RFP MUL_PS_2026_02 Police Feasibility Study.pdf

CITY OF MULBERRY, GEORGIA

Office of the Chief Marshal

Police Department

Feasibility and Implementation Study

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP MUL-PS-2026-02)

Prepared for Mayor and City Council

City of Mulberry, Gwinnett County, Georgia

STATUS

City lite · No ad valorem millage

SERVICE TODAY

Gwinnett County Police contract

POPULATION

Approx. 41,400 · 28 sq. mi.

LOCAL FORCE

Marshal's Office established 2025

RFP No. MUL-PS-2026-02

September 17, 2026

2078 TERON TRACE, SUITE 100 · MULBERRY, GEORGIA 30019

www.mulberryga.gov http://www.mulberryga.gov/

CITY OF MULBERRY, GEORGIA POLICE DEPT. FEASIBILITY STUDY

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 2 OF 15

Contents

1. INVITATION — RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02

2. PLANNING CONTEXT

3. OBJECTIVES

4. SCOPE OF WORK

5. DELIVERABLES

6. SCHEDULE AND BUDGET GUIDANCE

7. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

8. PROPOSAL CONTENTS

9. EVALUATION CRITERIA (100 POINTS)

10. CITY-FURNISHED INFORMATION

11. CONTRACT TERMS (SUMMARY)

12. SUBMISSION AND ATTACHMENTS

EXHIBIT A — COST PROPOSAL FORM

EXHIBIT B — COMPARABLE REFERENCES

EXHIBIT C — OFFEROR CERTIFICATION

EXHIBIT D CONTRACTOR AFFIDAVIT AND AGREEMENT

HOW PROPOSALS WILL BE SCORED

PROPOSAL EVALUATION SCORECARD

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 3 OF 15

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

1. INVITATION — RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02

The City of Mulberry, Georgia invites proposals from qualified firms for a Police Department Feasibility and Implementation Study. This is a professional-services study only. It does not create a department, buy equipment, build a facility, or change any current service arrangement. The selected firm shall deliver findings, a working cost model, and an implementation roadmap that the Mayor, City Council, City Manager, and Chief Marshal can use.

Finish all work within 90 calendar days after award and no later than Friday, January 29, 2027. Submission of Service Provider Proposal. No later than 3:00 P.M. on October 16, 2026. Clearly marked RFP MUL-PS- 2026- 02, the proposal package must be sent within one sealed envelope, consisting of two separate envelopes (one envelope for the Technical Proposal and one envelope for the Cost Proposal). Within the Technical Proposal envelope, there shall be one electronic copy in PDF format. Within the Cost Proposal envelope, there shall be one electronic PDF copy. Failure to submit your technical and cost proposals will cause your proposal to be deemed non-responsive.

Proposals must be addressed as follows: City of Mulberry Attn: City Clerk

RFP MUL-PS-2026-02

2078 Teron Trace, Suite 100 Mulberry, Georgia 30019

THE QUESTION THIS STUDY MUST ANSWER

Within the budget the City will spend, and with no tax increase, which service model gives Mulberry the best coverage compared with the current Gwinnett County Police Department contract, keeps response intact during any transition, and uses the Marshal’s Office well?

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 4 OF 15

Item Detail

Issuing office City of Mulberry — Office of the City Manager, in coordination with the Chief Marshal

RFP number MUL-PS-2026-02

Issue date September 22, 2026 (or next business day after Council authorization)

Pre-proposal conference Virtual — Tuesday, September 29, 2026, 2:00 p.m. Eastern (optional)

Item Detail

Questions due Friday, October 2, 2026, 5:00 p.m. Eastern

Answers posted Monday, October 6, 2026

Proposals due Friday, October 16, 2026, 3:00 p.m. Eastern

Interviews (shortlist) Week of October 20, 2026

Target award On or before Tuesday, October 27, 2026

Notice to proceed Within five business days of award

Performance period 90 calendar days after award, and no later than Friday, January 29, 2027. Final report and Council presentation are due by the earlier of those dates.

Submission One electronic PDF to the City Clerk, plus six bound color copies if requested after shortlist

Point of contact City Manager Jamieson Palmer · Chief Marshal Robert Jones · 2078 Teron Trace, Suite 100, Mulberry, GA 30019

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 5 OF 15

2. PLANNING CONTEXT

Figures in this section are planning information. The consultant shall validate, reconcile, and document the baseline before modeling alternatives. A planning assumption is not an authorized staffing level, budget, or facility.

Topic Planning information

Community Newly incorporated City of Mulberry in Gwinnett County, Georgia. Operations began January 1, 2025.

Service area About 28–30 square miles; estimated population about 41,400 to 43,000; roughly 15,000 parcels.

Consultant shall lock a verified figure.

Operational demand Preliminary estimates range from about 33,000 dispatched calls a year to about 41,000 when officer-initiated activity is included. Validate definitions before use.

Traffic and schools About six miles of Interstate 85. The S.R. 124 corridor includes three schools within about one mile and heavy school-peak traffic.

Current environment Gwinnett County Police Department is the principal provider of traffic and criminal law enforcement. The City operates a Marshal’s Office. Sworn marshals already meet the same POST standard as municipal officers.

Dispatch The City does not presently plan to operate a municipal PSAP. Alternatives shall assume an interoperable external dispatch arrangement unless the City directs otherwise.

Staffing and facilities scenario

Preliminary planning figures are about 65 sworn and 12 civilian professional positions. These numbers may change. Use them as a starting envelope only, not an authorized roster. Size command, detectives, K-9, traffic, and other support from workload, not from the preliminary total.

Budget envelope At kickoff the City will state what it will spend on police services. It will not raise taxes to establish a police department. A tax increase is not an option and is not part of this study.

Patrol schedule Compare 8-hour, 10-hour, and 12-hour patrol shifts on the same workload and relief-factor basis.

Recommend one model. Show coverage, cost, overtime, supervision, recruitment, and well-being tradeoffs for all three.

Topic Planning information

Specialty support State assets: crime laboratory; Georgia State Patrol SWAT and air support; GBI for major crime scenes and major cases. City detectives investigate serious crime and may request GSP or GBI help. Do not design a City lab, SWAT team, or aviation unit.

Fleet Enterprise Fleet Management — leased vehicles and Enterprise fleet services. Cost the fleet on that model.

Stakeholders Mayor and Council, City Manager and staff, Marshal’s Office, Public Safety Advisory Committee, schools in the city, and Mulberry residents.

Coverage note Committee materials have described current contracted field coverage at about 3.5 officers per shift. Treat as a starting point only.

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 6 OF 15

3. OBJECTIVES

1. Establish a verified baseline of service demand, staffing capacity, response performance, existing costs, and operating conditions.

2. Compare the present GCPD service environment with a municipal police department, a hybrid expanded Marshal’s Office, an improved contract, and any City-directed variant.

3. Develop workload-based staffing, deployment, organization, technology, fleet, facility, and operating-cost requirements for each alternative.

4. Show whether each alternative fits inside the annual amount the City is willing to spend, and what service is given up if it does not.

5. Produce a phased implementation roadmap that preserves 911 continuity and names decisions, dependencies, risks, and responsible parties.

6. Deliver materials City leaders can use in public: facts, assumptions, tradeoffs, costs, and next steps.

7. Leave the City a reusable staffing and cost workbook, not only a static PDF.

4. SCOPE OF WORK

Proposers shall address every task below. Optional add-ons must be priced separately and shall not be required to complete the base study.

Out of scope. Do not study a tax or millage increase — the City will not raise taxes to establish a police department.

Do not brief POST or sworn-marshal legal authority; those questions are already settled.

Task A — Project initiation and data protocol

• Kickoff with City Manager, Chief Marshal, City Attorney, Finance, and the Public Safety Advisory Committee chair.

• Within ten business days after notice to proceed, submit a work plan, week-by-week schedule, interview plan, communication protocol, risk register, and complete data request.

• Establish procedures for secure handling, use, retention, return, and destruction of City and criminal-justice data.

• Data request shall cover CAD/RMS extracts and contract invoices for service inside city limits, crime and collision data geocoded to city limits, Marshal’s Office workload, development pipeline, and comparable-city pay data.

• Identify data limitations promptly. If CAD or other third-party data is slow, document the gap and finish on the best available proxy. The 90-day / January 29, 2027 clock does not pause.

Task B — Current-state assessment of GCPD service to Mulberry

• Map calls for service, response times, uncommitted / proactive time, and on-view activity inside city limits by hour, day, and beat-equivalent geography, including I-85 and major corridors.

• Describe investigative intake, case follow-up, and clearance experience for crimes occurring in the city.

• Describe community-facing work (schools, events, problem-solving) actually delivered in Mulberry, as distinct from countywide programs.

• Reconstruct what Mulberry residents pay for county police and how those dollars are allocated (patrol, investigations, specialized units, dispatch, jail, overhead, capital, vacancy credits, overtime).

• Benchmark service and cost against a negotiated set of peers (suggested starting set: Johns Creek, Milton, Peachtree Corners, Sugar Hill, Braselton, Buford, and one similarly sized newly formed or recently transitioned agency).

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 7 OF 15

,ppaattrrool,la,anandnddfefelolnonnynyyyiininnivnvvvessesttstiigitggiaagattatiiotiooinonnsnss...sU. se thhee

Task C — Mulberry stakeholder and community input

• At least two advertised public meetings (one weeknight, one weekend) inside the city.

• Structured interviews with the Mayor, each Councilmember, City Manager, Chief Marshal, City Attorney, and Public Safety Advisory Committee.

• Summarize that input in an interim memo before alternatives are locked.

Task D — Alternative service models (mandatory three, plus variants)

Every proposal must analyze, at minimum, the three models already before the City, using the same workload, service-level, and accounting rules so they can be compared.

• Alternative 1 — Status quo (improved contract). Remain with GCPD. Identify contract terms the City should seek (minimum on-duty strength in the city, named community officers, data-sharing, after-action reporting) and the cost of those terms.

• Alternative 2 — Municipal police department. Full-service City agency for patrol, traffic, community service, and investigations. Detectives shall be staffed and trained to investigate serious crime. High-cost specialties are state assets, not City units: state crime laboratory; Georgia State Patrol SWAT and air support; GBI for major crime scenes and major cases. The study shall describe request protocols and cost implications, not stand up those units.

• Alternative 3 — Hybrid. Expand the Marshal’s Office for traffic, ordinance, quality-of-life work, selected misdemeanor follow-up, and community presence. GCPD would keep 911, patrol, and felony investigations. Use the City’s existing marshal powers as they stand.

• Proposers may add a fourth variant (for example a delayed stand-up in two phases, or a multi-city JPA) if it is costed with the same rigor.

Task E — Staffing, organization, and operations design

• Workload-based patrol staffing: CAD analysis, travel time given 28–30 square miles and the interstate, relief factor (leave, training, court, light duty), minimum and target staffing by day and hour, and target proactive time.

Build three patrol-shift comparisons — 8-hour, 10-hour, and 12-hour — on the same call-for-service base.

Recommend one model and show coverage, cost, overtime, supervision, recruitment, and officer well-being for each.

• Command staff, first-line supervision, detectives, K-9, traffic, community and school resource, professional standards, records, property and evidence, fleet administration, fiscal, and other support. Size detectives to investigate serious crime in-house. GBI and GSP are request-for-assistance resources on major scenes, major cases, SWAT, and air support — not a substitute for a capable detective function. These units shall be analyzed even if the preliminary 65 sworn / 12 civilian envelope changes.

• Civilianization opportunities and the role of existing Marshal personnel (pay alignment, whether marshals remain a separate office or fold into the new department). POST eligibility is already established and is not a study question.

• Dispatch / 911: assume an interoperable external arrangement (county or other qualified center). Do not design a City PSAP unless the City directs that option in writing.

• Organization chart for each alternative at Year 1, Year 3, and Year 10.

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 8 OF 15

Task F — Facilities, fleet, and technology

• Conceptual facilities needs assessment: interim, adaptive reuse, leased, expanded, and new-construction options. Space program: public access, administration, investigations, report writing, interview rooms, evidence and property, K-9 kennel or vehicle support, equipment storage, secure processing if needed, training space for about 50 people, locker rooms, fitness, parking, and fleet support. Size the building to the recommended roster, using 65 sworn / 12 civilian only as a preliminary envelope that may change.

• Reuse of existing City space versus lease versus new construction; order-of-magnitude capital ranges, lead times, and sequencing — not architectural design and not a vendor specification.

• Fleet shall be modeled on Enterprise Fleet Management (lease plus Enterprise fleet services). Include marked, unmarked, K-9, and command vehicles under that lease model. Radios and interoperability, CAD/RMS interfaces, body-worn and in-car video, digital evidence, e-citation, evidence tracking, camera or ALPR options, analytics, cybersecurity, and IT staffing. Do not specify a vendor for radios or cameras.

• Cybersecurity and CJIS compliance path for a new agency.

Task G — Operating-cost model inside the City’s stated budget

At kickoff the City will state what it will spend. Price each alternative so Council can see what that budget buys. If an alternative costs more, show what service would have to be cut.

• Build a working workbook (Excel or Google Sheets) the City keeps. Staff must be able to change headcount, wage assumptions, take-home car policy, start date, and call volume and see operating and capital results update.

• Personnel costs built from the Atlanta-metro hiring market only as needed to cost the recommended roster: base pay, incentives, overtime, and standard benefits load.

• One-time stand-up costs: recruitment and academy, uniforms and weapons, Enterprise vehicle lease initiation and outfitting, IT, furniture, policy manuals, accreditation start-up, and contingency. Do not assume a City-owned fleet purchase unless shown only as a comparison to Enterprise.

• Show costs at startup and in Years 1, 3, 5, 10, and 20. Separate cost estimates from funding decisions.

• State whether each alternative fits the City budget. If it does not, name the service that would be cut.

• Sensitivity cases: high-growth call volume and “county raises the contract price 15 percent.”

Task H — Transition risk and intergovernmental issues (in coordination with the City Attorney)

• Flag operational risks the City Attorney should review. Do not write a legal opinion.

• Liability insurance market for a new Georgia municipal police department and recommended coverage limits.

• Outline of an intergovernmental agreement if the City winds down or keeps selected specialized support.

• Records custody, open-records surge, and evidence chain-of-custody at transition.

• Dispatch / 911 continuity if the City stays on the county system or changes centers.

• This task is operational issue-spotting, not a legal opinion. The City Attorney remains counsel of record.

Task I — Transition and implementation plan

• Phased roadmap from City authorization through first service delivery and the first three years. Name tasks, sequence, accountable parties, dependencies, decision points, risks, mitigation, and cost timing.

• Recruiting and lateral hiring in the Atlanta market; vacancy factor in Years 1–2; policy and accreditation readiness;

records and evidence; dispatch integration; facilities, fleet, and technology sequencing.

• Continuity-of-service protections if hiring lags. Decision gates to pause, stay with GCPD, or accelerate.

• Public communications plan. Note school and mutual-aid implications in the written report.

• List operational approvals the City Attorney should confirm before any transition.

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 9 OF 15

Task J — Reporting

• Biweekly written status and monthly project meetings unless the City approves another cadence.

• Interim briefing to the Public Safety Advisory Committee after Tasks B–C.

• Draft report, City comment period of ten business days, final report.

• In-person presentation to City Council and a virtual executive briefing.

• All workpapers, maps, and the financial workbook delivered in editable form.

5. DELIVERABLES

# Deliverable Form

1 Kickoff package: work plan, schedule, data protocol, data request, stakeholder plan, risk register

Within 10 business days of NTP

2 Current-state profile of GCPD service and cost to Mulberry Memo + maps

3 Community and stakeholder input summary Memo

4 Alternatives framework (locked assumptions) Memo for City sign-off

5 Draft feasibility report covering Tasks D–I PDF + Word

6 Final report and 12-page executive summary PDF + Word, ADA-accessible

7 Working financial and staffing workbook Excel or Sheets

8 Slide deck and in-person Council presentation PPTX + appearance

9 Implementation / transition Gantt and RACI Spreadsheet + PDF

6. SCHEDULE AND BUDGET GUIDANCE

Finish the study, the final report, and the Council presentation within 90 calendar days after award, and no later than Friday, January 29, 2027. Day 1 is the award date, or a notice to proceed issued that same week. The earlier of day 90 and January 29, 2027, controls. Slow data does not pause the clock unless the City Manager agrees in writing. Submit one fixed price for Tasks A–J. Price optional modules separately; they must still fit the same deadline if the City adds them at award.

Planning range for a complete proposal is $80,000 to $130,000. That is guidance, not a cap. The City will score value against the scope, not the lowest number. Travel, on-site days, and two Council presentations belong in the base price. Do not price tax analysis or POST legal research.

7. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

• Five years of consulting to local government public-safety agencies in the United States.

• At least two completed studies in the last seven years that evaluated creating a new police department or exiting a sheriff / county contract. Provide the client, year, and a one-page description of the recommendation and what the client did.

• A named project manager who will attend the kickoff, the interim briefing, and the Council presentation.

• Ability to execute a professional-services contract with a Georgia municipality and to carry professional liability insurance of at least $1 million per claim.

• Disclosure of any work performed for Gwinnett County or GCPD in the last five years, and a conflicts plan.

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 10 OF 15

8. PROPOSAL CONTENTS

Submit one electronic PDF. Cap the technical proposal at 35 pages, not counting the cover letter, résumés, references, sample work, Exhibits A–C, and certifications. Keep the offer open 120 days. Send questions only to the City procurement contact. Do not contact elected officials, staff, or evaluators about this RFP except through that contact or at a meeting the City notices.

Required contents

Tab Content

1 Cover letter signed by an officer authorized to bind the firm. State the fixed price and the calendar.

2 Understanding of Mulberry — city-lite charter, Marshal’s Office, GCPD relationship, I-85 geography. Do not recycle a generic suburban staffing pitch.

3 Methodology by task, including the exact workload formulas, relief-factor method, and financial-model architecture.

4 Work plan and week-by-week schedule for the 90 days after award, ending no later than January 29, 2027.

5 Team: organization chart, résumés, hours by person by task, and who is on-site when.

6 Relevant experience and three references with phone and email. Identify any Georgia work.

7 Sample work: one redacted executive summary from a comparable feasibility or contract-exit study.

8 Cost proposal: fixed price by task, hourly rates for change orders, travel assumption, optional modules.

9 Insurance certificates, Georgia business registration or qualification, and litigation disclosure.

9. EVALUATION CRITERIA (100 POINTS)

Factor Points What “excellent” looks like

Methodology and fit to Mulberry 30 Three alternatives on one ledger; designs fit the City’s stated budget; CAD method is specified; hybrid marshal option is real; no tax or POST-legal filler.

Team and relevant experience 25 Named people who have stood up or priced a new agency; at least one former command officer and one financial modeler on the team; Georgia or Southeast work.

Work plan, presence, and schedule 15 Credible 90-day plan that also finishes by January 29, 2027; enough on-site days;

a data-gap plan that does not pause the clock.

Cost and value 20 Complete base scope inside one price; transparent hours; optional modules not used to hide the real number.

Clarity of writing and sample work 10 A Councilmember can understand the sample executive summary in fifteen minutes.

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 11 OF 15

Official scoring uses the 0–5 scale and multipliers in Appendix B. How the City applies these factors is explained in Appendix A, printed in this RFP and usable as a stand-alone panel brief. A shortlist of up to three firms may be interviewed. Interviews may re-weight the same criteria. The City may ask shortlisted firms for a best-and-final price. Award will be made to the proposal deemed most advantageous to the City, which may or may not be the lowest priced. The City reserves the right to reject all proposals, to waive informalities, and to negotiate scope with the highest-ranked firm.

10. CITY-FURNISHED INFORMATION

• City Charter, Marshal’s Office ordinance, and relevant intergovernmental correspondence.

• The annual amount the City is willing to spend on police services (budget envelope), provided at kickoff.

• Confirmation that sworn marshals already meet applicable POST requirements.

• Public Safety Advisory Committee materials and any working budgets already presented to Council.

• Development pipeline and comprehensive-plan drafts.

• Written City support for a records or CAD request if operational data is needed to complete the baseline.

• Meeting space at City Hall and posting of public-meeting notices.

11. CONTRACT TERMS (SUMMARY)

• Georgia law governs. Venue in Gwinnett County. The executed professional-services agreement controls.

• The City may reject any or all proposals, waive minor irregularities, cancel or modify the solicitation, request clarification, negotiate, or award as City policy allows.

• The City will not reimburse proposal, interview, or negotiation costs.

• Proposals are public records. Claimed exemptions must cite the legal basis. The City decides disclosure.

• Professional liability $1 million per claim; general liability $1 million; automobile $1 million; workers’ compensation statutory. Endorsements per the City agreement.

• City data remains City property. The City receives ownership or an unrestricted perpetual license to final reports, models, maps, and slides.

• The firm remains responsible for subcontractors. Key personnel and material subcontractors may not be replaced without City approval.

• Progress payments: 20% at accepted kickoff package; 30% at accepted current-state and community memo;

30% at draft report; 20% at accepted final report and Council presentation.

• Disclose actual or potential conflicts that could affect independence. No contact with elected officials or evaluators about this solicitation except through the designated procurement contact or a City-noticed public meeting.

• Oral statements do not bind the City. Only written addenda modify this RFP.

12. SUBMISSION AND ATTACHMENTS

• Submit one electronic PDF to the City Clerk by the due date and time stated in the invitation table.

• Late proposals will not be opened.

• The City may request six bound color copies from shortlisted firms only.

• Attachments issued with this RFP, or posted as addenda: (1) draft professional-services agreement; (2) required proposal forms (addenda acknowledgment, non-collusion, E-Verify / SAVE, reference sheet); (3) map of city limits and major corridors; (4) Marshal’s Office enabling ordinance; (5) questions and answers after the question deadline. Evaluation materials printed with this RFP: Appendix A (how proposals will be scored) and Appendix B (scorecard).

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 12 OF 15

EXHIBIT A — COST PROPOSAL FORM

Complete this form. The City prefers one all-inclusive fixed not-to-exceed fee. Optional tasks must be separately priced and are not required for selection.

Task or cost element Proposed fee Assumptions / included expenses

A. Initiation and data protocol

B. Current service and demand baseline

C. Stakeholder and community engagement

D. Service-delivery alternatives

E. Staffing, deployment, and organization

F. Facilities, fleet, and technology

G. Operating and startup cost model

H–I. Transition and implementation roadmap

J. Final study, toolkit, and Council presentation

Included travel and expenses

Total fixed not-to-exceed price

Hourly rates by labor category (for change orders):

Optional work and price, if any:

EXHIBIT B — COMPARABLE REFERENCES

Provide three clients from the last ten years for municipal police feasibility, new-agency formation, contracted-service evaluation, or comparable public-safety analysis.

Ref. Client and project Contact Phone and email Completed

The City may contact any reference or other public client to verify performance.

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 13 OF 15

EXHIBIT C — OFFEROR CERTIFICATION

By signing, the offeror certifies that the proposal is submitted in good faith and is accurate to the best of its knowledge;

that all material conflicts and exceptions are disclosed; that the proposal remains valid for at least 120 days; and that the signatory is authorized to bind the offeror.

Legal name of offeror

Authorized representative / title

Signature and date

Georgia business status / SAM if any

BEFORE ISSUANCE

Dates in the invitation table should be locked when Council authorizes release. The City Attorney shall review insurance, protest, and procurement language before the RFP is posted. Use Appendix B for official scoring. Each evaluator completes one sheet per firm, independently, before discussion. Appendix A is the scoring brief for the panel.

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 14 OF 15

EXHIBIT D CONTRACTOR AFFIDAVIT AND AGREEMENT

(E-VERIFY AFFIDAVIT)

Contractor Affidavit under O.C.G.A. § 13-10-91(b)(1)

By executing this affidavit, the undersigned contractor verifies its compliance with O.C.G.A. § 13-10-91, stating affirmatively that the individual, firm or corporation which is engaged in the physical performance of services on behalf of the City of Dunwoody has registered with, is authorized to use and uses the federal work authorization program commonly known as E-Verify, or any subsequent replacement program, in accordance with the applicable provisions and deadlines established in O.C.G.A. § 13-10-91. Furthermore, the undersigned contractor will continue to use the federal work authorization program throughout the contract period and the undersigned contractor will contract for the physical performance of services in satisfaction of such contract only with subcontractors who present an affidavit to the contractor with the information required by O.C.G.A. § 13-10-91(b). Contractor hereby attests that its federal work authorization user identification number and date of authorization are as follows:

Federal Work Authorization User Identification Number _

Date of Authorization

Name of Contractor

CITY OF MULBERRY

Name of Public Employer

I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on , , 2026 in (city), (state).

Signature of Authorized Officer or Agent

Printed Name and Title of Authorized Officer or Agent SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME

ON THIS THE DAY OF , 2026 .

NOTARY PUBLIC

My Commission Expires:

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 15 OF 15

APPENDIX A

HOW PROPOSALS WILL BE SCORED

This appendix is part of RFP MUL-PS-2026-02. It tells proposers and the evaluation panel how the 100-point system in Section 9 will be applied. The official scoring sheet is Appendix B. Award is to the proposal most advantageous to the City, which may or may not be the lowest price.

Scoring rules

• Score each factor 0–5 using the anchors below. Half points (2.5, 3.5, 4.5) are allowed when the proposal sits between two anchors.

• Weighted points = raw score × multiplier: Methodology ×6 (max 30), Team ×5 (max 25), Schedule ×3 (max 15), Cost ×4 (max 20), Writing ×2 (max 10).

• If a factor is missing a mandatory element listed in the “cap” row, that factor may not be scored above 2.

• Do not trade points across factors. A strong team does not raise a weak methodology score.

• Comments are required on Appendix B if any factor is below 3 or is a 5.

Factor rubrics

1. Methodology and fit to Mulberry · 30 points · raw × 6 Cap at 2 unless present: all three alternatives; a stated CAD / relief-factor method; no tax or POST-legal filler billed as core scope

Raw Anchor — what the evaluator must be able to point to in the proposal

0 No methodology, or a marketing brochure. Does not address Mulberry, GCPD, or the Marshal’s Office.

1 Generic national staffing ratios only. No alternatives. No CAD method. Wrong question (assumes a department will exist and only asks how many patrol officers).

2 One alternative developed (usually a city PD). Mentions workload but no formula. Hybrid marshal model is a sentence.

Geography of I-85 / 28 sq. mi. not used.

3 Two alternatives with some workload basis. Hybrid mentioned but not costed on the same ledger. Budget envelope acknowledged. Method described at a high level.

4 Three alternatives on one ledger. CAD / relief-factor method specified. Hybrid is a real design. Startup and operating costs sit inside the City’s stated budget. Out-of-scope tax and POST work omitted.

5 Everything in 4, plus Mulberry-specific deployment (interstate, growth pipeline, Marshal integration options), a reusable workbook architecture, and clear service-level targets for each alternative.

2. Team and relevant experience · 25 points · raw × 5 Cap at 2 unless present: named project manager; hours by person; at least two comparable studies identified

0 No names, or names with no résumés. Cannot tell who would do the work.

1 Titles only (Director, Manager). No new-agency or contract-exit studies. No Georgia or local-government public-safety record shown.

2 Some names, thin résumés. One loosely related staffing study. Project manager not committed to kickoff, interim briefing, and Council.

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 16 OF 15

3 Named team with a project manager and either a former command officer or a cost-modeler, not both. Two studies, but not clearly new-agency or contract-exit. Hours exist but do not match résumés.

4 Named PM plus a former command officer and a cost-modeler. Two qualifying studies in seven years with client, year, and what the client did. Hours match résumés. PM attends the three required meetings.

5 Everything in 4, plus Georgia or Southeast work, and a reference the City can call on a new-agency or contract-exit study.

On-site days assigned to named people, not “the firm.”

3. Work plan, presence, and schedule · 15 points · raw × 3 Cap at 2 unless present: a calendar that hits 90 days after award and January 29, 2027, whichever is earlier

0 No schedule.

1 A 150-day or open-ended national template. No on-site days. No data-gap plan.

2 A schedule exists but overruns 90 days or January 29, 2027. On-site presence is “as needed.” Data delays are treated as automatic extensions.

3 90-day / January 29 calendar is stated. Phases listed. On-site days not dated. Data-gap plan is a sentence.

4 Week-by-week plan from award to Council presentation. Dated on-site days in Mulberry. Written plan if CAD or other third-party data is late that keeps the clock running.

5 Everything in 4, plus named staff on each week, a Council-ready draft date, and a continuity plan if a team member drops.

4. Cost and value · 20 points · raw × 4 Cap at 2 unless present: one fixed price for Tasks A–J; optional modules separated; travel and two Council presentations inside the base

Raw Anchor — what the evaluator must be able to point to in the proposal

0 No price, or “to be negotiated.”

1 A number with no task breakdown. Scope quietly excludes investigations, hybrid design, or the workbook.

2 Priced, but optional modules are required to reach the scope in Section 4. Travel extra. Hours hidden.

3 Fixed price for most of the scope. Hours shown. One or two tasks thinly staffed. Price far outside the $80,000–$130,000 planning range without an explanation.

4 One fixed price for Tasks A–J. Hours and rates visible. Travel and two presentations inside the base. Optional modules clearly optional. Price explained if outside the planning range.

5 Everything in 4, plus a clean hour-by-task table that matches the work plan, and a change-order rate the City can use without reopening price.

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 17 OF 15

5. Clarity of writing and sample work · 10 points · raw × 2 Cap at 2 unless present: a sample executive summary from a comparable study

0 No sample. Proposal is unreadable or boilerplate with the wrong city name.

1 Sample is a long technical tome. First page does not state a recommendation. Proposal is hard to follow.

2 Sample exists but is not a feasibility or contract-exit study. Writing is dense. Mulberry facts are generic.

3 Readable proposal. Sample is relevant. A Councilmember can find the recommendation, but not in fifteen minutes.

4 A Councilmember can understand the sample in fifteen minutes. First page states a decision. Mulberry-specific facts are correct.

5 Everything in 4, plus tables and maps a Council packet can reuse, and no padding.

Weighted conversion Use this if an evaluator wants to see the points before writing the raw score on Appendix B.

Raw Methodology (×6) Team (×5) Schedule (×3) Cost (×4) Writing (×2) If all 5 match

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 6 5 3 4 2 20

2 12 10 6 8 4 40

3 18 15 9 12 6 60

4 24 20 12 16 8 80

5 30 25 15 20 10 100

Suggested band: below 50 — do not interview. 50–69 — interview only if the panel agrees a deficiency is curable. 70–84 — interview.

85–100 — interview and likely finalist. These bands are guidance; the written record is the Appendix B total.

How the panel will use Appendix B

• Three evaluators: City Manager, Chief Marshal, and one Council or Public Safety Advisory Committee designee.

• Each evaluator completes one Appendix B sheet per firm, independently, before discussion.

• Raw score is 0–5 (half points allowed). Weighted score = raw × the multiplier on the sheet (×6, ×5, ×3, ×4, ×2).

• Average the three weighted totals. Suggested floor to interview: 70 / 100.

• Interviews re-score the same five factors on a fresh Appendix B sheet. Do not add a sixth factor.

• The City may request a best-and-final price from the shortlist. Keep every completed sheet in the procurement file.

Questions every shortlisted firm should answer

• Show the hybrid marshal model on one page, with headcount and cost inside the City’s budget envelope.

• Walk day 1 to day 90, including week 3 if CAD or other third-party data has not arrived.

• Who is physically in Mulberry, and in which week?

Print this appendix with the RFP and give a copy to each evaluator with Appendix B.

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-02 | SEPTEMBER 2026 PAGE 18 OF 15

APPENDIX B

PROPOSAL EVALUATION SCORECARD

RFP MUL-PS-2026-02 · Police Services Feasibility Study · City of Mulberry, Georgia. Each evaluator completes one sheet per firm, in ink or PDF, before any group discussion. Score 0–5 using the Appendix A anchors, then multiply. Do not adjust weights.

Proposing firm Sheet Proposal / Interview

Evaluator name / title Date

Scale: 0 = missing / non-responsive 1 = poor 2 = fair 3 = adequate 4 = good 5 = excellent. Half points (4.5) are allowed.

Weighted score = raw score × multiplier.

Factor What to look for Max × Raw 0–5 Weighted

Methodology and fit to Mulberry

Three alternatives on one ledger (GCPD / city PD / hybrid marshal). Designs fit the City’s stated budget. CAD and relief-factor method is written down. Hybrid option is a real design. No tax or POST-legal filler.

30 × 6

Team and relevant experience

Named project manager at kickoff, interim briefing, and Council. Former command officer and a cost-modeler on the team. Two new-agency or contract-exit studies in seven years. Hours by person match the résumés. Georgia / Southeast work is a plus.

25 × 5

Work plan, presence, and schedule

Week-by-week plan covering 90 days after award and finishing by January 29, 2027, whichever is earlier. Real on-site days in Mulberry. Written plan if CAD or other third-party data is late that does not pause the clock.

15 × 3

Cost and value One fixed price for Tasks A–J. Hours and rates visible.

Travel and two Council presentations inside the base price.

Optional modules listed separately — not used to hide the real number.

20 × 4

Clarity of writing and sample work

A Councilmember can understand the sample executive summary in fifteen minutes. The first page states a decision, not only a process.

10 × 2

TOTAL Add the five weighted scores. Interview scores use this same sheet; do not invent a sixth factor.

100 / 100

Comments (required if any factor is scored below 3 or at 5)

Evaluator finding Mark one Signature

Shortlist / advance to interview [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Hold

Recommended for award after interview [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] BAFO first

Conflict of interest or prior work with this firm?

[ ] None [ ] Disclosed:

Date:

Panel practice: three evaluators (City Manager, Chief Marshal, one Council or Committee designee). Average the weighted totals. Suggested interview floor: 70 / 100. Interviews re-score this same sheet. Do not add criteria. Keep every completed sheet with the procurement file.

RFP NO. MUL-PS-2026-01 | AMENDMENT TO PLANNING CONTEXT AND TASK F ADDENDUM PAGE

ADDENDUM · INCORPORATED INTO THE RFP

Planning context, stakeholders, and Task F

1. Planning Context — Jail and courts The Gwinnett County Sheriff's Office handles jail, court security and transport, the warrants division, and civil-court process. Record those duties so they are not assumed into a City police roster. This study does not design a City jail or a Sheriff function. A court holding cell and courtroom-security costs are required under Task F.

2. Planning Context — Stakeholders Mayor and Council, City Manager and staff, Marshal's Office, Public Safety Advisory Committee, schools in the city, Mulberry residents, and business owners who operate in the city whether or not they live there.

Task C — Interviews Structured interviews include the Mayor, each Councilmember, City Manager, Chief Marshal, City Attorney, the Public Safety Advisory Committee, and business owners who operate in the city.

Task F — Court holding cell and courtroom security The space program shall include a court holding cell and courtroom-security support space. Cost the holding cell, related construction or fit-out, cameras, duress and access control, and operating costs for courtroom security. Do not design a City jail. Jail, transport, and warrants remain Sheriff functions unless the City later directs otherwise.

This addendum is part of RFP MUL-PS-2026-02. Where it conflicts with earlier text, this page controls.