Revised RFP City of Detroit Water System Improvements RFP 5282026.docx
DOCX document 68 KB Posted
- Attached to
- RFP for City of Detroit Water System Rehabilitation, Loan Administration, & Civil Engineering
- Solicitation number
- S-Q10041-00016890
- Issued by
- Marion County, Oregon
About this file
Summary of RFP for City of Detroit Water System Rehabilitation
This Revised Request for Proposals is issued by the City of Detroit, Oregon for grant/loan administration and civil engineering services to support the rehabilitation of its water system. The project will construct an emergency potable water intertie between Detroit and Idanha, located approximately five miles apart, consisting of approximately 25,000 feet of new water main installation along Highway 22, alterations to existing pressure reducing valve stations, a new bidirectional pump station, and a bidirectional flow meter to enable bidirectional water pumping between treated water reservoirs. The procurement is structured in two phases: Phase 1 (guaranteed) covers engineering design and feasibility studies, while Phase 2 (optional) covers construction oversight and construction management. Proposals must be submitted in four hard copies to Michelle Connor, City Recorder, by 2:00 p.m. local time on June 4, 2026, with a 15-page response limit. Staff recommendations are scheduled for June 6, 2026, with City Council approval anticipated for June 9, 2026. Proposers must demonstrate current experience in at least one project of similar size and nature completed within the past five years where both grant/loan administration and engineering services were provided.
The RFP demonstrates a strong preference for firms with prior experience with the Special Public Works Fund (funded by the Oregon State Lottery and administered by the Oregon Infrastructure Finance Authority), as well as experience with the Infrastructure Finance Authority, Oregon Housing and Community Services, Oregon Emergency Management, and FEMA. Project funding is provided through the Special Public Works Fund and FEMA, though specific contract award values or budget ranges are not disclosed. The selected consultant must carry comprehensive general liability insurance of $2,000,000, professional liability insurance of $500,000, automobile liability insurance of $500,000, professional errors and omissions insurance of $2,000,000, and workers' compensation insurance as required by Oregon law. Evaluation will be weighted on location of firm (10%), familiarity with the City (25%), references (15%), experience with grant administration and water system engineering (40%), understanding/approach and proposal quality (10%), and staffing plan and pricing proposal (15%). The contract will be awarded to the most qualified proposer following negotiation of detailed scope and fees, with final City Council approval required. No specific set-asides for disadvantaged enterprises or restricted vendor categories are identified.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Addendum 4 City of Detroit Water System Improvements RFP 5282026.docx | DOCX document | |
| City of Detroit Water System Rehabilitation RFP.pdf | ||
| RFP Detroit Waterline - Amendment 1.docx | DOCX document |
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
PO Box 589, Detroit, OR 97342, Phone (503) 854-3496 - Fax (503) 854-3232
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
FOR
CITY OF DETROIT WATER SYSTEM REHABILITATION,
LOAN ADMINISTRATION, AND CIVIL ENGINEERING
Advertised May 7, 2026
This project was funded in part with a financial award from the Special Public Works Fund, funded by the Oregon State Lottery and administered by the Oregon Infrastructure Finance Authority.
Proposals Due:
2:00 pm June 4, 2026
Address Proposals to:
City of Detroit Attn: Michelle Connor, City Recorder Detroit@wvi.com PO Box 589 Detroit, OR 97342
SECTION 1 - GENERAL INFORMATION
1.01 Project Scope
The proposed project will construct an emergency potable water intertie between Detroit and Idanha. The two communities are located approximately five miles apart. The intertie would consist of approximately 25,000 feet of new water main installed along highway 22, alterations to existing pressure reducing valve stations, a new bidirectional pump station, and a bidirectional flow meter. Water should be able to be pumped back and forth between the treated water reservoirs for both Detroit and Idanha. Phase 1 of this project will be for engineering design and feasibility. Should the project be able to be constructed, phase 2 will consist of construction oversight and construction management of the project designed in phase 1. While only phase 1 work is guaranteed, the owner shall reserve the right to award phase 2 of the project to the winning proposal.
1.02 Proposal Request
Four hard copies of the written materials in response to this RFP must be submitted in hard copy form no later than the proposal due date of 2:00 p.m. local time on Thursday, November 21, 2024, to Michelle Connor, City Recorder.
| 1.03 | Proposer's Proposal | ||||||
| Proposers responding to this proposal request must follow the directions stated | within | the RFP. Adherence to these rules will ensure a fair and objective | analysis of the proposals. Proposals should be prepared simply and | economically. Special bindings, colored displays, promotional materials, etc., | are not necessary. Emphasis should be on completeness, brevity, and clarity of | the content. | |
| Provide a clear and concise description of your firm's capabilities to meet | the RFP requirements. Proposals must demonstrate current experience in at least one project of the general size and nature performed within the last five (5) years where both full grant/loan administration and engineering services were provided. Failure | to comply with or complete any part of this request may result in the rejection of your proposal. |
| 1.04 | Schedule | |||
| Advertisement | May 7, 2026 | |||
| Proposal Due at 2:00 pm Local Time | June 4, 2026 | |||
| Staff Recommendation | June 6, 2026 | |||
| City Council Approval | June 9, 2026 |
| 1.05 | Issuing Office |
| All correspondence pertaining to this RFP should be directed to City of Detroit. |
| 1.06 | Submitting Proposals | ||||
| Proposals must be submitted via hard copy only, to City of Detroit. Fax | submissions | or email copies will not be accepted. Proposals must be received | by the date and time stated in the Schedule. Submittals that are late, incomplete, | or misdirected will be considered non-responsive, with no exceptions. | |
| The proposal must be submitted in a sealed envelope, clearly marked as | follows: | ||||
| City of Detroit | |||||
| Attn: Michelle Connor, City Recorder | |||||
| RE: Proposal to RFP: City of Detroit Water System Rehabilitation |
| 1.07 | Proposal Withdrawal |
| Any proposal may be withdrawn at any time before the "Proposal Due" date. |
| 1.08 | Rejection or Acceptance of Proposals |
| The City expressly reserves the following rights to: |
a. Disregard any or all irregularities in the proposals.
b. Reject any or all of the proposals or portions thereof.
c. Base award with due regard to quality of services, experience, compliance with the RFP, and other factors as may be necessary under such circumstances.
d. Reject all proposals and re-advertise at the City's sole discretion.
| 1.09 | Selection of Consultant | ||
| The City's Selection Committee will recommend to the City Council that the | contract award be made to the proposer that is in the Committee's opinion, best | qualified. Council approval will be required. | |
| The City's Selection Committee will follow the following steps to identify the best | qualified proposer: |
i. Evaluate and rank all qualified proposals according to the evaluation criteria.
ii. Negotiate with the top ranked proposer for a detailed scope and acceptance fee for the project. (Negotiate with the next ranked proposer if the first one does not lead to fruition.)
iii. Recommend to the City Council that the contract award be made to the proposer that is in the Committee's opinion, best qualified after the scope and fee negotiation is complete.
| 1.10 | Requirements of Insurance | |
| The successful proposer will be required to meet the City's insurance coverage | as described below: |
a. Comprehensive general liability - $2,000,000.00
b. Professional liability - $500,000.00
c. Automobile liability - $500,000.00
d. Workers' compensation - As required by ORS 656.017
e. Professional errors and omissions - $2,000,000.00 The successful proposer shall provide certification of all coverage's and shall name the City of Detroit as "an additional insured" on all except workers' compensation insurance policies prior to signing the contract. The City is defined as the entity named on the declarations page of the coverage agreement and its officers, employees, and agents including volunteers, authorized to act on behalf of the City.
| 1.11 | Execution of Contract | |||
| It is anticipated that the total cost for FEMA & SPWF administration, design, and | construction | services will need to be approved by Council. The contract should | be signed within two weeks of council award of the contract. |
| 1.12 | Public Records | ||||
| Any materials submitted by the proposer shall become the property of the City | unless otherwise specified. During the evaluation of proposals and the | selections of the Consultant, the proposals shall be open to public inspection. | Proposals should not contain any information which the proposers do not wish to | become public. |
| 1.13 | Tax ID Number | |
| Proposals must state the proposer's Federal/State of Oregon Taxpayer | Identification Number. |
| 1.14 | Federal/State/Local Requirements | ||||||
| The selected proposer shall comply with all Federal, State and local laws, | regulations, | executive orders and ordinances applicable to the work under this | contract , including | without limitation, the provisions of ORS 279B.220, | 279B.2610, 279B.235, and 279B.270. In addition, proposers agree to comply | with: |
a. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964;
b. Section V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973;
c. The American with Disabilities Act of 1990 and ORS 659.425;
d. All regulations and administrative rules established pursuant to the forgoing laws: and
e. All other applicable requirements of Federal and State civil rights and rehabilitation statues, rules and regulations.
f. All consultants need to comply with all contract clauses in FEMA Federal Contract Provisions as applicable outlined in 2 CFR 200 Annex II. (See Appendix A).
g. 2 CFR 200.317-327 (Federal Procurement Statutes)
Proposer is subject to the Oregon Worker's Compensation Law and shall comply with ORS 657.017, which requires the provision of Worker's Compensation coverage for all employees working under this contract. The City's programs, services, employment opportunities and volunteer positions are open to all persons without regard to race, religions, color, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability or political affiliation.
1.15 Payment
The City will reimburse the Consultant under contract for services performed based on the approved scope of work completed after they are selected through the subsequent RFP and selection process.
The State of Oregon and FEMA are not a party to this agreement.
1.16 Funds
Funds for this project are being provided through a Special Public Works Funds and FEMA.
SECTION 2 - Proposal Content
There is a 15 page limit for the Proposals. The City is not interested in brochures, boilerplate filler, or general information that is not relevant to the project at hand. The consultants responding to this RFP are advised to provide a clear and responsive approach addressing all issues noted in this RFP.
Key elements should include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following items: (The identified elements are presented in no particular order.)
| 2.01 | Understanding of Need | ||
| The consultant should clearly state their understanding of the City's need for | grants/loans administration and project engineering for a small community. | Specific examples and insights will be useful in this section. |
| 2.02 | Approach | |||
| The consultant should attempt to describe their approach to serving as project | engineer for a small community like Detroit, how they will communicate with the | City, and what policies they will follow when interacting with the City on a day to | day basis. |
| 2.03 | Experience | |
| Consultant shall provide a description of their general experience with grant/loan administration and water system engineering. Preference will be | given | to firms with SPWF experience, working with IFA, OHA, OEM, and FEMA. All applicable experience should be provided. |
| 2.04 | Project Team | |||
| Describe the proposed project team for the contract. Describe who will be the | key contacts and leaders of the team and the office where they work. Discuss | who will interact with the City and the organizational structure that will be | proposed. |
| 2.05 | Availability | |||
| It is important that the selected engineering firm will be capable of responding to | the City's needs in a timely manner, complete projects on time, and be an | efficient resource for the City. The Proposal should address the consultants | approach to ensuring that the City's needs will be met by their firm. |
| 2.06 | References | |||||
| Firms responding to this Proposal must provide a list of municipal client references | within Oregon for which the firm or members of the firm have provided similar or | related services within the past 5 years. A description of pertinent projects and | current contact information for the agency should be provided. The firm must | also provide a list of litigation pending or filed against firm within the past 5 | years. |
SECTION 3 - SELECTION CRITERIA
The City will screen and rank the Proposals based on the criteria outlined in this section. The selection panel will make a final choice and recommendation to the Council to award the engineering contract to the most qualified consultant.
A brief description of the primary selection criteria is provided below:
| 3.01 | Proximity of Firm to Detroit | ||
| The City wishes to work closely with the selected firm and desires fast and | effective service. The consultant should address how they will provide effective | service and how they will address travel costs and travel time issues. |
| 3.02 | Experience and Familiarity with the City of Detroit | ||||
| Firms and firm members who have specialized experience with or who have | gained a specialized understanding of the City of Detroit will be considered | above firms and engineers without such an understanding. Describe your firm or | firm member's experience and/or describe the level of familiarity gained during | the Proposal process. |
| 3.03 | References | ||||
| References where the consultant has served as the grant/loan administrator | and/or EOR for municipal water system clients in Oregon where similar or related | work was performed. References should also be able to describe the firm's | responsiveness, availability, and ability to complete projects in a timely and | orderly manner. | |
| 3.04 | Experience Providing Grant Administration and Water System Engineering | ||||
| The City is seeking a consultant familiar with grant funding administration and | water system engineering. As a small City, it is critical that the consultant have | this experience. |
| 3.05 | Consultant's understanding and approach and quality of Proposals | |||
| This selection criteria will allow the selection committee to award points based on | the quality of the Proposal, the consultant's understanding of the City's needs, the | consultant's approach to the work, or any other quality about the consultant's | proposal that sets it apart from any others. |
3.06 Staffing Plan and Pricing Proposal.
Provide a staffing plan and an estimate of the total hours, detailed by position, required for the project tasks as outlined. Discuss the workload for all key team members and their capacity to perform the requested services for the project, according to your proposed schedule.
In accordance with ORS 279C.110, following the identification of the Proposer that is determined to be in City’s best interest, a Pricing Proposal will be considered. The pricing proposal must consist of:
1. A schedule of hourly rates that the prospective consultant will charge for the work of each individual or each labor classification that will perform the professional services the local contracting agency requires for the procurement, in the form of an offer that is irrevocable for not less than 90 days after the date of the proposal; and
1. A reasonable estimate of hours that the prospective consultant will require to perform the professional services the local contracting agency requires for the procurement; and may include, at the local contracting agency’s request, additional pricing information that is limited to:
1. A description of each task that the prospective consultant understands as comprising the professional services;
1. A list of each individual or labor classification that will perform each task, together with the hourly rate that applies to the individual or labor classification; and
1. A list of expenses, including travel expenses, that the prospective consultant expects to incur in connection with providing the professional services
SELECTION CRITERIA SUMMARY
| Selection Criteria |
| Relative Weight |
| Location of firm |
| 10 |
| Familiarity with City |
| 25 |
| References |
| 15 |
| Experience w/ Grant Admin. & Water System Engineering |
| 40 |
| Understanding and Approach; Quality of Proposal |
| 10 |
| Staffing Plan and Pricing Proposal |
| 15 |
| Total |
| 115 |
SECTION 4 - LIMITATIONS
This RFP does not commit the City of Detroit to paying any costs incurred by consultant in the submission or presentation of a proposal, or in making the necessary studies for the preparation thereof. Further, the City of Detroit reserves the right to:
· Accept or reject any and all submittals received as a result of this RFP at any time;
· Negotiate with qualified consultants;
· Cancel the RFP, in part or in whole, if it is determined to be in the best interest of the City to do so;
· Waive minor irregularities and formalities in the Proposals submittals;
· Seek further Proposals for engineering design and construction services contracts, in whole or in part, for recommendation contained in the completed facilities plan;
· The City reserves the right to seek clarification on any point in any Proposal at any phase of the selection process;
No guarantee of work, financial obligation, or other assurance is made to any respondent of the RFP whether selected or not for the role.
image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .