform. Nevertheless, both Duncan and SP Plus represented inc0rrect information to the City to meet the minimum threshold so they could be considered for the RFP. A Xergx?s Technology and Performance is Superior to that of Duncan Included in the Consortium was one individual city that processed over 300,000 tickets in 2011 Berkeley, California. On February 5, 2013, Berkeley left the Consortium (and Duncan) and awarded its ticket processing contract to Xerox. Berkeley noted Xerox?s superior technology and qualifications in selecting Xerox over Duncan after a competitive bid process. Berkeley and New Orleans are very similar with respect to ticket processing, number of tickets processed, and systems requested by their respective RFPs. Attached as Exhibit is Berkeley?s award to Xerox that details why Berkeley awarded the contract to Xerox. Should the City have any questions of Berkeley with respect to Xerox, Duncan, or Berkeley?s RFP process and award, please contact Noel Pinto in Berkeley at 510?981-5892. Additionally, Los Angeles, California recently awarded its ticket processing to Xerox. At the conclusion of a competitive bid process, Los Angeles awarded the contract to Xerox over Duncan, citing Xerox?s superior technology and qualifications as the basis for its selection. Thus, since the January 22, 2013 protest, two cities have awarded Xerox contracts over Duncan because of Xerox?s superior technology and performance. 2i. Duncan is Not Quali?ed On December 13, 2013, Duncan?s project manager in St. Louis, Missouri was sentenced to prison after pleading guilty to wire fraud connected to his role as Duncan?s project manager in St. Louis. Essentially, for at least two years, Duncan?s project manager defrauded St. Louis by invoicing and receiving payment for work that was not performed. An article brie?y describing the scheme is attached as Exhibit 51_. Duncan is the Most Expensive Bidder The City?s meeting minutes produced in response to Xerox?s public records request re?ect that the City determined that Duncan submitted the second lowest priced proposal to the City. This is inaccurate. The attached Exhibit is a pricing comparison performed by the City for all three vendors. Unlike Xerox, Duncan requires a one?time equipment charge of $4,569,145, which raises its yearly cost to $5,665,129, signi?cantly higher than the cost of Xerox?s proposal. Thus, Duncan is by far the highest price. SHIELDS MOTT LUND Mr. Richard F. Cortizas May 17, 2013 Page 4 Once Xerox receives the remaining responsive documents to its public records request, Xerox will review the documents and, if additional protest items are identi?ed, supplement its January 22, 2013 protest to the City. Xerox is more than willing to answer any questions that the City may have with respect to its bid or protest, SP Plus?s bid, or Duncan?s bid. With best regards, I am, Very truly yours, LNS:elm Enclosures cc: Mr. James N. Haddow, Jr. (Via email, with enclosures) Ms. Mary K. Kleinpeter-Zamora (via email, with enclosures) Cortizas.007.LNS.wpd C4 :1?st A. II Mum-um. erm 2 Warm?; I Ararat. 5m 1313mm. Mimi/mn- 113-244-550 Cm or Dmcm-a 313-214-5505 Lw. DErmmE-cr n11an momma? - January 24, 2013 Carmel Narnia! Sonior-O?ioc Xerox Stale 3: Local Solutions, Inc. 255 California suit: 55:; San Francine. California 94111 RE: Fmedum of Infnrun?on Act Request Dlte? November 30, 2012 Cumming the Numenf the Company {but (In; City?s Parking Tickots sad the Total Volume of Tickets Prom in Calendar Your 2011 Dear Ms. Naraval: This letter smears the City ofDetroit?s supplemental} response? to the above-referenced matter. Yeast-dag on January 23.. 2012, we a pm?li? msponsc lunar pertaining to hem No. I ofyour rcq?ucst. We or: now in moo'ipt of information :concoming Item No. 2 ofyour-rcqust. which stocks: "Total volume of tickets processed in 2011 (for-on and parking).? In lhatregari your request is granted. Bos'ed?on information provided by City ochlroit Municipal MPIWLJE is our,.undmtand3hs that 364190011i9k?svm in (3111111 $11.1- Jun: 30. 2012).- ?chy truly grog Emmi-la Assistant Corporation Counsol Govemrnental A?airs Section (313)37-5057 'l 3 Cirrur Of?ce of the City Manager CONSENT CALENDAR February 5. 2013 To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Christine Daniel. City Manager Submitted by: Michael Meehan, Chief of Police Subject: Contract: ACS State and Local Solutions for a Parking Citation Management Solution RECOMMENDATION Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract and any amendments with ACS State and Local Solutions to provide Parking Citation Management Services for a total amount not to exceed $1,440,000 from April 1, 2013 to June 30, 2016. FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION An annual amount of $480,000 for this contract has been allocated in the Information Technologis 311 Customer Service Budget (General Fund budget code 010?2709-410- 3038) in FY 2013. In FY 2014, the funding will be moved to the Police Department budget (General Fund budget code: $1 .440,000 Total amount for FY 2013 through FY 2016 The contract has been entered into the City?s contract database and assigned CMS No. CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS The current system for issuance, processing and collections of parking citations is not ef?cient. A Request for Proposals (RFP) for a Parking Citation Management System was issued by the City in December, 2011. Four (4) proposals were received in response to the RFP by the proposal due date of January 26, 2012. The City?s current vendor, City of Inglewood, chose not to submit an independent proposal, but was listed as a subcontractor in Duncan Solutions Inc. RFP response. The three proposers, which met the minimum quali?cations as established in the RF P, advanced to the next step of the selection process where each vendor was invited to present their solution to City staff. A selection panel comprised of key stakeholders from Police, Public Works and Finance rated the 3 proposals, after those proposers and their teams made a live demonstration. The selection panel rated the proposals in the following order: 2180 Milvia Street. Berkeley. CA 94704 0 Tel: (510) 981-7000 0 TDD: (510) 981-6903 0 Fax: (510) 931-7099 E-Mail: ngerkeleanfg Website: Contract: ACS State and Local Solutions for a Parking Citation Management Solution CONSENT CALENDAR February 5. 2013 1. ACS State and Local 2. Data Ticket 3. Duncan Solutions ACS State and Local Solutions. was the ranked as the top proposal. based on their ability to meet the needs of the entire City. They will be responsible, but not limited. to providing the following services as detailed in the RFP: . General Information Processing Data Processing . Correspondence Processing . Residential Parking Processing (including on-iine renewal) . Financial Deposits and Reconciliation - . Customer Service Center . Reporting Requirements . Administrative Adjudication Process Collection of Delinquent Account Process Handheld Equipment, Software and Supplies . System Hardware Replacement Training BACKGROUND Parking citation issuance and processing has been managed in different departments in the City for many years. The City currently has two separate contracts for issuing and processing parking citations. The citation issuance (Contract No. 6397) with Duncan Solutions (formerly Enforcement Technologies), that has been in place since 2004. The parking citation processing (Contract No.7187) with City of lnglewood has been in place since 2006 and the City has contracted with them since 1993. The original terms of the contracts are antiquated and do not meet City?s present operational needs. For instance. the contract with Duncan Solutions does not provide for new upgraded equipment capable of capturing GIS information. The equipment currently used was provided by the contractor many years ago. the equipment is outdated. and no longer meets the operational needs of Parking Enforcement division. Additionally. the citation processing contract with the City of Inglewood does not address on-line renewal for Residential Parking Permits (RPP). A selection panel comprised of City staff representing stakeholder departments interviewed and watched demonstrations from each proposer and their team. Proposers made presentation about their company. and the solutions they offer. They also answered questions about their proposal for City staff. Each proposer and their team were asked an identical set of pre-established questions as well as follow up questions based on the presentation and proposals. Panel members independently scored the proposers based upon their responses. experience. proposed solution to the speci?cations of the RFP and ease of customization of the system to meet City's unique needs. Page 2 Contract: ACS State and Local Solutions for a Partan Citation Management Solution CONSENT CALENDAR February 5, 2013 RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION The selection panel awarded ACS State and Local Solutions the highest points based on the criteria established in the furthermore this vendor comes highly recommended by their current and former clients. Additionally, the vendor?s proposed solutions in response to the RFP, not only meet, but exceed the City?s unique needs for parking citation management services. The proposed handheld citation computer solutions exceed RFP speci?cations, and there is no additional cost to the City for activation of features on the handheld citation computers, such as printing a photo on the citation, of the vehicle being cited, in the process of issuance. ACS offers leading technology innovations such as dashboard reporting, importing of reports to Excel or Access, web-based document imaging and processing, RPP on?line renewal, intemet payments, a interactive Voice Response (NR) phone system with pay- by?phone features, and the ability to interface with City?s system. Furthermore, ACS offers an Automated Street Sweeper Camera System which can issue street sweeping citations, and Automated License Plate Recognition capability which automatically identify vehicles parked in timed zones. ACS is technology neutral and their company is considered an integrator, which allows us to leverage best of breed technologies from other vendors for our parking enforcement program. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED Staff could have recommended extending the current contracts; however, the current contracts were awarded in 2004 and 2006 respectively. The contracts are antiquated and not practical in meeting City's current and future citation management service needs. Issuance of the RFP to solicit proposals for these services was in the City?s best interests. CONTACT PERSON Noel Pinto, Parking Enforcement Manager, Police, 981-5892 Attachments: 1: Resolution Page 3 RESOLUTION NO. CONTRACT: ACS STATE AND LOCAL SOLUTIONS FOR A PARKING MANAGEMENT SOLUTION WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Parking Citation Management Service in December, 2011; and WHEREAS, four prospective vendors submitted proposals meeting the minimum quali?cations in response to the RFP to provide Parking Citation Management Services; and WHEREAS, key stakeholders comprised the selection panel, which interviewed the vendors and evaluated the proposals; and WHEREAS, ACS State and Local Solutions was ranked highest by the selection panel as being the most responsive to the speci?cations listed in the and WHEREAS. funding for this contract in an annual amount of $480,000 is available from the General Fund CMS. No. NOW THEREFORE, BE RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the City Manager is authorized to execute a contract and any amendments with ACS State and Local Solutions to provide Parking Citation Management Services for a total amount not to exceed $1,440,000 from April 1, 2013 to June 30, 2016. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Berkeley authorizes the City Manager upon conclusion of the three (3) year contract and upon ACS State and Local Solutions consistently performing its responsibilities above and beyond the terms of the contract to extend the contract by two (2) additional, one (1) year options, for a total amount not to exceed $2,400,000 from April 1, 2013 to June 30, 2018. 2613 Parting water oorlh'actu and manger wire fraui- St. Lads BLsiness Journd This was printed from St. Louis Business Journal - .. Dec 13, 2012, 2:57pm CST . Parking meter contractor and manager sentenced for wire fraud Re hl Editorial Assistant? St. Louis Businss Journal Email [Miner Dannidle ?n?n and Emlg?ab?muah were sentenced today after pleading guilty to wire fraud for their roles in a parking meter scam. Benson was sentenced to 27 months in prison, and Habeebuliah was sentenced to six months in prison. Both were also sentenced to restitution of $223,546, according to the U.S. Attorney?s Of?ce for the Eastern District of Missouri. In 2009, the City of St. Louis outsourced its on?street parking meter maintenance and revenue operations to Duncan Solutions, for which Habeebuliah was the St. Louis operations manager, the U.S. Attorney's O?ioe said. Duncan Solutions subsequentiy subcontracted with Benson and his company Dankar Enterprise Inc. to maintain the parking meters and collect money from them. From June 2009 through December 2011, Benson submitted invoica to the City Treasurer's Of?ce that were in?ated by $5,000 to $8,000 each, for a total of $223,546, according to the U.S. Attorney's Of?ce. The false invoices claimed that two individuals worked for Benson?s Dankar Enterprises under the contract, but they did not. When Habeebuliah became aware of the fraudulent invoices in August 2009 two months after Benson began submitting false invoices he demanded that Benson pay him a share of the in?ated amount instead of reporting it to his supervisors at Duncan Solutions. 112 2I6I13 Parking In order to cover for these payments, Habeebullah created a sham consulting company, Waypoint Automotive Solutions, which contracted with Benson's Dankar Enterprises to provide consulting services to Dankar for a fee. That fee started at $2,000 per month, then increased to $3,000 per month. Habeebullah received a total of approximately $59,000 through this arrangement. 0 Pagel 0 IMLEWAH Related links: Your News Made Easy Sign up for the DailyUpdate The latest local businss news delivered to you ead'I day. ?r your email address I IKSign Up <_Q_ldecp_o_s? meta: We recommend From around the web 9 n' ft 6 Th; Average salary 91? an (lemme AirlineSIBMLd eHow ?rmer BofA CEQ En ir i tels anilieeods Resansand Lodges gar Salesman gonfessions updated Edrrunds - I mug-M Id 7 I Whine; Dexxnows 1? Willem MUSE: nanycanuy Jimmie 391a,! Request For Proposal Curbside Management and Enforcement Pricing Comparison - Assumptions 2127:.? 4- 7 3- Based on 350, 000 Tickets per Year Contingency Fee . Current Capture Rate 72% of 350.000Tickets Current Delinquent Rate 28% of 350,000 Tickets Current Delinquent Fees and Fines $160 per ticket Booting based on 7200 Boots per Year Average Booting Fee $300 per Boot .- Per Space Charges Based on 5000 Spaces SingleIDoubIe Space Meter 950 Spaces Multi - Space Meters 411 Duncan equipment charges will bring yearly cost to $5,665,129 EXHIBIT IIDII Request For Proposal Curbside Management and Enforcement Pricing Comparison - ACS ?ck?t?ocessing Yearly Fee Equipment Fee?One-Time Charge Based on 350, 000 citations per year $2.98 $1,043,000 Included Contingency Fee 29% $568,400 Included Handheld Unit Included Included Wireless Upgrade Included Included Wireless Connectivity Charge 150 Handhelds Included Included Ticket Envelope Fee Included Included Ticket Processing Fees (Subtotal) $1,611,400 Source Fee I 7200 boots {Year $0 Included Included In Source Contingency Fee 29% $626,400 Included Outsourced Fee $0 Included Included Total Ticket Processing Fees $2,237,800 Included fist"; Yearly Equipment Fee?One-Tlrne Charge Per Space Based on 5000 Spaces 546.221Mo. $2,750,000 Per Unit Total Cost Single Space Meter - IPS 950 Spaces Included Included [Double Space Meter Not Offered Not Offered Mll?- Space Meters: [Luke - 411 - Multl Space Units Not Offered Not Offered Strada 411 Multl SpaceUnits Included Included Duncan - 411'Multl Space Units Not Offered Not Offered Meter Operations Fees $2,750,000 Included ITotal Yearly Fees $4,987,800 I Equipment - Maintenance fees Included in per space charges Included Request For Proposal Curbside Management and Enforcement .. . - Pricing Comparison - Standard Parking Yearly Fee ?Based on 350, 000 citations per year $2.63 .- $920,500 Equipment Foe?One?Tlme Charge Included Contingency Fee 2% $39,200 Included Handheld Unit Included - Included Wireless Upgrade Included Included Wireless Connectivity Charge $100fMo 150 Handhelds Included Included Ticket Envelope Fee Included Included Ticket Processing Fees (Subtotal) $959,700 Iln Source Fee I 7200 boots {Year $90 $648,000 Included Iln Source Contingency Fee! $300 Fine [Boot 10% $216,000 Included Outsourced Fee 573 $525,600 Included Total Ticket Processing Fees in Source $1,823,700 Included opera . Yearly Per SpaceIY ear Equipment Fee?One-Time Charge lPer Space Based on 5000 Spaces 5337'?r $1,935,000 Total Cost Single Space Meter Parktel 950 Spaces $398" Included Included Double Space Meter incl Included Included Multi- Space Meters Included Luke - 411 - Multi Space Units $49.16lMo. $590!? $2,950,000 included Strada - 411 Multi SpaceUnits $3,505,000 Included Duncan - 411 Multi Space Units Not Offered Not Offered [Meter Operations Fees $2,950,000 Included ITotal Yearly Fees $4,773,700 I Equipment - Maintenance - Double Space Meter fees Included in per space charges Included Request For Proposal Curbside Management and Enforcement Pricing Comparison - Duncan Yearly Fee Equipment Fee?0ne-Tlme Charge Based on 350, 000 citations per year $2.97 $1,039,500 Contingency Fee 27% Handheld Unit $3993 Charge per Unit X150 Units $529,200 $3,993 0593.950 Wireless Upgrade $773 Charge per Unit 150 Units $773 $115,050 Wireless Connectivity Charge 150 Handhelds $15,000 $180,000 Ticket Envelope Fee $0.07 Ticket Processing Fees - One-time Equipment Charge (Subtotal) $1,748,700 $714,900 $5 $3,600 included In Source Contingency Fee! $300 Fine Boat 15% $324,000 Included Outsourced Fee 40% $864,000 Included Ticket Processing Fees incl. in Source Booting - Equipment Total $2,076,300 $714,900 Per Space Based on 5000 Spaces Yearly Maint-Eiuip. [Year Equip. Fee?One-Tlme Charge Meter Maintenance Fee 5000 Spaces $44.58 $535 $2,675,000 Per Unit Total Cost Single Space Meter - Duncan Liberty - 950 Spaces 5728 $691,600 [Double Space Meter Not Offered Not O?ered IMulti- Space Meters: [Luke- 411 - Multi Space Units $7,695 $3,162,645 Strada - 411 - Multi SpaceUnits $7,672 $3,153,192 [Duncan - 411 - Multi Space Units $5,865 $2,410,515 lMeter Operations Fees $2,575,000 One Time Equipment Fee Total $4,569,145 Total Yearly Fees $4,751,300 Equipment - Maintenance fees are separate. Duncan has a one time equipment charge of $4,569,145 Duncan equipment charges will bring yearly cost to $5,665,129 ACS Has 2 different pricing options which are not speci?ed Standard Parking meter pricing is per based on meter type Duncan equipment charge is in addition .to per?space pricing