Addendum Date: August 27, 2026

ADDENDUM 1 TO RFP NO. 27-15

for

Sports Strategy Study - Green Fee Project

STATE OF HAWAI‘I

HAWAI‘I TOURISM AUTHORITY

DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & TOURISM

This Addendum includes:

• RFP 27-15 Sports Strategy Study - Green Fee Project answers to questions submitted on

HIePRO.

Note: A new version of the RFP is not forthcoming. All changes are documented in the Addendum(s).

Applicants must refer to the Addendum(s) to know of the changes.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1. Will HTA share any of its existing sporting event economic impact studies or reports?

a. Yes

2. Will HTA share its latest feasibility study, projections, project timeline for the New Aloha

Stadium?

a. Not applicable – Detailed information regarding the New Aloha Stadium feasibility study, project timeline and projections reports will not be available for this study.

3. Will HTA share any available Hawaii Convention Center statistics and capacity values regarding sporting events?

a. Yes.

4. Will HTA share its known UH-Manoa [and other UH campuses, as pertinent] sports complex statistics and capacities?

5. Will HTA provide access (including contact information and referrals) to sporting event organizers (including events lost within the last 25 years), as well as the then-projected financial information (including costs and benefits) about such events?

a. No.

6. Will HTA/DBEDT share its known information about economic multipliers, related reports, and modeling data for revenues, costs, retail, and rental markets related to sports tourism and related events?

7. What data, routine monitoring metrics, or post-event environmental impact reports can HTA provide regarding ecological stressors (specifically related to nearshore marine health, shoreline erosion, trail degradation, and wildlife disruption) related to primary sports tourism hotspots across the Hawaiian Islands?

a. None available.

8. Will HTA/DBEDT provide current information on state and county public subsidies, grants, tax incentives, fee waivers, and municipal service expenditures (such as police overtime, traffic management, and post-event park sanitation) allocated to support sports events across Hawaii over the past five fiscal years?

9. Will HTA share its available data on youth sports involvement across the state?

10. Will HTA provide any available information on Public Safety, Emergency Medical Services, and Search & Rescue incident rates involving tourists participating in sporting events and extreme or unguided sports?

11. Can the ten-year corporate experience requirement in conducting sports tourism studies be satisfied collectively by the proposed project team (key personnel or academic researchers), if not thorugh a sole named individual or subcontractor?

12. If an Offeror intends to engage a specialized subcontractor (e.g., an economic impact specialist firm) post-award, will HTA permit the qualifications and historical case studies of that subcontractor to satisfy the minimum qualifications under Section 3.1.3, Item 5.b?

13. How does HTA define the expected boundaries of the contractor's role in delivering "proposed legislation"? To ensure the contractor does not perform inherently governmental policy-making functions under Section 2.10, is HTA seeking broad legislative policy recommendations, or is it expecting fully drafted bill language?

a. Any recommendations in draft form.

14. Given the tight turnaround between the draft report due date (5 March 2027) and the final report deadline (31 March 2027), what is HTA’s committed review period for providing feedback on the draft report? Are there scheduled intermediate milestones or presentation dates with the HTA Board of Directors built into this timeline to ensure final acceptance is reached by March 31?

a. One week after draft report is submitted for internal review.

15. It appears that county-specific VAPs have recently been sought by HTA through RFPs such as its <RFP 26-16 Visitor Assistance Program - O‘ahu>, for which final reports are not due until

31 January 2028. Are the extant VAPs noted on <https://vashbigisland.org/faqs/> available for review?

a. Not Applicable.

16. Please explain the reference to "case-based service model” under the "EVALUATION

CRITERION 2: PROPOSED APPROACH."

a. Experience based.

17. The final report is due 31 March 2027, while the contract ends 31 May 2027. What contractor support will be required by HTA during April and May 2027?

a. None.

18. In Section 3.1.3 (Item 8), the RFP instructs offerors that their budget proposals must have "key services itemized (i.e., visitor support services, reporting, the number of hours per task, the rate of personnel, etc.)." Please clarify a need to itemize "visitor support services" within a sports strategy study. Might there be boilerplate language employed here (and possibly elsewhere) from a disparate RFP, such as RFP NO. 26-16: VISITOR ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (VAP)

OʻAHU? Please advise of any similar potential oversights.

19. Under Section 2.8, the contractor is obligated to provide "reasonable transition assistance to the

State and cooperation with any successor contractor(s)"; the RFP dictates that this transition support is considered part of the contractor's core obligations and must be included in the flat contract price. However, no limitataions are presented on the timetable for by when such a successor may be indentified by HTA. Will HTA accept jurisdiction as an intermediary of any such materials requested to be transferred if no such successor is enrolled prior to the end of the extant contract?

20. Will HTA/DBEDT share available tax yields and Green Fee data from sports facilities engaging major sports events?

21. Will HTA disclose its available statistical data addressing current Hawaii Sports Tourism revenues and costs?

22. Will HTA share any collected information regarding Hawaii Sports Tourism revenues and costs

(even if only direct costs and revenues from direct participants)?

23. Will HTA introduce or connect the selected consultant with in-state sports venues to conduct assessments?

24. Will HTA/DBEDT share any collected information about the spending of participants as well as friends and family members in (or visiting) Hawaii for athletic events?

25. Will HTA/DBEDT share available Information regarding in-state sporting events and environmental impacts, such as water meter tracking or collected waste tonnage?

26. Will HTA/DBEDT share any available resident sentiment surveys and resultant data collected regarding sporting and non-sporting events?

27. Will DBEDT share any collected retail or rental-lodging data related to in-state sporting events?

Yes.

28. Will tax yields from sporting facilities and Green Fee levies collected within specified timespans

[before, during, and after] of in-state sporting events be shared with the selected consultant?

29. Will HTA/DBEDT share any collected data from other state or local agencies regarding lifeguards, coastal line restoration, post-event restorations, or hiking trails (such as statistics from Diamond Head State Monument)?

30. Will DBEDT share any collected information regarding traffic volume, service degradation, and congestion during in-state sporting events?

31. Will DBEDT share any collected data from other agencies regarding parking lot turnover, parking facilities, and parking overflow during in-state sporting events?

32. In light of recent storms and power outages, is HTA able to consider extending the deadlne for proposal submission?

33. Will HTA share any collected data regarding resident versus tourist utilization of sporting facilities and any reported displacements of any parties related to such utilization?

34. Will HTA share any collected data regarding state and county expenditures required to repair, staff, and clean public facilities after being utilized by sports tourists?

35. Will HTA/DBEDT share any collected data regarding resident sentiment and visitor satisfaction scores about in-state sporting events?

36. Will HTA/DBEDT share any collected data or correspondence regarding public safety concerns and expenditures for in-state sporting events?

37. Will HTA disclose any collected information about, and provide referrals for communication with, known in-state, out-of-state, and international DMOs?

38. Will HTA/DBEDT share collected data andmetrics regarding golf courses, country clubs, and marinas, including utilization of such by residents and visitors?

39. Will HTA/DBEDT disclose any available GPS/GIS sporting event participant data?

40. Reference: Section 2.2 (Scope of Work), Paragraph 2.2.1.2 (Infrastructure and Major Venue

Assessment, page 8) and Exhibit F (Summary of HTA’s FY27 Sports Strategic Plan, page 50).

Question: Will HTA clarify the intended balance of focus for this study and clarify if the primary objective is venue-driven—aimed at identifying strategies to revitalize and maximize the utilization of major sports venues for professional and collegiate events—or if the focus is equally weighted toward community-centric, low-impact, or intrinsic sporting events that do not rely on large-scale stadium infrastructure?

41. Reference: Section 2.2.1.1 (Core Market and Economic Evaluation, page 8) and Exhibit F, Section 4 (Portfolio and Venue Management, page 50). Question: Under the "Portfolio and

Venue Management" guidelines, HTA notes a target of attracting travelers with high disposable income. Is HTA seeking a strategy focused heavily on the physical revitalization of major venues to host professional and collegiate teams, or should the study prioritize non-venue-reliant niche and participatory sports that align with regenerative tourism and ecological limits?

a. HTA is seeking both strategic studies.

42. Reference: Section 2.2 (Scope of Work, page 8). Question: To what extent should the final strategic roadmap prioritize recommendations for structural, operational, and marketing interventions at major state and university sports facilities, versus broader statewide programmatic initiatives for sports tourism development?

a. The HTA is seeking all recommendations to increase sports tourism development.

43. Page 8, Section 2.1, Paragraph 2: Will HTA share any of its existing sporting event economic impact studies or reports to assist the contractor in establishing a research baseline?

44. Page 51, Exhibit F, Section 7, Paragraph 1: Will HTA share its latest feasibility study, projections, and project timeline for the New Aloha Stadium to facilitate the evaluation of venue lifecycles?

45. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.2.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA share any available Hawaii Convention Center statistics and capacity values regarding sporting events to assist with the major venue assessment?

46. Page 8-9, Section 2.2.1.2.b, Paragraph 1: Will HTA share its known University of Hawaiʻi at

Mānoa (and other pertinent UH campuses) sports complex statistics and capacities?

47. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.b, Paragraph 1: Will HTA provide contact information, referrals, and historical financial projections for sporting event organizers, including those of events lost to the state within the last 25 years?

48. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA and DBEDT share known information, reports, and modeling data for economic multipliers, revenues, costs, retail, and rental markets related to sports tourism and events?

49. Page 8, Section 2.1, Paragraph 1: What data, routine monitoring metrics, or environmental impact reports can HTA provide regarding ecological stressors (such as marine health, erosion, and trail degradation) at primary sports tourism hotspots?

50. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.a.ii, Paragraph 1: Will HTA/DBEDT provide detailed historical information on state and county public subsidies, grants, tax incentives, fee waivers, and municipal service expenditures allocated to sports events over the past five or more fiscal years?

51. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.c, Paragraph 1: Will HTA share its available baseline data on youth sports involvement across the state to assist with the youth development assessment?

52. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA provide available public safety, emergency medical services, and search and rescue incident rates involving tourists participating in extreme or unguided sports?

53. Page 14, Section 3.1.3, Item 5.b, Paragraph a: Can the ten-year professional experience requirement be satisfied collectively by the qualifications of the proposed key personnel and academic researchers rather than a single entity?

54. Page 14, Section 3.1.3, Item 5.b, Paragraph a: Will HTA permit the qualifications and case studies of a specialized subcontractor formally engaged post-award to satisfy the minimum qualification requirements?

55. Page 11, Section 2.10, Paragraph 1: How does HTA define the boundaries of the contractor's legislative support to ensure the contractor does not perform inherently governmental policy-making functions?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 13. Please refer to the response provided to Question 13.

56. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.5.b & c, Paragraph 1: What is HTA's committed review period for providing feedback on the draft report submitted on 5 March 2027, to ensure the final report deadline of 31 March 2027, is met?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 14. Please refer to the response provided to Question 14.

57. Page 23, Section 4.2, Evaluation Criterion 2A, Paragraph 1: Given the scoring criteria referencing the Visitor Assistance Program, are the existing VAP reports or materials available to offerors for review?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 15. Please refer to the response provided to Question 15.

58. Page 23, Section 4.2, Evaluation Criterion 2A, Paragraph 3: Will HTA clarify and explain the reference to the "case-based service model" in the scoring guidelines under Evaluation

Criterion 2A?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 16. Please refer to the response provided to Question 16.

59. Page 10, Section 2.5 and Page 9, Section 2.2.1.5.c: Please clarify what specific contractor support or deliverables will be required during April and May 2027 after the final report is submitted on 31 March 2027.

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 17. Please refer to the response provided to Question 17.

60. Page 15, Section 3.1.3, Item 8, Paragraph 2: Please clarify if the requirement to itemize "visitor support services" is a boilerplate error, and confirm if such itemization is required for this

Sports Strategy Study.

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 18. Please refer to the response provided to Question 18.

61. Page 11, Section 2.8, Paragraph 1: Will HTA serve as the intermediary host for transitioning project files if no successor contractor is enrolled prior to the end of the contract term on 31

May 2027?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 19. Please refer to the response provided to Question 19.

62. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA/DBEDT share available historical tax yields and Green Fee data from sports facilities associated with major sporting events?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 20. Please refer to the response provided to Question 20.

63. Page 8, Section 2.1, Paragraph 2: Will HTA disclose its currently available baseline statistical data addressing sports tourism revenues and public costs in Hawaii?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 21. Please refer to the response provided to Question 21.

64. Page 8, Section 2.1, Paragraph 2: Will HTA share any historically collected data on sports tourism revenues and costs, even if limited to direct expenditures by direct participants?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 22. Please refer to the response provided to Question 22.

65. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.2.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA facilitate direct introductions and coordinate access for the selected contractor with in-state sports venues to conduct physical and operational assessments?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 23. Please refer to the response provided to Question 23.

66. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA/DBEDT share any collected survey data regarding companion travel spending (friends and family of athletic event participants) in

Hawaii?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 24. Please refer to the response provided to Question 24.

67. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA/DBEDT share available quantitative environmental impact data, such as water usage or waste tonnage, from previous in-state

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 25. Please refer to the response provided to Question 25.

68. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA/DBEDT provide copies of any past resident sentiment surveys and raw datasets collected regarding the community impacts of in-state

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 26. Please refer to the response provided to Question 26.

69. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.a, Paragraph 1: Will DBEDT share any collected retail sales or rental-lodging transaction data captured during major in-state sporting event periods?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 27. Please refer to the response provided to Question 27.

70. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA/DBEDT share localized tax yields and Green

Fee collections pre-, during, and post-event for major sports facilities?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 28. Please refer to the response provided to Question 28.

71. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA/DBEDT provide inter-agency data regarding lifeguarding, shoreline restoration, or trail usage related to sports tourism hotspots?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 29. Please refer to the response provided to Question 29.

72. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.a, Paragraph 1: Will DBEDT share available metrics regarding traffic volume increases and roadway service degradation during major in-state sporting events?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 30. Please refer to the response provided to Question 30.

73. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.a, Paragraph 1: Will DBEDT share collected municipal data regarding parking lot turnover, facility capacity, and parking overflow during major sporting events?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 31. Please refer to the response provided to Question 31.

74. Page 4, Section 1.4, Paragraph 1: In light of recent storms and electrical infrastructure issues, is HTA able to consider extending the deadline for proposal submission?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 32. Please refer to the response provided to Question 32.

75. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA share data regarding resident versus visitor utilization of public sporting facilities and any reported community displacement impacts?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 33. Please refer to the response provided to Question 33.

76. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA/DBEDT share data regarding state and county maintenance expenditures required to repair, staff, and clean public facilities after sports tourism events?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 34. Please refer to the response provided to Question 34.

77. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA/DBEDT provide historical data regarding resident sentiment surveys and visitor satisfaction scores specifically tied to in-state sporting events?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 35. Please refer to the response provided to Question 35.

78. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA/DBEDT share historical records, reports, or agency correspondence regarding public safety expenditures and concerns for in-state sporting events?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 36. Please refer to the response provided to Question 36.

79. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.c, Paragraph 1: Will HTA share collected benchmark data and facilitate communication referrals with known in-state, out-of-state, and international DMOs?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 37. Please refer to the response provided to Question 37.

80. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.2.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA/DBEDT share collected utilization data and performance metrics regarding Hawaii's public and private golf courses, country clubs, and marinas?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 38. Please refer to the response provided to Question 38.

81. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.a, Paragraph 1: Will HTA/DBEDT disclose any available GPS/GIS spatial tracking data for sporting event participants to assist with economic dispersion modeling?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 39. Please refer to the response provided to Question 39.

82. Page 8, Section 2.1, Paragraph 2: Given that this study is funded through the legislative Green

Fee appropriation as detailed in Attachment A, does HTA expect the final report to include strategic recommendations on how the sports tourism sector can actively generate or contribute to a permanent environmental fund or visitor fee to protect Hawaii's natural resources?

a. This question will be addressed in Addendum 3.

83. Page 11, Section 2.7, Paragraph 1: Will HTA permit the contracted team to employ anonymized primary survey data collected during this study for peer-reviewed academic publications and presentations, subject to HTA's review and approval prior to publication?

84. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.c.i, Paragraph 1: To what extent does HTA expect the contractor to evaluate and re-weight the sports strategic roadmap's target Major Market Areas in light of recent macroeconomic changes, such as extreme exchange rate volatility, which have significantly impacted international visitor spending power?

a. Up until the date of the final report is submitted to the HTA.

85. Page 3, Section 1.2, Paragraph 1: Should the statewide Sports Strategic Plan recommendations identify and propose county-specific sports tourism policies that align directly with the sub-regional county DMAPs already adopted by local communities?

86. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.a, Paragraph 1: For the community impact and mitigation assessment, will HTA accept a hybrid model employing virtual public forums and localized digital surveys to satisfy community engagement standards, or must in-person community focus groups and town halls be conducted on each island?

a. The HTA will review any recommendations by the contractor.

87. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.a.i, Paragraph 1: Does HTA require the net economic benefit evaluation to utilize a dynamic, multi-regional Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model to account for Hawaii's unique labor and capital constraints and import leakage, or will a standard, static

Input-Output multiplier framework be acceptable?

a. The HTA will review all recommendations by the contractor.

88. Page 8, Section 2.1, Paragraph 2: To satisfy the legislative intent of the Green Fee appropriation, must the selected contractor’s methodology incorporate quantitative ecological carrying-capacity modeling, or will qualitative assessments of the sports tourism environmental footprint suffice?

a. HTA will review all recommendations by the contractor.

89. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.c.i, Paragraph 1: For the market demand assessment across Major

Market Areas, must the contractor conduct primary, multilingual consumer surveys within international markets (including Japan, China, Korea, and Oceania), or will HTA permit the exclusive use of secondary, historic visitor data?

a. HTA will consider all assessments and recommendations by the contractor.

90. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.3.a, Paragraph 1: Will the selected contractor be required to establish a formal scientific baseline for measuring localized social carrying capacity and resident displacement at public parks and county beaches during high-impact sports tourism events?

91. Page 3, Section 1.2, Paragraph 1: To comply with the evaluation standards under the

"Specialized Knowledge" criterion, must the contractor demonstrate that all key personnel and subcontractors have documented training in the practical application of the HTA's Maʻemaʻe

Toolkit and proper Hawaiian orthography?

92. Page 9, Section 2.2.1.5.a, Paragraph 1: Does HTA expect the "proposed legislation" deliverable to be submitted as fully drafted, legally binding statutory bill language ready for introduction to the Hawaii State Legislature, and if so, what level of professional liability and indemnity will the State provide to the contractor for performing this specialized legal function?

a. This question is substantially similar to Question 55. Please refer to the response provided to Question 55.

93. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.2.a, Paragraph 1: Will the selected contractor be required to conduct physical, on-site structural and operational assessments of sports facilities across all six specified Hawaiian Islands?

94. Page 11, Section 2.7, Paragraph 1: Since all "reports, studies, data... and other work product" become the sole property of the State of Hawaii, does this ownership right extend to any proprietary economic modeling software, database architectures, or GIS algorithms developed by the contractor (after the start of the contract period) to generate the strategic roadmap?

95. Page 8, Section 2.2.1.1.a, Paragraph 1: Will the selected contractor be responsible for independently coordinating data collection and multi-stakeholder engagement across multiple distinct state and county agencies (including DBEDT, DLNR, DOT, DOE, and the four separate county tourism and parks departments), or will HTA provide dedicated inter-agency administrative liaisons to manage this complex inter-governmental process?

96. Page 11, Section 2.8, Paragraph 1: Given the transition assistance obligations, is the contractor required to provide ongoing, uncompensated technical support, data transfers, and stakeholder briefings to HTA or its successor contractors during the final two months of the contract performance period (April and May 2027) after the final report has already been accepted?

97. Please clarify, “2. Monthly evaluation reporting and data analysis on sporting event viability in the State, and its impact on sports tourism market.” Page 9, 2.3 Performance Measures.

a. A reporting system or metrics to analyze sporting events and it’s economic impact on sports tourism market in Hawaii.

98. Is the final Sports Tourism Strategy only limited to increasing sporting events during the shoulder periods as stated in 2.2.1.1.b: Core Market and Economic Evaluation?

99. Please define “diversified, high-value visitors” as stated in 2.2.1.1.b: Core Market and Economic

Evaluation. The Destination Brand document does not seem to be accessible.

a. “Diversified, high-value visitors”: a diversified group of visitors from various market segments with disposable income to travel for sporting events.

100. Page 49, Exhibit E, Paragraph 1 and the AG-008 Attachment: Please clarify which version of the State of Hawaii General Conditions governs this solicitation, as Exhibit E references the

July 2017 edition while the attached AG-008 document is the January 10, 2023 edition.

a. The General Conditions applicable to this solicitation are the AG-008 General[TF1.1]

Conditions included with the solicitation. Exhibit E contains an inadvertent reference to the July 2017 version. The reference to the July 2017 edition is superseded by the

AG-008 General Conditions included with this solicitation. HTA will issue an

Addendum to correct Exhibit E accordingly.

101. Page 16, Section 3.1.2, Item 12 and Attachment 04 (SPO Form-21, page 1): Since Attachment

04 is the June 16, 2003 SPO Form-21 Standard Qualification Questionnaire covering

"construction experience" and "equipment," may professional services offerors omit the construction-specific fields on pages 4–11 and submit only the general corporate experience and financial statement records?

a. No. Offerors shall submit Attachment 04, Standard Qualifications Questionnaire, and respond to all questions on the form as required by Section 3.1.3, Item 12. Where a qQuestionQuestionsuestion or field is not applicable to the professional services solicited under this RFP, the Offeror may indicate “N/A” and, where appropriate, provide a brief explanation. Offerors should not omit the questionnaire or applicable portions of the form.

102. Page 16, Section 3.1.3, Item 12 and Attachment 04 (SPO Form-21, page 8): For the Standard

Qualification Questionnaire financial balance sheet, must the financial statements be compiled, reviewed, or audited by an independent CPA, and what is the oldest acceptable fiscal year-end date for this statement?

a. Offerors shall complete the financial information requested in Attachment 04, Standard Qualifications Questionnaire. The financial information submitted should reflect the Offeror's most recently completed fiscal year for which financial information is available as of the proposal due date. The RFP does not establish a specific minimum age or fiscal-year cutoff beyond the requirements stated in

Attachment 04.

103. Attachment 04 (SPO Form-21, pages 3 and 5): Please clarify the requisite nature of use of

<construction> throughout.

a. References to “construction” or “construction experience” in Attachment 04 are part of the standard qualification questionnaire. Because this RFP solicits professional services, Offerors should respond to each question to the extent applicable to the

Offeror and the services being solicited. If a construction-specific question or field is not applicable, the Offeror may indicate “N/A.”

104. Page 18, Section 3.2.7 and Attachment 08, Attestation 14: As Attestation 14 of the Conflict of

Interest form requires the offeror to accept the State's General Conditions "without exception," please clarify if an offeror is disqualified if a list is made of specific exceptions to the General

Conditions as permitted under Section 3.2.7 and the "Exceptions" section of Attachment 02.

a. Offerors may identify exceptions in accordance with Section 3.2.7 of the RFP and

Attachment 02. The submission of an exception does not, by itself, automatically disqualify an Offeror. Exceptions will be evaluated in accordance with Section 3.2.7, and the State reserves the right to determine whether an exception is material and whether the proposal should be deemed nonresponsive based on the nature or extent of the exception.

105. Page 16, Section 3.1.3, Item 14 and Attachment 06, Items 15 and 16: To satisfy the subcontractor selection disclosure requirements, is the prime contractor required to conduct a formal, documented competitive selection process for all academic and environmental subcontractors?

a. Yes

106. Page 16, Section 3.1.3, Item 14 and Attachment 06, Items 15 and 16: How will HTA evaluate the "reasonableness of the subcontract amount" for highly specialized academic researchers, if any?

a. Must meet within the allocated budget amount.

107. Page 14, AG-008 General Conditions, Paragraph 42.c.1: In light of the GPS/GIS data collection and participant surveys required under Section 2.2, what specific technological safeguards and security awareness training certifications will the State require the contractor's staff and subcontractors to complete to satisfy the Personal Information protections of Paragraph 42?

a. The State does not prescribe a specific technology platform, cybersecurity certification, or security-awareness certification for purposes of satisfying Paragraph

42 of AG-008. The Contractor shall implement appropriate technological safeguards acceptable to the State to reduce the risk of unauthorized access to Personal

Information. In addition, employees who will have access to Personal Information must complete security-awareness training relating to the protection of Personal

Information and must execute the confidentiality agreements required by Paragraph

42. The Contractor shall also comply with the applicable security-breach notification requirements of Chapter 487N, HRS.

108. Page 44, Exhibit D, Paragraph 4 and AG-008 General Conditions, Paragraph 24: Will the raw economic datasets, participant travel logs, and financial records shared in confidence by private sports organizations be exempt from public disclosure under Chapter 92F-13, HRS, or does the

State require all collected secondary data to be delivered as open-access public records under complete State ownership?

a. Information submitted to or maintained by HTA is subject to the Hawaiʻi Uniform

Information Practices Act, Chapter 92F, HRS. Information is not automatically exempt from disclosure solely because it was provided by a private sports organization or identified as confidential. Any applicable exemption from disclosure will be determined pursuant to Chapter 92F, HRS. Offerors and Contractors should identify information they believe is confidential or proprietary in accordance with Section

3.2.6 and Attachment 07; however, designation as confidential does not itself establish an exemption from disclosure.

109. Page 29, Section 5.9.4 and AG-008 General Conditions, Paragraph 2.f: Does the State require all subcontractors—including independent academic researchers and community survey personnel—to maintain the identical $1,000,000/$2,000,000 Commercial General Liability limits and name the State of Hawaii as an additional insured on their individual policies?

a. Yes. To the extent a subcontractor is required to maintain insurance under the

Contract, the applicable insurance requirements in Section 5.9 apply, including the required additional-insured provisions for the State of Hawaiʻi. The RFP requires

Commercial General Liability coverage of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate. Section 5.9.4 expressly provides that each required insurance policy, including a subcontractor's policy, shall contain the specified additional-insured and other required provisions.

110. Page 17, Section 3.2.4 and AG-008 General Conditions, Paragraph 2.d: Since this is a professional services contract [rather than, apparently, a construction contract], please confirm that the State’s General Excise Tax (GET) subcontractor deductions and pyramiding exemptions under Chapter 237, HRS, do not apply to these services, meaning that the prime contractor must pay the full GET (up to 4.5%) on the entire $350,000 gross contract value and all professional services subcontractors must independently pay the full GET rate again on their respective sub-allocated fees.

a. The Contractor is responsible for complying with all applicable requirements of

Chapter 237, HRS, including applicable General Excise Tax requirements. The proposed price must be inclusive of applicable GET and all other taxes and expenses.

The State will not provide a determination regarding the particular tax treatment of the Contractor or its subcontractors. Offerors should consult the Hawaiʻi Department of Taxation or their tax professional regarding the application of Chapter 237, HRS, to their particular circumstances.

111. Page 4, Section 1.3.1, Paragraph 1 and Page 27, Section 5.2, Paragraph 2: Will HTA confirm that an offeror must possess a fully active and approved HIePRO vendor account at the exact time of proposal submission, and that out-of-state entities who have not completed the multi-week process of registering with the Hawaii Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs

(DCCA) to establish local corporate standing will be disqualified if they cannot produce a fully approved Certificate of Vendor Compliance (CVC) immediately upon the day of the award announcement?

a. Yes, contractor must have a valid CVC clearance upon submission date

112. Page 50, Exhibit F, Section 5, Paragraph 1, and Page 9, Section 2.2.1.5: Since HTA will announce the final awards for Calendar Year 2027 sports events in November 2026, while the

Contractor is not due to deliver the final strategic roadmap until 31 March 2027, please clarify how HTA plans to integrate the study's recommendations into a calendar year portfolio that has already been awarded.

a. The study is intended to inform HTA's broader sports tourism strategy, policy, investment, infrastructure, and future event-planning decisions. The study recommendations are not intended to retroactively modify or reopen sports-event awards already made for Calendar Year 2027. HTA may, however, consider the study's findings and recommendations in future sports-event procurement, portfolio development, strategic planning, budgeting, policy development, and other applicable decision-making.

113. Page 8, Section 2.1, Paragraph 2 and Page 8, Section 2.2.1.3.a: To support the Green Fee legislative intent, must the contractor perform primary, scientifically rigorous ecological fieldwork and environmental monitoring of marine health, trail erosion, and wildlife disruption across all six islands , or is the contractor expected only to compile and synthesize existing secondary data from and provided by DLNR?

a. No

114. Page 31, Sections 5.13 and 5.14, and AG-008 General Conditions, Paragraph 19.d: If the State unilaterally directs the Contractor to perform specialized translations of the final strategic roadmap or proposed legislation (such as converting reports into non-English languages, proper Hawaiian orthography, or complex GIS map formats into specialized communication auxiliary aids) will HTA issue a formal contract modification and price adjustment to cover these translation costs, or must all such variable compliance fees be absorbed entirely within the flat $350,000 budget even if these expectations change during the course of the contract?

a. The requirements in Sections 5.13 and 5.14 are included within the scope of services and the fixed-price contract. The Contractor shall include in its proposed price all costs necessary to comply with the requirements of the RFP, including applicable accessibility and Hawaiian orthography requirements. If HTA subsequently requests services that are outside the scope of the Contract, any resulting change to the

Contract, including any adjustment to the Contract price, shall be addressed in accordance with the applicable contract modification requirements and applicable

State procurement laws and rules. No additional compensation shall be due unless authorized through an executed contract modification or otherwise authorized in accordance with the Contract and applicable State procurement requirements.

115. Page 14, AG-008 General Conditions, Paragraph 7: Will HTA clarify if the Contractor’s duty to defend the State "from and against all liability, loss, damage, cost, and expense" is active immediately upon a third-party claim, meaning the Contractor must pay the State's upfront legal defense and attorneys' fees before any determination of Contractor fault or liability is legally established?

a. The Contractor's defense, indemnification, and hold-harmless obligations are governed by Paragraph 7 of AG-008 and applicable law. The State is not modifying or limiting those obligations through this response.

116. Page 14, AG-008 General Conditions, Paragraph 8: Under the Cost of Litigation clause, if the

State is made a party to a lawsuit commenced by a third party or subcontractor regarding this project, will the Contractor be contractually required to pay the State’s legal fees even if the

Contractor is ultimately determined to have no fault?

a. Yes. Paragraph 8 of AG-008 provides that, when the State is made a party to litigation commenced by or against the Contractor in connection with the Contract and the

State is without fault, the Contractor shall pay the costs and expenses incurred by or imposed on the State, including attorneys' fees. The State is not modifying this provision through the Q&A.

117. Page 11, Section 2.8, Paragraph 3: Since transition assistance to successor contractors is considered part of the Contractor's core obligations and must be included in the flat contract price, will HTA establish a maximum cap on professional hours or define a strict expiration date for this uncompensated transition support to prevent open-ended labor expenditures after

31 May 2027, or will this expectation of uncompensated assistance end upon the termination of the contract period?

No, all work must be completed at contract termination.

118. Page 14, AG-008 General Conditions, Paragraph 42.d: In the event of a security breach or unauthorized disclosure of personal information under the contract, is the Contractor solely responsible for absorbing all financial liabilities and administrative costs associated with

Chapter 487N public notifications, credit monitoring, and forensic mitigation?

a. The Contractor shall comply with Paragraph 42 of AG-008 and all applicable requirements of Chapter 487N, HRS, concerning security breaches involving Personal

Information. The Contractor is responsible for the obligations and costs for which it is responsible under the Contract and applicable law, including applicable mitigation and notification requirements. The RFP does not establish a blanket requirement making the Contractor responsible for every possible cost or liability arising from a security incident regardless of circumstances or applicable law.

119. Page 13, AG-008 General Conditions, Paragraphs 29 and 30: Since this is a firm-fixed-price contract awarded through competitive proposals, will HTA confirm that the Contractor is exempt from certifying cost or pricing data under Paragraph 29, and that the State will not perform post-award audits or retroactive price cuts on the Contractor's actual profit, payroll, or overhead rates under Paragraph 30?

a. The Contract is a firm-fixed-price contract. Accordingly, the Contract price will not be adjusted based on the Contractor's actual profit, payroll, overhead, or other actual costs incurred in performing the Contract. The general audit provision in Paragraph

30 of AG-008 does not apply to firm-fixed-price contracts. Any requirements concerning cost or pricing data under Paragraph 29 of AG-008 shall apply only to the extent required by the provision and applicable State procurement laws and rules.