Resolution of the City of Jersey City, NJ. CityCterk FileNo. Res- 16-623 Agenda No. _lo-z-15 Approved:^ TITLE: RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONTRACT TO APPRAISAL SYSTEMS, INC. FOR THE REVALUATION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES COUNCIL offered and moved adoption of the following resolution: WHEREAS, Resolution Res. 10.286, approved on May 12,2010, authorized Jersey City to use the Competitive Contracting Law, N.J.S.A. 40A:l 1-4.1 et seq., to award a concession contract for the revaluation of real property for assessment purposes; and WHEREAS, the City issued a Request for Proposals ("RFP") on June 8 2016 seeking a Vendor that is expected to complete a revaluation of real property by December 31, 2017 in order to comply with the order issued on April 4fli, 2016 by the acting Director of the Division of Taxation in the New Jersey Department offlie Treasury; and WHEREAS, the competitive contracting process is considered to be a fair and open bid process under the New Jersey Local Unit Pay-To-Play Law, NJ.SA 19:44A-20.4 et seq.; and WHEREAS, Jersey City publicly advertised for bids and received two proposals; and WHEREAS, a review committee appointed by Jersey City's B-usitiess Administrator pursuant to N.J.A.C. 5:34-4.3 reviewed the proposals and prepared a report attached hereto recommending that the contract be awarded to Appraisal Systems Inc. for an amount of $4,395,358.00; and WHEREAS, funding shall be available to pay for the awarded contract pursuant to City Ordinance 16.130 that authorizes the issuance of Special Emergency Notes; and WHEREAS, City Resolution /fc. SSS^ waives flie 20 day veto period for City Ordinance 16.130; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Municipal Council of the City of Jersey City that: 1. Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40A:11-4.1 et^eq,, a concession contract for the revaluation of real property for assessment purposes is awarded to Appraisal Systems, Inc. 2. The concession contract is awarded at a cost of up to $4,395,358.00 for a temi of two (2) years commencing on the date the attached contract is signed by City Officials. 3. The language of the RFP, followed by the language of the bid response provided by Appraisal Systems, Inc. constitutes the binding language of the base contract. 4. Subject to such modifications as may be deemed necessary or appropriate by Corporation Counsel, the Mayor or Business Admirust-ator is authorized to execute additional subordinate agreements or amendments to the awarded contract provided that such agreements do not materially alter what was specified in the RFP. Continuation of Resolution Pg.# City Clerk File No. Res. 16.623 10.Z.15 Agenda No. TITLE: RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONTRACT TO APPRAISAL SYSTEMS, INC. FOR THE REVALUATION OF REAL PROPERTY FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES 5. Notice of this action shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the municipality within ten (10) days of this award. 6. The resolution authorizing the award of this contract and the contract itself shall be available for public inspection. I _:_, Donna Mauer, Chief Financial Officer, hereby certify that fimding in the amount of $4,395,358.00 shall be available pursuant to the issuance of Special Emergency Notes authorized by City Ordinance 16.130. APPROVED; APPROVED: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM Business Administrator Corporation Counsel Certification Required i-1 Not Required U COUNCLPERSON AYE APPROVED RECORD OF COUNCIL VOTE ON FINAL PASSAGE 9.14.16 AYE AYE NAY N.V. COUNC1LPERSON • NAY N,V. COUNCILPERSON YUN RIVERA HSCEfiHAN OSBORNE WAHERMAN BOGG1ANO COLEMAN LAVARRO, PRES. 'GAJEWSKI N,V. N.V.-Not Voting (Abstain) ^^T ^ z^(s' Signature Name Date Note: The Local Government Ethics Law in NJ.S.A 40A:9-22.1 et seq and can be revlewd on the State ofNJ Legislative Website at http://www.ni leg, statejiLus/, Click on "Statues" and enter "40A:9-22.1" in the Search Box. ANALYSIS OF JERSEY CHY REVALUATJON PROPOSALS Evaluator's Name: Matthew O'Donnell/ Esq, Title: Outside Counsel Education: J^AC^cz^^ (?F ^fG^c^ /\6^^n^ ^^ /7M^/z^- -^U^l^S P^CTO^ ASW/TIE-D pUQUC /^ccyu^r^r ^^/T' ^ ^y) •.Crtyof'Jer^yCt-fy Cm'trfloation ofNo QonBict oflntere-stCompetitlve'Conti-aGtn-ig Evaluation; 3h7^ ^pas^h/ i^_ I) Demonstration of a clear understanding of the scope ofworkandreiated objectives. .Cb) ^n^t^TOtf&WP^^^G yTlc/Cfcp 1-20 z ^ ~0 1_ 7•7 0 -4 CA+/ /^- (y^t^l^-Vt /r 7/^£T^/ Q_ ^ ' ^"^ p5' ^ 4) Description and type of quality control and assurance programs for the accurate collection of filed data. (b) History and experience in performing the work: (8 Points) . • 1-8 - IET t^ ^tff(^v' £^f^ ~o~ y- //i) €^/w^^ ^ /^"u- - j fi? 1) The ability to demonstrate a successful record of accomplishment of service as evidenced by on time, on budget, and contract compliance performance. ~s~ 2) Present &. past litigation, threatened litigation, and alternate dispute resolution experience because of being contracted to perform a reassessment or re-assessment ~ff 3) The demonstrated ability of having successfully completed a recent reassessment project(s) with similar valuation characteristics, traits and demographies to that of the City of Jersey City. (c) Availability of personnel, facilities, equipment and other resources: (15 Points) 1-1.5 , j£ ^ 1^_ ~^~y ^ ^ ^ jr/^w /- ^r - ^ /^w'' ff^ft^wS ^ M^T 1) The ability to demonstrate the capacity to successfully complete the rodGcocGmont1 of the City in time for the 201^" tax year. 2) Vendor's current workload. 3) The availability of existing qualified, trained & competent in-house field personnel currently available to start the City's Reassessment. Please attach resumes. 4) The amount of actual documented experience utilizing the MikAu^.yLilUiIs CAMA & Imaging software. ^/T^ L- 5) The number of Certified Tax Assessors (CTA's) on staff. 6) The number of Certified General Real Estate Appraisers (SCGREA) on staff. 7) The number of Certified Residential Real Estate Appraisers (SCRREA) on staff. 8) Qualifications of staff. 9) Identify and describe each of the Vendor's principles/owners/sharehqlders role and availability in the reassessment of the City of Jersey City. 3. Cost Criteria: (40 Points) (a) Cost of services to be provided to be perfonned: (15 Points) ' 1-15 < 1) Relative cost: How does the cost compare to other similarly scored proposals. ^^ ^ (yf<^- ^i-^. 2- c^ CLT I 7^Lt^ ^' ^'^7 ^-' \^^" -^ /"^s ^^^c^f^- ^vf-^f ^('fy 2) Full explanation: Is the price and its component charges, fees, etc. adequately explained or documented. 3) Cost proposal to be completed- See Appendix A-l. (b) Assurances of performance: (10 Points) 1-10 ,0 ~3~ zr ~y ^- ^ )^f^y^ '' ^*^7 fi'M^t^/^fc /r~ ^^ T^r YCT^S. ^i&- 1) Are the suitable bonds, warranties, or guarantees provided? 2) The typa. nature, and extent of quality control and assurance programs. (c) The Vendor's financial stability and strength: (15 Points) •1-15 i) The ability of the vendor to demonstrate sufficient fmancial resources to meet its obligations. Total Points Rank ~y ^' "^^C^€ /^^.f-A/UU State's; Approved Revafuation Firm's N^fne (Point Range) 7,1 E:yaEiriAn:MetJiodoIo^ (?P] 'Tb.© .fb'Ilo-mng ,s.£^l he .ns'ed as &riten:a for tite-evatotit^ propos'ais..under the Competitiive Cmitr^mg process; Tecfanica'E Criteria: <3Q Po^ts) (a)- Proposed Methodology: (20 PQints) 1-20 iS ^ 1) .Demonstration @f:a erearmdei:s£^din;g,olft;h&.spQpe 9fwQrk.and.r^tediG:bjecti:ves.. S 2) Coinpleteae^ &.. responsiven.ess to specij5cat-iians.,an:d general re€ u:irenxefits. 3), D.o:G,a'm$ntati.lon of past .pCTfoi:maQ'ce .of ^^^GX'?IS; 'proposed mefedQ^^. 4^. Use of.tti.novafi^e.'tefihpolpgy an4. techniques* (fc) PtiNicAIafcion-s: (rO.Mnfs) 5 5 €/^ s €1^ 1-1Q T^TBB^escnpMQn^.Ti^turean^.;e^nt^ pre-revatuation;-ongoing.. attd.post-rev^lLiatioTi'. Inelude ^mple.(^)r o-f'work* 7^ Th:e"descpption, nature ;an.d.'ex£est0fa.V^-do.i;^s:iafotmai taxpayferjs" hea:Nng,p.ro©ess. 1. ML 2. Mstaagem^Mt Ctiteria: (30 Points) (a)' P.rojept,Man%geme@'Fte .C7.P&ints) £x J^_ 1-7 I) 'S^liedyimg'time-l'ine. 2) Projee.t martagemeht.plan of'y/pF^ •^ -^1 32%; MW: - - -- - tam .3?5 D?gcrip?m la?dfity-pe ofqpaiity e'?z?i?gi? ant; assuranm for $11.5; mwr?te mnw??n .05? {11) History. in perfizmmi?g-t?ge leg 2.1) The. ability-to 9fammpri?hmtaf?emea-as evade-med by an "P??serzt past E-i?f?gmiam threataned I?Ii-tigafi?nh, andgaitema?a of?beiing mo?iracied i0 pen-fem a reasg?i'ssmem?gqr re~assi??5menp .3): ability of ?a?f?lg a mean: pre?x-wig) similar t- and d?mgra?hfrmo' Ef?e-City: of :1 Essay ECU :ilaheility facili?fii?g md??iie?resemces: 5-1-5 I): Theabiliiy?ta thescggagityrto- they'eity in time: fm the ?x year, The qualified; fie-k3 {am-Senna} canali?y ma?a-able ire} gartmhe any-=3 $113356 4-) The dogumexfceci emm'i'encg uti?zing soft-Ware; The ilmmb?l? Gif?Ceirti?ed' A-ssessms?f-Em?s} :01; The ?mb?ar Garrard Rea} Same.A?pr??sews?sm?m} gm- 7) The immh?i? Refsicimtial .j 'ier): Qualificating ofsm?j 9} Idgntify and d??ei?i-h??aqh Qf'1h6 Rfmda?g avail-ability in the (if? 3136}: City 3. GW-Cz?ircri?a: (4.9- ?oim?s) - Al -t^ff y^^O'T-^- State's Approved Reva:lu3t.ion Firm's Name (PQint .Range] 7.1 X-y.atetlon Metfa^