Golf_Course_Wetland_Mitigation_Monitoring_(Addendum_#1_Revision).pdf

Community Services Department

Request for Proposals (RFP) #196239 For

Golf Course Wetland Mitigation Monitoring

Proposal Submittal Deadline:

Wednesday, December 17, 2025 BEFORE 3:00 pm

Procurement Contact:

Albert Lujan Contract Administrator albert.lujan@paloalto.gov

(650) 463-4954

CITY OF PALO ALTO

PURCHASING/CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

250 HAMILTON AVENUE

PALO ALTO, CA 94301

(650) 329-2271

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction

2. Pre-Proposal Conference and Certifications

3. Proposal Content and Format

4. Contract Type and Method of Payment

5. Scope of Work

6. Evaluation Criteria

7. Oral Interviews

8. Public Nature of Materials

9. Collusion

10. Disqualification

11. Non-Conforming Proposal

12. Gratuities

13. Firms or Persons Not Eligible to Submit A Proposal

14. Suspension and Debarment Status

15. Proposer Questionnaire

Attachments:

A - Attachment A Final R2_PaloAltoGolfCourse Cert 802332 - 6-16

B - Attachment B Golf Course (ICF) Mitigation & Monitoring Plan 061416

C - Attachment C PAGC_Existing Conditions Rpt_20240823_Reduced

D - Attachment D PAGC_Delineation Report_2025_06_20r

E - Attachment_E_Professional_Services_Agreement_Sample

F - Attachment_F_Insurance_Requirement

G - Attachment_G_Cost_Proposal_Wetland_Monitoring_and_Reporting

H - Attachment_H_Proposer_Info_Form

I - Attachment I Firm_Experience

1. INTRODUCTION

The City of Palo Alto is seeking proposals from qualified firms to provide services for

Conduct mitigation monitoring and reporting for golf course reconfiguration project as required by regulatory permits.. The required services and performance conditions are described in the Scope of Work (or Services).

1.1. Summary

Conduct mitigation monitoring and reporting for golf course reconfiguration project as required by regulatory permits.

1.2. Background

Background

The City of Palo Alto completed construction of the Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course Reconfiguration Project in 2017 following a flood protection project on San Francisquito Creek that impacted the golf course. The Golf Course, now the Baylands Golf Links, is located within the Palo Alto Baylands at 1875 Embarcadero Road in Palo Alto, California.

The reconfiguration project resulted in 0.29 acres of temporary and 1.36 acres of permanent impacts to wetlands/waters of the United States and State. The project’s permits (Attachment A) and Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (Attachment B) require at least

4.0 ac of on-site wetland expansion (i.e., wetland creation) and 0.20 ac of on-site wetland enhancement to compensate for the project’s impacts (ICF International 2016).

The plan to expand and enhance the project wetlands is provided in the project’s Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP). The plan included 8.03 ac of wetland expansion and 0.42 of enhancement of existing wetlands at the golf course project site, exceeding the minimum permit required mitigation acreage by 100%. The RWQCB permit states (on Page 4) that, “Of the 8.03 acres of wetlands that the Applicant proposes to expand and the 0.42 acres that the Applicant proposes to enhance, 4 acres of expansion and 0.20 acres of enhancement are required to compensate for the Project’s impacts to waters of the State. Additional acres of expanded or enhanced wetlands may be used to provide for any additional mitigation required by Condition 33.”

The City implemented grading and planting to expand and enhance the wetland habitat in 2016 and 2017. Wetland expansion included excavating fill from elevated terrain surrounding existing wetlands, while wetland enhancement included invasive species removal. Both expanded and enhanced wetlands were then hydroseeded and planted with native brackish marsh plant species such as brown-headed rush (Juncus phaeocephalus), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), meadow barley (Hordeum brachyantherum), alkali barley (Hordeum depressum), and common spikeweed (Centromadia pungens). The project’s permits and MMP call for a minimum of 5 years of habitat monitoring of the expanded and enhanced wetlands. Since the wetland expansion/enhancement occurred in 2016 and 2017, mitigation monitoring was required in 2017 through 2021.

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 4

While the correct acreage of wetlands was constructed, the maintenance and monitoring necessary to attain performance standards was not completed. Per Condition 33 of the RWQCB permit, the amount of mitigation required increases by 10% for each year that successful implementation of mitigation was deferred.

The City has been in communication with the RWQCB and is working diligently to get the project into compliance. The following documents have been submitted to the RWQCB and are attached as reference to this RFP.

• Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course Reconfiguration Project Wetland Mitigation Condition Assessment Report (H.T. Harvey & Assoc., August 2024) (Attachment C)

• Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course Reconfiguration Project Wetland Delineation Report (H.T. Harvey & Assoc., June 2025) (Attachment D)

• Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course Reconfiguration Project Remedial Wetland Mitigation Plan (H.T. Harvey & Assoc., September 2025) (Attachment E)

Remedial Actions

Several remedial actions have been completed, or are planned, to increase the cover and diversity of native hydrophytic species and to increase the probability that success criteria will be met. These include:

• trail decommissioning through wetlands,

• removal of invasive plant species,

• hydrologic modifications to drains present in some wetlands, and

• revegetation to increase wetland species richness and native wetland cover, including:

o Seeding with native wetland seed, o Revegetation with container plants (native plant species) in expanded and enhanced wetland areas.

The revegetation will occur over a two-year timeframe. In 2025, 0.3 acres will be revegetated – 0.2 acres with seed and 0.1 acres with container plants. In 2026, an additional 0.3 acres will be revegetated with either seed, container plants, or a combination depending on success of the revegetation effort in 2025.

Mitigation Monitoring Plan

This scope consists of CONSULTANT providing the CITY with professional services for the monitoring and reporting of wetland mitigation associated with the City of Palo Alto Golf Course Reconfiguration Project. The scope of services includes, but is not limited to, wetland mitigation monitoring and annual reporting for a period of five years, or until success criteria are met and the RWQCB has indicated in writing that the City’s mitigation obligations have been met. It is understood that all monitoring and reporting services shall be conducted in compliance with applicable environmental regulations and permit requirements, MMP and revisions to the MMP.

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 5

The monitoring methods are based on the project’s Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP;

ICF International 2016) and revised monitoring methodology approved for the project by RWQCB in 2024 and as described in Section 4-Monitoring and Adaptive Management of the Remedial Wetland Mitigation Plan.

The City of Palo Alto completed construction of the Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course

Reconfiguration Project in 2017 following a flood protection project on San Francisquito

Creek that impacted the golf course. The Golf Course, now the Baylands Golf Links, is located within the Palo Alto Baylands at 1875 Embarcadero Road in Palo Alto, California.

The reconfiguration project resulted in 0.29 acres of temporary and 1.36 acres of permanent impacts to wetlands/waters of the United States and State. The project’s permits (Attachment A) and Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (Attachment B) require at least

4.0 ac of on-site wetland expansion (i.e., wetland creation) and 0.20 ac of on-site wetland enhancement to compensate for the project’s impacts (ICF International 2016).

The plan to expand and enhance the project wetlands is provided in the project’s

Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP). The plan included 8.03 ac of wetland expansion and 0.42 of enhancement of existing wetlands at the golf course project site, exceeding the minimum permit required mitigation acreage by 100%. The RWQCB permit states (on

Page 4) that, “Of the 8.03 acres of wetlands that the Applicant proposes to expand and the 0.42 acres that the Applicant proposes to enhance, 4 acres of expansion and 0.20 acres of enhancement are required to compensate for the Project’s impacts to waters of the State. Additional acres of expanded or enhanced wetlands may be used to provide for any additional mitigation required by Condition 33.”

The City implemented grading and planting to expand and enhance the wetland habitat in 2016 and 2017. Wetland expansion included excavating fill from elevated terrain surrounding existing wetlands, while wetland enhancement included invasive species removal. Both expanded and enhanced wetlands were then hydroseeded and planted with native brackish marsh plant species such as brown-headed rush (Juncus phaeocephalus), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), meadow barley (Hordeum brachyantherum), alkali barley (Hordeum depressum), and common spikeweed

(Centromadia pungens). The project’s permits and MMP call for a minimum of 5 years of habitat monitoring of the expanded and enhanced wetlands. Since the wetland expansion/enhancement occurred in 2016 and 2017, mitigation monitoring was required in 2017 through 2021.

While the correct acreage of wetlands was constructed, the maintenance and monitoring necessary to attain performance standards was not completed. Per Condition 33 of the

RWQCB permit, the amount of mitigation required increases by 10% for each year that successful implementation of mitigation was deferred.

The City has been in communication with the RWQCB and is working diligently to get the project into compliance. The following documents have been submitted to the RWQCB and are attached as reference to this RFP.

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 6

• Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course Reconfiguration Project Wetland Mitigation

Condition Assessment Report (H.T. Harvey & Assoc., August 2024) (Attachment

C)

• Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course Reconfiguration Project Wetland Delineation

Report (H.T. Harvey & Assoc., June 2025) (Attachment D)

• Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course Reconfiguration Project Remedial Wetland

Mitigation Plan (H.T. Harvey & Assoc., September 2025) (Attachment E)

Remedial Actions

Several remedial actions have been completed, or are planned, to increase the cover and diversity of native hydrophytic species and to increase the probability that success criteria will be met. These include:

• trail decommissioning through wetlands,

• removal of invasive plant species,

• hydrologic modifications to drains present in some wetlands, and

• revegetation to increase wetland species richness and native wetland cover, including:

• Seeding with native wetland seed,

• Revegetation with container plants (native plant species) in expanded and enhanced wetland areas.

The revegetation will occur over a two-year timeframe. In 2025, 0.3 acres will be revegetated – 0.2 acres with seed and 0.1 acres with container plants. In 2026, an additional 0.3 acres will be revegetated with either seed, container plants, or a combination depending on success of the revegetation effort in 2025.

Mitigation Monitoring Plan

This scope consists of CONSULTANT providing the CITY with professional services for the monitoring and reporting of wetland mitigation associated with the City of Palo Alto

Golf Course Reconfiguration Project. The scope of services includes, but is not limited to, wetland mitigation monitoring and annual reporting for a period of five years, or until success criteria are met and the RWQCB has indicated in writing that the City’s mitigation obligations have been met. It is understood that all monitoring and reporting services shall be conducted in compliance with applicable environmental regulations and permit requirements, MMP and revisions to the MMP.

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 7

The monitoring methods are based on the project’s Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP;

ICF International 2016) and revised monitoring methodology approved for the project by

RWQCB in 2024 and as described in Section 4-Monitoring and Adaptive Management of the Remedial Wetland Mitigation Plan.

1.3. Contact Information

Procurement Contact:

Albert Lujan

Contract Administrator albert.lujan@paloalto.gov

(650) 463-4954

Department:

Community Services

1.4. Timeline

Release Project Date: November 24, 2025

Question Submission Deadline: December 10, 2025, 3:00pm

Proposal Submission Deadline: December 17, 2025, 3:00pm

2. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE AND CERTIFICATIONS

2.1. Examination of Proposal Documents

The submission of a proposal shall be deemed a representation and certification by the

Proposer that it:

• Has carefully read and fully understand the information that was provided by the

City to serve as the basis for submission of this proposal.

• Has the capability to successfully undertake and complete the responsibilities and obligations of the proposal being submitted.

• Represents that all information contained in the proposal is true and correct.

• Did not, in any way, collude, conspire to agree, directly or indirectly, with any person, firm, corporation or other Proposer in regard to the amount, terms or conditions of this proposal.

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 8

• Acknowledge that the City has the right to make any inquiry it deems appropriate to substantiate or supplement information supplied by Proposer, and Proposer hereby grants the City permission to make these inquiries, and to provide any and all related documentation in a timely manner.

2.2. Addenda / Clarifications

Should discrepancies or omissions be found in this RFP or should there be a need to clarify this RFP, questions or comments regarding this RFP must be submitted to the

Questions & Answers section of this project listing on OpenGov.

Correspondence shall be communicated through the City’s electronic procurement system. Responses from the City will be provided through the Questions & Answers section of OpenGov for this project and available to all. Inquiries received after the deadline for questions stated in the timeline will not be accepted. All addenda shall become a part of this RFP and shall be acknowledged on the Proposer’s submittal.

The City shall not be responsible for nor be bound by any oral instructions, interpretations or explanations issued by the City or its representatives.

2.3. Submission of Proposals

All proposals shall be submitted electronically through the City’s electronic procurement system (OpenGov) at: https://procurement.opengov.com/portal/palo-alto-ca

Proposals shall be in a submitted status no later than 3:00 pm on Wednesday, December

17, 2025.

The e-procurement system will not accept any proposals after the specified close time.

2.4. Withdrawal or Modification of Proposals

A Proposer may withdraw or modify its proposal at any time before the expiration of the time for submission of proposals as provided in the RFP by entering the project on

OpenGov and selecting to "unsubmit" the proposal. Proposal must be resubmitted after using the "unsubmit" button and making any updates or modifications to the submittal or it shall not be considered as a valid submittal. No request for modification of the proposal shall be considered after its submission and acceptance on grounds that Proposer was not fully informed to any fact or condition.

2.5. Rights of the City of Palo Alto

This RFP does not commit the City to enter into a contract, nor does it obligate the City to pay for any costs incurred in preparation and submission of proposals or in anticipation of a contract. The City reserves the right to:

• Make the selection based on its sole discretion

• Reject any and all proposals https://procurement.opengov.com/portal/palo-alto-ca

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 9

• Issue subsequent Requests for Proposals

• Postpone opening for its own convenience

• Remedy technical errors in the Request for Proposals process

• Approve or disapprove the use of particular subconsultants

• Negotiate with any, all or none of the Proposers

• Accept other than the lowest offer

• Waive informalities and irregularities in the Proposals and/or

• Enter into an agreement with another Proposer in the event the originally selected

Proposer defaults or fails to execute an agreement with the City

An agreement shall not be binding on the City unless and until it is executed by authorized representatives of the City and of the Proposer.

3. PROPOSAL CONTENT AND FORMAT

These instructions outline the guidelines governing the format and content of the proposal and the approach to be used in its development and presentation. The intent of the RFP is to encourage responses that clearly communicate the Proposer’s understanding of the

City’s requirements and its approach to successfully provide the products and/or services on time and within budget. Only that information which is essential to an understanding and evaluation of the proposal should be submitted. Items not specifically and explicitly related to the RFP and proposal, e.g. brochures, marketing material, etc. will not be considered in the evaluation.

All proposals shall address the following items in the order listed below and shall be numbered in the proposal document.

3.1. Proposal Summary

This Section of the Proposal shall discuss the highlights, key features and distinguishing points of the Proposal. A separate sheet shall include a list of individuals and contacts for this Proposal and how to communicate with them. Limit this Section to a total of three (3) pages including the separate sheet.

3.2. Profile on the Proposing Firm(s)

This Section of the Proposal shall include a brief description of the Proposer’s firm size as well as the proposed local organization structure. Include a discussion of the Proposer firm’s financial stability, capacity and resources. Include all other firms participating in the

Proposal, including similar information about the firms.

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 10

Additionally, this Section shall include a listing of any lawsuit or litigation and the result of that action resulting from (a) any public project undertaken by the Proposer or by its subcontractors where litigation is still pending or has occurred within the last five years or

(b) any type of project where claims or settlements were paid by the consultant or its insurers within the last five years.

3.3. Qualifications of the Firm(s)

This Section of the Proposal shall include a brief description of the Proposer’s and any sub-Proposer’s qualifications and previous experience on similar or related projects.

Separately complete and upload the required attachment provided as "Qualifications of

Firm Relative to City's Needs", provide descriptions of pertinent project experience with other public municipalities and private sector entities, including a summary of the work performed, the total project cost, the percentage of work the firm was responsible for, the period over which the work was completed, and the name, title, and phone number of clients to be contacted for references. Give a brief statement of the firm’s adherence to the schedule and budget for the project.

This Section of the Proposal shall include information regarding any relationships with firms and/or individuals that may submit proposals in response to the RFPs being developed.

3.4. Work Plan or Proposal

This Section of the Proposal shall present a well-conceived service plan. Include a full description of major tasks and subtasks. This section of the proposal shall establish that the Proposer understands the City’s objectives and work requirements and Proposer’s ability to satisfy those objectives and requirements. Succinctly describe the proposed approach for addressing the required services and the firm’s ability to meet the City’s schedule, outlining the approach that would be undertaken in providing the requested services.

3.5. Proposed Innovations

The Proposer may also suggest technical or procedural innovations that have been used successfully on other engagements and which may provide the City with better service delivery. In this Section of the Proposal discuss any ideas, innovative approaches, or specific new concepts included in the Proposal that would provide benefit to the City.

3.6. Project Staffing

This Section of the Proposal shall discuss how the Proposer would propose to staff this project. Key project team members shall be identified by name, title and specific responsibilities on the project. An organizational chart for the project team and resumes for key Proposer personnel shall be included. Key personnel will be an important factor considered by the review committee. Changes in key personnel may be cause for rejection of the proposal.

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 11

3.7. Proposal Exceptions

This Section of the Proposal shall discuss any exceptions or requested changes that

Proposer has to the City’s RFP conditions, requirements and sample contract. If there are no exceptions noted, it is assumed the Proposer will accept all conditions and requirements identified in the “Sample Agreement for Services.” Items not excepted will not be open to later negotiation.

3.8. Proposal Costs and Rates

The fee information is relevant to a determination of whether the fee is fair and reasonable in light of the services to be provided. Provision of this information assists the City in determining the firm’s understanding of the project, and provides staff with tools to evaluate (and, if applicable, negotiate) the cost.

This Section of the Proposal shall include the proposed costs to provide the services desired. The proposal shall also detail any other relevant cost and price information (such as any change to the fees based on any options a proposer is able to offer), plus a proposed not-to-exceed amount that would be contained in a potential agreement with the City. The hourly rates or a schedule of rates may be used for pricing the cost of additional services outlined in the Scope of Services.

Supplementary to this RFP and any submitted Proposal is the Cost Proposal Attachment provided with this RFP which must be upload electronically as part of your Proposal.

PLEASE NOTE: The City of Palo Alto does not pay for services before it receives them. Therefore, do not propose contract terms that call for upfront payments or deposits.

3.9. Evidence of Financial Stability

Proposers are required to establish to the City’s satisfaction that they are financially stable and can complete the obligations of a contract resulting from this solicitation. To meet this requirement, Proposers shall submit one of the following items that must be prepared by an independent third party:

• The most recent audited financial statement

• Reviewed financial statements for the last two years

• A letter of good standing from a credible financial institution or a Certified Public

Accountant that contains sufficient information for proposal evaluators to reasonably conduct an objective assessment of the Proposer’s financial viability and/or the Proposer’s risk of default, OR

• A Dun & Bradstreet Business Information Report or Comprehensive Report prepared or updated within the last 12 months.

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 12

NOTE: The City recognizes the confidential nature of certain financial disclosures and will treat the information as such in accordance with applicable law, referenced in the Section of this RFP entitled "Public Nature of Materials".

4. CONTRACT TYPE AND METHOD OF PAYMENT

It is anticipated that the agreement resulting from this solicitation, if awarded, will be a

Not-To-Exceed Budget Per Task form of contract. A Sample Agreement of Services is provided as an Attachment to this RFP. The method of payment to the successful

Proposer shall be on a Not-To-Exceed Budget Per Task with a maximum “not to exceed” fee as set by the Proposer in the proposal or as negotiated between the Proposer and the City as being the maximum cost to perform all work. This figure shall include direct costs and overhead, such as, but limited to, transportation, communications, subsistence and materials and any subcontracted items of work. Progress payments will be based on a percentage of project completed.

Proposers shall be prepared to accept the terms and conditions of the Agreement, including Insurance Requirements. If a Proposer desires to take exception to the

Agreement, Proposer shall provide the following information in Proposal Exceptions of their submittal package. Please include the following:

• Proposer shall clearly identify each proposed change to the Agreement, including all relevant Attachments.

• Proposer shall furnish the reasons for, as well as specific recommendations, for alternative language.

The above factors will be taken into account in evaluating proposals. Proposals that take substantial exceptions to the proposed Agreement may be determined by the City, at its sole discretion, to be unacceptable and no longer considered for award.

Insurance Requirements

The selected Proposer(s), at Proposer’s sole cost and expense and for the full term of the

Agreement or any extension thereof, shall obtain and maintain, at a minimum, all of the insurance requirements outlined in this RFP and its attachments.

All policies, endorsements, certificates and/or binders shall be subject to the approval of the Risk Manager of the City of Palo Alto as to form and content. These requirements are subject to amendment or waiver if so approved in writing by the Risk Manager. The selected Proposer agrees to provide the City with a copy of said policies, certificates and/or endorsement upon award of contract.

5. SCOPE OF WORK

5.1. Wetland Mitigation

TASK 1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 13

A. Project initiation meeting

B. Annual pre-monitoring kick-off meeting

C. Review meeting to discuss results of annual monitoring and recommendations

TASK 2: MONITORING

Monitoring of the two different types of mitigation wetland, expanded and enhanced, will be monitored and analyzed separately. Monitoring for both types will occur in the spring of each calendar year, in March through May, dependent on rainfall.

A. BIOLOGICAL - Successful establishment of wetland vegetation will be based on health and vigor of native, hydrophytic wetland species, absolute percent cover of both native, hydrophytic and invasive species, and native plant species richness. The methodology for absolute cover, health and vigor, and species richness described in September 2025 Monitoring and Adaptive Management

(Section 4) of the Remedial Wetland Mitigation Plan shall be used.

B. NATURAL RECRUITMENT – Natural recruitment will be recorded each monitoring year.

C. HYDROLOGIC MONITORING – The extend and duration of ponding will be monitored for the first three years of the monitoring period in wetland groups two and six. A qualified restoration ecologist will provide guidance and recommendations to the City to potentially adjust the drain modifications.

D. PASPALUM MONITORING - The distribution of Paspalum will be assessed by a qualified restoration ecologists within the 10-foot buffer around the 8.48 ac wetlands. Any location where Paspalum turf has invaded the 10-foot buffer will be mapped during annual monitoring.

E. PHOTO DOCUMENTATION – Annual color photos will be taken from the photo-documentation locations shown in Figure 2 and Appendix B of the Remedial

Wetland Mitigation Plan.

TASK 3: DATA ANALYSIS

Data analysis will be conducted as soon as possible following monitoring and collection of field data. Data analysis will be conducted using standard spreadsheet, database, and statistical computer applications. Data input will be spot-checked and results reviewed by a restoration ecologist or consultant project manager.

Annual monitoring results will be compared with results from previous years to evaluate site progress.

TASK 4: ANNUAL REPORTING

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 14

Consultant shall prepare an annual monitoring report that adheres to the monitoring and reporting methods described in Task 2, and in Section 4 of the Remedial Wetland

Mitigation Plan (H.T. Harvey & Assts., September 2025) to the City by September 1 of each calendar year with the first report due September 1, 2026. The City will review and the final report will be transmitted by the City to the Regional Water Quality Control Board by December 31.

Annual monitoring reports will be prepared by the restoration ecologist responsible for monitoring. Pursuant to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers South Pacific Division

Mitigation Guidelines, the annual report will include the following components.

• A vicinity map and a compensatory mitigation map.

• A description of the restoration site's location and characteristics, including a summary of the restoration effort.

• A discussion of the previous year's management efforts.

• A summary of the monitoring methods and discussion of any modifications made to the monitoring methods since the previous year.

• A summary of the results of the biological performance criteria monitoring and supporting data included as an appendix.

• A summary of the results of the hydrologic and salinity monitoring.

• A summary of the Paspalum TE turf monitoring.

• A discussion of remedial measures identified and implemented during the previous year and a summary of the effectiveness of the remedial measures that were implemented.

• Adaptive management recommendations, including discussion of any concerns or areas of inadequate performance and recommendations for remedial actions.

• Mitigation treatments: photo and other monitoring locations.

TASK 5: ADDITIONAL SERVICES

Additional services could include implementation of additional remedial actions recommended by Consultant’s Restoration Ecologist to increase likelihood of meeting project success criteria at the end of the monitoring period. This could include invasive species removal, seeding or planting native container plants, or hydrologic modifications.

6. EVALUATION CRITERIA

City staff will evaluate the responsive submittals provided based on the following criteria, at a minimum. Please Note: The Scoring Method and Points assigned to each criterion are not published on the RFP. The Scoring Methods and Points are applicable to the RFP.

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 15

No. Evaluation Criteria Scoring Method Weight (Points)

1. Quality of the Proposal (Required)

Quality and completeness of proposal

N/A N/A

2. Proposed Solution (Required)

Quality, performance and effectiveness of the solution, goods and/or services to be provided by the Proposer

N/A N/A

3. Experience (Required)

Consultant or contractor’s experience, including the experience of staff to be assigned to the project, with engagements of similar scope and complexity

N/A N/A

4. Cost (Required)

Proposed cost to the City

N/A N/A

5. Financial Condition and Stability

(Required)

Consultant or contractor’s financial condition and stability

N/A N/A

6. Timely Performance (Required)

Consultant or contractor’s ability to perform the contract within the time specified

N/A N/A

7. Prior Record of Performance for

Government Agencies (Optional)

Consultant or contractor’s prior record of performance with the city or other local, county or state agency

N/A N/A

8. Ability to Provide Ongoing Services

(Optional)

Consultant or contractor’s ability to provide in the future any maintenance, repairs, parts and/or services

N/A N/A

9. Compliance (Required)

Consultant or contractor’s compliance with applicable laws, regulations, policies

(including city policies), guidelines and orders governing prior or existing contracts performed by the consultant or contractor

N/A N/A

7. ORAL INTERVIEWS

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 16

Proposers may be required to participate in an oral interview. The oral interview will be a panel comprised of members of the selection committee.

Proposers may only ask questions that are intended to clarify the questions that they are being asked to respond.

Each Proposer’s time slot for oral interviews will be determined randomly. Proposers who are selected shall make every effort to attend. If representatives of the City experience difficulty on the part of any Proposer in scheduling a time for the oral interview, it may result in disqualification from further consideration.

8. PUBLIC NATURE OF MATERIALS

Responses to this RFP become the exclusive property of the City of Palo Alto. At such time as the Administrative Services Department recommends to form to the City Manager or to the City Council, as applicable, all proposals received in response to this RFP becomes a matter of public record and shall be regarded as public records, with the exception of those elements in each proposal which are defined by the Proposer as business or trade secrets and plainly marked as “Confidential”, “Trade Secret”, or

“Proprietary”. The City shall not in any way be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any such proposal or portions thereof, if they are not plainly marked as “Confidential”, “Trade Secret”, or “Proprietary” or if disclosure is required under the Public Records Act.

Any proposal which contains language purporting to render all or significant portions of the proposal “Confidential”, “Trade Secret”, or “Proprietary” shall be regarded as non-responsive.

Although the California Public Records Act recognizes that certain confidential trade secret information may be protected from disclosure, the City of Palo Alto may not accept or approve that the information that a Proposer submits is a trade secret. If a request is made for information marked “Confidential”, “Trade Secret”, or “Proprietary”, the City shall provide the Proposer who submitted the information with reasonable notice to allow the

Proposer to seek protection from disclosure by a court of competent jurisdiction.

9. COLLUSION

By submitting a proposal, each Proposer represents and warrants that its proposal is genuine and not a sham or collusive or made in the interest of or on behalf of any person not named therein; that the Proposer has not directly induced or solicited any other person to submit a sham proposal or any other person to refrain from submitting a proposal; and that the Proposer has not in any manner sought collusion to secure any improper advantage over any other person submitting a proposal.

10. DISQUALIFICATION

Factors such as, but not limited to, any of the following may be considered just cause to disqualify a proposal without further consideration:

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 17

• Evidence of collusion, directly or indirectly, among Proposers in regard to the amount, terms or conditions of this proposal

• Any attempt to improperly influence any member of the evaluation team

• Existence of any lawsuit, unresolved contractual claim or dispute between

Proposer and the City

• Evidence of incorrect information submitted as part of the proposal

• Evidence of Proposer’s inability to successfully complete the responsibilities and obligation of the proposal

• Proposer’s default under any previous agreement with the City, which results in termination of the Agreement

11. NON-CONFORMING PROPOSAL

A proposal shall be prepared and submitted in accordance with the provisions of these

RFP instructions and specifications. Any alteration, omission, addition, variance, or limitation of, from or to a proposal may be sufficient grounds for non-acceptance of the proposal, at the sole discretion of the City.

12. GRATUITIES

No person shall offer, give or agree to give any City employee any gratuity, discount or offer of employment in connection with the award of contract by the city. No city employee shall solicit, demand, accept or agree to accept from any other person a gratuity, discount or offer of employment in connection with a city contract.

13. FIRMS OR PERSONS NOT ELIGIBLE TO SUBMIT A

PROPOSAL

In order to avoid any conflict of interest or perception of a conflict or interest, Proposer(s) selected to provide professional services under this RFP will be subject to the following requirements:

• The Proposer(s) who works on the procurement will be precluded from submitting proposals or bids as a prime contractor or subcontractor in the ultimate procurement.

• The Proposer(s) may not have interest in any potential Proposer for the ultimate procurement.

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 18

• The Proposer may not have a conflict of interest as defined under Palo Alto

Municipal Code section 2.30.600 or 2.30.610, or as defined under state law including the Political Reform Act or Government Code section 1090 et seq.

• Notwithstanding the above, Proposer(s) may submit proposals or bids as the prime contractor or subcontractor in the ultimate procurement where the Proposer(s) duties and services do not include preparing or assisting the City with any portion of the preparation of a request for proposals, request for qualifications, or any other solicitation regarding a subsequent or additional contract with the City, and the

Proposer(s) participation in the planning, discussions, or drawing of project plans or specifications is limited to conceptual, preliminary, or initial plans or specifications and cooperates with the City to ensure that all bidders for a subsequent contract on any subsequent phase of the project have access to the same information, including all conceptual, preliminary, or initial plans or specifications prepared by the Proposer(s).

14. SUSPENSION AND DEBARMENT STATUS

As applicable, the City will verify whether a contractor and its subcontractors, if any, are suspended or debarred from doing business with the federal government by searching the Excluded Parties List System (www.sam.gov). This verification process applies to contracts funded by federal grants and which are for $25,000 or more (including as well any subcontract that is for $25,000 or more). Unless an exception applies, no such federal funds may go to a person or entity that is suspended or disbarred, thus any such person or entity found to be suspended or disbarred in the check of the www.sam.gov list system will be disqualified under the Request for Proposals.

15. PROPOSER QUESTIONNAIRE

15.1. Business Type*

Please indicate the type of business that your company will continue operating as.

☐ Individual

☐ Partnership

☐ Joint Venture

☐ Corporation

☐ Other

*Response required

15.2. Business Type Follow-Up*

If you indicated "Other" on the previous question, please explain here.

*Response required https://www.sam.gov/ https://www.sam.gov/

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 19

15.3. Year of Incorporation*

Please indicate the year of incorporation (if applicable). If not incorporated, please indicate such.

*Response required

15.4. State Incorporated*

In what state was your company incorporated?

*Response required

15.5. Business In California*

When was your company authorized to do business in the State of California?

*Response required

15.6. Qualifications of Firm - Experience of Firm*

Please download the below documents, complete, and upload. For additional instructions on this form, please see the section of this RFP titled "Proposal Content and Format" and the subsection titled "Qualifications of the Firm".

• Firm_Experience.pdf

*Response required

15.7. Proposal (without Cost)*

Please upload your Technical Proposal without fees/costs here. You will be uploading the fee/cost portion of your proposal separately in another step.

*Response required

15.8. Separate Cost File*

The fees/costs portion of your proposal should not be attached with the rest of your

Proposal and should be attached separately here using the document provided. Please download, update and review before uploading your fee/cost information here.

• Attachment_G_Cost_Proposal_...

*Response required

15.9. Evidence of Financial Stability-REQUIRED SUBMITTAL *

Please upload your Evidence of Financial Stability

*Response required

15.10. Additional Information

If any of your previous answers required additional information to be submitted or provided, please upload all such information here.

https://government-project.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/53652/ce5a4be1-492e-4eaf-913a-a0e17abfe3ae_Firm_Experience.pdf?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Credential=ASIA47RIURE4CYJWBRUP%2F20251202%2Fus-west-2%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20251202T184224Z&X-Amz-Expires=72000&X-Amz-Security-Token=IQoJb3JpZ2luX2VjEFIaCXVzLXdlc3QtMiJHMEUCIDKFb0qRTkgosWRvEJAVbtvcd10lNiVXTK85aYO8TOy0AiEA2VU5TaN8Hu9qf9%2BKb94j1M0tPtsbjhJvQOCkRc%2BsWpQqjAUIGxACGgw4OTIzNjQ2ODc2NzIiDNwCL0e3Z7f8WZ327yrpBNf1t%2FdspLNqElbkCswY9HDXDZDoz0crlyNU%2Fy%2FLeQxbgkCmWjyQaPDv4pJvsCcULtvRoaT9gImKcxLyIPNXph49bCp50uq1K7FVlW%2F6SddH5M28wLLJTwcPmrRdnfJFmmrH3stT%2F%2FE3d3rD9YrfidLjfHppLH%2FzKuZBoo5A2cvu7%2B846UQFv6V1RY4SSfxDLvVwEzrWKJ4j4uxX9P9zsnPp%2Bm0TBHb6XuFbG2apRk9tlFDBh%2BYpz2bOyG08HElEIAorTLZmloMnP3tpK75v%2F6WW6ladpt3al2791h28sJFjDExkLcJwtgqE4282fKHuuUfQjwLAvwtZHG3vxVJr8zYjLt15NqJpLkHIg8y2likFdQSTYUMT1WYI3Yc6%2FlkhEdFi4n2m9GDYWaeyi5zlXOizAZw%2F0KHypBuD957uB7R0kSQxtjglrlR7b9J7Uji%2BDw5axNVOKJLPfFhgvdOj%2B3oWeq2y%2BKwmWxzRKgVVL%2FLxsiAGz4XvVSFuDBsuX5o3cCPsIgxIf15o93UwsZkOJShTY%2FYPvCdAYruHT%2FeGLThL%2FrjM2Y5sh4il2qh%2BpqxODnhR8smoj%2Fr5kN2WzzXyKmPCLbV0qxncNRNYGzoefvPSNu2VpM4wMoZ%2FatH00W2Y1uO6Lt0KAcSh4kGnZHQByqg3ZH4%2BGbGuINKB76fzAWYH8%2BOr7rpl6qRzEjhyxuhNd61Zmh%2BQfjTycP6eaVReDv5OY0toIadawhJQDoQxUa%2BqIeCpjDWetFFkgmPO41rk5cRpnjI8YxEBurKlDVoDb6i5Krcv2jfrNhw5lp5C4mqp03W2rHsx%2BNG7MM3XvMkGOpkBSdbXjnAVxa%2Fgn0sbP85krxRaSEj23GpGxJlCMpYtpivEkGrp%2FD4dcXsGIBNSxya2pu4K8CPIJunBJ5npR4LT7f4YeSrnnGnb1%2B6XxQ1CGR2bICbB%2BwbCOGK2URALowLir0JWC6aL7fhmGH821kbyifJJbripRj0fVQNUi%2BNM9volo1W3aNaZ3j6vrmmPNFdFwx9rOQTSLacl&X-Amz-Signature=b947900ae7d58f7400bf46b7b3f9e8c6287ce8630851da06046123c008a2bf84&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&response-content-disposition=attachment%3B%20filename%3D%22Firm_Experience.pdf%22&x-id=GetObject https://government-project.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/214044/934a0b45-795b-4b1e-886c-f7f812f0d3f3_Attachment_G_Cost_Proposal_Wetland_Monitoring_and_Reporting.docx

Request for Proposal (RFP) #196239 20

15.11. Proposer Confirmation*

By confirming, the submission of a proposal shall be deemed a representation and certification by the Proposer that they have investigated all aspects of the RFP, that they are aware of the applicable facts pertaining to the RFP process, its procedures and requirements, and they have read and understand the RFP. No request for modification of the proposal shall be considered after its submission on the grounds that the Proposer was not fully informed as to any fact or condition.

Confirmation by the Proposer represents and warrants that he or she has the legal capacity and authority to bind the Company stated on the RFP submittal.

☐ Please confirm

*Response required

Text133