26-27-006-Addendum No.1 Questions and Answers Bid Open Date Extended Post.pdf

RFP-26-27-006

“Enterprise Customer Payment Platform and Payment Processing”

August 18,2026 Addendum No.1

Bid Open Date Extended : Thursday September 3, 2026, at 4:00PM

Questions/Answers:

• Does the City or Harris Advanced Utility Systems maintain a certified or preferred payment-provider program for CIS Infinity?

• If so, is certification or existing partner status required for this procurement?

Answer: Harris Advanced Utility Systems has an existing partnership with Paymentus.

New provider must be certified or existing partner with Harris Advanced Utility Systems.

• Will the selected payment provider receive equivalent access to the supported CIS Infinity APIs or adapters, technical documentation, test environment, and Harris AUS technical resources, regardless of whether the provider has an existing AUS integration?

Answer: Yes.

• Will Harris AUS professional services be made available through the City’s existing relationship to support CIS-side configuration, integration testing, and production implementation, or should the proposer include those services in its proposed scope and pricing?

Answer: Proposal should include those services.

• May a proposer satisfy the CIS Infinity integration-experience requirement by including a named subcontractor or integration partner with relevant AUS experience and references?

Answer: Yes.

RFP-26-27-006Enterprise Customer Payment Platform and Payment Processing

2 | P a g e

• Please identify the City’s current CIS Infinity version, hosting model, and supported integration method for account validation and balance inquiry, real-time payment posting, pending-payment updates, reversals and returned payments, refunds, and reconciliation.

Answer: CIS Infinity Version 4.1.63.134266. Internally hosted. REST and SOAP API are available for integration purposes.

• Should the selected payment platform integrate directly with CIS Infinity, through the City’s new citizen portal or integration layer, or through both?

Answer: Both. Must update CIS and citizen portal in real-time for payment transactions.

• How many active utility accounts, registered online users and annual bills does the City currently support?

Answer: ~43,000 utility accounts, ~6,000 online users, monthly billing for all accounts.

• Please provide annual payment volumes, total dollars processed, average transaction amount, and payment mix by: credit card; debit card; ACH/eCheck;

one-time payments; recurring/AutoPay payments; guest payments; and payment channel.

Answer: Estimated annual average based on previous 11 months of available data.

Total Payments / Year - 193,602 Number of Residential Payments / Year - 179,155 Number of Commercial Payments / Year - 14,447 Total / Year - $46,798,233.15 Total Residential / Year - $41,751,045.97 Total Commercial / Year - $5,047,187.18 Average Residential Monthly Bill - $233.04 Average Commercial Monthly Bill - $349.35 Customer’s Average Monthly Bill - $241.72

ACH – 12.41% | $234.16

Debit Card - 50.15% | $230.64 Credit Card - 33.19% | $235.16 OTP vs Non-OTP: Unknown. The City does not currently track this data.

Autopay – The City does not currently offer AutoPay.

Guest vs User: Unknown. The City does not currently track this data.

Web: $244.88 | 77.75%

IVR: $227.85 | 16.64%

Other: $239.58 | 5.61%

3 | P a g e

• Does the City have a preferred fee model - City-absorbed fees, customer-paid convenience/service fees, or a hybrid approach - or should vendors price multiple alternatives?

Answer: We have a hybrid approach of City absorbed fees for Residential customers and Customer paid fees for Commercial Customers.

• Are convenience or service fees currently assessed? If so, please provide the current fee structure by payment type and channel.

Answer: Current Residential fees absorbed at $3.75 per transaction. All other fees are paid by customers (Commercial, Industrial) with a maximum $500.00 payment per transaction.

This is looking to change to a percentage-based system per new industry standard guidelines. Residential fees will still be absorbed.

• What settlement timing, funding structure, deposit-account configuration, and daily reconciliation requirements must the solution support?

Answer: We expect the settlement timing to be within 1-3 days. We need a daily activity report (preferably in Excel) to reconcile to what is deposited to our account each day. We currently have the funds deposited into our bank account.

• Please provide estimated email, SMS, and push-notification volumes and clarify whether related messaging charges must be included in the five-year cost model.

Answer: Potential for up to ~43,000 monthly emails and an equal amount of SMS messages multiplied times the number of requested SMS messages. Messaging charges should be included.

• May SOC 2 Type II reports, penetration-test results, and other sensitive security documents be provided under a nondisclosure agreement or through a secure review process?

Answer: Yes

• What is the City's desired contract-award date, implementation start date, and production go-live date?

Answer: Implementation Start Date = 11/01/2026, Production Go-Live date = 03/31/2027. Award date = late September 2026

4 | P a g e

• How many references are required in each category, and may a single customer serve as a municipal, utility, and Harris AUS reference?

Answer: Preferably three.

• What CIS and customer engagement platform are currently used?

Answer: Current CIS = Harris CIS Infinity. Current Customer Engagement Platform = SilverBlaze Capricorn being replaced by Smart Energy Water SmartCX platform.

• Who is the current payment processor and gateway?

Answer: Paymentus.

• What payment channels are currently active: web, mobile, IVR, POS, kiosk, retail cash, lockbox, walk-in, QR, text-to-pay?

Answer: Web, Walk-in, POS, IVR.

• What is the breakout by payment method: ACH/eCheck, credit card, debit card, cash, check, digital wallet?

Answer: Walk-in = Cash or Check, Online = Credit Card or ACH/eCheck, POS = Credit Card.

• What is the breakout by channel and payment method?

Answer: Walk-in = Cash or Check, Online = Credit Card or ACH/eCheck, POS = Credit Card.

• What is the annual dollar volume and average ticket by payment Method?

Answer: Please reference question 9, which is on page 2, for this information.

• Are fees currently absorbed by the City or paid by customers?

Answer: It is a mixture of both. The City absorbs the residential customers fee, but commercial accounts must pay their fees.

• Does the City want customer-paid fees, City-paid fees, or a hybrid model?

Answer: hybrid

• Is kiosk, POS/cashiering, IVR, retail cash, QR code, text-to-pay, Answer: POS/cashiering, IVR, Cash, Check, ACH/eCheck.

• Are there existing contracts or integrations that must remain in?

Answer: Contracts and Integrations with Harris CIS Infinity and Smart Energy Water SmartCX.

5 | P a g e

• What reporting, reconciliation, settlement, and posting formats are required?

Answer: A batch file will need to be sent that can be read by our cashiering system (RCS/Catalis). A daily report (preferably in Excel) will need to be sent in order to reconcile to the daily deposits.

• Does the City require real-time posting or batch posting?

Answer: Yes via API.

• Are there any required implementation milestones before the tentative March 31, 2027 completion date?

Answer: No.

• What are the total bills or statements produced each month?

Answer: ~43,000 monthly bills.

• What is the total number of card transactions processed online each month?

Answer: The City averages 16,133 online transactions each month.

• What is the total number of ACH transactions processed online each month?

Answer: The City averages 2,080 ACH transactions each month.

• What is the total of card transactions processed using the IVR each month?

Answer: The City averages 2,684 IVR transactions each month.

• What is the total ACH transactions processed using the IVR each month?

Answer: The City averages 182 ACH transactions via IVR each month

• What is the total of card transactions processed using SMS/text each month?

Answer: The City does not process SMS/Text based payments.

• What is the total of ACH transactions processed using SMS/text each month?

Answer: The City does not process SMS/Text based payments.

• What is the Average Ticket Amount?

Answer: The City does not understand the question.

• What is the Maximum payment amount allowed, if any?

Answer: No maximum on Residential, $500.00 maximum on all others.

• What is the total of enrolled users?

Answer: ~8,000

6 | P a g e

• What processing pricing model do currently support? Pass-Thru, Percentage, or Flat Fee?

Answer: Currently Flat Fee but will be adopting new industry standard percentage-based pricing.

• Is a Service or Convenience Fee supported? If so, what is the current amount?

Answer: $3.75 per payment transaction.

• Please provide 3 months of your merchant processing statement Answer: The City has provided a link to this information at the bottom of this document.

• What is the reason for going out to bid at this time?

Answer: Seeking new real-time reporting, Auto-Pay, and improved reporting functionality.

• Are there any services related issues with the current vendor?

Answer: No real-time integration and Auto-Pay functionality.

• Are you looking for some feature or capability the current vendor does not provide?

Answer: Seeking new real-time reporting, Auto-Pay, and improved reporting functionality.

• What is the length of contract and is pricing expected to be held firm for the duration of the contract?

Answer: Five (5) year period with the option to renew for two (2) additional Five

(5) year periods. Fixed price for initial period and can be renegotiated at renewal periods.

• What is the anticipated award date for this project?

Answer: Anticipated late September

• What is the expected Go Live date for this project?

Answer: March 2027

• Would you please provide 12 months of transactional data, including the number of transactions and total amount processed, broken out by payment method?

Answer: Please reference question 9, which is on page 2, for this information.

• Please confirm whether the scope is limited to utility payments. Which payment channels are required (online, IVR, and/or in-person), and how many in-person terminals are needed?

7 | P a g e

Answer: Current scope, Utility payments only. Online, IVR, and in-person POS requirements. ~5 POS required.

• Please identify the City's current payment platform/gateway, merchant processor, and other third-party payment providers supporting utility payments.

Answer: Paymentus

• Please describe the City’s current fee model for utility payments, including which payment methods are City-absorbed versus customer-paid.

Answer: Residential customers are absorbed and paid by the City, Commercial customers are paid by the customer.

• For the requirement to support disconnect/reconnect workflows, please clarify the expected functionality and interaction between the selected payment solution and Harris AUS.

Answer: Real-time payment posting to Harris AUS and Smart Energy Water customer portal.

• Please identify the City's existing customer engagement platform and describe the expected integration between that platform and the proposed solution.

Answer: Current = SilverBlaze Capricorn. New = Smart Energy Water SmartCX.

Real-time payment posting to Harris AUS and Smart Energy Water customer portal.

• Please clarify the data migration requirement, including the specific data to be migrated, source system(s), historical period, and expected responsibilities of the selected vendor.

Answer: No data migration.

• May the requirements for push notifications, configurable communication campaigns, communication preference management, and communication history be satisfied through integration with the City's existing customer engagement platform rather than natively within the payment platform?

Answer: Yes, with Smart Energy Water SmartCX.

• Please confirm whether March 31, 2027 is the City's target go-live date and provide the anticipated implementation start date or desired implementation timeline.

8 | P a g e

Answer: Start = 10/01/2026, Go-Live = 03/31/2027.

• The timeframe between receiving answers to our questions and the response deadline does not provide adequate time for review and assessment. Would you consider extending the deadline to ensure we can submit a complete and well-informed response?

Answer: No.

• Can the City please provide the most recent twelve months of Utility payment volume by payment type, including transaction count and dollar volume for credit card, debit card, and ACH/eCheck transactions.

Answer: Please reference question 9, which is on page 2, for this information.

• If available, please also identify the residential versus commercial transaction count and dollar volume for card payments Answer: Please reference question 9, which is on page 2, for this information.

• 360S2G is interested in participating in RFP 26-27-006, Enterprise Customer Payment Platform and Payment Processing. We would appreciate clarification regarding the interview requirement included in the proposal requirements.

Answer:Virtual interviews will be acceptable.

• The RFP requests a letter stating the Offeror’s willingness to be interviewed on site at the City of Danville. Would the City accept a live virtual interview via Microsoft Teams, Zoom, or another City-preferred platform in lieu of an on-site interview?

Answer: Virtual interviews will be acceptable.

• Please provide volumes of both credit card and eCheck/ACH that would be processed through the online portal. Answer: The City is unable to provide a definitive response because the question does not specify the applicable reporting period.

• # of transactions by credit card and eCheck/ACH. Answer: The City is unable to provide a definitive response because the question does not specify the applicable reporting period.

9 | P a g e

• Total dollars processed by credit card and eCheck/ACH. Answer: The City is unable to provide a definitive response because the question does not specify the applicable reporting period.

• Average payment amount Answer: The City is unable to provide a definitive response because the question does not specify the applicable reporting period.

• Does the certification required by §3.8.E apply to this engagement, given that no on-site work is involved? If so, which personnel must be listed — for example, only those with access to City data?

Answer: The City requires that all vendors and sub vendors are applicable regardless of on-site work. Specifically, this is for all personnel working on the project.

• Please confirm that the following provisions do not apply to this engagement and will be struck from any resulting contract: §1.10 (Virginia Uniform Building Code);

§1.11 and §1.14 (VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications, VDOT Standard Drawings, Project Manual, and Plans); §1.12 (retainage and escrow); §3.7 (cleanup and removal of waste materials, tools, and construction equipment); §3.8.C (on-site staff member requirement); §3.15 (storage area, designated parking, and pre-construction conference); §3.21.B (construction site safety); and §3.26.C and §3.26.D (concealed, subsurface, or latent physical conditions). Answer: This section does not apply to this project. Disregard.

• Please clarify the required proposal format: (1) whether a page limit, section order, or tab structure applies; and (2) whether the City would like line-item responses to each requirement in the Specifications document, along with items A–I on page 21.

b) Is there a required template for the five-year cost model, or may vendors use their own pricing format? Additionally, please clarify the "quantities listed above" referenced in §4.0(2), as no quantities appear in the solicitation. Answer: We are open to any format of submission outside of the specifications in section 3.4 Method of Proposal Submission section.

Section 3.2.A states that award will be made to the "lowest responsible and responsive Vendor, with consideration given to completion time," while §3.2.D refers to the proposal "most advantageous to the City." The scope document also lists weighted evaluation criteria. a) Please clarify whether award will be based on the lowest responsible and responsive vendor or the highest ranked, best-value proposal under the weighted evaluation criteria. b) Please confirm that the criteria

10 | P a g e and weights listed in the scope document constitute the scoring matrix referenced in §3.2.B and that cost and pricing account for 10% of the total score. Answer:

Evaluation will be based on 3.2D and the highest ranked, best-value proposal.

The City confirms that the criteria and weights listed in the scope document constitute the scoring matrix referenced in §3.2. B and that cost and pricing account for 10% of the total score.

• Does the City require migration of stored payment tokens, AutoPay and recurring payment enrollments, customer profiles, and historical payment data from the incumbent platform? b) If historical payment data migration is required, how many years are in scope? c) Will the incumbent's stored payment vault be made available for transfer, or should the transition plan assume customers will re-enroll their payment methods at cutover? Answer: No.

• Which disconnect and reconnect functions are required — real-time reconnect trigger upon payment posting, collection of reconnect fees, presentation of disconnect notices, or a combination? Will AUS remain the system of record for account status? Answer: No disconnect reconnect functionality required. AUS will remain the system of record for account status.

• Should Harris licensing, configuration, or professional services costs required for the integration be included in proposed pricing, or will the City procure those separately? Answer: Yes.

• Please identify: the Harris AUS version in use; whether AUS is deployed on-premise or hosted by Harris; the integration method in place with the incumbent payment vendor (batch file exchange, web services / API, or direct database access); and whether the City licenses the AUS API or web services module. Answer: Harris CIS Infinity version = 4.1.63.134266. On-premises. Our licensed REST/SOAP API integration required.

• b) What update frequency does the City require for balance and history display — real-time inquiry, near-real time, or scheduled batch? Does the current AUS configuration support outbound account inquiry? Answer: Real-time.

• Is the single sign-on requirement intended for customer authentication, for City administrative staff, or both? Please identify the City's identity provider and required protocol (SAML 2.0, OpenID Connect, or other). Answer: Yes

11 | P a g e

• Does "support digital billing enrollment" require electronic bill presentment, or paperless enrollment with notification only? If presentment is in scope, who is the City's current bill print vendor, and will the print file be made available? Answer: eBill is handled by Customer Portal not in scope.

• b) Should City staff be able to create, schedule, and launch communication campaigns directly within the platform? Answer: No.

• Section 2.1 requires integration with the City's customer engagement platform, which is not identified in the solicitation. Please identify the platform and vendor, and describe the expected integration points and data exchange. Answer: Smart Energy Water SmartCX. Single-sign on and real-time payment posting integration required.

• Please confirm which of the following payment channels are in scope: automated IVR / phone; agent-assisted phone; in-person counter and point-of-sale;

unattended kiosk; text-to-pay; and mail or lockbox remittance. Answer: IVR / phone;

in-person counter and point-of-sale; text-to-pay, mobile.

• Is scope limited to utility billing, or does the City anticipate adding other revenue types during the term (taxes, business licenses, permits, fines, or miscellaneous receivables)? If so, should pricing account for them? Answer: Currently Utility Billing.

• Will merchant services and underwriting be provided under this contract, or will the City retain its existing merchant accounts and acquiring relationships? Answer: We are only asking for payment processing services. The proposer is the merchant services provider.

• Does the City intend to absorb payment processing costs, pass them to the customer, or apply a hybrid model? If the City intends to change from its current approach, please describe the intended model. Answer: Hybrid model. Moving from flat-fee to percentage-based model.

• Please provide: total active utility accounts; annual transaction count and annual dollar volume by payment channel; average transaction amount; current credit card / debit card / ACH mix; and the number of City staff requiring administrative access.

12 | P a g e

Answer: ~43,000 accounts, monthly billing, City admins = ~3, Please reference question 9, which is on page 2, for the remaining information.

• Please specify the initial contract term and any renewal options. Answer: The initial contract term will be Five (5) years with the option to renew Two (2) additional Five

(5) year periods.

• b) Please provide the current platform contract's expiration date and the anticipated award and notice-to-proceed dates. Is March 31, 2027 the required go-live date?

Answer: Current contract expires December 2027.

Go-Live = 03/31/2027.

• c) Please clarify whether the post-acceptance warranty period is one year under §3.8.H or 24 months under §3.11.C. Answer: Post-acceptance warranty period is Twenty-Four (24) months.

• Section 1.6 states that performance and payment bonds are "Not Applicable," while §4.0(3) and the BidNet posting indicate they are required. Section 3.5.C.3 also references a proposal guaranty that is not otherwise specified. Please clarify: a) Which bonds or guaranties, if any, are required with the proposal and upon award?

Please specify the amount and form of each. Answer: Bonds are not applicable to this project.

• b) If a bond must equal 100% of the contract amount, how should that amount be calculated, and how long must the bond remain in effect? Answer: Bonds are not applicable to this project.

• c) Because the engagement involves no construction, on-site labor, or material suppliers, will the City waive the payment bond? Answer: Bonds are not applicable to this project.

• 26-27-006-Link Copy of COD_May_June_July_2026_Merchant_Document.xlsx https://danvilleva-my.sharepoint.com/:x:/g/personal/royalsw_danvilleva_gov/IQCrx9G6x9MpTo8x5pj8IgZLATS52HVE7BPUn8dFVgLr6w0?e=FsihVj

• Bid Open Date Extended to: Thursday September 3, 2026, at 4:00PM

End of Addendum No. 1

Bidders shall acknowledge receipt of all Addenda.

Carol Henley, Director of Purchasing

Company Name ___________ Signature: _______ _

Address: ______________ Name: ________ _ (Printed)

__________________ Title: ________ _ City State Zip Code

Date: ___________ E-mail Address. _________ _

Phone No.: __________ Fax No.: __________ _

13IPage