0_Informal_RFP_4269.pdf

Informal Request for Proposals

City of Minneapolis Public Works

Shared Mobility Compliance and Operation Support Event #0000004269

Proposals Due by: 2:00 PM, September 9, 2026

REQUEST FOR

PROPOSALS FOR

Shared Mobility Compliance and Operation Support

I. Background: It is the intention of the City of Minneapolis to solicit proposals for a vendor to supply shared mobility management software and services to upkeep and expand our management of shared mobility in the City. The contract will be structured as an initial two (2) year term with the option for the City to renew for one (1) additional one-year term for a total contract length of up to 3 years.

The City of Minneapolis (hereinafter referred to as the City), makes this Request for Proposals (hereinafter referred to as the RFP) to provide the micromobility data and operations support to assist in managing the compliance of the shared mobility vendors in the City. The shared bike and scooter vendors operate around 2500 scooters and 1500 ebikes annually. The City has utilized in-house data support to date. The city is looking to increase services to provide additional compliance monitoring, digital operation support, and other organizational support.

II. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE: A pre-proposal conference will be held at 1:00 pm, August 27, 2026 via teams:

Microsoft Teams meeting Join: https://teams.microsoft.com/meet/288249347300296?p=X3zr8mOOcEWjYdE0Gz Meeting ID: 288 249 347 300 296 Passcode: kv9FF6VA

Dial in by phone:

+1 612-276-6670,,837620802# United States, Minneapolis Phone conference ID: 837 620 802#

III. PROPOSAL DUE DATE and LOCATION: All proposals must now be submitted electronically through the eSupplier Portal. If you are already a City Supplier you should have received an email containing your eSupplier User ID and Password. If you do not remember your password, click on the “Forgot Password” tile to enter your User ID and a new password will be emailed to you. If you are not already a city supplier, click on the eSupplier link below and then click on the “Bidder Registration” tile to register. If you need further assistance with eSupplier, please send an email to eprocurement@minneapolismn.gov eSupplier Portal – Electronic Proposal Submission https://comet-fs.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/psc/supplier

NOTE: Late Proposals will not be accepted.

IV. PROPOSAL FORMAT: The Vendor shall provide the appropriate information in sufficient detail to demonstrate that the evaluation criteria has been satisfied as specified in the Section titled “EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS”.

https://teams.microsoft.com/meet/288249347300296?p=X3zr8mOOcEWjYdE0Gz mailto:eprocurement@minneapolismn.gov https://comet-fs.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/psc/supplier

To allow for easier comparison of proposals during evaluation, proposals should contain the following sections and appendices and be arranged in consecutive order, with a page limit of 30, excluding company financials, which should be provided separately.

1. Executive Summary - The Executive Summary should include a clear statement of the

Vendor’s understanding of the RFP including a brief summary of the Scope of Work.

Include, at a minimum, an outline of the contents of the proposal, and a summary of the proposed services.

2. Scope of Services - Describe in detail how services will be provided.

3. Experience and Capacity - Describe background and related experience demonstrating ability to provide required services. Indicate if company expansion is required to provide service.

4. Personnel Listing - Show involved individuals with resumes and specific applicable experience. Sub-consultants should also be listed, including the identification of any that are certified in the City of Minneapolis Small & Underutilized Business Program.

5. Company Financial Information – Proof of financial responsibility, any bankruptcy filings by the vendor, its principles and officers during the previous seven years.

6. References - List references from contracts similar in size and scope.

7. Cost/Fees - Indicate proposed cost of equipment and services including a description of how costs were determined; hourly rates; direct costs and payment billing schedule.

Please complete the Attachment D – Costs Worksheet.

V. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS – SELECTION OF VENDOR: Proposals will be reviewed by an Evaluation Panel made up of representatives of the City of Minneapolis, Department of Public Works – Traffic and Parking Services Division and other City staff and City partner assistance as they might require. The Evaluation Panel may select a "short list" of qualified Vendors who may be formally interviewed as part of the final selection, as deemed necessary by the City. Evaluations will be based on the required criteria listed in the Section titled “PROPOSAL FORMAT”, and the following:

A. Quality, thoroughness, and clarity of proposal.

B. How well the Scope of Services offered meets department objectives.

C. Financial responsibility and capacity of company including whether or not the company, any affiliates, subsidiaries, officers or directors have filed for federal bankruptcy protection within seven years of the date of this RFP.

D. Organization and management approach and involvement for a successful project.

E. Cost of services proposed.

A formal Presentation/Interview may be requested of the “short list” Vendor/s. Specifically, the City requests that the Vendor’s Project Manager assigned to the proposed project team lead the Presentation and that actual members of the project team (including any sub-consultants) participate in the formal presentation/interview.

The Presentation/Interview of the “short listed” Vendor’s will consist of the following elements:

1. Discussion of the Vendor’s approach to providing services for this Project based upon the

Scope of Services described herein.

2. Overview of the Vendor’s experience as related to the Scope of Services, including qualifications and experience of assigned staff.

3. A demonstration of the proposed approach and software solutions.

The Evaluation Panel will schedule and arrange the presentations.

VI. SCHEDULE: The following is a listing of key Proposal and Project milestones:

RFP Release August 19th, 2026 Pre-Proposal Conference August 27th, 2026 at 1:00 pm Questions on RFP Due by September 2nd, 2026 at 4:00 pm Responses to Questions posted by September 4th, 2026 at 4:00 pm, Proposals due by September 9th, 2026 at 2:00 pm Estimated Vendor selection October, 2026 Estimated services start date October, 2026 Estimated services end date October 31st, 2029

VII. CONTRACT: The contracting parties will be the City of Minneapolis and the Vendor selected to provide the services as described herein. The selected proposal, along with the RFP and any counter proposal will be incorporated into a formal agreement after negotiations. It is the intent of the City to award a single contract for a term of two (2) years with the option to extend the contract, at the sole option of the City, on an annual basis for up to one (1) additional year term for up to a maximum of 3 years.

VIII. DEPARTMENT CONTACT/REQUESTS FOR CLARIFICATION: The Vendor’s primary interface with the City will be with the Contract Manager who will act as the City’s designated representative for the Project. Prospective responders shall direct inquiries/questions in writing only to:

Contract Manager: Max Gonzalez, Project Manager City of Minneapolis Department of Public Works Email: Max.Gonzalez@minneapolismn.gov

Responses to the questions will be posted to the current event in the eSupplier Portal – Contracting Opportunities.

The Contract Manager is the only individual who can be contacted regarding the Project before proposals are submitted. The Contract Manager cannot vary the terms of the RFP.

IX. REJECTION OF PROPOSALS: The City does not promise to accept the lowest cost proposal and specifically reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, to waive any formal proposal mailto:Max.Gonzalez@minneapolismn.gov requirements, to investigate the qualifications and experience of any Consultant, to reject any provisions in any proposal, to obtain new proposals, to negotiate the requested services and contract terms with any Consultant, or to proceed to do the work otherwise. Incomplete proposals and proposals not sufficiently detailed or not in acceptable form may be returned for completion or may be rejected by the City.

X. ADDENDUM TO THE RFP: If any addendum is issued for the RFP, it will be posted as an attachment to the current event. The City reserves the right to cancel or amend the RFP at any time.

XI. DATA PRACTICES: Data you provide in response to this RFP will be subject to the Minnesota

Government Data Practices Act and may be available to the public. Minn. Stat. 13.591 classifies Business Data and subdivision 3specifically addresses data submitted in response to an RFP. If you are submitting specific data which you believe meets the definition of trade secret data as defined in Minn. Stat. 13.37, please indicate this on the documents containing the data. The City may ask you to establish that the data meets all of the conditions set forth in Minn. Stat. 13.37, subdivision 1(b).

XII. SITE VISITS: Vendor may visit the City’s Mobility hub sites in reference to the services to be provided but are prohibited from interviewing City staff or other visitors in any effort to obtain information relating to this RFP. All requests for clarification should be submitted in writing as outlined in this RFP. Failure to follow this prohibition could result in the rejection of the proposal.

ATTACHMENT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES

It is the intent of this document to outline a general description of the Project, the extent of services required, and the relationship of this Project to other work. The contents of this document are considered representative of the Project as a whole, but are by no means conclusive.

Current System and Background Information

The intent of this RFP is to select a vendor to provide operational support, compliance monitoring, and coordinate data and policies across various jurisdictions. The City of Minneapolis licenses and operates shared mobility providers, but there are additional jurisdictions that are within the City boundaries.

Tasks and Objectives

The intent of this RFP is to select a vendor to provide micromobility support to the City of Minneapolis.

The City is looking to augment data solutions and reporting options around the micromobility options within the city. The City is seeking management software that assists with

1) Compliance Monitoring – Robust and Real time feedback

a. Report broken or defective devices, abandoned vehicles, and improper use in the field

b. Assign fines for violations

c. Real time monitoring of devices, based on location and vehicle type

d. Create custom reports on specific metrics

e. Track violations reported by city staff directly to the providers and receive communication on status for address violations

f. Monitor bike racks

2) Publish and push dynamic data policies

a. Geofence (slow zones, no ride zones, and no park zones)

b. Event management

3) Insight to cross jurisdictional travel, vehicle counts, and trip metrics

a. Currently the City of Minneapolis has a license with the shared mobility companies, but there are additional jurisdictions within the city boundary that we are looking to include/exclude vehicle counts depending on various situations

i. Potential for additional jurisdictions

4) Future additional integrations

a. Carshare

i. The City of Minneapolis and City of Saint Paul have a City sponsored carsharing program.

b. Delivery robot

i. The City of Minneapolis and The University of Minnesota have ran pilots previous including delivery robots on the University campus.

c. AV’s (autonomous vehicles)

i. Autonomous vehicle companies have indicated that Minneapolis is a potential operation zone.

5) Data protection and Privacy

a. Narrative for complying with Minnesota Data Practices act and description of actions taken to protect user privacy and data.

i. Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA) https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/13

Scope of Services Response Format

Please provide the following information in the Scope of Services section of RFP responses:

1) A description of the products and services being offered as a solution including:

a. Specification sheets for your proposed micromobility support platform

b. Pricing range depending on scale of program and micro mobility devices

2) A proposed project implementation plan comprised of the following components:

a. If applicable, detail the integration for your management platform

b. Detail the plan for coordination with local mobility providers

3) A timeline for the implementation plan that includes:

a. Breakdown of necessary steps and estimated duration for integration

4) Complete the Attachment B – Professional Services Data Privacy

5) Complete the Attachment C – Cloud Technical Capabilities

6) Complete the Attachment D – Costs Worksheet for the products and services being offered

7) Complete the Attachment E – Prior Experience and Reference form

ATTACHMENT B

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DATA PRIVACY

ATTACHMENT

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DATA PRIVACY

Consultant must answer the following questions relating to data privacy.

# Question Response 1 Describe how City data created or associated with the project is stored and how access to it is restricted.

2 Describe all ways the City’s data that is created or collected as part of the project will be used for purposes beyond the City’s implementation of this scope.

3 Will third parties have access to this data for purposes other than those related to the project? Please provide details.

4 Have any third-party security or data protection assessments been performed?

If yes, please provide the assessments.

5 How will Consultant obtain written approval from the City prior to sharing any City data with a third party?

ATTACHMENT C

Cloud Technical Capabilities

CLOUD TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES

The terms “System”, “Software”, and “Application” is used throughout this attachment.

These terms are meant to represent the Consultant’s proposed software and infrastructure, as applicable.

1. Consultant must respond to each individual capability by entering an ‘X’ in one of the non-grey columns provided. Select the appropriate response using the following guidelines below. If the columns are grey, provide a description in the “Describe” column.

Standard The capability is satisfied by the System proposed.

• If the System requires specialized configuration, Consultant must enter required configuration in the “Describe” section provided.

• If the capability is satisfied by third-party software, please indicate the third-party product proposed.

Customization A modification to the System is required to satisfy the capability.

• Consultant must provide an explanation of the work required to perform the modification in the “Describe” section provided.

Not Available The System will not satisfy the capability.

2. Consultant to provide a brief explanation of how the capability will be satisfied for each capability.

Describe • If the capability is met by more than one module, Consultant must list which module or modules are required to satisfy the capability.

• Consultant may also include screen shots, diagrams, samples, and inventories for any capability listed.

• If unable to meet the capability, Consultant must offer a brief explanation or propose an alternative way to meet the capability.

Ref.

No.

Capability Standar d

Customizatio n

Not Availabl e

Describ e

A. System Architecture

1. The System will not be allowed to use the City’s email system. Describe how the System will send emails.

2. The proposed System must be hosted under a valid and registered domain name (e.g., https://yourcompany.vendor.com) and not solely accessible via an IP address. The System must:

• Provide a fully qualified domain name (FQDN) for the hosted service.

• Not make use of raw IP addresses for production access, user login, or application endpoints.

B. End User Computing

3. The System must run over a web browser and not require a thick or thin client for both administrative- and end-users.

4. If yes, all functionality is supported over a web browser.

5. If yes, System supports current browser versions, including but not limited to Firefox, Chrome, Edge and implements modern web standards.

6. If the System doesn’t run over a web browser, describe how the software runs (for example, via a thick client).

7. If via a thick or thin client, software must support remote, unattended/silent installation and configuration.

8. If the System provides a native mobile application, describe how the application renders on smart phones and/or tablets, including any hardware or operating system limitations.

9. If a mobile application is available, it continues to be functional during loss of network connectivity, e.g. store locally and automatic sync when network connectivity is available. Describe how this can be achieved.

10. Software is designed to run on a wide variety of form factors using a responsive or native design.

C. Security Application Security

11. System does not require users to have local administrator rights to access or use the solution.

12. System design adheres to the principle of least privilege (see, for reference, NIST’s definition: https://csrc.nist.gov/glossary/term/least_pri vilege).

13. System must allow the City to perform authenticated or non-authenticated scans and penetration tests without impact to production data, or provide the results of such recent scans and tests.

14. Application must comply with OWASP top 10 risks for web applications.

15. System operates with controls applied by mobile device and mobile application management technology services

(MDM, MAM).

16. Application must support SAML for modern authentication protocols for single sign-on for City users and provide a mechanism for additional identity provider for constituents.

17. Describe how the System manages PCI-DSS data, should this data be used in the proposed System.

https://csrc.nist.gov/glossary/term/least_privilege https://csrc.nist.gov/glossary/term/least_privilege

18. The security features provided in the System and by the hosting facility (if applicable) is compliant with the relevant industry recognized security standards.

Data Security

19. System has the ability to classify data elements and unstructured data that are regulated as private or otherwise not public under local, state or federal law.

20. System has the ability to mask and/or redact regulated not-public data from system views, query results, and outputs.

21. System has the ability to classify and prevent changes to structured or unstructured data elements that are considered official (immutable) government records within the System.

22. System has the ability to support input validation to maintain data quality and integrity.

23. System has the ability to prevent unauthorized users from changing or deleting data.

24. System has the ability to secure data transferred between the client (ie. on City devices, client devices, or a web browser) and the application.

25. System has the ability to encrypt data, including backups, at rest and in transmission.

26. System must ensure confidentiality, integrity and availability of the data.

Secure Maintenance

27. Describe how Consultant maintains an active vulnerability and threat-monitoring program that conforms to the following standards:

• Zero day vulnerabilities are remediated within two business days

Critical and high vulnerabilities are remediated within 30 business days

Cybersecurity

28. System must protect City data and services with a firewall or other City-approved solution that excludes all network traffic to environments hosting City data and services, except that which is explicitly allowed.

Examples of untrusted networks includes:

• Internet

• Other customer networks

• Consultant management network

• Consultant corporate network

29. System employs and monitors network and host-based intrusion detection and prevention solutions to protect City data and services. This includes anti-malware capabilities.

30. System employs a continuous security monitoring solution including the ability to manage and protect log files from tampering and retain logs for up to 12 months.

31. The System must ensure full separation of the City’s data from that of other customers, tenants, or clients on the same platform, and guarantee that no other customer can access the City’s data.

32. System must restrict access to City data and services by Consultant’s personnel to only those who have an approved business need.

33. System has the ability to log and report on physical access to infrastructure hosting City data and services.

34. System must ensure all City data, including backups, resides within the continental United States.

35. Describe how the System uses artificial intelligence to fulfill any of the functionality provided by the System.

36. System will not transmit city data over API to general purpose AI models such as ChatGPT.

D. Auditability/Security Monitoring

37. System must include documented procedures to audit at least annually all user access accounts to City data.

38. System preserves and protects logs against tampering or deletion by privileged users.

39. System must have the capability to enforce auditing and log basic information about user access activity, administration activities, system events and errors, and access violation reports. Activity logs must capture at least the following:

• User authentication

• Type of event

• Date and time

• Success or failure indication

• Origination of event

Identity or name of affected data, system component or resource

40. System logs and reports on security events including, but not exclusive to:

• Log on

• Log off

• Failed Log on

• Account Locked

• Account Unlocked

Password Reset

41. System logs and reports on access/authentication changes including, but not exclusive to:

• New account created

• Accounts disabled / enabled

• Account deleted

• Authorization changes such as adding user (or removing from) a new role or other evidence of an authorization change.

Privilege escalation (ie. escalation from any user role to system administrator role)

42. System has the ability to implement ‘separation of duties’ (fraud prevention) controls around critical workflow and transaction changes and approvals.

43. System logs and reports on changes to configuration settings.

44. System logs and reports on application and data management events such as:

• Data Element Changes

• System Error messages

• Files opened and closed

• Files modified

E.

Interactivity

45. System provides mechanism to consume secure SOAP-based and/or REST-based web services from external and internal systems.

46. System provides mechanism that can be automated to export data via batch process(es).

47. System provides capability for automated near real-time export of data out of the system.

48. System integration layer is kept on same upgrade schedule as the core system.

49. System provides a repeatable and automated mechanism to access to data required by the City to perform all reporting and ETL functions necessary to support business processes.

F. Storage, Reporting, and Retrieval

50. System allows for the configuration of data retention rules within the System.

51. The System must include robust reporting functionality that meets both operational and strategic business needs.

Specifically, the System must:

• Provide a comprehensive set of standard out-of-the-box reports relevant to the solution’s core functions.

• Support the ability to generate custom reports based on business-specific criteria, including filtering, grouping, date ranges, and user-defined fields.

52. All data collected within the System (whether it be out-of-the-box or customized) must be accessible via the

System’s robust reporting functionality.

Disaster Recovery

53. System has the ability to back-up and restore data to support the following:

• Recovery Point Objective: [24-hours – no more than 24-hours data loss.]

• Recovery Time Objective (Incidental Restore Requests): 4 hours

54. System supports 99.99% uptime.

55. System supports testing or other verification of the disaster recovery process on an annual basis.

G. User Interfaces

56. If available, describe how each release of the System is compliant with Section 508 and/ or WCAG2.1 AA specifications.

57. If available, describe how all interfaces (both for administrators and end-users) are compliant with Section 508 and/or WCAG2.1 AA specifications throughout the System’s lifecycle.

ATTACHMENT D

Costs Worksheet

Pricing Tables – Recurring Fees for Service

Service Interval Price Per Interval Annual Price (Example: Software) (Monthly) ($100.00/month) ($1,200.00)

Total Annual Cost: $____________

ATTACHMENT E

Prior Experience and Reference Form

Prior Experience and Reference Form

Company Name: ______________________________________________ Date: _______________________________________________________ List two (2) references able to attest to safety record and performance related to service requirements listed to provide services for shared mobility operations support.

Please include City name, affiliation, work address and contact information.

1._________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2._________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Provide list of municipalities within the past five (5) years related to service requirements listed in this solicitation. Provide Customer, Location and Date.

Customer Location Dates of Service Provided