attachment-1-rfp-liquor-2025-08-a-q-a.pdf

PDF 55 KB Posted

Attached to
Developer/Operator for Hampton I-95 Service Areas
Solicitation number
RFP Liquor 2025-08-A
Issued by
Rockingham County, New Hampshire

About this file

Q&A Document for RFP 2025-08-A: Developer/Operator for Hampton I-95 Service Areas

This is a Question and Answer document issued by the New Hampshire Liquor Commission (NHLC) in response to developer inquiries regarding RFP 2025-08-A for a Developer/Operator to construct and operate Service Areas at Hampton I-95 locations in northbound and southbound configurations. The NHLC addressed seven substantive inquiries from prospective developers regarding operational flexibility, default remedies, ownership changes, drive-thru service requirements, and the definition of affiliated companies for financial and litigation disclosures. Key clarifications include confirmation that drive-thru facilities are a required program element rather than optional, that the NHLC retains all options regarding lender cure rights and operator replacement following defaults, and that ownership restructuring, estate planning transfers, and refinancing transactions require notice to the NHLC with reserved rights for the Commission to exercise remedies outlined in the contract appendices. The NHLC declined to answer a question regarding reasonable evolution of foodservice and retail concepts due to ambiguity in the question language.

The Q&A document clarifies that "affiliated companies" for purposes of financial capacity demonstration includes the Developer/Operator and any entities or individuals upon whom the Developer/Operator relies for funding of construction, improvements, operations, and maintenance. For litigation disclosures, affiliated companies extend to any entity or individual identified in the financial capacity section plus individuals and entities listed in the RFQ Section II. The document emphasizes that delays beyond the Developer/Operator's reasonable control will be addressed case-by-case and that all operational standards set forth in Section D-4 (Products Offerings and Service Standards) must be maintained throughout the lease term.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
rfp-liquor-2025-08-a.pdf PDF

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

DEVELOPER/OPERATOR COMMENT / INQUIRIES AND RESPONSES

TO RFQ/RFP 2025-08-A - DEVELOPER/OPERATOR FOR HAMPTON I-95 SERVICE AREAS

1. Q: Would the NHLC consider a one-day-for-one-day extension to Rent

Commencement Dates for delays resulting from permitting, governmental approvals, utility coordination, or other matters outside the Developer/Operator’s reasonable control, provided the Developer/Operator has diligently pursued all approvals?

A: Any delays beyond reasonable control of the Developer/Operator will be addressed on a case-by-case basis.

2. Q: Will the NHLC permit with prior approval reasonable evolution of foodservice, retail, and service concepts over the lease term provided overall operational quality and service standards are maintained?

A: Reference D-4 Products O2erings and Service Standards and the terms set forth therein. It is not clear what “reasonable evolution” means. Due to the ambiguous nature of the question this will not be answered and the RFQ/RFP will not be amended.

3. Q: With reference to Appendix D-16, Appendix D-27, and Appendix D-44, would the NHLC permit a qualified lender or lender-designated replacement operator to cure defaults and assume operations prior to termination?

A: The Developer/Operator must adhere to the terms set forth in Sections

D-16, D-27, and D-44. The NHLC must retain the right to exercise all options set forth therein.

4. Q: With reference to Appendix D-44, please clarify whether internal ownership restructuring, estate planning transfers, passive ownership changes, refinancing transactions, or lender-directed transfers following a default with appropriate notice to NHLC would constitute a prohibited change of ownership?

A: The Developer/Operator must adhere to the terms set forth in Section D-

44. The Developer/Operator is obligated to provide the required notice and the

NHLC must reserve the right to exercise all options set forth therein.

5. Q: Does the NHLC have a preference regarding whether drive-thru service is included or excluded as part of the proposed operational program? Page 5, Page 32, and Page 42 all say that “The Service Areas must also provide essential services such as… drive-thru facilities”. The “shall be permitted” language only appears on

Page 59.

A: The Drive-Thru design element is a required program element.

6. Q: With reference to Appendix D-23 and Appendix D-27, please clarify whether lenders would be provided the opportunity to cure defaults or appoint a qualified replacement operator prior to termination following an insolvency-related event.

A: The Developer/Operator must adhere to the terms set forth in Sections

D-23 and D-27. The NHLC must retain the right to exercise all options set forth therein.

7. Q: Please clarify what is intended by “all major Developer/Operator affiliated companies” on Page 19. Specifically, what is meant by “a8iliated”? Does it mean entities under common ownership and/or control of the Developer/Operator or does it include the various third-parties, consultants, contractors, and subcontractors that may be assisting a Developer/Operator with their response?

A: Neither. Section VI requires the Developer/Operator to demonstrate its

“financial capacity to finance the re-development of the Hampton Liquor sites, and to operate and maintain the facilities, including funding all construction, improvements, and maintenance requirements.” For bullet point two under

Section VI (relative to financial statements), “a2iliated companies” includes the Developer/Operator and any and all entities or individuals that the

Developer/Operator is relying on to fund all construction, improvements, operations, and maintenance requirements.

For bullet point three under Section VI of the RFQ (relative to litigation), “a2iliated companies” would include any entity or individual identified in bullet points one and two of Section VI, in addition to any of the individuals or entities outlined in Section II of the RFQ on page 17-18.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .