Title
MOTION TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE TO AWARD RFQ #PSUT-25-11 "WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS ENGINEERING, PUMPING AND FORCE MAINS," IN ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTE 287.055, CONSULTANTS' COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATIONS ACT (CCNA), WITH THE HIGHEST RANKED VENDORS, CHA CONSULTING, INC., BLACK & VEATCH, AND HAZEN AND SAWYER AND TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE CONTRACTS FOR SERVICES.
Summary Explanation and Background
PROCUREMENT PROCESS TAKEN:
- Chapter 35 of the City’s Code of Ordinance is titled “PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES, PUBLIC FUNDS.”
- Section 35.15 defines a Request for Qualifications as “A written solicitation for competitive sealed offers with the title, date and hour of the public opening designated. A request for qualifications shall include, but is not limited to, general information, functional or general specifications, statement of work, instructions for offer and evaluation criteria. All requests for qualifications shall state the relative importance of the evaluation criteria. The city may engage in competitive negotiations with responsible offerors determined to be reasonably susceptible of being selected for award for the purpose of clarification to assure full understanding of and conformance to the solicitation requirements. Offerors shall be accorded fair and equal treatment with respect to any opportunity for discussion and revision of offers, and such revisions may be permitted after submissions and prior to award for the purpose of obtaining the best and final offer.”
- Section 35.19 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "SEALED COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCEDURE."
- Section 35.19(A) states, "All sealed competitive solicitations as defined in §35.18 shall be presented to the City Commission for their consideration prior to advertisement."
- Florida Statute (F.S.) 287.055 is known as the “Consultant’s Competitive Negotiation Act” (CCNA).
- F.S. Section 287.055(2)(a) defines Professional services as “those services within the scope of the practice of architecture, professional engineering, landscape architecture, or registered surveying and mapping, as defined by the laws of the state, or those performed by any architect, professional engineer, landscape architect, or registered surveyor and mapper in connection with his or her professional employment or practice.”
- F.S. Section 287.055(2)(f) states “Project” means that fixed capital outlay study or planning activity described in the public notice of the state or a state agency under paragraph (3)(a). A project may include:
1. A grouping of minor construction, rehabilitation, or renovation activities.
2. A grouping of substantially similar construction, rehabilitation, or renovation activities.
- F.S. Section 287.055(3)(a)(1) states “Each agency shall publicly announce, in a uniform and consistent manner, each occasion when professional services must be purchased for a project the basic construction cost of which is estimated by the agency to exceed the threshold amount provided in s.287.017 for CATEGORY FIVE ($325,000) or for a planning or study activity when the fee for professional services exceeds the threshold amount provided in s.287.017 for CATEGORY TWO ($35,000), except in cases of valid public emergencies certified by the agency head. The public notice must include a general description of the project and must indicate how interested consultants may apply for consideration.”
- F.S Section 287.055 (2)(g) states:
1. "A "continuing contract" is a contract for any of the following:
a. Professional services entered into in accordance with all the procedures of this act between an agency and a firm whereby the firm provides professional services to the agency for projects in which the estimated construction costs of each individual project under the contract does not exceed $7.5 million. Beginning July 1, 2025, and each July 1 thereafter, the department shall adjust the maximum amount allowed on the preceding June 30 for each individual project in a continuing contract by using the change in the June-to-June Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers issued by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of Labor. The department shall publish the adjusted amount on its website;
b. Study activity if the fee for professional services for each individual study under the contract does not exceed $500,000; or
c. Work of a specified nature as outlined in the contract required by the agency, with the contract being for a fixed term or with no time limitation except that the contract must provide a termination clause.
2. Firms providing professional services under continuing contracts may not be required to bid against one another."
Note - Effective July 1, 2026, the Department of Management Services (DMS) adjusted the maximum estimated construction cost for each individual project under a continuing contract from $7,725,000 million to $8,021,250, pursuant to Section 287.055(2)(g), Florida Statutes.
- Section 35.21 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "AWARD OF CONTRACT."
- Section 35.21(A) of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "City Commission Approval."
- Section 35.21(A)(1) states, “An initial purchase of, or contract for, commodities or services, in excess of $100,000, shall require the approval of the City Commission, regardless of whether the competitive bidding or competitive proposal procedures were followed.”
SUMMARY EXPLANATION AND BACKGROUND:
1. On November 19, 2025, the City Commission authorized the advertisement of RFQ #PSUT-25-11 "Wastewater Treatment Plant Process Engineering, Pumping and Force Mains," which was advertised on December 8, 2025.
2. The purpose of this solicitation was to acquire proposals from qualified firms to serve in the capacity of Process Engineering Services, and to establish a “Continuing Contract”, as defined by Consultant’s Competitive Negotiation Act (C.C.N.A. - Florida Statute 287.055), with a pool of firms that can be used on an as needed basis.
3. On January 27, 2026, the City opened thirteen (13) proposals from the following vendors (listed in the order received):
|
Vendor Name |
|
EXP U.S. Services Inc. |
|
Black & Veatch |
|
Ardurra Group, Inc. |
|
CHA Consulting, Inc. |
|
CPH Consulting, LLC |
|
AECOM Technical Services |
|
Stantec |
|
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. |
|
WSP USA Inc. |
|
H2M Architects & Engineers, Inc. |
|
CSA Central, Inc. |
|
Hazen and Sawyer |
|
McKim & Creed |
4. On August 20, 2026, the City convened an evaluation committee for Phase 1 of the evaluation which was tasked with selecting, in order of preferences, no less than three (3) firms per trade deemed to be the most highly qualified to perform the required services. In determining whether a firm is qualified, the evaluation committee evaluated the qualifications of the proposers based on the weighted criteria listed below:
- Adequacy of Personnel / Ability of Professional Personnel (25 points)
- Past Record / Past Performance (25 points)
- Capabilities (25 points)
- Experience of the firm or individual (25 points)
5. Upon reviewing the evaluators' evaluation comments, the Procurement Department and the City Attorney's Office determined that some comments fell outside the scope of the weighted evaluation criteria. To ensure that the evaluation was conducted consistently with the criteria established in the solicitation and the requirements of the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act (CCNA), staff determined that the most prudent course of action was to reconvene the Phase 1 Evaluation Committee and conduct the evaluation again using only the applicable criteria.
On September 2, 2026, the City reconvened the Phase 1 Evaluation Committee to evaluate the qualifications submitted by the respondents. Following its review, the Evaluation Committee determined that the following four (4) firms were qualified and shortlisted to advance to the next phase of the evaluation:
|
Vendor Name |
|
Black & Veatch |
|
Hazen and Sawyer |
|
AECOM Technical Services |
|
CHA Consulting, Inc. |
6. On September 23, 2026, the City convened the second phase of the evaluation committee for presentations from the four ranked vendors.
The evaluation committee scored and ranked the vendors based on the weighted criteria provided for in the solicitation documents and listed below:
- Adequacy of Personnel / Ability of Professional Personnel (25 points)
- Past Record / Past Performance (25 points)
- Firm’s Understanding and Approach to the Work (35 points)
- Willingness to Meet Time and Budget Requirements (5 points)
- Recent, Current, and Projected Workloads of the Firms (5 points)
- Location (2.5 points)
- Local Vendor Preference / Veteran Owned Small Business Preference (2.5 points)
7. At the September 23, 2026, meeting, the Evaluation Committee heard presentations from the shortlisted firms, conducted a question-and-answer session with each firm, and ranked the firms as follows:
|
Vendor Name |
|
CHA Consulting, Inc. |
|
Black & Veatch |
|
Hazen and Sawyer |
A motion was made to direct the City Manager to negotiate a contract with the three highest ranked vendors.
8. Recommend Commission to approve the findings and recommendation of the evaluation committee to award RFQ #PSUT-25-11 " Wastewater Treatment Plant Process Engineering, Pumping and Force Mains," in accordance with Florida Statute 287.055, Consultants' Competitive Negotiations Act (CCNA), with the highest ranked vendors, CHA Consulting, Inc., Black & Veatch, and Hazen and Sawyer and to direct the City Manager to negotiate contracts for services.
Financial Impact
FINANCIAL IMPACT DETAIL:
a) Initial Cost: None at this time. A negotiated contract will be brought back to the Commission and executed by the vendor. In addition, staff proposes to present every work authorization, under these continuing contracts, in excess of the threshold ($100,000) stated under Section 35.21(A)(1) of the City's Code of Ordinances, as may be amended from time to time, to City Commission for approval.
b) Amount budgeted for this item in Account No: When specific projects are identified, the appropriate budgets and accounts will be utilized.
c) Source of funding for difference, if not fully budgeted: Not Applicable.
d) 5 year projection of the operational cost of the project: Not Applicable.
e) Detail of additional staff requirements: Not Applicable.
FEASIBILITY REVIEW:
A feasibility review is required for the award, renewal and/or expiration of all function sourcing contracts. This analysis is to determine the financial effectiveness of function sourcing services.
a) Was a Feasibility Review/Cost Analysis of Out-Sourcing vs. In-House Labor Conducted for this service? Not Applicable.
b) If Yes, what is the total cost or total savings of utilizing Out-Sourcing vs. In-House Labor for this service? Not Applicable.