Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
11-10-2026- City Commission Agendas & Packet Materials
A. Call to Order - 6:00 PM - Commission Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse B. Pledge of Allegiance and a Moment of Silence or Mindfulness C. Changes to the Agenda D. Authorize Absence E. Public Service Announcements F. FYI THE CITY COMMISSION OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, November 10, 2026 City Commission meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires assistance, please contact our ADA Coordinator, David Arnado, at 406.582.3232. Adaptive listening devices and handheld microphones are available for use by audience members upon request. How to Participate: If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda please send an email to comments@bozemanmt.gov or visit the Public Comment Page prior to 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. At the direction of the City Commission, anonymous public comments are not distributed to the City Commission or staff. Public comments will also be accepted in-person and through video conference during the appropriate agenda items but you may only comment once per item and oral comments are usually limited to three (3) minutes. As always, the meeting will be recorded and streamed through the Commission's video page and available in the City on cable channel 190. For more information please contact the City Clerks' Office at 406.582.2320. This meeting will be held both in-person and also using an online video conferencing system. You can join this meeting: Via Video Conference: Click the Register link, enter the required information, and click submit. Click Join Now to enter the meeting. Via Phone: This is for listening only if you cannot watch the stream, channel 190, or attend in- person United States Toll +1 669 900 9128 Access code: 933 7244 1920 1 G. Commission Disclosures H. Approval of Minutes H.1 Approval of Regular City Commission Meeting Minutes from September 15, 2026 (Maas) I. Consent I.1 Accounts Payable Claims Review and Approval (Edwards) I.2 Approval of depository bonds and pledged securities as of September 30, 2026 (Clark) I.3 Authorize the City Manager to sign the Right-of-Way Agreement, Warranty Deed, Escrow Instructions, and the Buyers Statement to Obtain the Right-of-way Necessary to Construct Fowler Avenue Between Durston Road and W Babcock Street(Esparza) I.4 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Grant Agreement for a Portion of Impact Fees Associated with the Bozeman Montessori Annexation(DiTommaso) I.5 Acceptance of Petition for Annexation , Granting of Right-Of-Way, and Initial City Zoning for Genesis Business Park Subdivision(Sullivan) I.6 Authorize City Manager to Sign Purchase Agreement with Wastequip for the Purchase of 420 Bear Resistant Organics Management Totes(Esparza) I.7 Ratify the City Manager's Signature for the State of Montana Department of Environmental Quality for the Innovative Energy Engineering Studies for Local Governments Request for Applications for the Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study(Meyer) I.8 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Professional Services Master Task Order Agreement with DOWL, LLC for One Year of On Call Planning, Engineering, and Construction Oversight Services Agreement for a Variety of Stormwater Division Infrastructure Projects(Smith) I.9 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Professional Services Agreement with HDR Engineering for the Stucky Road Reconstruction Project from Fowler Avenue to South 19th Avenue(Giannetti) I.10 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Task Order 2 with Economic and Planning Systems (EPS) for a 2025 Market and Economic Conditions Report(DiTommaso ) I.11 Authorize the City Manager to Sign Service Order 2 with Jackola Engineering and Architecture for Lindley Center Renovations(Miller) I.12 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Task Order Number 5 for the Right of Way Acquisition Project with Clear Route Real Estate, LLC for Properties Necessary to Construct the Sourdough Transmission Mains Rehabilitation Project(Johnson) Consider the Motion: I move to approve the regular meeting minutes as submitted. Public comment on items within the Consent Agenda will be called for prior to the City Commission vote for approval. Oral comments are usually limited to three (3) minutes. 2 I.13 Authorize the City Manager to Sign Task Order 7 with HDR Engineering Providing Professional Services for Revision of the Total Maximum Daily Load for Nutrients for the Middle Segment of the East Gallatin River(Heaston) I.14 A Resolution Authorizing Change Order 1 to the Willson School Accessible Playground Project Landscape Architectural Designs(Cope) I.15 A Resolution Authorizing Change Order 2 to the MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement Project, Phase 1(Gamradt) I.16 Adopt a Resolution Authorizing Change Order 2 with CK May Excavating, Inc. for the Sourdough Intake Improvements Project(Kohtz) I.17 Ordinance, Final Adoption, Establishing a Zoning Designation of B-2, Community Business District, in Association withe Annexation of 2.002 Acres, the BRC North Loop Annexation (Formally PDI Investments), Application 20346(Rogers) J. Public Comment on Non-agenda Items Falling Within the Purview and Jurisdiction of the Commission K. Mayoral Proclamation L. Special Presentation L.1 Veterans Alliance of Southwest Montana Recognition and Donation Presentation to the Bozeman Sunset Hills Southwest Montana Veterans Cemetery(Overton) M. Action Items M.1 Resolution Establishing the Unit Cost for Payment of Cash In Lieu of Water Rights (Shawn Kohtz) M.2 A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, Directing the City Manager Regarding Next Steps for the Fowler Neighborhood Project(Fine) This is the time to comment on any matter falling within the scope of the Bozeman City Commission. There will also be time in conjunction with each agenda item for public comment relating to that item but you may only speak once per topic. Please note, the City Commission cannot take action on any item which does not appear on the agenda. All persons addressing the City Commission shall speak in a civil and courteous manner and members of the audience shall be respectful of others. Please state your name, and state whether you are a resident of the city or a property owner within the city in an audible tone of voice for the record and limit your comments to three (3) minutes. Written comments can be located in the Public Comment Repository. Special presentations typically have neither public nor City Commission comment. Receive Donation and Allocate to Southwest Montana Veterans Cemetery at Bozeman Sunset Hills Cemetery Public comment on all action items will be called for prior to the City Commission making a motion or conducting discussion. Oral comments are usually limited to three (3) minutes. I move to approve the Resolution. 3 N. FYI / Discussion O. Adjournment 4 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Alex Newby, Deputy City Clerk Mike Maas, City Clerk Cola Rowley, Assistant City Manager Chuck Winn, City Manager SUBJECT:Approval of Regular City Commission Meeting Minutes from September 15, 2026 MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Minutes RECOMMENDATION:Consider the Motion: I move to approve the regular meeting minutes as submitted. STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver information to the community and our partners. BACKGROUND:In 2013, The Clerks' Office identified goals related to the Commission’s priority of Improving Technology Utilization and Proficiency. Improvements included: • Live streaming broadcast of the City Commission Meeting • Meeting efficiency • Better access of meeting information for staff and the public • Time savings • Streamlined approach to citizen involvement and public comment In addition to the City Commission, many City Boards utilize the system as well. Beginning January 5, 2021 meetings in the Granicus platform have been closed captioned. Those captions are searchable using the advanced search option on our video view page. Users are always welcome to contact the City Clerks' Office at 406.582.2320 or email BozemanClerksDepartment@bozemanmt.gov for assistance. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:As determined by the Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:None. 5 Attachments: 09-15-26 City Commission Meeting Minutes.pdf Report compiled on: June 3, 2026 6 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, September 15, 2026 Page 1 of 8 THE CITY COMMMISSION MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MINUTES September 15, 2026 City Commission meetings are open to all members of the public. Present: Joey Morrison, Jennifer Madgic, Douglas Fischer, Emma Bode, Alison Sweeney Absent: None Excused: None Staff at the Dais: Assistant City Manager (ACM) Jon Henderson, City Attorney (CA) Greg Sullivan, Deputy City Clerk (DCC) Alex Newby A) 00:02:31 Call to Order - 6:00 PM - Commission Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse B) 00:03:46 Pledge of Allegiance and a Moment of Silence or Mindfulness C) 00:04:34 Changes to the Agenda Item F.3 Authorize the City Manager to Sign the Torch Relay Agreement with LA28 to host the Olympic Torch Relay will be pulled and will become Action Item I.1. D) 00:04:57 FYI • 00:05:35 ACM Jon Henderson shared the upcoming Civic Academy opportunity for 30 Bozeman participants to learn about Municipal Governance in the City of Bozeman. It will run Wednesday afternoons from 1 pm to 4 pm between October 14th and December 9th. • 00:06:21 The City of Bozeman will host a visit from a delegation from Ukraine. This will be an opportunity to build a peer to peer relationship while sharing Bozeman Municipal experience in local government and learning about resiliency in the context of issues they face at home. 00:07:01 Construction began this week at Bogert Pool on numerous improvements there. E) 00:08:06 Commission Disclosures F) 00:08:17 Consent F.1 Accounts Payable Claims Review and Approval 7 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, September 15, 2026 Page 2 of 8 F.2 Authorize the City Manager to Sign the Notice of Award for the Fowler Avenue Connection Segment 1 Improvements project, to CK May Excavating, for the Total Bid in the Amount of $4,018,965.00, and Final Contract Documents Once Received Notice of Award_Fowler_Seg_1_083006.pdf Fowler_Seg 1_Bid_Recommendation_083026.pdf F.4 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Memorandum of Understanding and License Agreement with Gallatin County Emergency Management for the Sourdough Fuels Reduction Grant and Project Implementation MOU for Fuels Reduction Grant_City and GCEM_Final.pdf GCEM Invitation for Competitive Sealed Bids.pdf Grant Routing Form_GCEM Grant.pdf F.5 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Subscription Agreement with VertiGIS for Geographic Information System (GIS) Software Support Services VertiGIS Consulting Services_FY27-29.pdf F.6 Authorize the City Manager to sign a Professional Services Agreement with Strategies 360 for Tenants Right to Counsel Communications Services Tenants' Right to Counsel Communications Services _ Strategies 360 _ Due August 14, 2026, 4_00 PM MT.pdf PSA TRC Final.docx F.7 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Professional Services Agreement with Design 5 Landscape Architecture for Design Services for the Willson School Accessible Playground Project 2026 PSA-D5_Willson Park 2026_final.pdf F.8 Authorize the City Manager to sign a Professional Services Agreement with Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. (AE2S) for Website Hosting and Support Services for the Bozeman Drought Monitoring Tool PSA_OPTX_2026.pdf Exhibit A_Scope of Services_OPTX_2026.pdf F.9 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Professional Services Agreement with Hale Creative Consulting LLC for Staff Training Services for the Parks and Recreation Department PSA - Hale Creative Consulting.pdf Exhibit A - Scope of Services - Hale Consulting.pdf F.10 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Professional Services Agreement with Sanbell for Preliminary Design of the North Frontage Road Wastewater and Shared-Use Pathway Improvements Professional Services Agreement - N Frontage Road Wastewater and Shared Use Pathway_FINAL.pdf F.11 Authorize the City Manager to Sign Amendment 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with OnSite Energy for the Bozeman Public Library Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Expansion Project Amendment_1_PSA_OnSite_Energy_Bozeman_Library_PV_Expansion_Project.pdf F.12 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Second Amendment with High Country Paving, Inc. for City Hall Parking Lot Replacement Project 2026 Construction Agreement Second Amendment (High Country Paving - City Hall Parking Lot).pdf 8 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, September 15, 2026 Page 3 of 8 F.13 Authorize the City Manager to Sign Amendment 4 to Task Order 3 of the Professional Services Master Task Order Agreement with HDR Engineering Providing for Construction Phase Services for the Water Reclamation Facility Solar Project Amendment 4 TO 3 BZN Solar.pdf F.14 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Task Order 1 with Cascadia Partners for Economic Development and Community Housing Services Cascadia Task Order 1.pdf F.15 A Resolution Adopting Corrected Resolution Numbers to Correct an Administrative Error Resolution Numbering Correction.docx F.16 Ordinance, Final Adoption of a Text Amendment modifying Sections 38.610.030 and 040 (Application of wetland regulations), 38.620 (Watercourse setbacks), and 38.710.120 (Submittal Materials for Review) within Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, Application 26217 26217 Ordinance Wetlands Submittal Provisional Adoption.docx 00:08:26 Public Comment on Consent • There was no Public Comment on Consent. 00:09:24 Motion to approve: I move to approve Consent Items one and two and four through sixteen. Jennifer Madgic: Motion Emma Bode: 2nd 00:09:35 Vote on the Motion to approve: I move to approve Consent Items one and two and four through sixteen. The Motion carried 5 - 0. Approve: Joey Morrison Jennifer Madgic Douglas Fischer Emma Bode Alison Sweeney Disapprove: None G) 00:09:48 Public Comment on Non-agenda Items Falling Within the Purview and Jurisdiction of the Commission 00:10:04 Cindy Miller commented on the Harvest Creek/Cattail Creek Corridor. H) 00:13:10 Special Presentation H.1 Bozeman Housing Affordability Civic Dialogue Final Results and Proposed Workplan 9 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, September 15, 2026 Page 4 of 8 Bozeman Commission Presentation Sep 15.pdf Mayor Morrison introduced Russia Chavis who works with Civic Dialogues, part of Change.org. 00:16:05 Russia Chavis presented the Bozeman Housing Affordability Civic Dialogue Final Results, Introduction, 193 IDEAS from over 500 residents, Why housing affordability, A mini-public, Understanding the Bridging Score, Principles Tested in the Dialogue, Policy Actions for the City, Community Housing Fund Investments, Priorities 1, 2 and 3, Thank you. 00:29:05 Questions of presenter I) Action Items 00:40:15 F.3) Authorize the City Manager to sign the Torch Relay Agreement with LA28 to host the Olympic Torch Relay LA28-City of Bozeman Torch Relay Invitation Letter and Agreement.pdf 00:40:41 Assistant City Manager Jon Henderson shared the current details of the LA28 projected agreement. 00:41:40 Questions of Staff 00:47:55 Public Comment on Action Item 1 LA28 00:48:16 Natsuki Nakamura commented on LA28 and the possible cost. 00:49:54 Motion to authorize: I move to authorize the City Manager to sign the Torch Relay agreement with LA28 to host the Olympic Torch Relay. Emma Bode: Motion Douglas Fischer: 2nd 00:50:14 Discussion 00:57:08 Vote on the Motion to authorize: I move to authorize the City Manager to sign the Torch Relay agreement with LA28 to host the Olympic Torch Relay. The Motion carried 5 - 0. Approve: Joey Morrison Jennifer Madgic Douglas Fischer Emma Bode Alison Sweeney 10 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, September 15, 2026 Page 5 of 8 Disapprove: None I.1 00:57:27 Ordinance Provisional Adoption Creating a New Division of Chapter 40 of the Bozeman Municipal Code Related to Water Adequacy An Ordinance Provisional Adopt Creating a New Division to BMC Ch 40 Re Water Adequacy.docx 00:57:45 Staff Presentation Utilities Director Shawn Kohtz presented the Ordinance Provisional Adoption Creating a New Division of Chapter 40, Amendment Purpose 1, Amendment Purpose 2, Amendment, Removal from Chapter 38. 01:00:39 Questions of Staff 01:04:34 Public Comment • There was no public comment 01:05:03 Motion to provisionally adopt: I move to provisionally adopt the ordinance creating a new division of chapter 40 in the Bozeman Municipal Code related to water adequacy. Douglas Fischer: Motion Alison Sweeney: 2nd 01:05:13 Discussion 01:06:04 Vote on the Motion: to provisionally adopt I move to provisionally adopt the ordinance creating a new division of chapter 40 in the Bozeman Municipal Code related to water adequacy. The Motion carried 5 - 0. Approve: Joey Morrison Jennifer Madgic Douglas Fischer Emma Bode Alison Sweeney Disapprove: None I.2 01:06:23 Resolution 2026-77 Adopting the Cattail Creek Corridor and Anchor Route Park Master Plan CC-Resolution_Cattail-Corridor-Park-Master-Plan.docx Exhibit-A-UPFB_Cattail_Corridor_Resolution - final.docx 11 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, September 15, 2026 Page 6 of 8 2026 Cattail Corridor and Anchor Route Park Master Plan.pdf 01:06:39 ACM Henderson introduced staff 01:07:31 Staff Presentation Director of Parks and Recreation Mitch Overton and Parks Planning and Development Manager Addi Jadin presented the Cattail Creek Corridor and Anchor Route Park Master Plan, Plan Area, Observations, Planning Context, Nearby Development, Parks, Recreation and active Transportation Plan (PRAT) Alignment, Active Transportation Network and Anchor Routes, Key Principles, Section 1: Davis Pond to Cattail Subdivision, Section 2: Gap Area, Section 3: West Winds, Section 3: Harvest Creek, Public Engagement, Timeline, Resolution. 01:31:21 Questions of Staff 02:18:57 Public Comment 02:19:15 Heather Higgs commented on the Cattail Creek Corridor and Anchor Route Park Master Plan. 02:20:57 Cindy Miller commented on the Cattail Creek Corridor. 02:22:28 Terri Lumsden commented on the Cattail Creek Corridor and Anchor Route Master Plan. 02:23:07 Ryan Wilson commented on the Cattail Creek Corridor. 02:26:15 Motion to approve: I move to approve a Resolution Adopting the Cattail Creek Corridor and Anchor Route Park Master Plan. Alison Sweeney: Motion Jennifer Madgic: 2nd 02:26:30 Discussion 02:42:26 Vote on the Motion to approve: I move to approve a Resolution Adopting the Cattail Creek Corridor and Anchor Route Park Master Plan. The Motion carried 5 - 0. Approve: Joey Morrison Jennifer Madgic Douglas Fischer Emma Bode Alison Sweeney 12 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, September 15, 2026 Page 7 of 8 Disapprove: None J) 02:42:47 Appointments J.1 Appointment to the Library Board of Trustees Library Board Applications for Agenda Sept2026.pdf 02:43:00 Disclosure: Commissioner Bode shared a disclosure. 02:43:39 Public comment on Appointments • There was no public comment 02:44:02 Motion to appoint: I move to appoint Amara Reese-hansell to the Library Board of Trustees to fulfill a term ending June 30th, 2027, and I move to appoint Emmy Chuck to the Library Board of Trustees to a term ending June 30th, 2031. Jennifer Madgic: Motion Emma Bode: 2nd 02:44:33 Vote on the Motion to appoint: I move to appoint Amara Reese-hansell to the Library Board of Trustees to fulfill a term ending June 30th, 2027, and I move to appoint Emmy Chuck to the Library Board of Trustees to a term ending June 30th, 2031. The Motion carried 5 - 0. Approve: Joey Morrison Jennifer Madgic Douglas Fischer Emma Bode Alison Sweeney Disapprove: None K) 02:44:55 FYI / Discussion • 02:45:01 Commissioner Sweeney Cash-in-Lieu for Parklands follow-up. • 02:46:08 Commissioner Sweeney would like to have a work session on our Neighborhoods Program. 13 Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, September 15, 2026 Page 8 of 8 • 02:47:39 Mayor Morrison mentioned that we currently only have one vacancy on our City Boards. L) 02:48:12 Adjournment ___________________________________ Joey Morrison Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Mike Maas City Clerk PREPARED BY: ___________________________________ Alex Newby Deputy City Clerk Approved on: November 10, 2026 14 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Serena Axelson, Accounts Payable Clerk Rhonda Edwards, Accounts Payable Clerk Aaron Funk, City Controller Melissa Hodnett, Finance Director SUBJECT:Accounts Payable Claims Review and Approval MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Finance RECOMMENDATION:The City Commission is recommended to make a motion and approve payment of claims as presented. STRATEGIC PLAN:7.5. Funding and Delivery of City Services: Use equitable and sustainable sources of funding for appropriate City services, and deliver them in a lean and efficient manner. BACKGROUND:Montana Code Annotated, Section 7-6-4301 requires claims to be presented to the City Commission within one year of the date the claims accrued. Claims presented to the City Commission under this item have been reviewed and validated by the Finance Department. The Department has ensured that all goods and services have been received along with necessary authorizations and supporting documentation. Please provide approval for checks dated November 11, 2026. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:The City Commission could decide not to approve these claims or a portion of the claims presented. This alternative is not recommended as it may result in unbudgeted late fees assessed against the City. FISCAL EFFECTS:The total amount of the claims to be paid is presented at the bottom of the Expenditure Approval List posted on the City’s website at https://www.bozeman.net/departments/finance/purchasing. Report compiled on: August 21, 2024 15 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Laurae Clark, Treasurer SUBJECT:Approval of depository bonds and pledged securities as of September 30, 2026 MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Finance RECOMMENDATION:Approve the depository bonds and pledged securities as of September 30, 2026. STRATEGIC PLAN:7.5. Funding and Delivery of City Services: Use equitable and sustainable sources of funding for appropriate City services, and deliver them in a lean and efficient manner. BACKGROUND: Pledged securities are assets, such as government or municipal bonds, that a financial institution commits as collateral to secure a deposit in excess of the $250,000 insured by the FDIC. Utilizing pledged securities offers an added layer of security for large deposits, ensuring that funds are protected beyond the standard FDIC insurance limits. This practice ensures that public money remains secure, promoting fiscal responsibility and stability. Per MCA section 7-6-207 the City Commission must approve pledged securities at least quarterly. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the City Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:The city is sufficiently pledged. Attachments: Depository Bonds & Securities 093026.docx SLC_589175.pdf Report compiled on: October 22, 2026 16 DEPOSITORY BONDS AND SECURITIES AS OF September 30, 2026 MATURITY CUSIP NO/LOC NO. TOTAL AMOUNT US BANK All Accounts Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation-Operating Accts $ 250,000.00 LOC-FHLB Cincinnati 11/30/2026 589175 $ 12,000,000.00 TOTAL – US Bank $ 12,250,000.00 This is to certify that we, the Commission of the City of Bozeman, in compliance with the provisions of Section 7-6- 207, M.C.A., have this day certified the receipts of US Bank, for the Depository Bonds held by the Director of Finance as security, for the deposit for the City of Bozeman funds as of September 30, 2026, by the banks of Bozeman and approve and accept the same. _____________________________________________ JOEY MORRISON, Mayor _______________________________________ _______________________________________ DOUGLAS FISCHER, Deputy Mayor JENNIFER MADGIC, Commissioner _______________________________________ _______________________________________ EMMA BODE, Commissioner ALISON SWEENEY, Commissioner 17 PLEDGED SECURITIES AND CASH IN BANK As of September 30, 2026 US BANK Total Cash on Deposit $5,929,894.83 FDIC Coverage $250,000.00 Amount Remaining $5,679,894.83 Pledges Required 104% $5,907,090.62 Actual Pledges $12,000,000.00 Over (Under) Pledged $6,092,909.38 REFERENCE: Section 7-6-207, M.C.A. 18 Issue Date:September 30, 2026 LOC No.:589175 Beneficiary:City of Bozeman P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 Ladies and Gentlemen: For the account of U.S. Bank National Association, CINCINNATI, OH, we hereby authorize you to draw on us at sight up to an amount of $12,000,000.00. This letter of credit is irrevocable, unconditional and nontransferable. Drafts drawn under this letter of credit must be accompanied by the original letter of credit and be presented in substantially the form attached as Exhibit A, at the office identified below by an authorized officer of the beneficiary no later than 2:00 P.M., Cincinnati time, on Monday, November 30, 2026. This letter of credit sets forth in full the terms of our obligations to you, and such undertaking shall not in any way be modified or amplified by any agreement in which this letter is referred to or to which this letter of credit relates, and any such reference shall not be deemed to incorporate herein by reference any agreement. We engage with you that multiple drafts drawn under and in compliance with the terms of this letter of credit will be duly honored at the Credit Department of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Cincinnati, 221 East Fourth Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202. This letter of credit is subject to the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (2007 Revision), International Chamber of Commerce Publication 600. Sincerely, James C. Frondorf SVP, CCO J. Bradley Baker VP, Credit Services c:Corinne M Yerigan O'Neil U.S. Bank National Association 19 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Bob Murray, Project Engineer Emiliano Esparza, Acting Director of Transportation and Engineering Department SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to sign the Right-of-Way Agreement, Warranty Deed, Escrow Instructions, and the Buyers Statement to Obtain the Right-of- way Necessary to Construct Fowler Avenue Between Durston Road and W Babcock Street MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Property RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to sign the Right-of-Way Agreement, Warranty Deed, Escrow Instructions, and the Buyers Statement to obtain the right of way necessary to construct Fowler Avenue between Durston Road and W Babcock Street. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices: Prioritize long-term investment and maintenance for existing and new infrastructure. BACKGROUND:The design on Phase II of the Fowler Avenue Construction Project is nearly complete. Phase II is the portion of roadway between Durston Road and W Babcock Street. To allow for construction of Phase II, all the right-of-way south of the Fowler Place Subdivision and east of the section line ditch needs to be obtained. The required right-of-way is all under single ownership, and the City has come to an agreement in principle with the property owner to purchase the necessary right-of-way. The property is currently in the process of a boundary relocation which will create the tract for the City to purchase. The documents listed in the recommended action are those that the City will need to execute to complete the property transfer once the tract is created. The property acquisition was included in the FY26 budget to align with Phase II construction, which is planned for Spring 2027. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:Property acquisition will be funded by $2,554,166.69 from the Street Impact Fee Fund under Project Number SIF114, Fowler Avenue Connection: Huffine to Oak. The project is included in the 2026 Adopted Annual Operating Budget with a project total of $9,551,800 total under Project SIF114. 20 Attachments: Fowler-French ROW Agreement.pdf Fowler-French Warranty Deed.pdf Fowler-French Escrow Instructions.pdf Fowler-French Buyers Statement.pdf H26-02 Fowler French Appraisal.pdf Report compiled on: October 20, 2026 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 APPRAISAL REPORT OF TRACT 3-B OF C.O.S. 1069A WEST BABCOCK STREET AND FOWLER AVENUE BOZEMAN, MONTANA FOR SANDERSON STEWART PREPARED BY: NICHOLAS J. HOGAN, MAI HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC 7901 SADDLEBOW TRAIL MISSOULA, MT 59808 38 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................ 7 SCOPE OF WORK ......................................................................................................................... 9 RECORD OWNER ....................................................................................................................... 18 LOCATION OF PROPERTY....................................................................................................... 19 LEGAL DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................. 19 REASONABLE EXPOSURE TIME & MARKETING TIME .................................................... 19 PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED ............................................................................................ 21 GENERAL AREA AND NEIGHBORHOOD DATA AND TRENDS ....................................... 26 MARKET ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................. 30 GOOGLE EARTH PHOTOGRAPH ............................................................................................ 42 PLAT MAP ................................................................................................................................... 43 SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS........................................................................................................ 44 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................... 46 TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS ................................................................................................... 48 THE APPRAISAL PROCESS ...................................................................................................... 56 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH ......................................................................................... 58 VALUE ESTIMATE AND CERTIFICATION ........................................................................... 99 ADDENDA Assumptions & Limiting Conditions Engagement Letter Appraiser Qualifications & License 39 7901 Saddlebow Trail Missoula MT 59808 Ph. (406) 239-6425 nickhogan@gmail.com kellih.mt@gmail.com Nicholas J. Hogan, MAI MT, ID & WY General Certified - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 3 February 11, 2026 Tony Gaddo, Prime Consultant Clear Route Real Estate, LLC PO Box 6162 Bozeman, Montana 59771 RE: Appraisal report of Tract 3-B of C.O.S. 1069A, intersection of South Fowler Avenue (proposed extension) and West Babcock Street, Bozeman, Montana Dear Mr. Gaddo: This appraisal report is submitted in response to the engagement letter provided to this firm. It is prepared as a narrative appraisal report in the requested format, consisting of 100 pages plus addenda. The report has been developed and presented in full conformance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), as promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation (current edition). It also adheres to any supplemental standards or client-specific requirements outlined in the engagement letter, which are consistent with USPAP and do not constitute jurisdictional exceptions. A clear understanding of this appraisal service requires careful review of the Scope of Work section. This section defines the problem identification, intended use, intended user(s), type of opinion sought, and the extent of research, analyses, and reporting performed to develop credible assignment results. It most directly communicates the nature and limitations of the appraisal service rendered. Regarding competency (as required under the USPAP Competency Rule), I, Nicholas J. Hogan, MAI, confirm that I possess the necessary knowledge, experience, and expertise to complete this assignment competently. I maintain current and practical experience in the valuation of commercial and development properties in the City of Bozeman and across the State of Montana. This includes the successful completion of multiple appraisal assignments for properties in the immediate market area and similar locales. As a designated MAI member of the Appraisal Institute, I have demonstrated advanced proficiency through rigorous education, examination, peer review, and ongoing professional practice in commercial real estate valuation. I am fully confident in my ability to provide credible opinions of value for this property type and market context. 40 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 4 This report is intended solely for the use specified in the engagement letter and by the identified client and intended users. It may not be distributed to or relied upon by others without my express written consent. The subject property is located in the northwesterly area of the city of Bozeman, Montana. The property under study here consists of a single tract (3-B) located on the northerly side of the 3300 block of West Babcock Street at the intersection of South Fowler Avenue. The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the before and after values associated with the proposed public use easement. The subject property is situated in a neighborhood area bounded to the south by West Babcock Street and to the east by North 19th Avenue, in the City of Bozeman vicinity, Gallatin County, Montana. North 19th Avenue functions as a primary commercial arterial roadway in this portion of the market, while West Babcock Street serves as a secondary arterial. The immediate surrounding area is predominantly residential in character, with limited commercial influences extending westward from North 19th Avenue. The subject parcel encompasses a gross site area of 9.09 acres. It has direct access from West Babcock Street along its southern boundary. Additional access is provided from Fowler Avenue and Christopher Way to the north, as well as two access points off of Valley Drive one on the north easterly corner and one on the southeasterly corner. A pedestrian path traverses north-south on the adjacent parcel to the west, situated west of an existing ditch. The subject property is located in Gallatin County Zoning District 1 and is zoned R - General Residential. Adjacent properties reflect a mix of Gallatin County residential zoning and City of Bozeman residential zoning districts. The broader immediate neighborhood exhibits a range of residential densities, from single-family to high-density multi-family uses. Properties directly abutting the subject are primarily under county residential zoning, including single-family and medium-density residential classifications. Surrounding zoning in the vicinity includes a combination of City of Bozeman districts such as R-1 (low-density residential), R-2 (moderate- density residential), R-3 (medium-density residential), and R-4 (high-density residential), along with comparable county designations. The subject has not been annexed into the City of Bozeman. However, consultation with the Bozeman Planning Department confirms that annexation would not present significant obstacles for proposed development, consistent with the city's ongoing growth policies and the frequent successful annexation of similarly situated parcels in response to Bozeman's rapid expansion and demand for developable land. No flood hazard areas (such as FEMA-designated Special Flood Hazard Zones) affect the property, which is typical for this type of undeveloped or semi-rural parcel within the Bozeman market area. The exhibits and discussion provided by the client all refer to the proposed acquisition as an easement. The proposed acquisition is actually a fee acquisition and the before and after analysis takes that into account. The property rights appraised, both before and after are the encumbered fee simple estate. This assumption reflects that typical utility easements, rights-of-way, or similar 41 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 5 minor encumbrances are present but do not materially detract from the highest and best use or overall market value. The appraiser is unaware of any environmental hazards stemming from the subject's historical use or potential contamination risks from adjacent properties. No adverse easements, encroachments, or other title defects are known to exist that would impair marketability or use. This description provides context for the site's location, physical characteristics, zoning framework, and development potential. “Before the Acquisition” Based upon my investigations, studies, and analyses, it is my opinion the encumbered market value of the fee simple interest, including mineral and subsurface interest, subject to encumbrances of record and subject to the extraordinary assumptions, hypothetical conditions and jurisdictional exceptions as appropriate, before, relative to the proposed fee simple acquisition, of the subject property, as of February 3, 2026, is: In the after condition, the property size will have a significant change. The physical characteristics of the property will change, including total site area shape and overall access. “After the Acquisition” Based upon my investigations, studies, and analyses, it is my opinion the encumbered market value of the fee simple interest, including mineral and subsurface interest, subject to encumbrances of record, and subject to the extraordinary assumptions, hypothetical conditions and jurisdictional exceptions as appropriate, in the after condition relative to the proposed fee simple acquisition, as of February 3, 2026, is: Income Approach Cost Approach Sales Comparison Approach $9,310,000 - $9,750,000 As Is, Fee Simple As Is, Fee Simple, Before Nine Million Three Hundred Ten Thousand Dollars and No Cents n/a n/a $9,310,000 Subject Before Acres 9.09 Subject Before SF 395,960 Fee Acquisition 102,814 Fee Acquisition Acres 2.36 Subject, After SF 293,146 Subject After Acres 6.73 Land Description, After 42 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 6 Your attention is invited to the data found within the body of this report which, in part, is the foundation of this conclusion. I wish to thank you for this opportunity; should you find need for this firm's services again, please do not hesitate to contact me. Professionally yours, HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC Nicholas J. Hogan, MAI MT General Certificate No. REA-RAG-LIC- 370 Expires: 3/31/2026 Income Approach Cost Approach Sales Comparison Approach $6,380,000 - $6,890,000 Fee Simple, After Difference As Is, Fee Simple, After n/a n/a $6,890,000 Two Million Four Hundred Twenty Thousand Dollars and No Cents $2,420,000 Six Million Eight Hundred Ninety Thousand Dollars and No Cents 43 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 7 SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS RECORD OWNER: Barbara Ann French, John Bradley French, Robert Lee French and Carolyn Lisa French. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Tract 3-B of C.O.S. 1069A, on the 3300 block of West Babcock Street at intersection of South Fowler Avenue. PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED: Fee Simple; before and after the proposed fee simple acquisition. SCOPE OF WORK: Provide opinion of value based on the “as is” condition of the real property described herein before and after the proposed fee simple acquisition. DEFINITION OF VALUE: Market Value; specific definition found in the report. INTENDED USE: The intended use will be to assist the client and intended users in appropriately compensating the property owners for the imposition of the proposed fee simple acquisition. DATE OF INSPECTION: July 18, 2023; please refer to the extraordinary assumptions relative to the prior inspection of the subject versus the current date of value. DATE OF VALUATION: February 3, 2026 CLIENT/INTENDED USER: The client is identified as Clear Route Real Estate, LLC as the prime consultant. Intended users include the client as well as the City of Bozeman. PRESENT USE: Vacant land. HIGHEST AND BEST USE - BEFORE: Residential development. HIGHEST AND BEST USE - AFTER: Residential development. SITE DESCRIPTION: The subject parcel encompasses a gross site area of 9.09 acres. It has direct access from West Babcock Street along its southern boundary. Additional access is provided from Fowler Avenue and Christopher Way to the north, as well as two access points off of Valley Drive one on the 44 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 8 north easterly corner and one on the southeasterly corner. A pedestrian path traverses north-south on the adjacent parcel to the west, situated west of an existing ditch. The subject property is located in Gallatin County Zoning District 1 and is zoned General Residential. Adjacent properties reflect a mix of Gallatin County residential zoning and City of Bozeman residential zoning districts. The broader immediate neighborhood exhibits a range of residential densities, from single-family to high-density multi-family uses. Properties directly abutting the subject are primarily under county residential zoning, including single-family and medium-density residential classifications. Surrounding zoning in the vicinity includes a combination of City of Bozeman districts such as R-1 (low-density residential), R-2 (moderate- density residential), R-3 (medium-density residential), and R-4 (high-density residential), along with comparable county designations. The subject has not been annexed into the City of Bozeman. However, consultation with the Bozeman Planning Department confirms that annexation would not present significant obstacles for proposed development, consistent with the city's ongoing growth policies and the frequent successful annexation of similarly situated parcels in response to Bozeman's rapid expansion and demand for developable land. No flood hazard areas (such as FEMA-designated Special Flood Hazard Zones) affect the property, which is typical for this type of undeveloped or semi-rural parcel within the Bozeman market area. Valuation, Before and After: Income Approach Cost Approach Sales Comparison Approach $9,310,000 - $9,750,000 As Is, Fee Simple As Is, Fee Simple, Before n/a n/a $9,310,000 Income Approach Cost Approach Sales Comparison Approach $6,380,000 - $6,890,000 Fee Simple, After As Is, Fee Simple, After n/a n/a $6,890,000 45 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 9 SCOPE OF WORK The Scope of Work for this appraisal, previously referred to as the Scope of the Appraisal serves as the foundational element defining the appraisal process. This aligns with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP – 2024 edition), promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation, as well as relevant guidance from the Appraisal Institute's Guide Notes to its Standards of Professional Practice. USPAP establishes binding requirements and guidelines governing the development of appraisal opinions (under Standards 1 and 2) and the reporting or communication of those opinions. The selected appraisal service and reporting option must be consistent with the defined Scope of Work, which outlines the extent of research, analysis, and procedures necessary to produce credible assignment results tailored to the client's intended use and users. This appraisal fully complies with the regulatory requirements of the State of Montana, as administered by the Montana Board of Real Estate Appraisers, through adherence to USPAP's Standards, Ethics Rule, Competency Rule, and other applicable provisions. The Scope of Work reflects the appraiser's professional judgment regarding the actions and analyses deemed necessary for credible results in the context of the assignment. It encompasses elements such as problem identification, the type and extent of data researched, property inspection (if applicable), and the depth of analyses applied. Guidance from The Appraisal Institute, including updates addressing the USPAP 2024 edition, reinforces the critical role of the Scope of Work Rule. This rule emphasizes the appraiser's responsibility to determine and perform an appropriate scope that ensures credible results while allowing flexibility based on the assignment's intended use. The Scope of Work must be disclosed in the report as required, and it must meet or exceed what would be expected by peers in similar assignments. According to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP – 2024 edition), promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation, the Scope of Work Rule explicitly requires that, for each appraisal and appraisal review assignment, an appraiser must fulfill the following three core obligations: 1. Identify the problem to be solved. This involves problem identification through determining key assignment elements, such as: The client and any other intended users; The intended use of the appraiser’s opinions and conclusions; The type and definition of value; The effective date of the opinions and conclusions; The subject of the assignment and its relevant characteristics (physical, legal, and economic); and 46 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 10 Any assignment conditions (including assumptions, extraordinary assumptions, hypothetical conditions, laws, regulations, jurisdictional exceptions, or other factors affecting the scope). Communication with the client is typically required to establish most of these elements, while the appraiser exercises professional judgment (based on competency) to identify relevant property characteristics. 2. Determine and perform the scope of work necessary to develop credible assignment results. The appraiser must decide on and then carry out the type and extent of research, data collection, property inspection (if applicable), and analyses needed to produce credible results given the identified problem, intended use, and assignment conditions. The scope must be sufficient for credibility, and the appraiser bears the responsibility for this determination (with flexibility allowed, but the burden is on the appraiser to demonstrate adequacy). This includes deciding what to do (or not do) in terms of inspection, data researched, and analytical methods applied. 3. Disclose the scope of work in the report. The report must clearly disclose the scope of work performed, including what was done and (as relevant) what was not done, to enable intended users to understand the assignment results properly and assess their credibility. This disclosure ensures transparency and compliance with reporting standards (e.g., under Standards Rules 2-2 for appraisals or 4-2 for reviews). These requirements are outlined in the Scope of Work Rule (which addresses problem identification, research, and analyses) and are reinforced in Standard 1 (for real property appraisal development), which states that the appraiser must "identify the problem to be solved, determine the scope of work necessary to solve the problem, and correctly complete research and analyses necessary to produce a credible appraisal." The appraiser must be prepared to demonstrate that the chosen scope is sufficient for credible results, and the entire process promotes public trust by ensuring independence, objectivity, and appropriateness to the assignment's context. This framework applies nationwide, including in Montana, where state regulations (via the Montana Board of Real Estate Appraisers) mandate compliance with USPAP. Problem Identification: Client and any other intended users: The client is identified as Clear Route Real Estate, LLC. Other intended users include the City of Bozeman. Clear Route Real Estate, LLC is the prime consultant with the city of Bozeman and Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group, LLC is the subconsultant. My contract is with Clear Route Real Estate, LLC with the city of Bozeman recognized as the intended user of the report. 47 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 11 Although the landowners may be provided with a copy of the appraisal, they are not recognized intended users. Intended use of the appraiser’s opinions and conclusions: The intended use of the report will be to assist the client and intended users in appropriately compensating the property owners for the imposition of the proposed fee simple acquisition for the Fowler Avenue road project right-of-way. Type and definition of value: The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the market value of the property described herein and commonly referred to as the subject property. The valuation is based on the "as is" condition of the property before and after acquisition of the proposed fee simple acquisition. The current fair market value has been developed and refined by the State of Montana and found in state statute MCA70-30-313 and is as follows: Current fair market value is the price that would be agreed to by a willing and informed seller and buyer, taking into consideration, but not limited to the following factors: 1. The highest and best reasonably available use and its value for such use, provided current use may not be presumed to be the highest and best use; 2. The machinery, equipment, and fixtures for the part of the real estate taken; 3. Any other relevant factors as to which evidence is offered. Subject of the assignment and its relevant characteristics: The subject property is situated in a general neighborhood area bounded to the south by West Babcock Street and to the east by North 19th Avenue, in the City of Bozeman vicinity, Gallatin County, Montana. North 19th Avenue functions as a primary commercial arterial roadway in this portion of the market, while West Babcock Street serves as a secondary arterial. The immediate surrounding area is predominantly residential in character, with limited commercial influences extending westward from North 19th Avenue. The subject parcel encompasses a gross site area of 9.09 acres. It has direct access from West Babcock Street along its southern boundary. Additional access is provided from Fowler Avenue and Christopher Way to the north, as well as two access points off of Valley Drive one on the north easterly corner and one on the southeasterly corner. A pedestrian path traverses north-south on the adjacent parcel to the west, situated west of an existing ditch. The subject property is located in Gallatin County Zoning District 1 and is zoned General Residential. Adjacent properties reflect a mix of Gallatin County residential zoning and City of 48 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 12 Bozeman residential zoning districts. The broader immediate neighborhood exhibits a range of residential densities, from single-family to high-density multi-family uses. Properties directly abutting the subject are primarily under county residential zoning, including single-family and medium-density residential classifications. Surrounding zoning in the vicinity includes a combination of City of Bozeman districts such as R-1 (low-density residential), R-2 (moderate- density residential), R-3 (medium-density residential), and R-4 (high-density residential), along with comparable county designations. Assignment conditions: For the reader’s edification, I have incorporated definitions for hypothetical conditions and extraordinary assumptions. These definitions are taken from USPAP 2024. “HYPOTHETICAL CONDITION: a condition, directly related to a specific assignment, which is contrary to what is known by the appraiser to exist on the effective date of the assignment results, but is used for the purpose of analysis. Comment: Hypothetical conditions are contrary to known facts about physical, legal, or economic characteristics of the subject property; or about conditions external to the property, such as market conditions or trends; or about the integrity of data used in an analysis.” “EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTION: an assignment specific assumption as of the effective date regarding uncertain information used in an analysis which, if found to be false, could alter the appraiser’s opinions or conclusions. Comment: Uncertain information might include physical, legal, or economic characteristics of the subject property; or conditions external to the property such as market conditions or trends; sore the integrity of the data used in an analysis. -Extraordinary Assumptions: This appraisal is based in part on the extraordinary assumption that the subject property's physical condition, improvements, and relevant characteristics as observed during my prior personal inspection on July 18, 2023 (for a previous assignment) remain substantially unchanged and representative as of the effective date of value for this assignment (February 3, 2026). No personal inspection of the property was performed specifically for this assignment. The prior inspection was a full personal inspection conducted in the normal course of that earlier assignment. However, given the passage of time, there is inherent uncertainty regarding any potential changes due to damage, modifications, environmental factors, or other events that may have occurred since then. If this extraordinary assumption proves incorrect (i.e., if material changes to the property have occurred), the opinions of value, analyses, and conclusions in this report could be affected and might require revision. This assumption is necessary to develop credible assignment results given the client's instructions and the scope of work accepted for this assignment. No hypothetical conditions are used in conjunction with this matter. 49 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 13 -Hypothetical Conditions: As of the effective date of this appraisal, the proposed fee acquisition has not yet been imposed or recorded on the subject property. The "after" valuation presented in this report (reflecting the impact of the acquisition) is developed under the following hypothetical condition, as required for credible analysis in this assignment: The fee acquisition is assumed to be fully imposed, executed, and recorded against the subject property as described and analyzed within this report. This hypothetical condition is contrary to what is known to exist on the effective date of value (i.e., the acquisition is not yet in place). It is employed here for the specific purpose of reasonable analysis and comparison, to estimate the market value of the property subject to the acquisition versus the value without it, consistent with the client's assignment objectives. In accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) (Standards Rule 1-2(g) and reporting requirements under Standards Rule 2-1(c) and 2-2(a)(xi)), this hypothetical condition is clearly and conspicuously disclosed. The "before" valuation assumes the property remains unencumbered by the proposed fee acquisition. All analyses, highest and best use considerations, and value conclusions in the "after" scenario are predicated on this hypothetical condition. Should the proposed acquisition not be imposed or be modified in a material way, the opinions of value expressed herein for the encumbered condition would not be applicable. This disclosure ensures that intended users fully understand the basis for the "after" value opinion and the assumptions underlying the valuation. -Jurisdictional Exceptions: None. The use of extraordinary assumptions and hypothetical conditions within the report should be viewed within the context that their use might affect the assignment results. Determine and perform the scope of work necessary to develop credible appraisal assignment results: Property Identification and Extent of Inspection: The Property Identification encompasses a comprehensive description of the subject's physical and legal attributes relevant to the valuation problem. Physical characteristics include site size, shape, topography, access and frontage, visibility, special amenities or features, any detrimental conditions (e.g., drainage issues, easements impacting usability), available utilities (public water, sewer, electricity, natural gas, etc.), and site improvements (if any). Legal characteristics address the property rights appraised specifically, the fee simple estate encumbered by the proposed fee simple acquisition (as analyzed in the "after" scenario), along with any existing covenants, restrictions, easements, zoning regulations, or other title encumbrances that influence marketability, highest and best use, or value. For this assignment, the extent of inspection 50 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 14 included a complete viewing of the subject property on a previous date by the appraiser. This on- site inspection allowed for direct observation of the site's physical condition, boundaries, access points, surrounding influences, and any apparent features or limitations. Competency and Qualifications: Pursuant to the USPAP Competency Rule, the appraiser, Nicholas J. Hogan, MAI, affirms possession of the knowledge, experience, and expertise necessary to complete this assignment competently. Detailed qualifications are provided in the addendum to this report, documenting education, professional designations (including MAI membership in the Appraisal Institute), examination, peer review, continuing education, and ongoing professional practice. Specifically, the appraiser routinely performs valuation services for similar vacant residential development land in the Bozeman/Gallatin County market area. This includes multiple assignments involving annexation considerations, rezoning potential, and before-and-after easement impact analyses in comparable locations. Combined with formal professional qualifications, this experience satisfies USPAP competency requirements for this property type, market, and assignment complexity. No extraordinary measures (e.g., co-appraisal or specialized consultation) were required. Assignment Objective and Problem Identification: As requested by the client, this is a traditional market value appraisal assignment requiring an opinion of the market value of the specified real property interest. The valuation reflects the "as is" condition of the property as of the effective date, presented in a before-and-after format to quantify the impact of the proposed fee acquisition. The "before" value assumes the property remains unencumbered by the fee acquisition. The "after" value is developed under the hypothetical condition (previously disclosed) that the fee acquisition has been fully imposed and recorded. In eminent domain proceedings, particularly those involving partial takings for infrastructure projects like road extensions, the "before and after" appraisal method is a standard approach used to determine just compensation for affected property owners. This method calculates the difference between the market value of the entire property before any acquisition occurs and the value of the remaining property after the taking, accounting for any damages or benefits resulting from the project. It ensures the owner is compensated not only for the land directly acquired but also for any net diminution in value to the remainder, such as severance damages from reduced access, altered utility, or changes in highest and best use. In the context of a proposed road extension, the "before" appraisal reflects the property's value in its pre-project state, as if the extension were not anticipated or occurring. This means the portion of land slated for the road is valued based on its contribution to the highest and best use often as developable land suitable for residential, commercial, or agricultural purposes, depending on 51 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 15 zoning, market demand, and comparable sales data. For instance, if the larger parcel is prime development land with potential for subdivision, the "before" value treats the future road strip as an integral part of that developable area, appraised at its full market potential without any discount or adjustment for the impending acquisition. This avoids undervaluing the property by prematurely considering it as "road" land or infrastructure. Conversely, the "after" appraisal incorporates the project's impacts: the road extension is now in place, the acquired strip is removed from the owner's control, and the remainder is re-evaluated for any resulting harms (e.g., bisecting the parcel, limiting development options, or increasing noise/traffic) or special benefits (e.g., improved access enhancing the remainder's value). Compensation is then the "before" value minus the "after" value, ensuring the owner is made whole without windfall or shortfall. This treatment valuing the road extension area in the "before" as development land rather than part of the acquisition is not arbitrary but mandated to prevent "project influence" from skewing valuations. Under Montana law, specifically MCA 70-31-301(3), any increase or decrease in fair market value caused by the public improvement or the likelihood of acquisition must be disregarded. This codifies the principle that the government cannot benefit from depreciation (e.g., market blight from project announcements, road cost sharing, etc.) or force owners to forgo enhancements the project might otherwise provide. These requirements align with constitutional protections for just compensation. The U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment prohibits taking private property for public use without just compensation, interpreted by courts to mean fair market value absent project influence (as seen in cases like United States v. Miller, 317 U.S. 369 (1943)). Montana's Constitution, Article II, Section 29, goes further by requiring compensation for property "taken or damaged" to the full extent of the loss, explicitly covering severance and other indirect harms in partial takings. Montana statutes, such as MCA 70-30-302 (assessing compensation from the date of summons at current fair market value) and MCA 70-30-313 (defining fair market value based on willing buyer-seller transactions), reinforce this by mandating impartial appraisals that consider highest and best use without project bias. Appraisal Approaches and Analyses Applied: The underlying asset is vacant land with residential development potential; therefore, not all three traditional approaches to value are applicable or necessary for credible results: The sales comparison approach is the only method utilized, as it directly reflects market behavior for similar vacant or minimally improved residential development parcels. The cost approach is not applicable due to the absence of significant improvements. The income approach is not relevant, as the property is not currently income-producing and the highest and best use does not involve rental or commercial operations. Peer-reviewed standards for this property type in this market expect primary reliance on the sales comparison approach, which has been fully implemented here. 52 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 16 Market Data and Comparable Selection: The market data analyzed for this appraisal assignment is limited to comparable sales of vacant residential development land (or sales of improved properties where the improvements contribute negligible value) located in the Bozeman vicinity. No comparable sales or market data from other areas, including larger metropolitan markets in Western Montana (e.g., Missoula) or Northwestern Montana (e.g., Kalispell), were considered or relied upon. Bozeman's market is dissimilar to other Montana metropolitan areas due to its distinct growth dynamics, including higher historical and projected appreciation rates, elevated median housing prices, and unique demand drivers (e.g., proximity to Montana State University, tech sector expansion, and recreational amenities). Recent data indicates Bozeman median home prices in the $675,000–$775,000 range (with some reports showing stabilization or modest year-over-year changes around -2.5% to +6% in late 2025/early 2026), significantly exceeding statewide medians (approximately $485,000–$599,000) and those in comparable cities like Billings, Missoula, or Great Falls. These differences render broader Montana metropolitan markets non- comparable for valuation purposes in this assignment. Data sources include: Big Sky Country MLS (primary service for the greater Bozeman area), Private contacts with real estate agents, investors, developers, owners, and management companies, Public records and other verified sources. Given Montana's status as a non-disclosure state, verified sales prices are obtained through confidential confirmations with real estate agents, buyers, sellers, or other knowledgeable parties (where parties consent to disclosure). In cases where confidentiality is requested or price details are restricted, such limitations are noted and handled in accordance with USPAP and standard professional practice. MLS data provides listing history, pending status, and physical details, supplemented by direct verification. Comparable sales include: Closed transactions, Pending/under-contract sales (for current market indications), Certain comparables feature minor existing improvements (e.g., older structures), but analysis (supported by discussions with listing agents and market participants) attributes negligible contributory value to those improvements due to the parcels' clear redevelopment potential for new residential uses. Buyer motivation in this market prioritizes land value and development entitlement over existing structures. 53 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 17 Highest and Best Use Context: The subject remains in Gallatin County jurisdiction and has not been annexed into the City of Bozeman. Consultation with the Bozeman Planning Department indicates strong municipal interest in annexing this parcel, with likely rezoning to a city residential district such as R-2 (moderate-density residential, typically allowing single-family, duplexes, and some multi- family) or R-3 (medium-density residential, supporting townhomes, apartments, and higher unit counts per acre). Annexation and rezoning are routine and not considered significant impediments in Bozeman's high-growth environment. Highest and best use conclusions therefore center on residential development under comparable zoning densities in the immediate area (mix of county and city residential districts). Comparable sales were selected accordingly, focusing on properties with similar zoning, location attributes, and development potential. Environmental and Other Limiting Conditions: The appraiser is not qualified as an environmental expert and has not conducted or been provided with a Phase I or Phase II environmental site assessment. In the absence of any observable red flags or known historical uses suggesting contamination, it is assumed (as a standard assumption and limiting condition) that the property is free of hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, or other environmental concerns that would materially affect value or marketability. This assumption is typical for vacant land appraisals in this market and aligns with observed conditions during inspection. No known cultural resource issues (e.g., archaeological sites, historic designations) or other extraordinary limitations affect the property. This section establishes the foundation for the valuation analyses that follow, ensuring transparency regarding data sources, methods, assumptions, and compliance with USPAP. Disclose the scope of work in the report: The discussion above outlines the problem to be solved and the appropriate scope of work to solve that problem. Report Option - Standard Rule 2-2: Pursuant to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), 2024 edition (effective January 1, 2024), real property appraisal assignments must be reported using one of two written report options as specified in Standards Rule 2-2: Appraisal Report, or Restricted Appraisal Report. The selected option must be prominently stated in the report. USPAP further provides that an appraiser may use any additional label or descriptive term in conjunction with—but not in place 54 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 18 of the required USPAP designation (Standards Rule 2-2(a) or (b), as applicable). This permits supplementary descriptors such as "Narrative Appraisal Report," "Summary Appraisal Report," or similar phrases to characterize the level of detail, format, or presentation style, provided the core USPAP label remains clearly identified. For this assignment, the report is prepared as an Appraisal Report (not a Restricted Appraisal Report). This complies with the client's specific request for a comprehensive narrative presentation in a detailed format suitable for understanding the analyses, supporting data, reasoning, and conclusions without requiring reference to external workfiles. To align precisely with the client's instructions, this report is formatted as a Narrative Appraisal Report (or equivalently, a detailed Appraisal Report in narrative style). This format includes: Full description of the appraisal problem, Identification of the property and property rights appraised, Scope of work disclosure, Highest and best use analysis, Application of the sales comparison approach (primary method for vacant land), Detailed comparable sales data, adjustments, and reconciliation, Before-and-after valuation reflecting the hypothetical condition of the fee acquisition, and supporting exhibits and addenda. This level of detail exceeds the minimum requirements for an Appraisal Report under USPAP (which uses terms like "summarize" for key elements) and ensures that intended users can fully understand the assignment results, including the rationale for opinions of value, without ambiguity or reliance on non-transmitted information. The use of the descriptive term "Narrative Appraisal Report" (or "Summary Report Format" as referenced in client communications) is intended solely to convey the comprehensive, explanatory nature of the presentation and does not alter the fundamental classification as an Appraisal Report under USPAP. No jurisdictional exceptions to USPAP are invoked in this regard. This prominent disclosure satisfies Standards Rule 2-2 requirements and provides clarity for all intended users regarding the report type, format, and compliance framework. RECORD OWNER The subject property is currently owned by the following individuals: Barbara Ann French John Bradley French Robert Lee French Carolyn Lisa French These current owners acquired the property on May 26, 2023, through an inheritance. Prior to this transfer, the property was held by: 55 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 19 Celia French Wood, Trustee, and The Celia French Wood Trust The previous ownership (under the Celia French Wood Trust) had been in place for more than three years as of the date of value. The subject property is currently listed for sale through a local real estate broker, but the listings are not and have not been exposed to the Big Sky Country MLS system. The property is subject to a listing agreement and marketed as two separate parcels. The first parcel corresponds to the area proposed for acquisition in connection with the Fowler Avenue extension. The second parcel represents the remainder property, in the after condition as described in this report. Both parcels are listed at $23.50 per square foot. This asking price is reportedly derived from the Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group, LLC prior appraisal completed in 2023. There is an apparent meeting of the minds between the current ownership noted above and the City of Bozeman regarding fee acquisition of the proposed Fowler Avenue extension area at this same rate of $23.50 per square foot. No other market activity involving the subject property including listings for sale, options to purchase, pending sales, or similar transactions has occurred within the past three years. The subject property listings have been exposed to specific local brokers but not the general market. LOCATION OF PROPERTY The subject property is located in the northwesterly area of the city of Bozeman, Montana. The property consists of a single tract (Parcel 3-B COS 1069A) located on the northerly side of the 3300 block of West Babcock Street at the intersection of South Fowler Avenue. LEGAL DESCRIPTION S11, T02 S, R05 E, C.O.S. 1069A, PARCEL 3-B, ACRES 9.09 REASONABLE EXPOSURE TIME & MARKETING TIME It is a requirement of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) to incorporate discussion & analysis of Exposure Time within a market value analysis of the subject property. USPAP 2024 defines exposure time as: “An opinion, based on supporting market data, of the length of time that the property interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal.” It is often assumed that this is consistent with the concept of Marketing Time. This has been defined within the "The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Seventh Edition", published by The Appraisal Institute as follows: 56 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 20 An opinion of the amount of time it might take to sell a real or personal property interest at the concluded market value level during the period immediately after the effective date of an appraisal. Marketing time differs from exposure time, which is always presumed to precede the effective date of an appraisal (Advisory Opinion 7 or the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation and Statement on Appraisal Standards No. 6, “Reasonable Exposure Time in Real Property and Personal Property Market Value Opinions” address the determination of reasonable exposure and market time.) The simple issue between these two definitions is one of historical evidence (exposure time is always presumed to precede the effective date of the appraisal) and prospective or future occurrence (marketing time). These may be the same in a stable market or opposite trends in a changing market. The situation could be a relatively weak or soft market noted by historical evidence yet current trends reflect a strong demand and investor expectations for continued strong demand. That could present opposite exposure time and marketing time discussions/conclusions. In accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) Standard Rule 1-2(c)(iv) and applicable supplemental standards, this appraisal includes consideration and analysis of exposure time as an integral component in developing credible opinions of market value. Exposure time is defined as the estimated length of time that the property interest being appraised would have been offered on the market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at the appraised value on the effective date of value. Marketing period (or marketing time) is the estimated length of time required to sell the property as of the date of value, assuming reasonable exposure and typical market conditions. For the “as is” condition, the estimated exposure time preceding the date of value is approximately 6 months. The estimated marketing period as of the date of value is also approximately 6 months. Pursuant to USPAP and supplemental standards, it is necessary for this appraisal to consider & analyze exposure time when developing an opinion of market value. For the as is, at completion and at stabilized occupancy the market exposure time preceding the date of value would have been roughly 12 months and the estimated marketing period as of the date of value is roughly 12 months. The tabulation below outlines the primary sales data in terms of total days on market. Sale No. 3 has a higher than normal list to sale ratio. The listing broker indicated numerous offers increase the price significantly. 57 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 21 PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED Property Rights Appraised, before: All surface rights entitled to the subject parcel subject to the exceptions of record noted in schedule B of the provided title commitment and subject to the hypothetical conditions and extraordinary assumptions. Property Rights Appraised, after: All surface rights entitled to the subject parcel subject to the exceptions of record noted in schedule B of the provided title commitment and subject to the hypothetical conditions and extraordinary assumptions. General Comments: The appraiser has not conducted a title search, reviewed an abstract of title, obtained a title commitment, or performed any formal examination of title records. Accordingly, no responsibility is assumed or warranted with respect to the marketability of title, the existence or absence of defects, encumbrances, clouds on title, adverse possession claims, boundary disputes, or any other matters that could affect the legal ownership or transferability of the subject properties. This appraisal is based on the supposition that marketable fee simple title to the subject property can be conveyed free and clear of any objectionable title defects, except for those standard exceptions and matters customarily shown on a title insurance policy (e.g., rights-of-way for roads, recorded easements for utilities, taxes not yet due and payable, and similar typical encumbrances). Utility easements (including but not limited to water, sewer, electric, telecommunications, and natural gas lines), road/access easements, and similar non-possessory interests are commonplace Sale No. Days on Market List to sale Sale No. 1 97 86% Sale No. 2 133 94% Sale No. 3 51 168% Sale No. 4 907 89% Sale No. 5 84 104% 58 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 22 and typical throughout the Montana market. Such easements are generally located along property boundaries or in locations that do not materially interfere with the highest and best use or development potential of industrial-zoned vacant land. In accordance with standard appraisal practice and USPAP requirements for relevance and materiality: A detailed discussion and analysis of specific easements will be provided only if any easement is determined to have a negative and measurable impact on the highest and best use, marketability, or value of the subject parcel(s). Otherwise, the existence of typical boundary-located utility and access easements is acknowledged here but does not warrant further individual notation or valuation adjustment in the approaches to value. As previously noted in the easement discussion section of this report, the primary comparable sales and the subject parcels are considered reasonably similar with respect to overall easement impact. No material negative influence from easements has been identified that would require specific adjustments beyond those already considered in the sales comparison approach. In summary, the appraisal assumes conveyance of good, marketable, and insurable fee simple title, subject only to typical recorded easements and other standard title exceptions that do not detract from the property’s utility or value in the current market. Any party relying on this appraisal for transaction purposes is strongly advised to obtain a current title commitment or title insurance policy and to conduct appropriate due diligence regarding title matters. 59 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 23 Pertinent Issues: The subject property includes a 90' x 90' existing drain field and an associated replacement drain field easement situated in the southerly portion of the parcel. This is a servient easement benefiting the single-family residence immediately south of the subject along Baxter Lane. The easement grants the southern property rights to utilize the drain field and replacement drain field for its onsite wastewater treatment system, as that residence continues to rely on a private septic system and private well rather than municipal services. The easement remains in full effect and will continue until the benefited property (the southern residence) obtains connection to the City of Bozeman's sanitary sewer system. No immediate or confirmed sewer connection exists for the benefited parcel, preserving the easement's active status. Notably, the southern residence is owned by one of the partial owners of the subject property, which may facilitate future coordination or potential release/relocation of the easement upon municipal sewer availability, however, that is not part of the subject standalone analysis. Additional plat/site features include a monitoring well identified on the plat, installed specifically for prior septic system design, permitting, and compliance monitoring; it is no longer in active use and does not pose an ongoing operational constraint. Along the westerly boundary, an irrigation ditch is present and will necessitate on-site mitigation measures during development, such as relocation, piping, or encapsulation to accommodate future improvements while 60 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 24 complying with water rights and drainage regulations, all part of the subject acquisition proposal by the city Bozeman and identified within the engineering. There is a plat notation of a ditch along the easterly side of the subject property. This ditch is no longer active or visible on the subject site. I have assumed for purposes of analysis this has been abandoned with no rights of use. In the context of the subject's highest and best use, these encumbrances are minor and addressable through standard entitlement processes, easement modifications (potentially via mutual agreement among partial owners), or design adjustments. They do not fundamentally impair physical feasibility or marketability, particularly given regional trends toward annexation, sewer extensions, and higher-density infill in Bozeman's westerly growth corridor. 61 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 25 GENERAL AREA MAP 62 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 26 GENERAL AREA AND NEIGHBORHOOD DATA AND TRENDS Environmental Factors: The Gallatin Valley is located at an elevation of 4,793 feet with a climate that is mild and dry. The annual mean temperature is 43 degrees F. The February average maximum temperature is 36 degrees F., and the July average maximum temperature is 83 degrees F. The average annual precipitation is 18.6 inches. The average annual snowfall is 83 inches. Bozeman’s climate reflects its Mountain Valley location. Bozeman, Gallatin County, and the entire state of Montana have 4 seasons. Summers are generally pleasant and characterized by warm to hot days, cool nights with an abundance of sunshine. Humid conditions are infrequent. Social Factors: According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the City of Bozeman’s population was 48,330 people in 2020. The per the 2023 ACS 5-Year Estimates the population of Bozeman was at 55,042 people, which is an increase of 13.9% over three years. Bozeman’s population has increased rapidly since 2010 by 51.1% when the population was estimated at 36,440 people. In order to accommodate increasing population and business growth, new land for residential, commercial, and industrial development has been annexed to the city. In 2010, the city was approximately 12,318.93 acres (19.25 square miles) in size. The total amount of acreage annexed into the city for 2013 was 111.02 acres, which increased the total size of the city to 12,777.67 acres or roughly 19.96 square miles. By the 2020 Census, the land area grew to 20.6 square miles. Per the U.S. Census ACS 5-Year Estimates, Bozeman exhibits a lower homeownership rate of 44.64% than the county as a whole at 61.52%, primarily due to the student body of Montana State University. In addition, the population of Bozeman is considerably younger than Gallatin County as a whole. The estimated median ages for Bozeman residents and Gallatin County residents were 28.6 years and 33.8 years, respectively. The median age for Montana residents was 41.3 years. Bozeman and Gallatin County have transformed over the past decade from a primarily agriculturally based community to a tourism related community. Growth in the area has been driven by several reasons, but one of which is the lifestyle and high quality of life that the area offers. Overall crime rates are low and there are many cultural experiences and outdoor activities such as snow skiing, fly-fishing, hiking trails, and other outdoor pursuits. Economic Factors: Bozeman’s employment landscape is dominated by: 1. Montana State University (MSU): The largest employer with 3,560 employees (faculty, 63 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 27 staff, executives). This number does not include the hundreds of graduate teaching and research assistance or the over 2,000 student workers in part time jobs employed by the university. MSU drives education, research (e.g., energy, biomedical), and local spending. 2. Bozeman Health: Employs 2,800+ across its network, which includes Deaconess Regional Medical Center, Belgrade Clinic, Big Sky Medical Center, and 60+ other clinics. It is Gallatin County’s top private employer, offering medical, surgical, and emergency roles. 3. Oracle Corporation: Since acquiring RightNow Technologies in 2012, Oracle’s Bozeman campus employs around 1,000 people in tech roles (software development, cloud solutions), leveraging MSU talent. 4. Bozeman Public School District: With 8 elementary, 2 middle, and 2 high schools, it employs an estimated 1,136 educators as of early 2024 estimates and serves 5,990+ students. 5. Simms Fishing Products: Headquartered in Bozeman, it employs 150-170 people in manufacturing and design of fishing gear, a niche but high-profile player. The company was acquired by Vista Outdoor Inc., in 2022. As of late 2024, Vista Outdoor has agreed to sell its outdoor product brands, including Simms to Strategic Value Partners (SVP). Despite the ownership changes, Simms has maintained its headquarters and management in Bozeman. Bozeman has a slightly differing economy than many parts of the State of Montana. One primary difference relates to the fact there are fewer large employers in this market. The economy of Bozeman is broad-based and diverse with many jobs in service and tourism industry, however due to the rapid growth, construction jobs are on the rise. Additionally, computer and management related occupations are increasing with the influx of new high-tech companies opening up in Bozeman. Well-known companies like Oracle and Elixiter have helped make Bozeman a new tech-hub and several smaller start-up companies are now taking advantage of the pool of local college graduates as well as the lifestyle the Bozeman area has to offer. Snowflake Inc., a cloud data company, relocated from California to Bozeman in May 2021. Besides Simms Fishing, there are a number of globally recognized outdoor manufacturing companies such as Missing Ranch Backpacks and Oboz Footwear now making Bozeman their home. Other major sectors of the economy include medical, government, retail, agriculture, and education. The largest primary employer in Bozeman is Montana State University. MSU employs an estimated 3,560 employees, including full time and part time faculty, staff, and executives. There is also an estimated 900+/- graduate teaching and research assistance and over 2,000 students in part-time jobs. Overall, the student body of MSU has a significant impact on the local economy. Other large employers consist of the State of Montana, Gallatin County, City of Bozeman, Bozeman Health, and Walmart. As the county’s employment base continues to diversify, the economic health will be buffered from a downturn in any of the county’s key industries. 64 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 28 Governmental Factors: The City of Bozeman is governed by a Commission-Manager system with most decision making coming from the elected City Commissioners. Fire and police protection are rated as quite adequate for a town the size of Bozeman. The rural areas near Bozeman are served by rural volunteer fire districts with the Gallatin County Sheriff's Office handling the police duties. Sanitation services are provided by the City through private contractors; the capacity to handle demand is considered adequate at present. Transportation and Other Factors: Bozeman is located in southwest Montana on U.S. Interstate Highway 90. Access to the south toward Yellowstone National Park and Salt Lake City is via U.S. Highway 191. Interstate highway systems, State of Montana, and Gallatin County maintained roadways provide access throughout the region. Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport is located between Bozeman and Belgrade and is one of the fastest growing airports in the country. Airlines providing service are Alaska, Allegiant, American Airlines, Delta, JetBlue, Southwest, Sun Country and United. Currently there are approximately 12 direct flights year-round to and from Bozeman to Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, Denver, Minneapolis, Chicago, Atlanta, and Dallas. There are direct flights to 17 additional airports on a seasonal basis. With more direct flights, Bozeman is now less difficult to travel to than other Montana cities. With the evolution of work from home employees, balancing living in Bozeman and city-based jobs is more attainable. BNSF provides rail freight service. Motor freight carriers include American Freight Inc., B4 Logistics Inc., We Will Transport It, Nationwide Transport, KM Transport Company, and MTS Freight. HRDC’s Streamline offers zero-fare public transportation throughout Bozeman; Greyhound Bus and Jefferson Lines service Bozeman with numerous daily bus stops; One Call Taxi provides taxi service throughout Bozeman and Airport Taxi provides service to and from the airport. Karst Stage offers airport shuttle service as well as a variety of charter services to destinations such as Yellowstone National Park and the local ski areas. Medical Care: Bozeman is well serviced by the medical community with almost all types of doctors available. Medical facilities consist of Bozeman Health Deaconess Regional Medical Center which is a Level III trauma center with 125 beds. It has a 20-bed critical care unit offering both intensive and progressive care, along with medical and surgical units, operating rooms, emergency and trauma care and a maternity unit that includes a neonatal intensive care unit. The campus also includes providers and clinics offering outpatient services for OB/GYN, surgery, urology, diabetes and nutrition care, family medicine, primary care, pediatrics, audiology, ENT, and vein medicine. There are also several nursing homes and assisted living facilities in the area. 65 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 29 Recreation: Bozeman and the area surrounding it provide excellent recreational opportunities. Within the city limits of Bozeman are numerous city parks and playgrounds. The surrounding areas provide hunting opportunities in nearby mountains while there is world-class fishing in surrounding rivers and streams. Other recreational pursuits include snow skiing at Bridger Bowl and Big Sky. TV/Radio: Bozeman Daily Chronicles provides newspaper service for Bozeman and the Gallatin Valley. Bozeman is served by several internet, cable TV, and satellite providers and approximately thirty radio stations operate in the Gallatin Valley providing adequate radio communication facilities. Schools: The Bozeman public school system includes eight elementary schools, two middle schools, two high schools, and a grade K-8 charter school. Private schools include Mount Ellis Academy & Elementary, operated by the Seventh Day Adventists for grades K-12; Petra Academy with grades K-12 as well as pre-K (PK); Heritage Christian School for grades PK-12; Middle Creek Montessori for grades PK-6; Bozeman Summit School for grades K-5; Headwaters Academy for grades 6-8; Opt Out School for grades K-5; and Traveling School which is an all-girls school grades 10-12; Bozeman Field School serving grades 9-12; Peak Potential Academy for grades 5- 8; Emerge School for grades K-12; Cottonwood Day School is specialized for students with learning challenges grades 1-12. Montana State University is located in Bozeman with a record breaking Fall 2025 enrollment of 17,165 students. The total includes 15,142 undergraduate students, and 2,023 graduate students, with roughly 50% of the student body being Montana residents. The university has nationally recognized research efforts, has more than 250 undergraduate areas of study, and more than 60 master’s degrees, 58 doctoral degree options, and various certificate programs for graduate students. The number of students has been rapidly increasing over the last 10 years and almost half of the students are from out of state. Approximately 70% of students live off campus which has a large impact on the Bozeman housing market. Conclusions: The real estate market in Bozeman has shown resilience amid broader stabilization following the pandemic-era boom. After years of rapid appreciation driven by in-migration, low inventory, and high demand, the market cooled in 2024–2025, with increased listings, longer days on market, and more realistic pricing from sellers. Median home prices hovered around $665,000–$675,000 by late 2025/early 2026, with modest year-over-year gains in some segments (e.g., up 6.1% in December 2025 per Redfin data) but overall stability rather than explosive growth. Inventory has risen, closed sales held steady (around 1,600–1,700 annually in recent years), and the market shifted toward balance, offering more negotiating power for buyers while maintaining strong long-term fundamentals. 66 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 30 Subdivision and development activity remains significant, with ongoing residential expansion, including single-family homes, multifamily units (e.g., apartments and condominiums), and commercial projects, responding to population pressures and housing needs. Multifamily construction has been notable, though absorption has caught up to new supply in some areas, pointing to gradual stabilization into 2026. Commercial real estate, including service-oriented developments tied to tourism and interstate access (e.g., hotels, retail, and mixed-use), continues to see investment. Economic forecasts from the University of Montana's Bureau of Business and Economic Research (BBER) indicate a pattern of very slow to moderate growth for Montana overall in 2026, with Bozeman (Gallatin County) likely outperforming many areas due to its tech, tourism, and service-sector strengths. While statewide population and job growth have slowed (e.g., Montana's population growth at historic lows in recent years), Bozeman benefits from above- average income growth, incremental affordability improvements, and potential catalysts like data centers or tech expansions later in 2026. Tourism visitation to Yellowstone and Glacier remains steady (with Yellowstone up slightly in 2025), and experts anticipate continued demand for housing and services despite cooling from post-pandemic highs. Dr. Paul Polzin (former BBER director) and current analysts have historically noted sustained growth in areas like Bozeman, with the 2026 outlook emphasizing stability, real estate market watching (e.g., recent price/rent declines but progress on affordability), and opportunities in tourism-related sectors. Overall, Bozeman's position as a vibrant, growing hub fueled by national park access, interstate connectivity, and a diversified economy supports ongoing demand for residential, commercial, and service-oriented real estate, positioning the area for measured but positive development in the coming years. MARKET ANALYSIS The Appraisal of Real Estate, Fifteenth Edition, published by the Appraisal Institute includes a chapter dealing with market analysis. The definition of market analysis is a study of the supply of and demand for a specific type of property in a specific market area. The label marketability analysis has traditionally been used when the scope of the analysis extends beyond general market analysis to investigate how a specific property is expected to perform in its market. However, in strictest usage, marketability analysis most precisely describes the final step in the formal six-step process. Marketability analysis is an essential step in the process of developing an opinion of market value and should not be confused with the analysis of general demographic or economic information for an area. In an appraisal of a specific property, the main purpose of marketability analysis is to show how the interaction of supply and demand affects the property’s future benefits to the owner in terms of the use of the property over time. To complete a marketability analysis (in the sixth step of the six-step process), an appraiser must first complete a market analysis (i.e., the preceding steps of the six-step process). For example, consider the appraisal of a neighborhood shopping center. A market analysis would measure the demand and competition for all neighborhood 67 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 31 shopping centers in a specified market, which may cover a two-mile area. A marketability analysis would then compare how a particular property (e.g., the property being appraised) will perform in that market given the relevant demand and competition. The conclusions of the marketability analysis then become the basis for determining the value implications for the property. Marketability analysis may perform several functions: (1) to determine the market outlook and trends for marketing a property, (2) to address the desired type, design, and locational characteristics of a development, (3) to provide estimates of the share of the market that the property is likely to capture during its economic life and its probable absorption rate, or (4) to suggest alternative uses in a market in which the existing use of a specific property is oversupplied or outdated. Marketability analysis also provides a basis for determining the highest and best use of a specific property in a defined market. In short, the market determines the appropriate use, and the use drives the value. An existing or proposed use may be put to the test of maximum productivity in highest and best use analysis only after it has been demonstrated that an appropriate level of market support exists for that use. In-depth marketability analyses specify the character of that support. For example, if current market conditions do not indicate that adequate demand for a proposed development exists, marketability analysis may identify the point in time when there will be adequate demand for that land use. Thus, marketability analysis helps appraisers forecast the timing of a proposed improvement and the amount of demand anticipated in a particular period of time. The basics of marketability (measure of market support) tend to rely on an equilibrium between supply and demand; particularly as these terms apply to economic models. Therefore, if the subject is priced according to its location (land value) and physical attributes (improvements, if any) where it will capture its share (fair share) of the market, there would be market support for the real estate. This is both a consideration of current and existing supply as well as the incorporation of future growth in competition (supply). Rather, it is a recognition of the appraisal analysis that identifies the subject property as to a particular real estate product (type) and the real estate market in which this property competes (location, Montana). The manner in which subject demand is analyzed is the simplest way to characterize a market analysis assignment because estimates of demand are formulated differently depending on the level of analysis required by the appraisal problem. In some cases, demand may simply be inferred from published data and from current and historical market conditions. It is my opinion 68 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 32 inferred market analysis is adequate to allow for a credible appraisal result. The primary analysis is based on population growth, housing, and household analysis as well as income analysis. The following tabulations contain data extracted from the U.S. Census Bureau 2023 ACS 5-Year Population Estimates. Montana Counties by Population The above tabulation lists the top eight counties in Montana based on population and also includes the city with the highest population in each county with a ranking for that city in the state based on population. In 2023, Gallatin County became the second largest county based on population with Bozeman ranked as the fourth largest city in the state with a population of 55,042 people and Belgrade ranked as the eighth largest city with a population of 11,425 people. Population Summary: The tabulation below outlines the population in Bozeman and Gallatin County since 2010. The population has steadily increased at over 2% annually since 2010 in both the county and Bozeman, with significant increased growth between 2020 and 2021 during the pandemic. County Population Rank City Population Rank Yellowstone 167,340 1 Billings 118,321 1 Bozeman 55,042 4 Belgrade 11,425 8 Missoula 119,639 3 Missoula 75,600 2 Flathead 108,445 4 Kalispell 26,830 7 Cascade 84,601 5 Great Falls 60,412 3 Lewis & Clark 72,580 6 Helena 33,126 5 Ravalli 45,807 7 Hamilton 4,949 27 Silver Bow 35,589 8 Butte 34,929 5 Gallatin 122,194 2 69 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 33 Bozeman Gallatin County Population & Demographics 2023 Population 55,042 122,194 Male 29,059 63,955 Female 25,983 58,239 2023 Median Age 28.6 33.8 The median age in Bozeman is roughly 5 years younger than the median age in the county. Bozeman Gallatin County Population Growth 2010 Population 36,440 87,676 2020 Population 48,330 111,401 2021 Population 51,574 116,725 2022 Population 53,500 119,685 2023 Population 55,042 122,194 2010-2020 Annual Growth Rate 3.26% 2.71% 2020-2021 Growth Rate 6.71% 4.78% 2021-2022 Growth Rate 3.73% 2.54% 2022-2023 Growth Rate 2.88% 2.10% 70 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 34 Residence One Year Ago Of the 54,601 people aged one year or older, 39,111 lived in the same house the prior year and 15,490 did not. Of those living in a different house, 5,584 lived in a different state and 523 lived abroad, which accounts for 39.4% of people that moved to Bozeman in the prior year were from out of the state or country. In Gallatin County that percentage is similar at 38.4% of people moving in from out of state or country. Households: Total number of households has steadily increased since 2010 in Bozeman as well as Gallatin County. Both have shown increased growth over the prior two years with Bozeman increasing the number of households by 5.02% between 2021 and 2022 and by 4.95% between 2022 and 2023. The county increased the number of households by 4.51% between 2022 and 2023. Bozeman Gallatin County Residence One Year Ago Number Number Total Population 55,042 122,194 Population 1 year old and over 54,601 120,992 Lived in the same house 39,111 98,568 Lived in a different house 15,490 22,424 Lived in the same county 7,062 10,549 Lived in a different MT county 2,321 3,274 Lived in a different state 5,584 8,011 Lived abroad 523 590 71 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 35 Household Income: The median household income in Bozeman is $79,903, which is a 7.81% increase from the previous year (2022) at $74,113. The average income increased by 8.33% in 2023, compared to Bozeman Gallatin County Households 2010 Households 15,423 35,753 2020 Households 20,457 45,287 2021 Households 20,988 46,378 2022 Households 22,041 47,874 2023 Households 23,131 50,031 2010 - 2020 Annual Growth Rate 3.26% 2.67% 2020 - 2021 Growth Rate 2.60% 2.41% 2021 - 2022 Growth Rate 5.02% 3.23% 2022-2023 Growth Rate 4.95% 4.51% Bozeman Gallatin County 2023 Median Household Income $79,903 $87,454 2022 Median Household Income $74,113 $83,434 2022-2023 Annual Rate 7.81% 4.82% 2023 Average Household Income $115,764 $124,551 2022 Average Household Income $106,862 $116,338 2022-2023 Annual Rate 8.33% 7.06% 2023 Per Capita Household Income $48,994 $51,148 2022 Per Capita Household Income $45,037 $47,269 2022-2023 Annual Rate 8.79% 8.21% Median Household Income Average Household Income Per Capita Income 72 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 36 2022, and the per capita income increased by 8.79%. The county median, average, and per capita incomes also increased by 4.82%, 7.06%, and 8.21%, respectively. Bozeman Gallatin County Households by Income Percent Percent < $10,000 3.5% 3.0% $10,000 to $14,999 3.3% 2.7% $15,000 to 24,999 6.0% 5.5% $25,000 to $34,999 7.1% 5.7% $35,000 to $49,999 9.4% 8.6% $50,000 to $74,999 16.6% 16.3% $75,000 to $99,999 13.3% 14.1% $100,000 to $149,9999 19.4% 19.8% $150,000 to $199,999 8.4% 10.2% $200,000 or more 12.8% 14.0% Median household income $79,903 $87,454 Mean household income $115,764 $124,551 73 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 37 Housing Units Summary: The number of housing units has increased since 2010 with significant growth in the most recent years. Housing Unit Tenancy: Bozeman has a larger percentage of renters (55.36%) than Gallatin County (38.48%), largely due to the student population affiliated with Montana State University. Owner occupied units in Bozeman are 44.64% of all occupied units. There is also a lower vacancy percentage of units in Bozeman as compared to the county. The Census did not have vacancy status data available with the 2023 ACS 5-Year Population Estimates. The data below was extracted from the 2020 Decennial Census. This illustrates the reason for vacancies in Bozeman and Gallatin County. 29.7% of vacancies in Bozeman are related to being seasonal, recreational, and/or occasional use, while 53.0% of the vacancies in the county are related to being seasonal, recreational, and/or occasional use. 29.2% are vacant Bozeman Gallatin County Housing Units 2010 16,761 40,448 2020 22,057 51,011 2021 22,468 51,826 2022 23,708 53,605 2023 24,846 55,589 2010-2020 Annual Growth Rate 3.16% 2.61% 2020-2021 Growth Rate 1.86% 1.60% 2021-2022 Growth Rate 5.52% 3.43% 2022-2023 Growth Rate 4.80% 3.70% Number Percent Number Percent Total Housing Units Occupied Housing Units 23,131 93.10% 50,031 90.00% Owner Occupied 10,325 44.64% 30,780 61.52% Renter Occupied 12,806 55.36% 19,251 38.48% Vacant Housing Units 1,715 6.90% 5,558 10.00% 24,846 55,589 Bozeman Gallatin County 74 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 38 rentals in Bozeman and only 17.2% are vacant rentals in Gallatin County. Again, this is largely influenced by the university student population of Bozeman. Value of Owner-Occupied Housing Units The median value of owner-occupied housing units in Bozeman is $614,900, which is higher than the median of $604,900 in Gallatin County. The large majority of homes in Bozeman as well as the county fall in the $500,000 to $999,999 range with 55.0% in Bozeman and 45.5% in Gallatin County. The range of $300,000 to $499,999 has the second greatest number of owner- occupied units. Only 8.9% of owner-occupied units in Bozeman fall under the $300,000 level and 13.5% of units are under $300,000 in Gallatin County. 2020 Decennial Census Bozeman Gallatin County Vacancy Status Total 1,800 5,718 For rent 525 982 Rented, not occupied 104 153 For sale only 133 414 Sold, not occupied 99 235 For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 535 3,029 For migrant workers 2 63 Other vacant 402 842 Value of Owner-occupied units Total Owner-occupied units Median Value Number Percent Number Percent Less than $50,000 125 1.2% 777 2.5% $50,000 to $99,999 168 1.6% 753 2.4% $100,000 to $149,999 165 1.6% 459 1.5% $150,000 to $199,999 117 1.1% 364 1.2% $200,000 to $299,999 353 3.4% 1,814 5.9% $300,000 to $499,999 2,386 23.1% 7,302 23.7% $500,000 to $999,9999 5,677 55.0% 14,009 45.5% $1,000,000 or more 1,334 12.9% 5,302 17.2% Bozeman Gallatin County 10,325 30,780 $614,900 $604,900 75 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 39 Employment Summary: Occupation Bozeman Gallatin County TOTAL civilian employed 16 years and older 33,894 70,355 Management, business, science, and arts occupations 16,333 31,270 Service occupations 6,254 11,857 Sales and office occupations 5,551 12,283 Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations 2,583 8,014 Production, transportation, and material moving occupations 3,173 6,931 76 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 40 Of the 34,974 people in the civilian labor force in Bozeman, 1,080 are unemployed. In Gallatin County the total unemployed is 1,689 of the 72,044 people in the civilian labor force. There are 45 people employed by the Armed Forces in the county, but none in Bozeman. Industry Bozeman Gallatin County TOTAL civilian employed 16 years and older 33,894 70,355 Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining 695 2,298 Construction 2,619 8,209 Manufacturing 2,043 4,347 Wholesale trade 476 1,586 Retail trade 4,369 8,944 Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 830 1,895 Information 395 850 Finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing 1,784 3,912 Professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste management services 4,950 9,222 Educational services, and health care and social assistance 8,971 15,431 Arts, entertainment, and recreation, and accommodation and food services 4,373 8,064 Other services, except public administration 1,634 3,628 Public administration 755 1,969 Bozeman Gallatin County Population 16+ In labor force 34,974 72,089 Civilian labor force 34,974 72,044 Employed 33,894 70,355 Unemployed 1,080 1,689 Armed Forces 0 45 Not in labor force 13,550 29,378 Total 48,524 101,467 77 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 41 The data in the tabulation below is from Site To Do Business (Prepared by ESRI) with rings at 1, 3 and 5 miles around Bozeman. Totals 1,184 100.0% 10,357 100.0% 3,269 100.0% 32,441 100.0% 3,621 100.0% 35,609 100.0% Unclassified Establishments 100 8.4% 39 0.4% 307 9.4% 102 0.3% 334 9.2% 112 0.3% Government 65 5.5% 568 5.5% 117 3.6% 1,289 4.0% 122 3.4% 1,374 3.9% 2.1% 1,797 5.0% Other Services 287 24.2% 1,858 17.9% 810 24.8% 5,483 16.9% 893 24.7% 5,913 16.6% 68 2.1% 1,621 5.0% 76Education Institutions & Libraries 19 1.6% 536 5.2% 7.6% 5,763 16.2% Legal Services 46 3.9% 184 1.8% 95 2.9% 388 1.2% 96 2.7% 390 1.1% 268 8.2% 5,707 17.6% 277Health Services 67 5.7% 615 5.9% 1.6% 303 0.9% Motion Pictures & Amusements 36 3.0% 197 1.9% 99 3.0% 587 1.8% 109 3.0% 637 1.8% 50 1.5% 255 0.8% 59Automotive Services 13 1.1% 84 0.8% 42.8% 15,674 44.0% Hotels & Lodging 14 1.2% 330 3.2% 39 1.2% 862 2.7% 40 1.1% 870 2.4% 1,430 43.7% 14,904 45.9% 1,550Services Summary 483 40.8% 3,803 36.7% 5.2% 1,159 3.3%176 5.4% 1,096 3.4% 187Real Estate, Holding, Other Investment Offices 63 5.3% 479 4.6% 1.8% 289 0.8% Insurance Carriers & Agents 37 3.1% 127 1.2% 75 2.3% 285 0.9% 77 2.1% 292 0.8% 61 1.9% 279 0.9% 66Securities Brokers 17 1.4% 78 0.8% 10.4% 2,363 6.6% Banks, Savings & Lending Institutions 18 1.5% 253 2.4% 44 1.3% 613 1.9% 45 1.2% 624 1.8% 355 10.9% 2,273 7.0% 376Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Summary 135 11.4% 938 9.1% 5.9% 1,664 4.7%201 6.1% 1,549 4.8% 214Miscellaneous Retail 80 6.8% 533 5.1% 1.5% 475 1.3% Eating & Drinking Places 85 7.2% 1,538 14.8% 187 5.7% 3,597 11.1% 193 5.3% 3,662 10.3% 44 1.3% 416 1.3% 54Furniture & Home Furnishings 20 1.7% 131 1.3% 1.5% 1,297 3.6% Apparel & Accessory Stores 21 1.8% 146 1.4% 53 1.6% 414 1.3% 55 1.5% 420 1.2% 45 1.4% 777 2.4% 53Auto Dealers, Gas Stations, Auto Aftermarket 16 1.4% 166 1.6% 0.5% 992 2.8% Food Stores 26 2.2% 779 7.5% 49 1.5% 1,051 3.2% 52 1.4% 1,074 3.0% 15 0.5% 975 3.0% 18General Merchandise Stores 5 0.4% 262 2.5% 18.6% 10,391 29.2% Home Improvement 11 0.9% 310 3.0% 30 0.9% 760 2.3% 36 1.0% 806 2.3% 623 19.1% 9,538 29.4% 674Retail Trade Summary 265 22.4% 3,865 37.3% 2.7% 1,454 4.1%76 2.3% 971 3.0% 96Wholesale Trade 22 1.9% 237 2.3% 1.1% 392 1.1% Utility 3 0.3% 32 0.3% 7 0.2% 65 0.2% 9 0.2% 91 0.3% 35 1.1% 368 1.1% 39Communication11 0.9% 162 1.6% 2.6% 1,023 2.9% Transportation 14 1.2% 142 1.4% 37 1.1% 506 1.6% 45 1.2% 555 1.6% 78 2.4% 848 2.6% 95Manufacturing24 2.0% 257 2.5% 1.9% 404 1.1% Construction 48 4.1% 231 2.2% 153 4.7% 1,297 4.0% 211 5.8% 1,775 5.0% 50 1.5% 279 0.9% 68Agriculture & Mining 14 1.2% 83 0.8% Employees by SIC Codes Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Businesses Employees BusinessesBusinesses Employees 61,270 Employee/Residential Population Ratio (per 100 Residents) 56 64 58 Total Residential Population: 18,428 51,014 3,621 Total Employees: 10,357 32,441 35,609 Total Businesses: 1,184 3,269 Data for all businesses in area 1 mile 3 miles 5 miles 78 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 42 GOOGLE EARTH PHOTOGRAPH 79 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 43 PLAT MAP 80 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 44 SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS View from the northwesterly corner of the subject property looking in a southerly direction. View from the same location as the previous photograph looking in an easterly direction. The subject property is situated to the right of the photograph. View from the alley between Christopher Way and Fowler Avenue looking in a southerly direction. View from the northeasterly corner of the subject property looking in a southwesterly direction. View from the same location as the previous photograph looking in a westerly direction. View showing the trail along the westerly boundary of the subject property. 81 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 45 View looking in a westerly direction along Babcock Street. The subject property is out of view to the right of the photograph. View from across Babcock Street looking in a northwesterly direction. View from across Babcock Street looking in a northerly direction. View looking in an easterly direction along Babcock Street. The subject property is situated to the left of the photograph. All subject photographs were taken for the prior assignment in 2023. They represent a reasonable visualization of the subject property. 82 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 46 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Land Description County Code 06-0798-11-2-06-07-0000 Physical Address 3300 block of W. Babcock St., Tract 3-B, C.O.S. 1069A Utility SFR/MFR development Soil Conditions Typical Location North of West Babcock Street & west of Valley Drive. Fowler Avenue dead ends on the north. Street Improvements Direct access from West Babcock Street along its southern boundary. Additional access is provided from Fowler Avenue and Christopher Way to the north, as well as two access points off of Valley Drive one on the north easterly corner and one on the southeasterly corner. A pedestrian path traverses north-south on the adjacent parcel to the west, situated west of an existing ditch. Size 9.09 Size Acres 395,960 Corner Lot No Common Areas None Irrigation None Vegetation/Tree Cover Mix of tree cover and open areas. Primarily tree cover is along boundaries. Water Resource Ditch along westerly boundary. Overall Topography Level to slightly rolling. Access Southern boundary: direct access from West Babcock Street (arterial), Northern boundary: access from Fowler Avenue and Christopher Way, Near Northeasterly boundary: Access from Valley Drive, Near southeasterly boundary: Access from Valley Drive, Westerly boundary: pedestrian access via path along existing ditch. Road Frontage Asphalt improved city maintained. 83 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 47 Utilities All city services Shape Irregular Zoning County zoning: R-General Residential. Potential for city zoning R2 or R3. Flood Hazard Zone X - FEMA panels 30031C0804D & 3031C0812D eff. 9/2/2011 Visibility Average Viewshed Average; residential neighbors. Wetlands None per maps. Irrigation ditch may have some concerns. Environmental Issues None known. Easements/Encroachments Ditch easement on west, drainfield easements on south. Offsite Improvements None. 84 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 48 Onsite Improvements None. TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS Total subject taxes are $3,062.04 for 2025. That produces a tax amount of $336.86 per acre, on an annual basis. Overall, that is considered reasonable given the location and physical characteristics. There is a minimal likelihood of a successful tax appeal. Tax ID Assessed Value Taxable Value 2025 Taxes RGG7673 $749,610 $6,896 $3,062.04 2025 Taxes $3,062.04 Size (Acres) 9.09 Per Acre $336.86 Taxes Per Acre 85 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 49 HIGHEST AND BEST USE The following definition of Highest and Best Use is taken from The Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Seventh Edition. 1. The reasonably probable use of a property that results in the highest value. The four criteria that the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum productivity. 2. The use of an asset that maximizes its potential and that is possible, legally permissible, and financially feasible. The highest and best use may be for continuation of an asset’s existing use or for some alternative use. This is determined by the use that a market participant would have in mind for the asset when formulating the price that it would be willing to bid. (IVS) 3. [The] highest and most profitable use for which the property is adaptable and needed or likely to be needed in a reasonably near future. (Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions) The Appraisal of Real Estate, Fifteenth Edition, published by The Appraisal Institute simply defines highest and best use as: The reasonably probable use of property that results in the highest value. The Fifteenth Edition further states: To be reasonably probable, traditionally a use must meet certain conditions: • The use must be physically possible (or it is reasonably probable to render it so). • The use must be legally permissible (or it is reasonably probable to render it so). • The use must be financially feasible. Uses that meet the three criteria of reasonably probable uses are tested for economic productivity, and the reasonably probable use with the highest value is the highest and best use. In appraisal practice, the concept of highest and best use requires the appraiser to consider any and all uses to which the property was capable of being adapted. For the analysis, the appraiser must first analyze physically possible and legally permissible criteria. Consideration must be given to these uses, recognizing the limitations imposed by physical limitations of the land including size, shape, and topography, as well as governmental regulations such as zoning ordinances, building codes and health standards. These can be approached in either order but 86 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 50 must be considered first to filter out any uses that would not be possible either physically or legally. Next the appraiser determines whether each of the possible uses are financially feasible, by looking at the attitudes of the typical investors in real property of this type in the area encompassing the subject property and determining whether that use is worth at least as much as it would cost to produce. Uses that do not pass the financially feasible test are eliminated as highest and best use. Once the uses are filtered down to be financially feasible, the final test of maximum productivity is applied. This is the last test to determine the highest and best use of the land as though vacant and the property as improved (if it is improved) and make a final conclusion of the use that would yield the highest value, which is the highest and best use of the property. The Appraisal of Real Estate, Fifteenth Edition, explains the concept of how to analyze the highest and best use of land as though vacant and highest and best use of the real estate as improved as follows: The analysis of land as though vacant focuses on alternative uses of the land, with appraisers analyzing each reasonably probable use. In the analysis of highest and best use of land as though vacant, appraisers seek the answers to several questions: • Should the land be developed or left vacant? • If left vacant, when would future development be financially feasible? • If developed, what kind of improvements should be built? In contrast, when appraisers analyze the highest and best use of the real estate as improved, the focus on alternative uses considers three possible actions related to the current improvements: 1. Retain the improvements. 2. Modify the improvements in some way, such as conversion, renovation, or alteration. 3. Demolish the improvements and redevelop the land. The analysis of the highest and best use of the real estate as improved answers a different question than the analysis of the land as though vacant: • Should the existing improvements on the property be maintained in their current state, should they be altered in some manner to make them more functionally efficient, or should they be demolished to create a vacant site for a different use? 87 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 51 • If renovation or redevelopment is warranted, when should the renovations or redevelopment occur? Implied within this determination of highest and best use is that the result is formed by the appraiser’s interpretation of market evidence, e.g., that the use determined from analysis represents an interpretative opinion and not a fact to be found. There are five general uses which are considered. These include residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, and recreational. Within the Montana marketplace I have found it more prudent to begin the analysis with legally permissible since this helps refine the analysis quickly and to the point. The following presents the highest and best use analysis for the subject property. The highest and best use of the subject property is analyzed in accordance with USPAP requirements and standard appraisal practice. This analysis considers four criteria applied in sequence: legally permissible, physically possible, financially feasible, and maximally productive. The conclusion reflects the use that is legally allowed, physically achievable, economically viable, and yields the highest present value as of the effective date. Legally Permissible: The subject property remains under Gallatin County jurisdiction and is zoned General Residential (R), a designation that generally permits a range of residential uses, including single- family dwellings and, depending on sub-districts, limited multi-family or cluster development (subject to county regulations and density standards). The property has never been annexed into the City of Bozeman. Consultation with the Bozeman Planning Department confirms that annexation would not pose significant barriers to development. Upon annexation, the property would likely receive a City of Bozeman residential zoning designation. Surrounding City zoning districts include: R-1 — Residential Single-Household Low Density (primarily single-family homes on larger lots); less likely per comments from the city of Bozeman, R-2 — Residential Two-Household Medium Density (allowing duplexes and some attached units), R-3 — Residential Medium Density (supporting townhomes, small multi-family buildings, and moderate unit counts per acre), R-4 — Residential High Density (permitting apartments and higher-density multi-family structures). Adjacent properties exhibit a mix of county General Residential and City R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4 zoning. An R-4 district lies directly to the northeast. Based on discussions with city planning staff, probable post-annexation zoning for the subject would be R-2 or R-3 (medium density), though the proximity of R-4 zoning mitigates density concerns and supports potential for higher- 88 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 52 density residential uses if market conditions warrant. Legally permissible uses are therefore residential in nature, consistent with the immediate neighborhood's transition from low- to medium- and high-density residential development. Physically Possible: The subject is a single legal parcel of 9.09 acres with good access: Southern boundary: direct access from West Babcock Street (arterial), Northern boundary: access from Fowler Avenue and Christopher Way, Near Northeasterly boundary: Access from Valley Drive, Near southeasterly boundary: Access from Valley Drive, Westerly boundary: pedestrian access via path along existing ditch. The site is mostly level, with minimal tree cover and no significant topographic constraints, drainage issues, or environmental impediments observed during inspection. Utilities are available or extendable in the area, typical for residential development in this market. No physical attributes inhibit residential subdivision or multi-family development. Combined with legally permissible residential uses, the highest physically possible use is residential development. Based on Bozeman's Unified Development Code, the R-3 Residential Multi-Household Medium Density District is designed for higher-density residential development compared to R-2, allowing one to five-household structures (e.g., triplexes, fourplexes, townhomes, and small condominium buildings) in urban or near-service areas. While large apartment complexes are more typical in R-4 or R-5, R-3 supports attached/condominium-style multi-unit developments with greater density potential through clustered buildings and shared amenities. Density range: Typically 10–15 dwelling units per gross acre for medium-density multi- household projects, controlled by minimum lot area per unit (often around 3,000 sf per unit for 3+ unit structures, equating to ~14.5 units/acre maximum before deductions), lot coverage (40%), floor area ratio (FAR of 1:1), and building height (up to 42 feet, ~3–4 stories with pitched roofs). Minimum lot area per unit: Approximately 3,000 sf for multi-unit buildings (e.g., triplex to fiveplex or condos), allowing higher density than R-2's focus on duplexes. Setbacks: Front: 15 feet; side/rear: 5–20 feet (reduced for attached units); garage: 20 feet from street. On-site roads / circulation: Similar to R-2, with private drives, parking (1.5–2 spaces per unit), sidewalks, and open space consuming 20–35% of gross site area. Other deductions: Stormwater, landscaping, buffers, and common areas: ~10–15%; total net deduction: 35–45%, leaving 55–65% for building footprints. For a condominium project (attached townhomes or low-rise condos), R-3 enables denser clustering, potentially achieving 12–15 units per gross acre in efficient designs. 89 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 53 Density Estimate for the 9.09-Acre Parcel (R-3): 1. Gross acreage: 9.09 acres. 2. Site deductions: 35%–45% for roads, parking, open space, setbacks, and infrastructure (similar to R-2 but with potential efficiency gains from higher density). Net developable area: ~5.0–5.9 acres. 3. Density calculation: At a typical R-3 condominium density of 12 units per gross acre (balanced for medium-density multi-unit projects): 9.09 × 12 = ~109 units. At a higher-efficiency range of 15 units per gross acre (achievable with clustered condos, minimal setbacks, and 3-story buildings): 9.09 × 15 = ~136 units. At a conservative 10 units per gross acre (factoring in stricter site constraints or minimum density requirements): 9.09 × 10 = ~91 units. 4. Realistic range for this site: Assuming level terrain, full utilities, and no major constraints (as discussed), 100–130 dwelling units total (~11–14 units per gross acre). This reflects R-3's allowance for small multi-unit buildings, with density limited by the 5-unit per structure cap but scalable across multiple buildings on a 9-acre site. An analysis of gross square feet per dwelling unit provides meaningful insight into achievable density and market-supported unit counts. This metric calculated as total gross site area divided by the number of dwelling units serves as a proxy for development intensity, accounting for building footprints, on-site roads, parking, open space, setbacks, landscaping, stormwater management, and other site deductions. In Bozeman's multifamily and condominium market, gross area per unit typically ranges from compact urban designs (lower sf/unit for higher density) to more spacious suburban or amenity-rich projects (higher sf/unit). The four primary comparable sales reflect a range of residential product types and densities, with known or proposed unit counts yielding the following gross area per unit: Sale No. 1 (apartment/multifamily): 879 sq ft per unit Sale No. 2 (apartment/multifamily): 2,227 sq.ft. per unit Sale No. 3 (proposed condominium development): 4,639 sq.ft. per unit Sale No. 5 (student housing): 793 sq ft per unit Range: 793 sq ft per unit (high-density apartments) to 4,639 sq ft per unit (lower-density or amenity-focused student housing). Arithmetic Mean: 2,135 sq ft per unit across the four comparables. The four primary comparable sales reflect a diverse mix of residential product types, each with distinct implications for unit density and gross area per unit in the Bozeman market. Sales 1 and 2 represent apartment-style multifamily developments, which typically achieve higher density through smaller average unit sizes and efficient building layouts. These projects cater to rental demand with compact floor plans, resulting in lower gross square footage per unit and higher overall unit counts per acre. 90 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 54 In contrast, Sale No. 3 involves a proposed condominium development, featuring moderate density and larger individual units more characteristic of for-sale townhomes or low-rise condos. This product type prioritizes spacious living areas, private outdoor space, and ownership appeal, leading to higher gross area per unit than pure rental apartments. Sale No. 5, focused on student housing, exhibits the lowest density per unit among the group. Its design accommodates transient occupancy with shared amenities, extensive parking requirements, and communal facilities, resulting in significantly more gross area allocated per unit. For the subject property with an estimate of 130 dwelling units produces a gross area per unit of approximately 3,046 square feet. This calculation is derived from the total site area (9.09 acres × 43,560 square feet per acre = 395,960 square feet) divided by the proposed 130 units. At 3,046 square feet per unit, the subject falls above the arithmetic mean of the comparables (2,135 square feet per unit) and toward the higher end of the observed range across the sales. This positioning indicates a more moderate density scenario, well-suited to a condominium-oriented development that balances unit size, amenities, and market expectations in Bozeman. The subject's implied 3,046 square feet per unit at 130 units is therefore reasonable and conservative relative to the comparable data. This density level supports a credible highest and best use as attached residential condominium development under a probable R-3 zoning, offering a balanced approach to market demand, and development feasibility. Financially Feasible Use / Timing (Most Likely Use): The subject is located in the northwesterly portion of the Bozeman area, west of North 19th Avenue and U.S. Highway 191 (formerly U.S. 83 in some references), in a predominantly residential neighborhood with strong growth influences from Bozeman's expansion. Bozeman continues to experience robust population and housing demand, driven by Montana State University, outdoor amenities, quality of life, and economic opportunities. Recent forecasts indicate Bozeman's population (approximately 58,600–59,900 as of 2025–2026) is projected to grow significantly through 2045, with ongoing need for new housing units despite periodic market softening or inventory increases. Residential development is financially feasible and the most likely use, given: Steady market demand for single-family, duplex, townhome, and multi-family product, Comparable land sales reflecting buyer motivation for residential subdivision or redevelopment, Proximity to urban services and infrastructure, Routine annexation success in similar locations. Timing is considered immediate to near-term, as market conditions support prompt development once entitlements (annexation, rezoning if needed) are secured. 91 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 55 Maximally Productive Use / Most Likely Buyer: The maximally productive use maximizes value through residential development aligned with surrounding densities (medium to potentially higher, influenced by nearby R-2/R-3 and R-4 zoning). The most likely buyer is a residential developer or builder (end-user or investor) seeking land for subdivision into single-family lots, townhomes, or small multi-family projects. Market data shows consistent demand for such properties, with buyers prioritizing development potential over existing improvements. Highest and Best Use Conclusion – Land as Vacant: The highest and best use of the subject property, as if vacant, is residential development consistent with the character and density patterns of the immediate neighborhood (single-family to medium/high-density multi-family). This use is: Legally permissible under current county zoning and highly probable under anticipated city zoning post-annexation, Physically possible given site characteristics and access, Financially feasible and supported by strong market demand, Maximally productive, yielding the highest value in the current market environment. This conclusion supports valuation via the sales comparison approach using comparable residential development land sales in the Bozeman area with similar zoning and location attributes. 92 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 56 THE APPRAISAL PROCESS The appraisal process follows a systematic, logical procedure to develop a credible opinion of value. It begins with clear identification of the appraisal problem (including the property rights, intended use, intended users, and effective date), followed by planning the scope of work, collecting relevant data, classifying and analyzing that data, applying appropriate valuation methods, and reconciling results into final value conclusions. Appraisers traditionally rely on up to three recognized approaches to value, each drawing from different market evidence: Cost Approach: This method estimates value by calculating the current cost to construct equivalent improvements (new), deducting accrued depreciation (physical, functional, and external), and adding the estimated land value (derived from market comparisons of similar sites). It is most applicable to newer or specialized properties where reproduction or replacement cost data is reliable and depreciation can be accurately measured. Income Capitalization Approach: This approach converts anticipated future income (net operating income) into a present value indication by applying a capitalization rate or discount rate derived from market transactions of comparable income-producing properties. It is most relevant for investment or income- generating properties where reliable income/expense data and market-derived rates exist. Sales Comparison Approach: This technique derives an indication of value through direct comparison of the subject property to recent sales of similar properties (comparables). Adjustments are made for differences in key elements such as location, size, zoning/entitlements, access, topography, timing of sale, and other market-influenced characteristics to reflect how the market would view the subject. Not all three approaches are required or applicable in every assignment. The appraiser must evaluate each approach's relevance and reliability based on the property type, market conditions, available data, and the principle that credible results depend on practical reflection of market behavior rather than theoretical exercise alone. USPAP (2024 edition) emphasizes that the appraiser selects and applies the approach(es) necessary for credible assignment results, disclosing the reasoning in the report. For this assignment, the subject is vacant land (9.09 acres) with highest and best use concluded as residential development (medium-density, consistent with probable R-2 or R-3 zoning post- annexation in Bozeman's growth market). There are no significant improvements contributing value, and the property is not currently income-producing. 93 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 57 The cost approach is not applicable or necessary, as there are no depreciable improvements to cost out or depreciate, and land value is better derived directly from market sales. The income capitalization approach is not relevant, as the land generates no current or stabilized income stream under its highest and best use (development-oriented rather than hold-for-rent). The sales comparison approach is the primary and most reliable method. It directly reflects buyer behavior in the Bozeman/Gallatin County market for similar vacant or minimally improved residential development parcels. Peer-reviewed standards and market practice expect primary reliance on this approach for vacant land valuations, particularly where comparable sales data is abundant and adjustments can be supported. The analysis herein applies the sales comparison approach exclusively, utilizing verified comparable sales (closed, pending, and select listings where appropriate) of residential development land in comparable submarkets. These comparables share key attributes such as residential zoning/density potential, proximity to Bozeman's expanding urban area, access to utilities/infrastructure, and buyer motivation focused on subdivision or multi-family potential. This methodology ensures credible, market-supported conclusions for both the "before" (unencumbered) and "after" (subject to the fee acquisition) value opinions, consistent with USPAP requirements for scope of work, analysis depth, and transparency. 94 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 58 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH A definition of this approach taken from the "DICTIONARY OF REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL, Seventh Edition" published by The Appraisal Institute has shown the following: Sales Comparison Approach. The process of deriving a value indication for the subject property by comparing market information for similar properties with the property being appraised, identifying appropriate units of comparison, and making qualitative comparisons with or quantitative adjustments to the sales prices (or unit prices, as appropriate) of the comparable properties based on relevant, market- derived elements of comparison. Under standard application of this approach, generally the comparable sales are reviewed in terms of physical similarities or dissimilarities, market condition differences, terms of sale, motivation factors involved, etc. When sufficient data is available, the approach takes on added dimension or credence. When there are very few comparable sales with only a relative degree of similarity, the approach is considered to be less applicable and therefore less reliable as an indication of value for the subject property. As noted in the Fifteenth Edition of "The Appraisal of Real Estate" published by The Appraisal Institute, the following is the identified systematic procedure employed within this technique: "1. Research the competitive market for information on properties that are similar to the subject property and that have recently sold, are listed for sale, or are under contract. Consider the characteristics of the properties such as property type, date of sale, size, physical condition, location, and land use constraints. The goal is to find a set of comparable sales as similar as possible to the subject property to ensure they reflect the actions of similar buyers. Market analysis and highest and best use analysis set the stage for the selection of appropriate comparable sales. 2 Verify the information by confirming that the data obtained is factually accurate and that the transactions reflect arm's-length market considerations. Verification should elicit additional information about the property and the market so that comparisons are credible. 3 Select the most relevant units of comparison in the market (e.g., price per acre, price per sq. ft., price per front foot) and develop a comparative analysis for each unit. The appraiser’s goal is to define and identify a unit of comparison that explains market behavior. 4 Look for differences between the comparable sale properties and the subject property using all appropriate elements of comparison. Then adjust the price of each sale property, reflecting how it differs, to equate it to the subject property or eliminate that property as a comparable. This step typically involves using the most similar sale properties and then adjusting for any remaining differences. If a transaction does not reflect the actions of a buyer who would also be attracted to the subject property, the appraiser should be concerned about comparability. 5 Reconcile the various value indications produced from the analysis of comparables to a value bracket and then to a single value indication. In terms of direct comparison, there are ten basic elements that should be factored into the technique. These consist of: 1. Real property rights conveyed 2. Financing terms (i.e., cash equivalency) 3. Conditions of sale (i.e. motivation) 95 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 59 4. Expenditures made immediately after purchase 5. Market conditions (i.e., time) 6. Location 7. Physical characteristics (e.g., size, soils, access, construction quality, condition) 8. Economic characteristics (e.g., expense ratios, lease provisions, management, tenant mix) 9. Use (e.g., zoning, water, and riparian rights, environmental, building codes, flood zones) 10. Non-realty components of value (e.g., business value, chattel, franchises, trademarks) The sales comparison approach is reflective of the basic principles of Anticipation, Balance, Change, Competition, Contribution, Externalities, Opportunity Costs, Substitution, and Supply/Demand. The essence of comparison is direct similarity and that focuses on similarity of highest and best use and then physical characteristics. The sales comparison approach utilized in this appraisal employs two distinct yet complementary methodologies to derive an indication of value for the subject property. The first methodology applies a price per square foot (or unit price) analysis based on the total gross site area. This approach uses closed or contract sales prices from primary comparables divided by their respective gross land areas (typically gross developable or total acreage, adjusted as necessary for site-specific constraints) to establish a per-square-foot rate reflective of land intensity and market-supported value for raw or semi-entitled residential development parcels. The second methodology focuses on a price per unit (or per dwelling unit) analysis, which accounts for the economic productivity and highest and best use potential by dividing the sales price by the number of dwelling units either achieved in closed transactions or proposed/approved through the City of Bozeman's planning and entitlement process. The primary sales comparables; Sale No. 1, Sale No. 2, Sale No. 3, and Sale No. 5 all feature achieved densities from completed developments or proposed densities documented in active or recently reviewed planning applications available on the City of Bozeman's public website and planning records. Notably, Sale No. 3 and Sale No. 5 remain on hold with the city of Bozeman as of February 2026 (with no ongoing construction), likely due to entitlement timelines, financing, market conditions, or other developer considerations, but I was unable to verify the actual reasons. For these, the unit counts and resulting per-unit indications are derived from the most current proposed plans submitted to and/or under review by the city, providing a reliable estimate for market expectations of achievable yield. Both approaches bracket the subject effectively, with the price-per-square-foot method emphasizing objective land area metrics and the price-per-unit method capturing development potential, entitlements, and investor/developer motivations in a market characterized by ongoing demand for attached medium-density housing (e.g., condominiums and townhomes), balanced supply absorption, and modest appreciation trends as of early 2026. The reconciliation places appropriate weight on each, considering factors such as parcel size, location premiums, zoning allowances, and the subject's unencumbered physical feasibility for approximately 85 units (after) to 130 units (before) depending on the scenario. This dual-method 96 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 60 framework ensures a market-supported value indication consistent with standard appraisal practice for residential development land in Bozeman. Land - Analysis of Sales: Property Rights Conveyed: All primary comparable sales represent arms-length transfers of fee simple title (fee simple absolute estate), conveying the full bundle of private property rights typically associated with real estate ownership in Montana. These transactions do not include unusual or atypical limitations, restrictions, or reservations that would materially detract from the standard fee simple estate, such as: Leasehold interests or ground leases, Life estates or other future interests, Deed restrictions beyond standard protective covenants, Conservation easements, Significant development rights transfers, Partial interests (e.g., undivided fractional ownership), or Other encumbrances that would impair the unencumbered fee simple estate. The property rights appraised for the subject is likewise the encumbered fee simple estate, consistent with the rights transferred in the comparable sales. Utility easements (for water, sewer, electric, telecommunications, and similar services) are present in most or all of the comparable sales, as is customary in this market. These easements are typically located along property boundary lines and do not encroach significantly into the buildable or usable interior areas of the sites. This configuration is materially similar to the easement pattern assumed for the subject parcels (under the stated extraordinary assumptions and hypothetical conditions). No comparable sale required an adjustment for differences in property rights conveyed. The fee simple estates transferred in the sales are sufficiently comparable to the fee simple estates appraised for the subject parcels, and no upward or downward adjustment is warranted for this element of comparison. In summary, the property rights conveyed across the primary sales and the subject are consistent in character and quality. This element of comparison Sale No Location Sale Date Sales Price Improvement Value Site Size Unit Price No. Units Unit Price Gross Area Per Unit $3,000,000 112 $0 $26,786 $4,719,167 71 $0 $66,467 $3,030,000 47 $0 $64,468 $4,000,000 $0 $6,678,000 184 $0 $36,293 130 3,046 879 2,227 4,639 793 Sale No. 1 Sale No. 5 NEC S 19th and West Kagy Jan-23 Sale No. 2 SEC S 11th and Opportunity Oct-23 Under Contract $30.46 $29.84 $13.90 $22.96 $45.78 2.26 5.01 3.63 Subject 9.09 NEC of Davis and Winter Park Apr-21Sale No. 3 Sale No. 4 Just west of Baxter and N 19th NEC N 27 and Tschae Lane 4.00 3.35 Dec-23 97 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 61 does not contribute to value differences and is considered neutral in the adjustment process. Financing Terms: The definition of market value (as adopted by the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and most federal lending guidelines) requires that the appraised value represent the most probable price that would be paid in a cash transaction or its cash equivalent, assuming a willing buyer and willing seller under no compulsion, with reasonable exposure in an open and competitive market. “Cash equivalent” refers to financing terms that are typical and prevailing in the market at the time of sale and do not provide an advantage or disadvantage to either party that would materially affect the price paid. In simple terms, the key question is: Did the financing conditions influence the price actually paid? If the terms were market-oriented (e.g., conventional bank financing at prevailing interest rates, down payments, and amortization periods) or if atypical terms had no demonstrable impact on the negotiated price, the transaction is considered cash equivalent and requires no adjustment for financing. In some cases, sellers may prefer or insist on seller-financed terms (e.g., contract for deed, installment sale, land contract) for legitimate non-value-related reasons, such as: Deferring capital gains tax liability through an installment sale under IRC Section 453, Retaining a security interest in the property, Accommodating a buyer who cannot qualify for conventional financing, or Other tax or estate-planning considerations. The mere presence of seller financing or a contract sale does not automatically indicate non- market terms or require an adjustment. Only when the terms are demonstrably favorable or unfavorable (e.g., below-market interest rate, unusually low down payment, balloon payment structure, or above-market interest rate) and those terms influenced the price paid would a cash equivalency adjustment be warranted. After full review of the primary comparable sales (including available transaction documents, broker comments, public records, and MLS data where applicable): No sale exhibited financing terms that were sufficiently atypical or advantageous/disadvantageous to warrant a cash equivalency adjustment. Where financing was seller-provided (e.g., contract for deed or installment sale), the terms appeared consistent with market norms for the property type, buyer pool, and time period, or there was no evidence that the financing structure materially affected the agreed-upon price. In instances where financing details were limited or questionable, those considerations have been addressed individually within the analysis of the specific comparable sale. No material impact on indicated value was identified in those cases. 98 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 62 In summary, all primary comparable sales are regarded as cash equivalent transactions for purposes of this appraisal. This element of comparison is neutral, and no adjustments for financing terms or cash equivalency are applied in the sales comparison approach. The sales prices are considered reflective of market value without distortion from atypical financing conditions. Conditions of Sale: The conditions of sale element of comparison addresses the motivational influences and circumstances surrounding each transaction that could cause the sale price to deviate from the definition of market value. Market value assumes a willing buyer and willing seller, both acting prudently and knowledgeably, without unusual compulsion or atypical pressures. Certain atypical conditions of sale may result in prices that do not reflect open-market behavior, including but not limited to: Distressed or forced sales – e.g., properties sold by lenders disposing of REO (real estate owned) assets acquired through foreclosure, short sales, or sales under duress to satisfy debt obligations; Bankruptcy or court-ordered sales – where the seller is compelled to liquidate assets under court supervision or creditor pressure; 1031 exchange-driven transactions – where a buyer’s strict timing requirements (to complete a like-kind exchange under IRC Section 1031) lead to concessions in price, accelerated closing, or acceptance of less favorable terms; Related-party transactions – sales between family members, affiliated entities, or business partners where the price may not reflect arm’s-length negotiation; Other motivational pressures – such as relocation deadlines, partnership dissolutions, estate settlements, or situations where one party is unusually motivated to sell quickly or acquire a specific property regardless of price. In contrast, transactions that qualify as market value indicators are those where both buyer and seller are motivated but not unduly influenced, acting in their best economic interests with reasonable exposure to the market and no atypical compulsion. After thorough review of the primary comparable sales (including available sale histories, broker interviews, public records, MLS notes, and other transaction data where obtainable): All selected comparable sales are considered uninfluenced, arm’s-length transactions with respect to conditions of sale. None of the sales exhibit evidence of distress, foreclosure, REO disposition, bankruptcy involvement, court-ordered transfer, 1031 exchange pressure, related-party dynamics, or other atypical motivational factors that would have materially affected the negotiated price. The sellers and buyers in each case are regarded as acting prudently, without compulsion to sell or purchase under non-market conditions. 99 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 63 As a result, no adjustments for conditions of sale are required or applied in the sales comparison approach. This element of comparison is neutral across the primary sales and the subject properties. The reported sale prices are accepted as reliable indicators of market value, free from distortion due to atypical transactional motivations. In instances where limited information on sale circumstances is available, the sales were nonetheless selected because available data and market context support the conclusion that they represent typical, market-driven transactions for the property type and submarket. Any potential atypical condition would have been addressed and quantified (if material) in the individual analysis of that comparable; no such adjustments were deemed necessary. 100 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 64 101 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 65 102 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 66 103 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 67 104 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 68 105 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 69 Market Conditions: The market conditions (or time) element of comparison accounts for changes in prevailing price levels over time for properties of similar type, use, and market segment. This adjustment reflects broad-based appreciation, depreciation, or stability in value levels between the date of each comparable sale and the effective date of appraisal, independent of property-specific changes. The following tabulation outlines a number of vacant land sale/resales extracted from the Big Sky Country MLS and located within a 10-mile radius of the subject location in Bozeman, Montana. The data represents a mixture of vacant land (residential lots) all with some level of residential zoning. This is generally older data between early to early 2019 through early 2023. The majority of the sales represent individual lot sales rather than larger development parcels. There are also several resales with relatively short turnaround timeframes, which may not represent a realistic long-term market adjustment. For the most part, the sales with a longer timeframe represent the lower end of the adjustments and it is reasonable to expect they also better illustrate the overall market conditions of the area, rather than the month-to-month fluctuations. A total of 14 sale/resales were uncovered. Indications vary from 1.11% to an upper end of 6.11%. The median of the 14 data points was 3.41% and the arithmetic mean was 3.42%. There were no indications of decreases in prices over this time frame. The property located at 1660 North 27th Avenue is a sale/resale. This property sold and resold over a 36 month timeframe. The original data sale was November 30, 2020 for a price of $1,621,500. The property most recently sold December 15, 2023 for a price of $3,000,000. That produces a monthly adjustment of 1.72% over that 36 month timeframe. Low 4/24/2020 $225,000 3/11/2019 $130,000 Data Points 14 High 3/7/2023 $710,000 12/27/2021 $560,000 Low 1.11% Average 9/11/2021 $404,143 6/1/2020 $265,621 High 6.11% Median 9/28/2021 $399,500 7/25/2020 $225,000 Median 3.41% 15 Mean 3.42% 14 Trimmed Mean (10%)3.42% 4 Mean All Positive 3.42% 37 % Sales Increased 100.0% High 0.00% Low 0.00% 9/11/2021 Mean of Decreases n/a 4/24/2020 Number of Decreases 0 3/7/2023 % Decreases 0% First Positive Date (Resale) Last Positive Date (Resale) High Months Difference Average Resale Date of Negative Indications (Resale) Negative Indications First Negative Date (Resale) Last Negative Date (Resale) Average Resale Date of Positive Indications (Resale) New Sales Old Sales Calculations Mean Months Difference Median Months Difference Low Months Difference Sale New Date New Price Old Date Old Price Months Monthly 1660 N 27th 12/15/23 $3,000,000 11/30/20 $1,621,500 36 1.72% 106 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 70 The tabulation below outlines a number of vacant residential land sales in the Bozeman immediate market area. The sales generally range in time from February 2022 to January 2026. A total of 16 sale/resales were uncovered with indications ranging from a -0.84% to an upper end of 1.96%. The overall mean of 0.42% and 62% of the indications were positive. Only two sale/resales had decreases ranging from 0.51% to a decrease of 0.84%. The next tabulation outlines a number of sales/resales of single-family residential units in the expanded Bozeman market area. These are all newer properties originally built after 2015. The adjustment in sales price was not a result of remodel or addition efforts, rather changes in market conditions. A total of 22 data points were uncovered with indications ranging from a low of -0.65% to an upper end of 1.69%. The median of all indications was 0.16% and the arithmetic mean of all 22 indications was 0.34%. Out of the 22 data points 68.2% increased with a total of six decreases. The decreases range from 0.07% to 0.65%. Low 10/25/2023 $240,000 2/16/2022 $200,000 Data Points 16 High 1/23/2026 $1,285,000 10/30/2024 $1,100,000 Low -0.84% Average 11/15/2024 $529,156 10/17/2022 $487,250 High 1.96% Median 12/13/2024 $475,000 8/4/2022 $405,000 Median 0.34% 25 Mean 0.42% 22 Trimmed Mean (10%)0.42% 8 Mean All Positive 0.62% 44 % Sales Increased 81.3% 12/29/2024 1/12/2024 High -0.84% 12/16/2025 Low -0.51% 10/17/2024 Mean of Decreases -0.45% 10/25/2023 Number of Decreases 2 1/23/2026 % Decreases 13% First Positive Date (Resale) Last Positive Date (Resale) Average Resale Date of Positive Indications (Resale) New Sales Old Sales Calculations Mean Months Difference Median Months Difference Low Months Difference High Months Difference Average Resale Date of Negative Indications (Resale) Negative Indications First Negative Date (Resale) Last Negative Date (Resale) 107 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 71 The market data analyzed for the subject property and comparable sales indicate a clear deceleration in price appreciation trends, transitioning toward stabilization or modest declines in recent periods. Historical monthly growth rates from 2019 through 2023 generally ranged from approximately 1.5% to 4.0% per month, reflecting a period of consistent upward pressure on values. In contrast, more recent periods (encompassing 2022 through early 2026) exhibit significantly softer trends, characterized by occasional price decreases interspersed with minimal positive movement, typically at or below 0.4% per month. Analysis of paired sales and resales further supports this softening: Among single-family residential properties, 27% of the transactions that involved a prior and subsequent closing reflected a net decrease in sale price. For vacant land parcels, 13% of the comparable paired sales demonstrated a decrease between the two transfer dates. Taken together, these indicators substantiate a slowdown in market momentum and the emergence of stabilized or slightly declining price levels in the most recent market activity. In response to these observed trends, time adjustments for the comparable sales have been applied conservatively as follows: For comparables with sale dates after December 15, 2023, no positive time adjustment (i.e., 0% per month) has been applied, reflecting the prevailing evidence of price stabilization or absence of measurable appreciation. For comparables with sale dates on or before December 15, 2023, a positive time adjustment of 1.75% per month has been applied where market conditions warrant an upward revision to reflect value trends prevailing at the time of the effective appraisal date. Low 5/23/2023 $832,500 2/25/2022 $735,000 Data Points 22 High 12/8/2025 $3,600,000 3/6/2024 $3,600,000 Low -0.65% Average 11/8/2024 $1,472,464 12/10/2022 $1,388,620 High 1.69% Median 11/15/2024 $1,200,603 11/6/2022 $1,050,000 Median 0.16% 23 Mean 0.34% 21 Trimmed Mean (10%)0.32% 13 Mean All Positive 0.60% 37 % Sales Increased 68.2% 5/12/2024 9/12/2023 High -0.65% 1/28/2025 Low -0.07% 1/24/2025 Mean of Decreases -0.24% 5/23/2023 Number of Decreases 6 12/8/2025 % Decreases 27% First Positive Date (Resale) Last Positive Date (Resale) High Months Difference Average Resale Date of Negative Indications (Resale) Negative Indications First Negative Date (Resale) Last Negative Date (Resale) Average Resale Date of Positive Indications (Resale) New Sales Old Sales Calculations Mean Months Difference Median Months Difference Low Months Difference 108 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 72 This adjustment methodology is considered reasonable and supportable given the documented deceleration in appreciation rates and the frequency of price decreases in recent paired sales data. Location: -North is to top of page Development in the Bozeman area continues to expand primarily westward and southward, driven by sustained population growth, in-migration, and infrastructure improvements as of February 2026. Westward growth is prominent along Huffine Lane and adjacent corridors, where large-scale mixed-use master-planned communities are advancing. The attached map outlines the primary comparable sales used in this analysis. These selected sales are considered to fall within a similar overall market area to the subject property, characterized by comparable development patterns, access to major corridors (including proximity to westward and southward growth zones), and shared market influences such as zoning allowances, entitlement trends, and demand for medium-density residential uses. No specific location adjustments have been applied, as the comparables are deemed reasonably similar in terms of overall market positioning and influences. Minor differences may exist particularly with Sale No. 5, which is located in closer proximity to Montana State University 109 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 73 and positioned (via current plans) to target student housing demand potentially warranting qualitative consideration in reconciliation for product type or tenant mix, though not requiring quantitative adjustment. Size: The next issue of significance relates a size adjustment. Theory holds that a smaller parcel should sell for a higher unit price and conversely a larger tract should sell for a lower unit price. The subject represents a generally, larger size residential parcel. While size definitely impacts the market (number of qualified buyers), the primary sales do not necessarily follow theory. The dataset includes five comparable sales for residential development land, with sizes ranging from 2.26 to 5.01 acres (mean: 3.65 acres), alongside metrics like adjusted price per acre (PPA), price per unit (PPU), total units (density), and gross site area per unit (GAPU). Sale 4 lacks data for PPU, density, and GAPU, so correlations involving those exclude it. The subject property, at 9.09 acres, is substantially larger than all comparable sales. Overall, the data does not support a significant or consistent size adjustment in the reconciliation of value for this residential development land. Appraisal theory generally posits that larger parcels command lower unit prices per acre (due to factors such as diminishing marginal utility, narrower buyer pools, and increased development risk). Upper end of the range — Sale No. 5 at $58.89 per acre (adjusted) represents the high- water mark. This sale reflects motivation for significantly higher density (≈55 units per acre, 184 total units, GAPU of 793 sq ft), geared toward student housing or similar intensive use. No adjustment has been applied for demolition costs of the existing church, which may further support its elevated indication. This comp is less directly comparable to the subject (130 units projected on 9.09 acres, ≈14.3 units per acre, GAPU ≈3,046 sq ft) due to the substantial density differential. Core/mid-range indications — The remaining sales cluster between $22.96 and $33.36 per acre: Size (Acres) Sale No. Adjusted Per SF 2.26 Sale No. 1 $32.48 3.35 Sale No. 5 $58.89 3.63 Sale No. 2 $33.36 4.00 Sale No. 4 $22.96 5.01 Sale No. 3 $25.67 9.09 Subject 110 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 74 Sale No. 4 ($22.96 per acre) anchors the low end but is under contract with the exact price not fully confirmed. It also carries development challenges, including groundwater issues and site configuration/access limitations. Sale No. 1 ($32.48), Sale No. 2 ($33.36), and Sale No. 3 ($25.67) provide more typical indications for moderate- to lower-density residential development. These exhibit varying zoning allowances and achieved/proposed densities (ranging from ≈9–50 units per acre), contributing to the spread but aligning more closely with the subject's probable lower-density. Given the overriding influence of zoning and density over pure parcel size and the lack of a clear, reliable pattern in the size-PPA relationship, no quantitative size adjustment has been applied in the price per acre or price per unit analyses during reconciliation. The subject's larger size (9.09 acres) and lower projected density place it more in line with the characteristics of Sales 2 and 3, suggesting a reconciled per-acre value toward the lower-to-middle portion of the $23.00 per sq.ft. to $33.00 per sq.ft. range (excluding the density-driven outlier of Sale No. 5). The final indication will weigh these qualitative factors heavily, with density/zoning differences receiving primary consideration in the final weighting of the comparables. Shape: In this appraisal, the subject property and all primary comparable sales/listing exhibit reasonably comparable shapes and configurations typical of development-oriented land in the local market. Some are perfectly rectangular, yet all maintain practical aspect ratios and orientations that support standard residential platting without imposing significant design constraints, excessive setbacks, or inefficiencies in lot layout. There are no material differences in shape or configuration between the subject and the comparables that would warrant adjustments in the Sales Comparison Approach. In this case, both the subject property and most of the primary comparable sales feature no significant unusable areas from these factors. Most parcels offer essentially full, unencumbered usable land area consistent with its total gross acreage, providing equivalent flexibility for residential subdivision including efficient lot platting, compliance with setback and frontage requirements, and accommodation of typical infrastructure without major deductions for environmental or topographic limitations. The one notable exception among the primary sales comparables is Sale No. 4 (currently under contract), located at 2050 Baxter Lane, Bozeman, MT. This approximately 7.5-acre parcel (total gross area) is impacted by environmental constraints, particularly toward the southerly portion, where a waterway and wetland areas are present. A wetland delineation report was referenced in listing materials, but not available for review. The listing agent indicated that roughly 4.0 acres to 4.5 acres remain developable after accounting for these impacts. For purposes of the analysis, the sale was evaluated based on an estimated 4.0 acres of net developable area (reflecting deductions for wetlands, creek buffers, setbacks, and related site constraints). This reduced developable portion affects the site's overall utility and intensity 111 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 75 potential compared to the subject property, which exhibits no comparable environmental encumbrances. Less weight is assigned to this comparable in the reconciliation for several reasons: The transaction remains under contract (as of recent listing data through early 2026), with no confirmed/closed sale price available for full verification. The presence of significant wetlands and waterway impacts introduces development limitations, mitigation requirements, permitting complexities, and potential cost adders (e.g., wetland delineation compliance, buffers, or compensatory mitigation under federal and state regulations), reducing its direct comparability to the subject's relatively unencumbered site. These environmental factors likely influence buyer motivations, pricing, and risk perceptions, making the indication less reliable as a primary target. Zoning: Zoning is a critical factor in the valuation of residential development land, as it governs permissible uses, density, lot sizes, setbacks, building height, and other development standards that directly influence subdivision feasibility, lot yield, infrastructure requirements, and overall market appeal. In the Bozeman/Gallatin County area, zoning distinctions between county and city jurisdictions can meaningfully affect value due to differences in regulatory frameworks, approval processes, utility availability, and development expectations. The subject property is currently zoned under Gallatin County residential regulations. In contrast, most of the primary sales are within the city of Bozeman city limits and zoned R3, R4 or R5. Sale No.Zoning Sale No. 1 R5 Sale No. 2 R3 Medium Density Residential Sale No. 3 R3 -Residential Medium Density Sale No. 4 AS, surrounding includes M-1, B2, R4 and R5 Sale No. 5 R4 112 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 76 Sale No. 4 is a historical County zoning and will be going through the annexation and rezoning process through the city of Bozeman. Despite this jurisdictional difference, the subject property is considered reasonably similar in zoning character to the comparables for appraisal purposes. Several factors support this comparability: Annexation Potential and City Intent: Discussions with the City of Bozeman Planning Department confirm that the City has long expressed interest in annexing the subject property (and surrounding unincorporated parcels in this corridor) into city limits. Annexation would almost certainly result in rezoning to a city residential classification most likely R-2 or R-3. This anticipated rezoning aligns the subject's future development potential closely with the density and use permissions already in place for the comparable sales. Market Participant Perspective: Buyers and developers in the Bozeman market routinely evaluate properties near the city boundary with an eye toward annexation and rezoning feasibility. Properties in this transitional zone are priced with consideration of their "highest and best use" as future city-zoned residential land, especially given Bozeman's ongoing growth pressures, housing shortage, and active annexation efforts in peripheral areas. The subject's location, proximate to existing city infrastructure, transportation corridors, and expanding urban services further supports the expectation of eventual city incorporation and compatible zoning. Practical Development Outcomes: Even under current county zoning, the subject parcel's size, topography, access, and surrounding land uses allow for a residential subdivision pattern that is functionally similar to what would be achievable under R-2 or R-3 zoning post-annexation (e.g., single-family lots with reasonable density, compatible with adjacent development). There are no overriding county restrictions (such as agricultural preservation overlays or extreme environmental constraints) that would materially limit residential development potential in a manner inconsistent with the comparables. Maps illustrating the current zoning for the subject property and surrounding parcels clearly depict the subject's county zoning in relation to adjacent city-zoned areas and the logical progression toward annexation. Because of the strong likelihood of annexation and rezoning to R-2 or R-3 (as confirmed by city planning staff), combined with market evidence that buyers price such parcels based on their imminent urban/residential potential rather than strict current zoning, no downward zoning adjustment is warranted. The comparables' city residential zoning serves as a reasonable proxy for the subject's expected post-annexation zoning and development capacity. Any minor differences in current regulatory detail are considered offset by the subject's superior position for near-term transition to city standards, reinforcing direct comparability without adjustment for zoning. 113 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 77 Utilities: The availability, proximity, and capacity of public utilities such as municipal water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, natural gas, electric power, and telecommunications are among the most significant factors influencing the value and development feasibility of residential land in the Bozeman, Montana market. In this appraisal, the subject property and comparable sales are regarded as highly similar with respect to utility availability for single-family residential development. Access: Access is a fundamental consideration in the valuation of residential development land in the Bozeman, Montana area. Adequate access directly affects subdivision feasibility, construction logistics, emergency vehicle response, marketability to builders and homebuyers, and overall development costs. In this appraisal, the subject property and all comparable sales are regarded as highly similar with respect to access for single-family residential development purposes. Road Frontage: Road frontage defined as the linear length of a parcel's boundary directly abutting a public road or street is a distinct but closely related component of access for residential development land in the Bozeman, Montana area. While general access ensures legal and physical connectivity to the public road system, road frontage specifically determines the number of potential subdivision entry points, the feasibility of multiple access streets, the efficiency of internal circulation design, compliance with local subdivision standards, and the overall lot yield and layout flexibility. Corner: Corner location; referring to a parcel situated at the intersection of two or more public roads can be an important consideration in the valuation of residential development land in the Bozeman, Montana area. In growing markets like Bozeman, where rapid population influx, housing demand, and suburban expansion drive subdivision activity, corner parcels can offer distinct advantages for single-family residential development. These benefits stem from enhanced design flexibility, improved subdivision economics, and increased market appeal, though they are often nuanced and not always a premium factor for larger development parcels. However, true corner locations are not always superior for every residential development scenario. Larger parcels may derive limited incremental benefit from corner positioning if the primary access road already provides sufficient frontage, or if the intersecting road is a minor or low-traffic street. In some cases, dual frontage can introduce minor drawbacks, such as increased setback requirements on both sides, potential noise from two roadways, or added landscaping/buffer obligations at the intersection. The subject property is not considered a true corner location but does have access via more than one public roadway. For the most part, the sales data are all corner locations with the exception 114 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 78 of Sale No. 4. However, this sale does have access on both the north and south from city maintained roadways. The comparables exhibit similar access characteristics: adequate frontage on primary public roads with supplementary connectivity that allows efficient platting without constraints on lot layout, entry design, or density potential. There are no material differences in corner positioning or multi-road access that would meaningfully affect development costs, lot yield, marketability, or overall feasibility for single-family residential use. Water Resources/Irrigation: The presence of water resources, such as irrigation ditches, canals, or water rights, can be a relevant consideration in the valuation of residential development land in the Bozeman, Montana area. An irrigation ditch traversing or bordering a property may offer potential benefits such as supplemental water for landscaping, open space irrigation, stormwater conveyance, or even limited aesthetic/recreational value in a subdivision setting. Conversely, it can present drawbacks, including: Reduced developable area (due to required setbacks, easements, or buffer zones mandated by Gallatin County or City of Bozeman regulations), Maintenance responsibilities or liability concerns (e.g., weed control, sediment buildup, or flood risk during high water events), Engineering complications (e.g., culverts, bridges, or realignments needed for road crossings and lot layout), Potential environmental restrictions (e.g., riparian buffers or wetland delineations if the ditch supports natural features). In this appraisal, the subject property has an existing irrigation ditch running along its westerly boundary. This feature is a historic agricultural easement typical of parcels in the Gallatin Valley and does not appear to convey transferable water rights usable for residential purposes (e.g., no domestic or municipal diversion rights are evident). The ditch primarily serves as a passive boundary feature and potential drainage corridor. None of the primary comparable sales (except Sale No. 4) include any similar irrigation ditches, canals, watercourses, or associated water resources on or adjacent to their parcels. All comparables are considered free of such features, resulting in fully unencumbered, buildable land without corresponding easements, setbacks, or maintenance obligations tied to irrigation infrastructure. Despite the presence of the irrigation ditch on the subject, no reliable, quantifiable evidence of a consistent market adjustment (positive or negative) for the presence of an irrigation ditch in residential development land. In the current Bozeman market, where parcels are priced predominantly based on location, size, zoning potential, utility access, and annexation prospects rather than agricultural remnants, the irrigation ditch is not treated as a material value- influencing characteristic. 115 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 79 Topography: Topography, the physical characteristics of the land's surface, including elevation changes, slope, grade, drainage patterns, and overall terrain is a critical factor in the valuation of residential development land in the Bozeman, Montana area. In the City of Bozeman, topographic conditions directly influence subdivision feasibility, site preparation costs, lot yield, infrastructure requirements (e.g., grading, retaining walls, road design, stormwater management), building placement flexibility, and long-term marketability to builders and homebuyers. In this appraisal, the subject property and all five primary comparable sales are characterized by level to gently sloping terrain that is highly suitable for single-family residential subdivision. Specifically: The subject parcel exhibits predominantly flat topography across its developable area, with minimal elevation variation. There are no steep escarpments, significant cut/fill requirements, or problematic drainage features that would constrain platting or increase site development costs beyond standard Bozeman-area expectations. The comparable sales similarly feature level or near-level terrain, free of major topographic impediments. Each parcel supports straightforward grading, standard road alignments, and efficient lot configurations without the need for extensive mitigation measures. Vegetation/Tree Cover: Vegetation, including tree cover, wooded areas, and natural landscaping, is an important consideration in the valuation of residential development land in the Bozeman, Montana area. Adjustments for vegetation or tree cover are typically applied when there are meaningful differences in clearing expense, retained aesthetic value, or regulatory burdens that affect net developable area or buyer perception. In this appraisal, the subject property and all primary comparable sales are characterized by relatively open terrain with minimal to no significant tree cover. Flood Hazard: Flood hazard designation is a critical consideration in the valuation of residential development land in the Bozeman, Montana area, as it directly affects subdivision feasibility, site preparation costs, insurance requirements, buildability, marketability, and long-term risk exposure for developers, builders, and future homeowners. In this appraisal, the subject property and all four primary comparable sales are located entirely within low-risk Flood Zone X, as confirmed by the most current FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (effective for Gallatin County and the City of Bozeman). Zone X is defined as areas of minimal flood hazard, outside the 0.2% annual chance (500-year) floodplain and well outside the 1% annual chance (100-year) floodplain. Specifically: Because the subject property and all comparables share identical flood hazard classifications each fully in low-risk Zone X with no flood-related development limitations, insurance 116 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 80 mandates, or added engineering requirements no adjustments for flood hazard are warranted. Improvements: The subject property, along with most of the primary sales comparables analyzed, lacks any structural improvements or other valuable site enhancements that would materially influence valuation or redevelopment potential. The land is effectively vacant or minimally improved for highest and best use purposes. Sale No. 4 includes an existing single-family residence that is currently rented. However, this improvement does not align with the property's highest and best use, which is multi-use redevelopment. The residence's location along Baxter Lane places it in a suboptimal position given the increasingly built-up character of the surrounding neighborhood, elevated traffic volumes on North 19th Avenue immediately to the east, and direct frontage on Baxter Lane to the north. Sale No. 5 is improved with a church building. Demolition costs could not be independently verified, and the listing agent did not provide specific estimates or documentation for such expenses. The reported analysis/sale price of $6,678,000 reflects the property as-is, without deduction for demolition (which has not yet occurred) or related site preparation. This project remains on hold with the City of Bozeman as of February 2026. Easements/Encroachments: Easements and encumbrances are important considerations in the valuation of residential development land in the Bozeman, Montana area, as they can affect subdivision feasibility, lot yield, site layout flexibility, infrastructure placement, open space requirements, and overall marketability to builders and homebuyers. These encumbrances can reduce the effective developable area, require setbacks or buffers, complicate platting (e.g., by limiting building envelopes or forcing lot reorientation), increase engineering costs (e.g., for utility crossings or relocations), or impose ongoing maintenance obligations. In Bozeman’s fast-growing residential market, where maximizing lot count and minimizing development constraints is key to profitability, easements that intrude significantly into the interior of a parcel often result in downward value adjustments in the Sales Comparison Approach. Boundary-located easements, however, are generally viewed as less impactful because they preserve the central buildable area for lots, homes, and infrastructure. In this appraisal, the subject property and all primary comparable sales are considered reasonably similar with respect to the overall impact of easements and encumbrances on single-family residential development potential, with the exception of the subject easement noted below: The subject property does have a 90’ x 90’ easement for an existing drain field and a replacement drain field. This easement is currently in effect and will remain in effect until the property to the south is hooked to city sewer. There is also the issue of a ditch on the westerly 117 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 81 side of the subject property but that is located on a boundary and not considered significant in terms of development potential or positive aesthetic elements. Subject Sale No. 1 Adjustment Size 2.26 Unit Price $30.46 Date of Sale Dec-23 Market Conditions No. 1 Dec-23 $0.00 Market Conditions No. 1 Time Lapse (months) 0 Date of Value Feb-26 Market Conditions No. 2 Time Lapse (months) 26 Market Conditions No. 2 $30.46 $0.00 Adjustments: Property Rights $0.00 Financing Terms $0.00 Conditions of Sale $0.00 Market Conditions $0.00 Adjusted Base Unit Price $30.46 Physical Conditions: Location North of West Babcock Street & west of Valley Drive. Fowler dead ends on the north. NEC N 27 and Tschae Lane Similar Size 9.09 2.26 Superior Shape Irregular Mostly rectangular. Similar Vegetation/Tree Cover Mix of tree cover and open areas. Primarily tree cover is along boundaries. Open Similar Frontage Asphalt improved city maintained. City maintained asphalt Similar Topography Level to slightly rolling. Level Similar Access West Babcock on the south. Fowler and Christopher dead end to the subject on the north. North 27 and Breeze Lane Similar Utilities All city services All city services Similar Zoning Would require change to R2, R3 in the before. R5 Superior Corner No Yes Similar Flood Hazard Zone X - FEMA panels 30031C0804D & 3031C0812D eff. 9/2/2011 None Similar Visibility Average Good Similar Viewshed Average; residential neighbors. Average Similar Environmental None known. None noted Similar Wetlands None per maps. Irrigation ditch may have some concerns. None noted Similar Easements Ditch along westerly boundary and drainfield easements on south. None Noted Similar Water; onsite Ditch along westerly boundary. None. Similar Lower than $30.46Overall Qualitative Rating 118 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 82 Subject Sale No. 2 Adjustment Size 3.63 Unit Price $29.84 Date of Sale Oct-23 Market Conditions No. 1 Dec-23 $1.25 Market Conditions No. 1 Time Lapse (months) 2 Date of Value Feb-26 Market Conditions No. 2 Time Lapse (months) 28 Market Conditions No. 2 $31.10 $0.00 Adjustments: Property Rights $0.00 Financing Terms $0.00 Conditions of Sale $0.00 Market Conditions $1.25 Adjusted Base Unit Price $31.10 Physical Conditions: Location North of West Babcock Street & west of Valley Drive. Fowler dead ends on the north. SEC S 11th and Opportunity Similar Size 9.09 3.63 Superior Shape Irregular Rectangular Similar Vegetation/Tree Cover Mix of tree cover and open areas. Primarily tree cover is along boundaries. None Similar Frontage Asphalt improved city maintained. Asphalt improved city maintained Similar Topography Level to slightly rolling. Level Similar Access West Babcock on the south. Fowler and Christopher dead end to the subject on the north. Opportunity, S 11th and Student Drive Similar Utilities All city services All city services Similar Zoning Would require change to R2, R3 in the before. R3 Medium Density Residential Similar Corner No Yes Similar Flood Hazard Zone X - FEMA panels 30031C0804D & 3031C0812D eff. 9/2/2011 None Similar Visibility Average Good Similar Viewshed Average; residential neighbors. Average Similar Environmental Issues None known. None noted Similar Wetlands None per maps. Irrigation ditch may have some concerns. None. Similar Easements Ditch along westerly boundary and drainfield easements on south. None Noted Similar Water; onsite Ditch along westerly boundary. None Similar Lower than $31.10Overall Qualitative Rating 119 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 83 Subject Sale No. 3 Adjustment Size 5.01 Unit Price $13.90 Date of Sale Apr-21 Market Conditions No. 1 Dec-23 $10.17 Market Conditions No. 1 Time Lapse (months) 32 Date of Value Feb-26 Market Conditions No. 2 Time Lapse (months) 26 Market Conditions No. 2 $24.07 $0.00 Adjustments: Property Rights $0.00 Financing Terms $0.00 Conditions of Sale $0.00 Market Conditions $10.17 Adjusted Base Unit Price $24.07 Physical Conditions: Location North of West Babcock Street & west of Valley Drive. Fowler dead ends on the north. NEC of Davis and Winter Park Similar Size 9.09 5.01 Superior Shape Irregular Generally rectangular Similar Vegetation/Tree Cover Mix of tree cover and open areas. Primarily tree cover is along boundaries. Good tree cover. Similar Frontage Asphalt improved city maintained. Asphalt improved, city maintained Similar Topography Level to slightly rolling. Level. Similar Access West Babcock on the south. Fowler and Christopher dead end to the subject on the north. Davis, Winter Park, Windward and Autumn Grove Similar Utilities All city services All city services Similar Zoning Would require change to R2, R3 in the before. R3 -Residential Medium Density Similar Corner No Yes Similar Flood Hazard Zone X - FEMA panels 30031C0804D & 3031C0812D eff. 9/2/2011 None Similar Visibility Average Average Similar Viewshed Average; residential neighbors. Average Similar Environmental Issues None known. None noted Similar Wetlands None per maps. Irrigation ditch may have some concerns. None Similar Easements Ditch along westerly boundary and drainfield easements on south. None Noted Similar Water; onsite Ditch along westerly boundary. None. Similar Offsetting to $24.07Overall Qualitative Rating 120 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 84 Subject Sale No. 4 Adjustment Size 4.00 Unit Price $22.96 Date of Sale Under Contract Market Conditions No. 1 Dec-23 $0.00 Market Conditions No. 1 Time Lapse (months) 0 Date of Value Feb-26 Market Conditions No. 2 Time Lapse (months) 0 Market Conditions No. 2 $22.96 $0.00 Adjustments: Property Rights $0.00 Financing Terms $0.00 Conditions of Sale $0.00 Market Conditions $0.00 Adjusted Base Unit Price $22.96 Physical Conditions: Location North of West Babcock Street & west of Valley Drive. Fowler dead ends on the north. Just west of Baxter and N 19th Similar Size 9.09 4.00 Superior Shape Irregular Mostly rectangular Similar Vegetation/Tree Cover Mix of tree cover and open areas. Primarily tree cover is along boundaries. Some tree cover. Similar Frontage Asphalt improved city maintained. Asphalt improved, city maintained Similar Topography Level to slightly rolling. Level Similar Access West Babcock on the south. Fowler and Christopher dead end to the subject on the north. Baxter to the north and Tschache to the south (rear). Similar Utilities All city services All city services Similar Zoning Would require change to R2, R3 in the before. AS, surrounding includes M-1, B2, R4 and R5 Superior Corner No No Similar Flood Hazard Zone X - FEMA panels 30031C0804D & 3031C0812D eff. 9/2/2011 None Similar Visibility Average Average Similar Viewshed Average; residential neighbors. Average Similar Environmental Issues None known. None noted Similar Wetlands None per maps. Irrigation ditch may have some concerns. Some Inferior Easements Ditch along westerly boundary and drainfield easements on south. None Noted Similar Water; onsite Ditch along westerly boundary. None Similar Higher than $22.96Overall Qualitative Rating 121 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 85 Subject Sale No. 5 Adjustment Size 3.35 Unit Price $45.78 Date of Sale Jan-23 Market Conditions No. 1 Dec-23 $9.45 Market Conditions No. 1 Time Lapse (months) 11 Date of Value Feb-26 Market Conditions No. 2 Time Lapse (months) 26 Market Conditions No. 2 $55.23 $0.00 Adjustments: Property Rights $0.00 Financing Terms $0.00 Conditions of Sale $0.00 Market Conditions $9.45 Adjusted Base Unit Price $55.23 Physical Conditions: Location North of West Babcock Street & west of Valley Drive. Fowler dead ends on the north. NEC S 19th and West Kagy Similar Size 9.09 3.35 Superior Shape Irregular Generally square. Similar Vegetation/Tree Cover Mix of tree cover and open areas. Primarily tree cover is along boundaries. None. Similar Frontage Asphalt improved city maintained. City of Bozeman asphalt Similar Topography Level to slightly rolling. Level Similar Access West Babcock on the south. Fowler and Christopher dead end to the subject on the north. West Kagy on the south. Similar Utilities All city services All city services Similar Zoning Would require change to R2, R3 in the before. R4 Similar Corner No Yes. Similar Flood Hazard Zone X - FEMA panels 30031C0804D & 3031C0812D eff. 9/2/2011 None Similar Visibility Average Average Similar Viewshed Average; residential neighbors. Average Similar Environmental Issues None known. None noted Similar Wetlands None per maps. Irrigation ditch may have some concerns. None noted Similar Easements Ditch along westerly boundary and drainfield easements on south. None Noted Similar Water; onsite Ditch along westerly boundary. None. Similar Lower than $55.23Overall Qualitative Rating 122 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 86 Per SF Reconciliation: Sale No. Qualitative Rating Indication Inferior Rating Superior Rating Size, Zoning Size Size Wetlands Size, Zoning Size Low Indication $22.96 High Indication $55.23 Arithmetic Mean $32.76 Sale No. 1 Lower than $30.46 Sale No. 2 Lower than $31.10 Sale No. 3 Offsetting to $24.07 Sale No. 4 Higher than $22.96 Sale No. 5 Lower than $55.23 The four primary sales produced overall indications ranging from $22.96 per square foot to an upper end of $55.23 per square foot. The arithmetic mean of the four primary indications, including Sale No. 4 was $34.67 per square foot. The arithmetic mean of the four primary sales, excluding the under contract sale number four is $35.21 per square foot. The upper end of the range is set by Sale No. 5 at $58.23 per acre (adjusted). This sale reflects motivation for significantly higher density (≈55 units per acre, 184 total units, GAPU of 793 sq ft), geared toward student housing. No adjustment has been applied for demolition costs of the existing church, which may further support its elevated indication. This comp is less directly comparable to the subject (130 units projected on 9.09 acres, ≈14.3 units per acre, GAPU ≈3,046 sq ft) due to the substantial density differential. The core and mid-range value indications from the comparable sales cluster between $22.96 and $31.10 per square foot. Sale No. 4, at $22.96 per square foot, establishes the low end of the range. However, this sale is currently under contract with the final price not fully confirmed. It is also affected by development challenges, including groundwater issues and limitations related to site configuration and access. The following sales provide more representative indications for moderate to lower-density residential development: Sale No. 1: $30.46 per square foot Sale No. 2: $31.10 per square foot Sale No. 3: $24.07 per square foot Subject listing: $23.50 per square foot 123 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 87 These indications reflect varying zoning allowances and achieved or proposed densities, ranging from approximately 9 to 50 units per acre. The resulting spread is attributable to these differences, but the values align more closely with the subject's probable lower-density residential use. Collectively, the three sales and the subject's current listing establish a range from $23.50 per square foot to $31.10 per square foot. This range provides a solid basis for valuation. The reconciled value conclusion for the subject property is $23.50 per square foot. The subject's listing price was established based on 2023 appraisal data. The Bozeman market has experienced some softening from post-pandemic peak levels with median home prices stabilizing or even some price decreases based on the market conditions analysis above. Category Amount Subject Size 395,960 Per SF $23.50 Indicated Value $9,305,069 Rounded to, before $9,310,000 Before Per SF Per Unit Reconciliation: The four primary sales comparables yield adjusted unit indications ranging from $28,564 per unit (low end) to $119,070 per unit (high end). This broad range reflects varying density levels, unit sizes, location qualities, and market positioning among the comparables. The lower-end indication ($28,564/unit) is derived from a sale inferior to the subject in key attributes, particularly density and unit size. The upper-end indication ($119,070/unit) stems from a sale superior to the subject, benefiting from location and density. Sale No Adjusted Unit Price Adjusted Unit Price Size Density Gross Area Per Unit Sale No. 1 $32.48 $28,564 2.26 112 879 Sale No. 2 $33.36 $74,289 3.63 71 2,227 Sale No. 3 $25.67 $119,070 5.01 47 4,639 Sale No. 4 $22.96 n/a 4.00 n/a Sale No. 5 $58.89 $46,692 3.35 184 793 Subject 9.09 130 3,046 Low $22.96 $28,564 2.26 47 High $58.89 $119,070 5.01 184 Mean $34.67 $67,154 3.65 104 124 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 88 The arithmetic mean across all four adjusted indications is $67,154 per unit (calculated as the average of $28,564 + $74,289 + $119,070 + $46,692), with a corresponding average gross land area per unit of approximately 2,134 square feet. This mean gross area per unit is modestly lower (indicating higher average density) than the subject's estimated 3,046 square feet per unit in the before scenario, positioning the subject's potential development as slightly less intense/more moderate-density relative to the comparable pool. Sale No. 1 indicates an adjusted value of $28,564 per unit. The gross land area per unit is 879 square feet, reflecting significantly higher density (smaller land area per unit) than the subject. This positions the sale at the inferior/low end of the range and represents a higher-density multifamily condominium project. Sale No. 2 indicates an adjusted value of $74,289 per unit. The gross land area per unit is 2,227 square feet, which is reasonably comparable to the subject's estimated 3,046 square feet per unit (before condition) or 3,449 square feet per unit (after condition). This sale exhibits similar medium-density characteristics and serves as one of the more balanced and reliable bracketing points. Sale No. 3 indicates an adjusted value of $119,070 per unit, at the upper end of the range. The gross land area per unit is 4,639 square feet, notably larger (more spacious per unit) than the subject. This supports a lower-density configuration, potentially with higher-quality features or amenities in a condominium-oriented development, positioning the sale as superior overall. Sale No. 5 indicates an adjusted value of $46,692 per unit. The gross land area per unit is 793 square feet, representing the highest density (smallest land area per unit) among the primary comparables and reflecting Montana State University student housing characteristics. The selected comparables bracket the subject adequately. The mean per-unit value and average gross land area per unit show a central tendency that is slightly weighted toward higher-density examples. The subject's appraisal estimated development is oriented toward medium-density condominium/townhome use, targeting approximately 11–14 units per gross acre, with emphasis on larger unit sizes and market-oriented amenities. This positioning aligns within the observed range of the comparables. Current Bozeman multifamily and condominium market conditions support this alignment, with steady demand for attached housing, ongoing absorption of new supply, and a transition to stabilized pricing for development land following prior periods of rapid growth. Adjustments applied to the comparables for density (using gross land area per unit as a proxy for development intensity and product quality), unit size, location, and entitlement status warrant a reconciled per- unit value indication in the middle-to-upper portion of the observed range, consistent with the subject's moderate-density profile in Bozeman's westerly growth corridor. Applying an indicated value of $75,000 per unit to the estimated 130 total units yields a land value indication of $9,750,000. 125 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 89 Category Amount Subject Size 130 Per Unit $75,000 Indicated Value $9,750,000 Rounded to, before $9,750,000 Before R3 Zoning Final Reconciliation, Before: The price per square foot analysis, based on adjusted comparable sales data for medium-density residential development sites in the greater Bozeman area, produced an indicated value of $9,310,000 for the subject property (before condition). This equates to a unit rate of $23.50 per square foot of gross land area (rounded from prior indications). This rate aligns with observed market trends for infill/edge residential development parcels in Bozeman's westerly corridors as of early 2026, where stabilized post-boom conditions support values in the mid-$20s per square foot for sites with similar zoning potential, access, and medium-density condominium/townhome orientation (though direct land sale comparables remain limited and often reflect varying entitlements, size, and location premiums). The price per unit analysis, utilizing the reconciled achievable development yield of 130 dwelling units, produced an adjusted indication of $9,750,000 at $75,000 per unit (derived from bracketing adjusted comparable indications, with the subject's moderate-density positioning and larger unit sizes/amenities supporting a mid-range per-unit land value amid Bozeman's balanced multifamily/condo market as of the date of value). Reconciling the two independent approaches price per square foot (emphasizing land area intensity) and price per unit (emphasizing economic productivity and market-supported yield) yields a final estimated market value indication of $9,310,000 for the subject property in the before condition. This conclusion is supported by the close alignment of the two methods, bracketing from primary sales comparables, and consistency with current market dynamics in Bozeman as of the date of value: steady demand for attached medium-density housing, ongoing absorption of supply, modest rent/price growth, and sustained developer interest in westerly growth areas under more balanced conditions. Summary Description of the Acquisition: Neighborhood Factors The subject property is primarily a single-family residential neighborhood. There are a mixture of similar type properties as compared to the subject, that were never annexed into the city and retain the older Gallatin County zoning. The fee acquisition will not have a significant impact on 126 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 90 the character of the neighborhood and will provide better access in a north-south transition through the immediate neighborhood. In general, this area is single-family residential and multifamily residential neighborhood with some interspersed commercial development along primary roadways. Legal Description: There is a change to the legal description in the after condition. The legal description of the subject property in the before as well as the metes and bounds description of the subject, in the after is below. 127 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 91 128 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 92 129 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 93 Subject Description, After: The proposed access acquisition represents a significant portion of the overall site area and materially affects the parcel. In the before condition, the subject property encompasses a gross area of 9.09 acres (approximately 395,960 square feet). The proposed fee acquisition involves a 2.36-acre strip along the westerly side of the property. This reduces the remaining site to 6.73 acres (approximately 293,146 square feet) in the after condition, consisting primarily of the easterly portion of the original tract. The acquisition area is irregular in shape: It begins as a narrow 15-foot-wide strip along Baxter Lane The strip then extends northward as a thinner corridor. It widens toward the central part of the tract. Finally, it tapers back to connect with Fowler Lane on the north. The acquisition consists of a fee simple interest in a parcel of land, as delineated by the metes and bounds legal description provided in the project plans. The total area of the acquisition is 102,814 square feet, which equates to 2.36 acres (calculated as 102,814 ÷ 43,560 square feet per acre, rounded to two decimal places in accordance with standard appraisal practice). In the before condition, the subject property comprises the entire parent tract under unified ownership and use. Following the acquisition, the after condition reflects the remaining remainder parcel, with an area of 6.73 acres. The combined area of the acquired parcel (2.36 acres) and the remainder parcel (6.73 acres) is consistent with the original parent tract configuration, totaling approximately 9.09 acres prior to the partial taking. This partial acquisition for road purposes results in a reduction of the subject property's usable area by 2.36 acres, or approximately 26% of the before-condition site area (2.36 ÷ 9.09 ≈ 0.2596). All other physical characteristics remain the same or very similar. Fowler Avenue will set the westerly boundary the subject property, in the after. The primary difference before, and after is an acquisition of the 2.36 acres along the westerly boundary. There will be no access from Baxter Lane on the south but Fowler Avenue will set the entire westerly boundary. Overall, the Subject Before Acres 9.09 Subject Before SF 395,960 Fee Acquisition 102,814 Fee Acquisition Acres 2.36 Subject, After SF 293,146 Subject After Acres 6.73 Land Description, After 130 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 94 subject property has reasonably similar access before and after the acquisition as well as other physical features. Assessed Value and Tax Load: The assessed value and overall tax load for the subject property will be less given the fee acquisition. Taxes in the after condition are estimated at the same per acre value as in the before. The subject property contains 6.73 acres, in the after with an estimated tax burden of $336.86 per acre. That produces an estimated tax burden, in the after of $2,266.97, annually. Zoning and Other Land Use Regulations The zoning and land use issues will not change in the after condition. Rental History The subject property is not rented and historically has never been rented. Highest and Best Use – After: Legally Permissible: There is no anticipated change in the underlying land use regulations governing the subject property. The site remains subject to Gallatin County zoning No annexation into the City of Bozeman is currently expected or imminent but would be readily available. The property continues to align with medium-density residential allowances under applicable county regulations or equivalent provisions. Physically Possible: The property has historically supported and continues to support medium-density multifamily, condominium, townhome, or single-family residential development. In the after scenario, the reduced site area is 293,146 square feet (approximately 6.73 gross acres, calculated as 293,146 ÷ 43,560 ≈ 6.73 acres). Density estimates scale proportionally from the before-condition analysis, assuming comparable site deductions, development efficiencies, and product types (e.g., clustered condominium or townhome designs featuring attached multi-unit structures such as triplexes, fourplexes, or small fiveplex condominiums). Gross acreage: ~6.73 acres. Site deductions: 35%–45% for roads, parking, open space, setbacks, stormwater management, landscaping, and infrastructure (consistent with prior clustered design Subject After 6.73 Per Acre $336.86 Estimated Taxes $2,266.97 131 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 95 assumptions). Net developable area: Approximately 3.7–4.4 acres. Using the before-condition density proxy of 10 units to 15 units per gross acre (reflective of medium-density multi-household/condominium potential under applicable Gallatin County regulations or equivalent medium-density provisions, such as legacy R-3 or updated Bozeman UDC categories if annexed): At 12 units per gross acre (balanced medium-density): 6.73 × 12 ≈ 81 units. At higher-efficiency 15 units per gross acre (clustered, potentially 3-story buildings): 6.73 × 15 ≈ 101 units. At conservative 10 units per gross acre: 6.73 × 10 ≈ 67 units. A realistic and achievable range for the reduced site is 75–95 dwelling units total (~11–14 units per gross acre). This assumes efficient condominium-oriented development with no major new physical constraints (e.g., topography, utilities, environmental features, or infrastructure limitations). Gross square feet per dwelling unit a key market proxy for development intensity and product quality—at the midpoint of 85 units is approximately 293,146 ÷ 85 ≈ 3,449 sf per unit. This is moderately higher (indicating slightly lower density/more spacious configuration) than the before scenario's ~3,046 sf/unit at 130 units on the full parcel. It remains well within observed comparable ranges for condominium projects in the Bozeman area (typically 793– 4,639 sf/unit, with means around 2,135 sf/unit in denser examples). This configuration supports emphasis on larger unit sizes, enhanced amenities, and strong market appeal in Bozeman's current stabilized, post-boom environment, where sustained demand for quality medium-density housing persists amid balanced supply, steady absorption, and modest growth in rents and values. In conclusion, the highest and best use of the property in the after condition supports an achievable development yield of approximately 85 dwelling units. Financially Feasible & Maximally Productive: Financial feasibility and maximally productive use remain largely unchanged in character from the before condition. The reduced site area proportionally limits overall scale and potential revenue, but the site's shape, access, and development attributes are generally preserved without significant new impediments (e.g., no major changes in configuration, access, or utility availability). Medium-density residential development particularly condominiums or attached multifamily continues to represent the maximally productive use, given strong regional demand for housing options in Bozeman's westerly growth areas. Recent market trends (2025–2026) show a balanced multifamily/condo environment with steady leasing absorption, modest rent growth, and ongoing new supply being absorbed over time, supporting viability even on smaller parcels. No alternative uses (e.g., commercial or lower-intensity) appear more productive under current conditions. The estimated number of units, in the after remains a fairly significant development even for this area of Bozeman. 132 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 96 Most Likely Buyer: The most likely buyer profile remains similar in both before and after scenarios: experienced residential developers or builders specializing in medium-density projects (e.g., condominium associations, townhome developers, or regional multifamily firms). The key difference is the smaller site scale in the after condition, but the size difference is likely insignificant. The parcel remains a fairly significant infill or edge development opportunity in Bozeman's westerly sector, appealing to those seeking efficient, high-value residential output in a market with strong demand. Timing of the Use: The highest and best use is immediate in both scenarios. Market conditions support prompt development or resale to ready buyers, as evidenced by primary sales comparables and ongoing absorption in Bozeman's residential sectors. No major delays from entitlements, infrastructure, or market softening are anticipated. Highest & Best Use of Land Only – After: The primary economic use of the land in the after condition is medium-density residential development, with strong potential for condominium-style attached units (e.g., triplexes to small multifamily buildings) or moderately intense apartment configurations. Single-family residential remains possible but less maximally productive given density allowances and market preferences for attached/condo products in this location. The before and after conditions are highly similar in terms of highest and best use character, with the primary distinction being reduced scale due to acreage loss. Sale comparables would draw from the same pool of medium-density residential development sites in the Bozeman area. The same primary sales data from the before is utilized in the after condition. Land Valuation, After: Category Amount Category Amount Subject Size 293,146 Subject Size 85 Per SF $23.50 Per Unit $75,000 Net Indicated Value $6,888,940 Net Indicated Value $6,375,000 Rounded to, after $6,890,000 Rounded to, after $6,380,000 After, Per SF After, Per Unit The tabulation above presents the indicated values derived from the two primary valuation approaches: the price per square foot analysis and the price per unit analysis. Both methods produce consistent and mutually supportive indications, though minor adjustments for parcel size (economies/diseconomies of scale), configuration, and market positioning could apply to either. 133 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 97 The price per square foot approach, based on adjusted comparable land sales for medium- density residential development parcels in the Bozeman area, concludes at $23.50 per square foot. Applied to the subject's gross area (approximately 293,146 square feet in the after condition), this yields a rounded indicated value of $6,890,000. This indication aligns well with observed market data for infill/edge residential development sites in Bozeman's westerly corridors as of early 2026, where stabilized conditions support values in the mid-to-upper $20.00 per square foot range for parcels with comparable zoning potential, access, and medium-density condominium/townhome feasibility. The price per unit approach, based on the reconciled achievable development yield of 85 dwelling units (midpoint of the realistic 75 units to 95 unit range, reflecting ~12.6 units per gross acre and efficient clustered designs), concludes at $75,000 per unit. This produces a rounded indicated value of $6,380,000. Reconciling these two independent approaches results in a final estimated market value indication of $6,890,000 for the subject property in the after condition. This conclusion places slightly greater weight on the price per square foot analysis, which is considered slightly more reliable and solid in this instance due to the following factors: Land area is a fixed, objective metric less susceptible to variability in density assumptions or product mix. Achievable density, while well-supported (75–95 units, midpoint 85), involves some inherent estimation for site-specific efficiencies, entitlements, and market absorption introducing modest potential fluctuation. The close bracketing from primary comparables and consistency with broader Bozeman market trends (stabilized pricing for development land, persistent regional housing demand, and no significant oversupply in medium-density sites) reinforce the per-square- foot method's methodology. The reconciled value of $6,890,000 is well-supported by both analyses. It accounts for the site's highest and best use as medium-density residential development (~85 units achievable, after), its physical/legal attributes, and prevailing economic conditions in Bozeman. The final conclusion of value is supported by the primary sales data which could have a slightly higher indication. Cost to Cure: There are no issues under a cost to cure category. Special Benefits: There are no issues under this category. 134 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 98 Recapitulation of the Compensation: Income Approach Cost Approach Sales Comparison Approach $9,310,000 - $9,750,000 As Is, Fee Simple Income Approach Cost Approach Sales Comparison Approach $6,380,000 - $6,890,000 Fee Simple, After Difference As Is, Fee Simple, Before As Is, Fee Simple, After n/a n/a $6,890,000 Nine Million Three Hundred Ten Thousand Dollars and No Cents Two Million Four Hundred Twenty Thousand Dollars and No Cents $2,420,000 n/a n/a $9,310,000 Six Million Eight Hundred Ninety Thousand Dollars and No Cents 135 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 99 VALUE ESTIMATE AND CERTIFICATION The undersigned does hereby certify that (except as otherwise noted in this appraisal report): 1. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. 2. The reported analysis, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and are my personal, impartial and unbiased professional analyses, opinions and conclusions. 3. I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and have no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. 4. I have performed services as an appraiser regarding the property that is the subject of this report within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment, in compliance with the ETHICS RULE of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP, 2024–2025 edition). Specifically, I previously completed an appraisal of the subject property for the City of Bozeman (as the primary intended user), with an effective date of value of July 18, 2023. That prior assignment involved valuation of a proposed easement for an extension of Fowler Avenue, with the easement valued at approximately 95% of the contributory land value (reflecting partial rights acquisition and retained use/utility).In contrast, the current assignment is a fee simple acquisition analysis (100% loss in value) employing the before-and-after valuation methodology to determine compensation. Key differences between the two assignments include: a. Acquisition type and impact: Fee simple (full title transfer) versus easement (partial interest). b. Acquisition size: The current proposed acquisition area is 102,814 square feet, which is significantly larger than the 65,340 square feet evaluated in the 2023 appraisal. c. Scope of work: While the overall scope remains similar (focused on the Fowler Avenue extension corridor and its impact on the subject property), the larger area, full fee interest, and updated market conditions as of the current date of value necessitate a new analysis, including revised highest and best use considerations, comparable sales, and before-and-after diminution in value calculations. No other services regarding the subject property have been performed by me within the three-year look-back period, either as an appraiser or in any other capacity. This prior service has been disclosed to the client prior to acceptance of the current assignment, and there are no confidentiality restrictions from the prior engagement that would preclude this disclosure. This statement is included in the certification section of the report to satisfy USPAP requirements under the ETHICS RULE (Conduct section) and Standards Rule 2-3, ensuring transparency regarding my prior involvement with the property. 136 - HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC - 100 5. I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. 6. My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. 7. My compensation for completing this assignment was not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. 8. My analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. 9. I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report but not current for this assignment. The subject property was inspected July 18, 2023 for a prior assignment. 10. No one provided significant professional assistance in the preparation or writing of this report. 11. As of the date of this report, Nicholas J. Hogan, MAI has completed the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. 12. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. 13. This report is in compliance with applicable regulations governing appraisal services and appraisal reporting requirements for the State of Montana. _________________________________________ NICHOLAS J. HOGAN, MAI MT General Certificate No: REA-RAG-LIC-370 Expires: 3/31/26 137 ADDENDA 138 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS By this notice, all persons and firms reviewing, utilizing or relying on this report in any manner bind themselves to accept these assumptions and limiting conditions. Do not use this report if you do not so accept. These conditions are a part of the appraisal report, they are a preface to any certification, definition, fact or analysis, and are intended to establish as a matter of record that the appraiser's function is to provide a present market value indication for the subject property based upon the appraiser's observations as to the subject property and the local and/or regional real estate market. This appraisal report is an economic study to estimate value as defined in it. It is not an engineering, construction, legal or architectural study nor survey and expertise in these areas, among others, is not implied. 1. LIMIT OF LIABILITY: The liability of the firm Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group, LLC and employees and affiliated independent contractors is limited to the CLIENT ONLY AND TO THE FEE ACTUALLY RECEIVED BY APPRAISER (TOTAL PER APPRAISAL). FURTHER, THERE IS NO ACCOUNTABILITY, OBLIGATION, OR LIABILITY to any third party. If this report is placed in the hands of anyone other than the client, the client shall make such assignment and related discussions. The Appraiser is in no way to be responsible for any costs incurred to discover or correct any deficiencies of any type present in the property; physically, financially, and/or legally. In the case of limited partnerships or syndication offerings or stock offerings in real estate, client agrees that in case of lawsuit (brought by lender, partner, or part owner in any form of ownership, tenant, or any other party), any and all awards, settlements of any type in such suit, regardless of outcome, client will hold Appraiser completely harmless in any such action. 2. COPIES, PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, USE OF REPORT: Possession of this report or any copy thereof does not carry with it the right of publication, nor may it be used for other than its intended use; the physical report(s) remain the property of Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group, LLC for the use of the client; the fee being for the analytical services only. The Bylaws and Regulations of the Appraisal Institute require each Member and Candidate to control the use and distribution of each appraisal report signed by such Member or Candidate except as hereinafter provided, the client may distribute copies of this appraisal report in its entirety to such third parties as he may select; HOWEVER, selected portions of this appraisal report shall NOT be given to third parties without the prior written consent of the signatories of this appraisal report. Neither all nor any part of this appraisal report shall be disseminated to the general public by the use of advertising media, public relations, news, sales or other media for public communication without the prior written consent of the Appraiser. 3. CONFIDENTIALITY: This appraisal is to be used only in its entirety and no part is to be used without the whole report. All conclusions and opinions concerning the analysis as set forth in the report were prepared by the Appraiser(s) whose signature(s) appear on the appraisal report, unless indicated as "Review Appraiser". No change of any item in the report shall be made by anyone other than the Appraiser and/or officer of the firm. The Appraiser and firm shall have no responsibility if any such unauthorized change is made. The Appraiser may not divulge the material (evaluation) contents of this report, analytical findings or conclusions, or give a copy of the report to anyone other than the client or his designee as specified in writing except as may be required by the Appraisal Institute as they may request in confidence for ethics enforcement, or by a court of law or body with the power of subpoena. Sales information obtained during the course of this appraisal assignment is the Appraiser's and it can be used or exchanged without consent of the client. 4. TRADE SECRETS: This appraisal was obtained from Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group, LLC and/or its individuals or related independent contractors and consists of "trade secrets and commercial or financial information" which is privileged and confidential and exempted from disclosures under 5 U.S.C. 552 (b) (4). Notify the Appraiser(s) signing report or a principal in Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group, LLC for any request to reproduce this appraisal in whole or in part. 139 5. INFORMATION USED: No responsibility is assumed for accuracy of information furnished by work of or work by others, the client, his designee, or public records. We are not liable for such information or the work of possible subcontractors. Be advised that some of the people associated with Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group, LLC and possibly signing the report are independent contractors. The comparable data relied upon in this report has been confirmed with one or more parties familiar with the transaction or from affidavit or other source thought reasonable; all are considered appropriate for inclusion to the best of our factual judgement and knowledge. An impractical and uneconomic expenditure of time would be required in attempting to furnish unimpeachable verification in all instances, particularly as to engineering and market-related information. It is suggested that the client consider independent verification as a prerequisite to any transaction involving sale, lease, or other significant commitment of funds for subject property. 6. TESTIMONY, CONSULTATION, COMPLETION OF CONTRACT FOR APPRAISAL SERVICE: The contract for appraisal, consultation or analytical service is fulfilled, and the total fee is payable prior to delivery of the report. The Appraiser(s) or those assisting in preparation of the report will not be asked or required to give testimony in court or hearing because of having made the appraisal, in full or in part, nor engage in post appraisal consultation with client or third parties except under separate and special arrangement and at additional fee. If testimony or deposition is required because of any subpoena, the client shall be responsible for any additional time, fees, and charges regardless of issuing party. 7. EXHIBITS: The sketches and maps in this report are included to assist the reader in visualizing the property and are not necessarily to scale. Various photos, if any, are included for the same purpose as of the date of the photos. Site plans are not surveys unless shown from separate surveyor. 8. LEGAL, ENGINEERING, FINANCIAL, STRUCTURAL, OR MECHANICAL NATURE HIDDEN COMPONENTS, SOIL: The Appraiser and/or firm has no responsibility for matters legal in character or nature, nor of any architectural, structural, mechanical, or engineering nature. No opinion is rendered as to the title, which is presumed to be good and merchantable. The property is appraised as if free and clear, unless otherwise stated in particular parts of the report. The legal description is assumed to be correct as used in this report as furnished by the client, his designee, or as derived by the Appraiser. Please note that no advice is given regarding mechanical equipment or structural integrity or adequacy nor soils and potential for settlement, drainage, etc. The lender and owner should inspect the property before any disbursement of funds; further it is likely that the lender or owner may wish to require mechanical or structural inspections by qualified and licensed contractor, civil or structural engineer, architect, or other expert. The Appraiser has inspected as far as possible, by observation, the land and the improvements; however, it was not possible to personally observe conditions beneath the soil or hidden structural, or other components. We have not critically inspected mechanical components within the improvements and no representations are made herein as to these matters unless specifically stated and considered in the report. The value estimate considers there being no such conditions that would cause loss of value. The land or the soil of the area being appraised appears firm, however, subsidence in the area is unknown. The Appraiser (singular or plural) does not warrant against this condition or occurrence of problems arising from soil conditions. The appraisal is based on there being no hidden, unapparent, or apparent conditions of the property site, subsoil, or structures or toxic materials which would render it more or less valuable. The Appraiser and firm have no responsibility for any such conditions or for any expertise or engineering to discover them. All mechanical components are assumed to be in operable condition and status standard for properties of the subject type. Conditions of heating, cooling, ventilating, electrical and plumbing equipment is considered to be commensurate with the condition of the balance of the improvements unless otherwise stated. No judgement may be made by us to adequacy of insulation, type of insulation, or energy efficiency of the improvements or equipment which is assumed standard for subject age and type. If the Appraiser has not been supplied with a deficiency or hazard inspection, survey or occupancy permit, no responsibility or representation is assumed or made for any costs associated with obtaining same or for any deficiencies discovered before or after they are obtained. No representation or warranties are made concerning obtaining the above mentioned items. 140 The Appraiser has no responsibility for any costs or consequences arising due to the need, or the lack of need for flood hazard insurance. An Agent for the Federal Flood Insurance Program should be contacted to determine the actual need for Flood Hazard Insurance. 9. LEGALITY OF USE: The appraisal is based on the premise that, there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state and local environmental regulations and laws unless otherwise stated in the report; further, that all applicable zoning, building, use regulations and restrictions of all types have been complied with unless otherwise stated in the report; further, it is assumed that all required licenses, consents, permits, or other legislative or administrative authority, local, state, federal and/or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use considered in the value estimate. 10. COMPONENT VALUES: The distribution of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only under the existing program of utilization. The separate valuations for land and building must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. 11. AUXILIARY AND RELATED STUDIES: No environmental or impact studies, special market study or analysis, highest and best use analysis study or feasibility study has been requested or made unless otherwise specified in an agreement for services or in the report. 12. DOLLAR VALUES, PURCHASING POWER: The market value estimated, and the costs used, are as of the date of the estimate of value. All dollar amounts are based on the purchasing power and price of dollar as of the date of value estimate. 13. INCLUSIONS: Furnishings and equipment or personal property or business operations except as specifically indicated and typically considered as part of real estate, have been disregarded with only the real estate being considered in the value estimate unless otherwise stated. In some property types, business and real estate interests and values are combined and essentially integrated to comprise the property in total, i.e. Hotels/Motels. 14. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS, CONDITIONED VALUE: Improvements proposed, if any, on or off-site, as well as any repairs required are considered, for purposes of this appraisal to be completed in good and workmanlike manner according to information submitted and/or considered by the Appraiser(s). In cases of proposed construction, the appraisal is subject to change upon inspection of property after construction is completed. This estimate of market value is as of the date shown which is indicative of a hypothetical condition or an extraordinary assumption. 15. VALUE CHANGE, DYNAMIC MARKET, INFLUENCES, ALTERATION OF ESTIMATE BY APPRAISER: The estimated market value, which is defined in the report, is subject to change with market changes over time; value is highly related to exposure, time, promotional effort, terms, motivation, and conditions surrounding the offering. The value estimate considers the productivity and relative attractiveness of the property physically and economically in the marketplace. In cases of appraisals involving the capitalization of income benefits, the estimate of market value or investment value or value in use is a reflection of such benefits and Appraiser(s) interpretation of income and yields and other factors derived from general and specific client and market information. Such estimates are as of the date of the estimate of value; they are thus subject to change as the market and value is naturally dynamic. "The Opinion of Market Value" in the appraisal report is not based in whole or in part upon the race, color or national origin of the present owners or occupants of the properties in the vicinity of the property appraised. Appraisal report and value estimate are subject to change if physical or legal entity or financing is different than that envisioned in the report. 141 16. MANAGEMENT OF THE PROPERTY: It is assumed that the property which is the subject of this report will be under prudent and competent ownership and management; neither inefficient nor super-efficient. 17. CONTINUOUS EDUCATION: The Appraisal Institute conducts a voluntary and a mandatory program of continuing education for its designated members depending upon date of membership. Those who meet the minimum standards of this program are awarded periodic educational certification. Please refer to the Appraisers Certification for compliance with the Appraisal Institute’s requirements addressing continuing education. 18. FEE: The fee for this appraisal or study is for the service rendered and not for the time spent on the physical report or the physical report itself. Amount of payment of fee for services is not contingent on any result, approval amount or other estimates or statements. 19. AUTHENTIC COPIES: The authentic copies of this report are signed in blue ink and have embossed type seal. Any copy that does not have the above is unauthorized and may have been altered. 20. INSULATION AND TOXIC MATERIALS: Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous material, which may or may not be present on the property, was not observed by the appraiser. The appraiser has no knowledge of the existence of such materials on or in the property. The appraiser, however, is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of substances such as asbestos, urea-formaldehyde foam insulation, or other potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the property. The value estimate is predicated on the assumption that there is no such material on or in the property that would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field, if desired. 21. REVIEW: Unless otherwise noted herein, any named Review Appraiser from Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group, LLC has reviewed the report as to general appropriateness of technique and format, and has agreed to accept full responsibility for the contents and conclusions noted therein. 22. CHANGES, MODIFICATIONS: The Appraiser(s) and/or principals of Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group, LLC, reserve the right to alter statements, analyses, conclusions or any value estimate(s) in the appraisal if there becomes known to us facts pertinent to the appraisal process which were unknown to us when the report was finished. 23. AFTER TAX ANALYSIS AND/OR VALUATION: Any "after" tax income or investment analysis and resultant measures of return on investment are intended to reflect only possible and general market considerations, whether as part of estimating value or estimating possible returns on investment at an assumed value or price paid; note that the Appraiser(s) does not claim expertise in tax matters and advises client and any other using the appraisal to seek competent tax advice as the Appraiser(s) is in no way to be considered a tax advisor or investment advisor. 24. ACCEPTANCE OF, AND/OR USE OF, THIS APPRAISAL REPORT BY CLIENT OR ANY THIRD PARTY CONSTITUTES ACCEPTANCE OF THE ABOVE CONDITIONS. APPRAISER LIABILITY EXTEND ONLY TO STATED CLIENT, NOT TO SUBSEQUENT PARTIES OR USERS OF ANY TYPE, AND THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF APPRAISER AND FIRM IS LIMITED TO THE AMOUNT OF FEE RECEIVED BY HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC. 142 2/1/2026 Page 1 of 4 TO#3 Fowler French Closing SUBCONSULTANT AGREEMENT (APPRAISAL SERVICES) This Subconsultant Agreement (“Agreement”) is made as of __________________, 20_____, by and between: Prime Consultant: Clear Route Real Estate, LLC c/o Tony Gaddo PO Box 6162 Bozeman, MT 59771 (“Prime”) and Subconsultant: Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group, LLC c/o Nick Hogan 7901 Saddlebow Trail Missoula, MT 59808 (“Subconsultant”) 1. PROJECT Subconsultant shall provide appraisal services in support of the following project: Project Name: Task Order #3, Fowler Avenue R/W Acquisition—French Parcel Closing Client/Agency: City of Bozeman Location: Bozeman, MT 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES Subconsultant shall perform professional real property appraisal services, which may include, but are not limited to: • Appraisal services detailed in section 4 Appraisals and Valuations, attached as Exhibit A • Coordination with Prime regarding scope, assumptions, schedules, and deliverables • Reasonable revisions or clarifications requested by Prime or the Client 3. PRIME CONTRACT INCORPORATION This Subconsultant Agreement is subject to and incorporates by reference the terms and conditions of the Prime Contract between Prime and the Client (previously supplied to Subconsultant with Task Order #2), to the extent applicable to Subconsultant’s services. Subconsultant agrees to be bound by and comply with all applicable requirements of the Prime Contract and shall assume toward Prime all obligations and responsibilities that Prime assumes toward the Client for Subconsultant’s work. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement and the Prime Contract, the more stringent provision shall control, unless otherwise directed in writing by Prime. 4. NOTICE TO PROCEED AND SCHEDULE Subconsultant is authorized to begin work upon execution of this Agreement. February 1 26 143 2/1/2026 Page 2 of 4 TO#3 Fowler French Closing Subconsultant shall complete and deliver the appraisal report(s) no later than: Appraisal Report Due Date: 2/13/26 . Time is of the essence unless otherwise agreed in writing by Prime. 5. TERM This Agreement shall commence on the NTP Date and remain in effect until the services are completed, unless terminated earlier under Section 13. 6. COMPENSATION Prime shall compensate Subconsultant as follows for full and complete performance of the services described in this Agreement: • Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group will bill for its services on a lump-sum basis of $3,950.00. No additional compensation shall be due unless authorized in writing by Prime through a written amendment. 7. BILLING AND PAYMENT Subconsultant may submit invoices no more than once per month. Payment to Subconsultant is expressly conditioned upon Prime’s receipt of payment from the Client for Subconsultant’s work. Subconsultant acknowledges and agrees that Prime shall have no obligation to pay Subconsultant until Prime has been paid by the Client. Invoices shall clearly reference the project and describe work completed to date. Upon Prime’s receipt of payment from the Client, Prime shall remit payment to Subconsultant within [15] days, unless otherwise agreed in writing. Subconsultant agrees that delays in payment by the Client shall not constitute a breach of this Agreement by Prime. 8. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS Subconsultant is and shall remain an independent contractor to Prime and not an employee, agent, partner, or joint venturer of Prime for any purpose. Subconsultant shall have no authority to bind Prime and shall be solely responsible for: • All federal, state, and local taxes • Income tax withholding, payroll taxes, and self-employment taxes • Workers’ compensation coverage (if applicable) • Insurance, licenses, permits, and certifications required to perform the services Subconsultant shall not be entitled to any benefits provided by Prime to its employees, including but not limited to health insurance, retirement benefits, paid leave, or unemployment insurance. 9. LICENSING, STANDARDS, INSURANCE, AND COMPLIANCE Subconsultant represents and warrants that they: a. Are properly licensed and certified to perform appraisal services in the State of Montana and will maintain licensure in good standing for the duration of this Agreement 144 2/1/2026 Page 3 of 4 TO#3 Fowler French Closing b. Shall perform all services in full compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and requirements, and in accordance with generally accepted professional appraisal standards imposed by the Client or incorporated through the Prime Contract c. Shall maintain insurance coverage meeting or exceeding the insurance requirements of the Prime Contract for the duration of this Agreement. Proof of insurance shall be provided to Prime upon request 10. OWNERSHIP OF WORK PRODUCT All appraisal reports and work products prepared under this Agreement shall be considered work made for hire and shall become the property of Prime and/or the Client, subject to applicable appraisal confidentiality and professional standards. 11. CONFIDENTIALITY Subconsultant shall keep confidential all project, client, and property owner information and shall not disclose such information except as necessary to perform the services or as required by law. 12. INDEMNIFICATION Subconsultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Prime, its officers, directors, employees, agents, and affiliates from and against any and all claims, losses, damages, liabilities, fines, penalties, costs, and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) arising out of or resulting from: 1. Any negligent act, error, or omission of Subconsultant in the performance of the services under this Agreement 2. Any breach of this Agreement by Subconsultant 3. Any violation by Subconsultant of applicable laws, regulations, or professional standards This indemnification obligation shall survive the completion or termination of this Agreement. 13. TERMINATION Either party may terminate this Agreement with [14] days’ written notice. In the event of termination, Subconsultant shall be compensated for work satisfactorily performed to the date of termination, subject to Client approval and the fee. 14. NO ASSIGNMENT Subconsultant shall not assign or subcontract any portion of this Agreement without the prior written consent of Prime. 15. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Montana. 16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and may be amended only by a written document signed by both parties. 145 2/1/2026 Page 4 of 4 TO#3 Fowler French Closing SIGNATURES Prime Consultant: Clear Route Real Estate, LLC Signature: __________________________ Name: _____________________________ Title: ______________________________ Date: ______________________________ Subconsultant: Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group, LLC Signature: __________________________ Name: Nicholas J. Hogan, MAI Title: Chief Appraiser Date: 2/2/26 Tony Gaddo Broker/Owner 2/1/2026 146 Fowler Avenue – French Closing Page | 1 1/27/2026 EXHIBIT A Scope of Services The scope of services is detailed below. 1. Project Research a. Obtain and review available preliminary design plans and project documentation b. Coordination meeting with the project team members c. Obtain/verify current deeds and ownership information for one parcel 2. Initial Property Owner Contact a. Initiate contact with owners and their real estate agent 3. Title Commitments a. A title commitment will be prepared by a title company for one parcel. b. Team coordination 4. Appraisals and Valuations a. A full narrative appraisal was previously prepared but is out of date. An updated appraisal report will be prepared by a licensed certified general appraiser (Hogan). b. Team Coordination c. QA/QC of appraisal 5. Prepare Contracts a. Prepare one deed document and R/W agreement for one parcel b. A deed exhibit will be required to acquire a new road tract in fee simple including a legal description, to be prepared at a later date (not included in this contract). c. Clear Route will prepare acquisition documents including graphics, figures, maps, letters, and project information d. The City will provide copies of related agreements or documents for the subject property for inclusion in the property acquisition and closing documents, as needed e. Prepare acquisition cost details and summary f. QA/QC of documents 6. Acquisitions a. Conduct acquisition meetings with property owners of one parcel to finalize agreement details. The owners have hired a real estate agent to list and sell their property. Clear Route will attempt to acquire a deeded road tract prior to the sale of the property and will coordinate with the property owner’s agent on sale details and agreement terms. b. Prepare final acquisition documents c. Prepare final acquisition costs d. QA/QC of documents 7. Title Clearing and Closing a. Prepare final title transfer documents, and schedule closing date b. Obtain mortgage releases, clear taxes and leans, as required c. Submittal of completed R/W acquisition offer packages to the City for review and execution 147 148 HOGAN REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL GROUP, LLC APPRAISER QUALIFICATIONS - NICHOLAS J. HOGAN, MAI APPRAISAL AND RELATED BUSINESS EXPERIENCE: December 2022 to present: Owner and chief appraiser, Hogan Real Estate Appraisal Group, LLC, specializing and real estate appraisal and consulting with emphasis noted below. January 1994 to December 2022: Staff Appraiser for Hall-Widdoss & Co., P.C. specializing in real estate appraisal and consulting with emphasis on multi-family residential, Section 42 LIHTC, assisted living facilities, farm and ranch, conservation easements, partial interests, and complex commercial valuation. Currently licensed in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming. Work includes value estimates for loan purposes, conservation easements, litigation support, estate planning, marketing, condemnation, accounting requirements and feasibility analysis. EDUCATION: University of Montana – Bachelor of Science in Business Administration (12/92) Appraisal Institute Courses and Seminars Court Testimony • 110 Appraisal Principles Montana 6th Judicial Court • 120 Appraisal Principles District of Montana Bankruptcy Court • 310 Basic Income Capitalization 9th Judicial Circuit Court, Kalamazoo, MI • 510 Advanced Income Capitalization US Bankruptcy Court Western District of Washington • 520 Highest and Best Use/Market Analysis Silver Bow County District Court • 530 Advanced Sales Comparison & Cost Approaches • 540 Report Writing and Valuation Analysis • Conservation Easement & Partial Interests • Yellow Book PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS: Member Appraisal Institute – MAI No. 12400 Montana General Certificate No. REA-RAG-LIC-370 Wyoming Certified Real Estate Appraiser Permit No. 1090 Idaho General Certified Appraiser No. CGA-3332 REPRESENTATIVE CLIENTS: US & State Federal Aviation Administration General Services Administration Bureau of Reclamation US Forest Service Office of Valuation Services Justice Department US Highway Administration US Army Corp of Engineers City of Missoula/Missoula County City of Bozeman Montana Department of Transportation Montana Fish Wildlife & Parks Missoula County Other Clients First Interstate Bank The Nature Conservancy US Bank Bank of America Sterling Savings Bank Rocky Mountain Bank Glacier Bank Five Valleys Land Trust Catholic Church – Diocese of Helena Montana Environmental Trust Group 149 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Jesse DiTommaso, Economic Development Coordinator Brit Fontenot, Economic Development Director SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Grant Agreement for a Portion of Impact Fees Associated with the Bozeman Montessori Annexation MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Grant RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to sign a grant agreement for a portion of impact fees associated with the Bozeman Montessori annexation. STRATEGIC PLAN:2.1 Business Growth: Support retention and growth of both the traded and local business sectors while welcoming and encouraging new and existing businesses, in coordination with the Economic Development Plan. BACKGROUND:The importance of early childhood education cannot be overstated. 90% of brain development occurs in children ages 0-5, meaning the vast majority of brain development occurs before children enter kindergarten. Quality early childhood education helps children build a solid foundation for attention, cognition, memory, social-emotional skills, language skills, and sensory and motor skills. Investing in early childhood education reduces educational gaps, economic burdens, and inequities by creating upward mobility through opportunity. Instead of costly and marginally successful programs later in life, quality early childhood education helps prevent the achievement gap by building the cognitive and social skills necessary for school readiness and eventual entrance into the workforce. Our current economy also relies on a stable child care sector. Child care is the workforce that enables the workforce. The 2025 Montana Department of Labor and Industry Report, Montanan's for Hire, highlights the impact of the lack of child care on labor force participation. According to the report, an estimated 64,000 Montana parents could not fully participate in the labor force in 2024 due to family responsibilities and lack of child care. In the FY27-28 budget process, the City Commission approved the Economic Development budget which included monies for child care infrastructure. Bozeman Montessori is located in the Genesis Business Park. Genesis Business Park is in the process of annexation. Each business in the Park is required to pay impact fees associated with annexation. Bozeman Montessori has requested funds to assist with the cost impact fees 150 associated with annexation. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:As recommended by the Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:The grant agreement is $5000, which is available in the approved Economic Development Budget. Attachments: Bozeman Montessori Impact Fee Grant Agreement FINAL.pdf Report compiled on: October 8, 2025 151 FY 2027 Grant Agreement – Bozeman Montessori Annexation Page 1 CITY OF BOZEMAN GRANT AGREEMENT Maintaining Child Care Slots Bozeman Montessori THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 10th day of November, 2026 by and between the City of Bozeman, Montana, a self-governing municipal corporation operating pursuant to its Charter and the laws of the State of Montana, located at 121 N. Rouse Ave., Bozeman MT 59771 (“City”) as GRANTOR and Bozeman Montessori, located at 3774 Equestrian Lane, Bozeman, Montana, as GRANTEE. WHEREAS, on June 6, 2023, the Bozeman City Commission adopted Resolution No. 5443 adopting the City of Bozeman’s 2023 Economic Vitality Strategy; and WHEREAS, the Economic Vitality Strategy calls for increasing the supply of child care as it is critical to the Bozeman economy to maximize the full potential of the available workforce. WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Economic Development Department budgeted for child care infrastructure in the approved FY2027 biennium budget; WHEREAS, Bozeman Montessori submitted a proposal to the City of Bozeman’s Economic Development Department for a grant to assist with impact fees associated with the annexation of an existing Child Care Facility in Bozeman (Bozeman Montessori) that would maintain the number of child care slots available in Bozeman; and WHEREAS, the City Commission may make grants of money for public purposes pursuant to Sect. 7-1-4124(9), MCA; and WHEREAS, the City Commission determines the granting of funds under this Agreement is for a public purpose benefitting the community by increasing the number of child care slots available. THE PARTIES AGREE: 1. The Grant. The City will grant and release to GRANTEE a sum of up to five thousand dollars ($5,000) from its Economic Development Fund (the “Grant”) pursuant to the payment terms in Section 3. 2. Use of Grant Funds. Grant funds in the amount of up to five thousand dollars ($5,000) will be used by GRANTEE for the sole purpose of impact fees as described in the proposal submitted by GRANTEE to the City Commission, attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference incorporated herein. 152 FY 2027 Grant Agreement – Bozeman Montessori Annexation Page 2 3. Payment of Grant Funds a. GRANTEE may request the Grant funds during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 as needed by providing proof of expenses paid. Acceptable forms of proof of payment shall be as determined in the sole discretion of the City’s Director of Finance. b. Unless otherwise approved by the Director of Finance, any funds from the Grant not awarded during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 will remain in the City’s Economic Development Fund and will be available for other appropriation. c. The City will have no obligation to pay any Grant funds unless at the time of the request for payment (i) all of GRANTEE’s representations as set forth in Section 4 are true and correct, and (ii) GRANTEE is not in breach of any term of this Agreement. If any of the above conditions are not satisfied in sole the determination of the City, the City shall have no obligation to make payment and the City’s determination to refrain from paying, or its inability to pay, any of the Grant funds shall not be or result in a default of this Agreement. 4. Grantee Representations a. GRANTEE has familiarized itself with the nature and extent of this Agreement and with all local conditions and federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations that in any manner may affect GRANTEE’s performance under this Agreement. b. GRANTEE represents and warrants to City that it has the experience and ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement; that it will perform said obligations in a professional, competent and timely manner and with diligence and skill; that it has the power to enter into and perform this Agreement and grant the rights granted in it; and that its performance of this Agreement shall not infringe upon or violate the rights of any third party, whether rights of copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity, libel, slander or any other rights of any nature whatsoever, or violate any federal, state and municipal laws. The City will not determine or exercise control as to general procedures or formats necessary for GRANTEE to meet this warranty. c. GRANTEE represents and warrants to City that the Grant funds are necessary to accomplish the financial requirements of the Early Alpine Academy Expansion. 5. Reports/Accountability/Public Information. If Grant funds are paid to GRANTEE, GRANTEE will provide to the City a formal written report that includes, at a minimum, the proof of expenses paid. GRANTEE agrees to develop and/or provide such other documentation as requested by the City demonstrating GRANTEE’s compliance with the 153 FY 2027 Grant Agreement – Bozeman Montessori Annexation Page 3 requirements of this Agreement. GRANTEE must allow the City, its auditors, and other persons authorized by the City to inspect and copy its books and records for the purpose of verifying that monies provided to GRANTEE pursuant to this Agreement were used in compliance with this Agreement and all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local law. GRANTEE will retain such records for seven years after receipt of final payment under this Agreement unless permission to destroy them is granted by the City. GRANTEE shall not issue any statements, releases or information for public dissemination without prior approval of the City. 6. Permits and Compliance With Laws. GRANTEE will obtain, in a timely manner, all required permits, licenses and approvals, and will meet all requirements of all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations which must be obtained or met in connection with the Project. 7. Independent Contractor Status. The parties agree that GRANTEE, its agents, employees, contractors, or subcontractors, are independent contractors for purposes of this Agreement and are not to be considered employees or agents of the City for any purpose. GRANTEE and its agents, employees, contractors, or subcontractors, are not subject to the terms and provisions of the City’s personnel policies handbook and may not be considered a City employee for workers’ compensation or any other purpose. GRANTEE, its agents, employees, contractors, or subcontractors, are not authorized to represent the City or otherwise bind the City in any way. 8. Default and Termination. If GRANTEE fails to comply with any condition of this Agreement at the time or in the manner provided for, the City may terminate this Agreement if the default is not cured within fifteen (15) days after written notice is provided to GRANTEE. The notice will set forth the items to be cured. If this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, GRANTEE will repay to the City any Grant funds already delivered to GRANTEE for the Bozeman Montessori annexation. 9. Limitation on GRANTEE’s Damages; Time for Asserting Claim a. In the event of a claim for damages by GRANTEE under this Agreement, GRANTEE’s damages shall be limited to contract damages and GRANTEE hereby expressly waives any right to claim or recover consequential, special, punitive, lost business opportunity, lost productivity, field office overhead, general conditions costs, or lost profits damages of any nature or kind. b. In the event GRANTEE wants to assert a claim for damages of any kind or nature, GRANTEE must first provide City with written notice of its claim, the facts and circumstances surrounding and giving rise to the claim, and the total amount of damages sought by the claim, within ninety (90) days of the facts and 154 FY 2027 Grant Agreement – Bozeman Montessori Annexation Page 4 circumstances giving rise to the claim. In the event GRANTEE fails to provide such notice, GRANTEE shall waive all rights to assert such claim. 10. Representatives a. City’s Representative. The City’s Representative for the purpose of this Agreement shall be Economic Development Coordinator, Jesse DiTommaso, or such other individual as City may designate in writing. Whenever approval or authorization from or communication or submission to City is required by this Agreement, such communication or submission must be directed to the City’s Representative and approvals or authorizations will be issued only by such Representative; provided, however, that in exigent circumstances when City’s Representative is not available, GRANTEE may direct its communication or submission to other designated City personnel or agents and may receive approvals or authorization from such persons. b. GRANTEE’s Representative. GRANTEE’s Representative for the purpose of this Agreement shall be Head of Finance, Marissa SherKenney, or such other individual as GRANTEE designates in writing. Whenever direction to or communication with GRANTEE is required by this Agreement, such direction or communication must be directed to GRANTEE’s Representative; provided, however, that in exigent circumstances when GRANTEE’s Representative is not available, City may direct its direction or communication to other designated GRANTEE personnel or agents. 11. Indemnity/Waiver of Claims/Insurance. To the fullest extent permitted by law, GRANTEE agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its agents, representatives, employees, and officers (collectively referred to for purposes of this Section as the City) harmless against all third party claims, demands, suits, damages, losses, and expenses, including reasonable defense attorney fees, which arise out of, relate to or result from GRANTEE’s (i) negligence, or (ii) willful or reckless misconduct. Such obligations shall not be construed to negate, abridge, or reduce other rights or obligations of indemnity that would otherwise exist. The indemnification obligations of this Section must not be construed to negate, abridge, or reduce any common-law or statutory rights of the indemnitee(s) which would otherwise exist as to such indemnitee(s). GRANTEE’s indemnification obligations under this Section shall be without regard to and without any right to contribution from any insurance maintained by City. Should any indemnitee described herein be required to bring an action against GRANTEE to assert its right to defense or indemnification under this Agreement or 155 FY 2027 Grant Agreement – Bozeman Montessori Annexation Page 5 under GRANTEE’s applicable insurance policies required below the indemnitee shall be entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred in asserting its right to indemnification or defense but only if a court of competent jurisdiction determines GRANTEE was obligated to defend the claim(s) or was obligated to indemnify the indemnitee for a claim(s) or any portion(s) thereof. In the event of an action filed against City resulting from the City’s performance under this Agreement, the City may elect to represent itself and incur all costs and expenses of suit. GRANTEE also waives any and all claims and recourse against the City or its officers, agents or employees, including the right of contribution for loss or damage to person or property arising from, growing out of, or in any way connected with or incident to the performance of this Agreement except “responsibility for his own fraud, for willful injury to the person or property of another, or for violation of law, whether willful or negligent” as per 28-2-702, MCA. These obligations shall survive termination of this Agreement. In addition to and independent from the above, GRANTEE shall at GRANTEE’s expense secure insurance coverage through an insurance company or companies duly licensed and authorized to conduct insurance business in Montana which insures the liabilities and obligations specifically assumed by GRANTEE in this Section. The insurance coverage shall not contain any exclusion for liabilities specifically assumed by GRANTEE in this Section unless and to the extent coverage for such liability is not reasonably available. The insurance shall cover and apply to all claims, demands, suits, damages, losses, and expenses that may be asserted or claimed against, recovered from, or suffered by the City without limit and without regard to the cause therefore and which is acceptable to the City and GRANTEE shall furnish to the City an accompanying certificate of insurance and accompanying endorsements in amounts not less than as follows: • Workers’ Compensation – statutory; • Employers’ Liability - $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate; • Commercial General Liability - $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate The City of Bozeman, its officers, agents, and employees, shall be endorsed as an additional insured on a primary non-contributory basis on the Commercial General Liability policy. The insurance and required endorsements must be in a form suitable to City and shall include no less than a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation or non-renewal. The City must approve all insurance coverage and endorsements prior to delivery of 156 FY 2027 Grant Agreement – Bozeman Montessori Annexation Page 6 Grant funds to GRANTEE. GRANTEE shall notify City within two (2) business days of GRANTEE’s receipt of notice that any required insurance coverage will be terminated or GRANTEE’s decision to terminate any required insurance coverage for any reason. 12. Nondiscrimination, Equal Pay GRANTEE agrees that all hiring by GRANTEE of persons performing this Grant Agreement shall be on the basis of merit and qualifications. GRANTEE will have a policy to provide equal employment opportunity in accordance with all applicable state and federal anti-discrimination laws, regulations, and contracts. GRANTEE will not refuse employment to a person, bar a person from employment, or discriminate against a person in compensation or in a term, condition, or privilege of employment because of race, color, religion, creed, political ideas, sex, age, marital status, national origin, actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, physical or mental disability, except when the reasonable demands of the position require an age, physical or mental disability, marital status or sex distinction. In addition, GRANTEE represents it is, and for the term of this Agreement will be, in compliance with the requirements of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Section 39-3-104, MCA (the Montana Equal Pay Act). GRANTEE must report to the City any violations of the Montana Equal Pay Act that GRANTEE has been found liable for or guilty of within 30 days of such finding for violations occurring during the term of this Agreement. GRANTEE shall require these nondiscrimination terms of its subcontractors providing services under this Grant Agreement. 13. Public Meetings and Access to Public Records a. In accordance with 7-1-4144, MCA and subject to any applicable legal obligation to protect and preserve individual confidential or private information, upon reasonable request and at reasonable times during normal business hours, GRANTEE shall make such records available for inspection and copying by members of the public. GRANTEE may charge for such copying in accordance with the policies of the City, which GRANTEE hereby adopts for such purposes. b. To determine whether a meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public and to determine whether information contained in GRANTEE documents is protected by law from disclosure, GRANTEE may seek a determination of the City Attorney at no cost to GRANTEE. Such request and determination shall not create an attorney- client relationship between GRANTEE and the City. 14. Attorney’s Fees and Costs. In the event it becomes necessary for a party to this Agreement to retain an attorney to enforce any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement or to give any notice required herein, then the prevailing party shall be 157 FY 2027 Grant Agreement – Bozeman Montessori Annexation Page 7 entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, including fees, salary, and costs of in- house counsel to include City Attorney. 15. Integration and Modification. This document contains the entire agreement between the parties and no statements, promises or inducements made by either party or agents of either party not contained in this written Agreement may be considered valid or binding. This Agreement may not be modified except by written agreement signed by both parties. 16. Dispute Resolution a. Any claim, controversy, or dispute between the parties, their agents, employees, or representatives shall be resolved first by negotiation between senior-level personnel from each party duly authorized to execute settlement agreements. Upon mutual agreement of the parties, the parties may invite an independent, disinterested mediator to assist in the negotiated settlement discussions. b. If the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within thirty (30) days from the date the dispute was first raised, then such dispute may only be resolved in a court of competent jurisdiction in compliance with the Applicable Law provisions of this Agreement. 17. No Assignment. GRANTEE may not subcontract or assign GRANTEE’s rights, including the right to Grant payments, or any other rights or duties arising hereunder, without the prior written consent of City. 18. No Third Party Beneficiary. The terms and provisions of this Agreement are intended solely for the benefit of each party and their respective successors and assigns. It is not the parties’ intent to confer third party beneficiary rights upon any other person or entity. 19. Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Montana without regard to conflict of law provisions. The Parties agree to submit to the personal and exclusive jurisdiction of the courts located within Gallatin County, Montana. 20. Non-Waiver. A waiver by either party of any default or breach by the other party of any terms or conditions of this Agreement does not limit the other party’s right to enforce such term or conditions or to pursue any available legal or equitable rights in the event of any subsequent default or breach. 21. Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is held to be void or unenforceable, the balance of the Agreement shall continue in effect. 158 FY 2027 Grant Agreement – Bozeman Montessori Annexation Page 8 22. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, which together constitute one instrument. 23. Consent to Electronic Signatures: The Parties have consented to execute this Agreement electronically in conformance with the Montana Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, Title 30, Chapter 18, Part 1, MCA. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument the day and year indicated below. _______________________ Date: __________ Chuck Winn, City Manager City of Bozeman _______________________ Date: __________ Mariss SherKenney GRANTEE Approved as to form: _______________________ Date: __________ Greg Sullivan, City Attorney City of Bozeman 159 FY 202x Grant Agreement – [name of project/services] Exhibit A Exhibit A Grant Proposal 160 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:N/A SUBJECT:Acceptance of Petition for Annexation , Granting of Right-Of-Way, and Initial City Zoning for Genesis Business Park Subdivision MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative RECOMMENDATION:Acceptance STRATEGIC PLAN:2.2 Infrastructure Investments: Strategically invest in infrastructure as a mechanism to encourage economic development. BACKGROUND:This item is for the Commission to acknowledge receipt of a petition to annex the Genesis Business Park to the City. City staff have been working with representatives of Genesis Business Park for over two years to address the need to connect Family Promise to both City sewer and water to provide Family Promise the opportunity to expand its services. To facilitate municipal sewer service for Family Promise, all of Genesis Business Park will need to annex to the City. A water main is proposed to be constructed to connect Family Promise to municipal water services. The attached Voluntary Petition for Annexation to City of Bozeman, Commitment for the Granting of Right-Of-Way, and Petition for Initial City Zoning for the Genesis Business Park Subdivision is the result of this cooperative effort. The annexation will include 27 lots. As part of this petition, the property owners request all properties within the Genesis Business Park be zoned B2M. Staff are currently processing the Petition; as such, this item will return to the City Commission at a future meeting for a decision on annexation and the requested zoning. Again, this item is simply to acknowledge receipt of the Petition. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None at this point in the process. ALTERNATIVES:N/A FISCAL EFFECTS:None at this point in the process. Attachments: 161 Genesis Business Park (Petition and Sig Pages).pdf Report compiled on: October 26, 2026 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Russ Ward, Solid Waste Superintendent Emiliano Esparza, Acting Director of Transportation and Engineering SUBJECT:Authorize City Manager to Sign Purchase Agreement with Wastequip for the Purchase of 420 Bear Resistant Organics Management Totes MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Vendor/Contract RECOMMENDATION:Authorize City Manager to Sign Purchase Agreement with Wastequip for the Purchase of 420 Bear Resistant Organics Management Totes. STRATEGIC PLAN:7.5. Funding and Delivery of City Services: Use equitable and sustainable sources of funding for appropriate City services, and deliver them in a lean and efficient manner. BACKGROUND:The City of Bozeman (City) was awarded an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Solid Waste Infrastructure for Recycling grant on March 21, 2024. The purpose of the grant is to expand and maintain the City’s Sustainable Organics Management Program. In support of the Organics Management Program, the City plans to purchase an additional 420 bear resistant organics totes ranging from 64 gallons to 96 gallons in capacity. The bear resistant totes will be used to provide single and multi-family households with year-round diversion of organic waste including food waste in areas with bear sightings. The bear resistant organics management totes were selected utilizing a Sourcewell cooperative purchasing contract to comply with State and City procurement requirements. Exhibit A is the EPA Solid Waste Infrastructure for Recycling grant, Exhibit B is the Sourcewell cooperative agreement, Exhibits C and D are Purchase Agreements with Wastequip that include price quotes for a total of 420 bear resistant organics totes. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:None identified or recommended. FISCAL EFFECTS:The total cost of the 420 totes is $134,327.00. The EPA Solid Waste Infrastructure for Recycling grant will cover the total cost of $134,327.00. Attachments: Exhibit A_EPA Solid Waste Grant Agreement_Final.pdf 178 Exhibit B_Sourcewell Master Agreement for Totes_Final.pdf Exhibit C_Purchase Order No 1_ 64 and 96 gallon bear totes from Wastequip_Final.pdf Exhibit D_Purchase Order No 2_96 gallon bear totes from Wastequip_Final.pdf Report compiled on: October 29, 2026 179 SC - 00I17000 - 0 Page 1 TYPE OF ACTION U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY MAILING DATE ACH#PAYMENT METHOD: PROGRAM CODE: DATE OF AWARDMODIFICATION NUMBER: GRANT NUMBER (FAIN):00I17000 80072ASAP 0 03/21/2024 New 03/26/2024 Cooperative Agreement SC RECIPIENT TYPE:Send Payment Request to: RECIPIENT: EIN: PAYEE: Municipal Bozeman, MT 59717-4751 City of Bozeman 81-6001238 411 East Main Street Contact EPA RTPFC at: rtpfc-grants@epa.gov 411 East Main Street City of Bozeman Bozeman, MT 59717-4751 PROJECT MANAGER EPA PROJECT OFFICER EPA GRANT SPECIALIST Kevin Handelin P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 khandelin@bozeman.netEmail: 406-582-3228Phone: Lauren Gregory gregory.lauren@epa.govEmail: 303-312-7825Phone: Esther Son Grants, Acquisition and IAs Branch, 8MSD-GA 1595 Wynkoop Street Denver, CO 80202 son.esther@epa.govEmail: 303-312-6772Phone: PROJECT TITLE AND DESCRIPTION Bozeman Sustainable Organics Management Program See Attachment 1 for project description. BUDGET PERIOD PROJECT PERIOD TOTAL BUDGET PERIOD COST TOTAL PROJECT PERIOD COST 04/01/2024 - 01/01/2027 04/01/2024 - 01/01/2027 $ 2,610,617.00 $ 2,610,617.00 NOTICE OF AWARD Based on your Application dated 02/15/2023 including all modifications and amendments, the United States acting by and through the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hereby awards $ 1,605,660.00. EPA agrees to cost-share 61.51% of all approved budget period costs incurred, up to and not exceeding total federal funding of $ 1,605,660.00. Recipient's signature is not required on this agreement. The recipient demonstrates its commitment to carry out this award by either: 1) drawing down funds within 21 days after the EPA award or amendment mailing date; or 2) not filing a notice of disagreement with the award terms and conditions within 21 days after the EPA award or amendment mailing date. If the recipient disagrees with the terms and conditions specified in this award, the authorized representative of the recipient must furnish a notice of disagreement to the EPA Award Official within 21 days after the EPA award or amendment mailing date. In case of disagreement, and until the disagreement is resolved, the recipient should not draw down on the funds provided by this award/amendment, and any costs incurred by the recipient are at its own risk. This agreement is subject to applicable EPA regulatory and statutory provisions, all terms and conditions of this agreement and any attachments. ISSUING OFFICE (GRANTS MANAGEMENT OFFICE)AWARD APPROVAL OFFICE ORGANIZATION / ADDRESSORGANIZATION / ADDRESS U.S. EPA, Region 8, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8 1595 Wynkoop Street Denver, CO 80202-1129 U.S. EPA, Region 8, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8 R8 - Region 8 1595 Wynkoop Street Denver, CO 80202-1129 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY DATEDigital signature applied by EPA Award Official Sarah Hulstein 03/21/2024 180 SC - 00I17000 - 0 Page 2 EPA Funding Information FUNDS FORMER AWARD THIS ACTION AMENDED TOTAL EPA Amount This Action $ 0 $ 1,605,660 $ 1,605,660 EPA In-Kind Amount $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Unexpended Prior Year Balance $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Other Federal Funds $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Recipient Contribution $ 0 $ 1,004,957 $ 1,004,957 State Contribution $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Local Contribution $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Other Contribution $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Allowable Project Cost $ 0 $ 2,610,617 $ 2,610,617 Assistance Program (CFDA)Statutory Authority Regulatory Authority 66.920 - Solid Waste Infrastructure Financing - Save Our Seas Act Grants 33 USC 4282(a) & FY22 Consolidated Appropriations Act (PL 117-103) 2 CFR 200, 2 CFR 1500 and 40 CFR 33 Fiscal Site Name Req No FY Approp. Code Budget Organization PRC Object Class Site/Project Cost Organization Obligation / Deobligation $ 364,136--4183000DP708P2E4C232408PCB003- $ 1,241,524--4183000DP708P2E4232408PCB003- $ 1,605,660 181 SC - 00I17000 - 0 Page 3 Budget Summary Page Table A - Object Class Category (Non-Construction) Total Approved Allowable Budget Period Cost 1. Personnel $ 329,971 2. Fringe Benefits $ 164,986 3. Travel $ 0 4. Equipment $ 1,936,700 5. Supplies $ 18,960 6. Contractual $ 160,000 7. Construction $ 0 8. Other $ 0 9. Total Direct Charges $ 2,610,617 10. Indirect Costs: 0.00 % Base $ 0 11. Total (Share: Recipient ______ % Federal ______ %)$ 2,610,61738.49 61.51 12. Total Approved Assistance Amount $ 1,605,660 13. Program Income $ 0 14. Total EPA Amount Awarded This Action $ 1,605,660 15. Total EPA Amount Awarded To Date $ 1,605,660 182 SC - 00I17000 - 0 Page 4 Attachment 1 - Project Description EPA's Solid Waste Infrastructure for Recycling (SWIFR) grants for political subdivisions of states and territories will fund activities that will result in a significant decrease in the generation of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) and/or an increase in the diversion of MSW from landfills and incineration, as well as fund innovative solutions and programs that provide or increase access to prevention, reuse, mechanical recycling, anaerobic digestion, and composting. The purpose of this award is to enhance the City of Bozeman efforts to meet the SWIFR grants elements. Specifically, the City of Bozeman will expand the Bozeman Sustainable Organics Management Program which will build residential collection infrastructure to provide single- and multi-family households with year-round diversion of organic waste, including food waste. The infrastructure enhancements include the purchase of two automated side loader collection vehicles, 8,000 carts, 100 bear-resistant carts, technology improvements, and programmatic education and outreach. This Program will provide collection services for up to 7,000 households by 2026 and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 1,950 metric tons of CO2 equivalent (MTCO2E) annually.The activities include establishing organics collection infrastructure, expanding organics collection to include food waste. Increase and optimize the capacity for processing organic materials, increasing the generation and distribution of finished compost product to the community, and diverting a significant quantity of organic material from the municipal solid waste stream. The anticipated deliverables include collection infrastructure purchases, establishing a food waste diversion program and expanding organics collection to year-round (from seasonal), and executing an education and outreach campaign to increase and optimize participation in the new organics collection program. The expected outcomes include the purchase of 8,000 64-gallon carts, 100 bear-resistant carts, two automated side loader collection vehicles, and two tablets and additional licenses for route software. Additionally, the City will create two permanent full-time collection driver positions, service and enroll 7,000 households with weekly collection of organics, service one disadvantaged community, divert 2,100 tons annually of organics collected and composted, reduce emissions by 1,950 MTCO2e annually, and create and apply 1,200 tons of compost locally. The intended beneficiaries include residents of multi family households and low income neighborhoods (50% of the City).No subawards are included in this assistance agreement. 183 SC - 00I17000 - 0 Page 5 Administrative Conditions National Administrative Terms and Conditions General Terms and Conditions The recipient agrees to comply with the current EPA general terms and conditions available at: https: //www.epa.gov/grants/epa-general-terms-and-conditions-effective-october-1-2023-or-later. These terms and conditions are in addition to the assurances and certifications made as a part of the award and the terms, conditions, or restrictions cited throughout the award. The EPA repository for the general terms and conditions by year can be found at: https://www.epa. gov/grants/grant-terms-and-conditions#general. A. Correspondence Condition The terms and conditions of this agreement require the submittal of reports, specific requests for approval, or notifications to EPA. Unless otherwise noted, all such correspondence should be sent to the following email addresses: • Federal Financial Reports (SF-425): rtpfc-grants@epa.gov and son.esther@epa.gov • MBE/WBE reports (EPA Form 5700-52A): son.esther@epa.gov • All other forms/certifications/assurances, Indirect Cost Rate Agreements, Requests for Extensions of the Budget and Project Period, Amendment Requests, Requests for other Prior Approvals, updates to recipient information (including email addresses, changes in contact information or changes in authorized representatives) and other notifications: gregory. lauren@epa.gov and son.esther@epa.gov • Quality Assurance documents, workplan revisions, equipment lists, programmatic reports and deliverables: gregory.lauren@epa.gov 184 SC - 00I17000 - 0 Page 6 Programmatic Conditions Grant-Specific Programmatic Terms and Conditions A. PERFORMANCE REPORTING AND FINAL PERFORMANCE REPORT Performance Reports – Content In accordance with 2 CFR 200.329, the recipient agrees to submit performance reports that include brief information on each of the following areas: 1) A comparison of actual accomplishments to the outputs/outcomes established in the assistance agreement work plan for the period; 2) The reasons why established outputs/outcomes were not met; and 3) Additional pertinent information, including, when appropriate, analysis and explanation of cost overruns or high-unit costs. Additionally, the recipient agrees to inform EPA as soon as problems, delays, or adverse conditions which will materially impair the ability to meet the outputs/outcomes specified in the assistance agreement work plan are known. Performance Reports - Frequency The recipient agrees to submit performance reports electronically to the EPA Project Officer within 90 days after the annual reporting period ends on 11/01/2026. The recipient must submit the final performance report no later than 120 calendar days after the end date of the period of performance. 1. Semi-annual performance reports are required and they are to be submitted electronically to the EPA Project Officer within 30 days after the reporting period (every six-month period). The reporting periods end on 10/31/2024, 4/30/2025, 10/31/2025, and 4/30/2026. The detailed final report is due within 120 days of the project deadline, 11/01/2026, and the final report is due by 1/31/2027. B. Cybersecurity Condition Cybersecurity Grant Condition for Other Recipients, Including Intertribal Consortia (a) The recipient agrees that when collecting and managing environmental data under this assistance agreement, it will protect the data by following all applicable State or Tribal law cybersecurity requirements. (b) (1) EPA must ensure that any connections between the recipient's network or information system and EPA networks used by the recipient to transfer data under this agreement, are secure. For purposes of this Section, a connection is defined as a dedicated persistent interface between an Agency IT system and an external IT system for the purpose of transferring information. Transitory, user-controlled connections such as website browsing are excluded from this definition. If the recipient's connections as defined above do not go through the Environmental Information Exchange Network or EPA's Central Data Exchange, the recipient agrees to contact the EPA Project Officer (PO) no later than 90 days after the date of this award and work with the designated Regional/Headquarters Information Security Officer to ensure that the connections meet EPA security requirements, including entering into Interconnection Service Agreements as appropriate. This condition does not apply to manual entry of data by the recipient into systems operated and used by EPA's regulatory programs for the submission of reporting and/or compliance data. (2) The recipient agrees that any subawards it makes under this agreement will require the subrecipient to comply with the requirements in (b)(1) if the subrecipient's network or information system is connected to EPA networks to transfer data to the Agency using systems other than the Environmental Information Exchange Network or EPA's Central Data Exchange. The recipient will be in compliance with this condition: by including this requirement in subaward agreements; and during subrecipient monitoring deemed necessary by the recipient under 2 CFR 200.332(d), by inquiring whether the subrecipient has contacted the EPA Project Officer. Nothing in this condition requires the recipient to contact the EPA Project Officer on behalf of a subrecipient or to be involved in the negotiation of an Interconnection Service Agreement between the subrecipient and EPA. C. Competency Policy Competency of Organizations Generating Environmental Measurement Data In accordance with Agency Policy Directive Number FEM-2012-02, Policy to Assure the Competency of Organizations Generating Environmental Measurement Data under Agency-Funded Assistance Agreements, 185 SC - 00I17000 - 0 Page 7 Recipient agrees, by entering into this agreement, that it has demonstrated competency prior to award, or alternatively, where a pre-award demonstration of competency is not practicable, Recipient agrees to demonstrate competency prior to carrying out any activities under the award involving the generation or use of environmental data. Recipient shall maintain competency for the duration of the project period of this agreement and this will be documented during the annual reporting process. A copy of the Policy is available online at https://www.epa. gov/sites/production/files/2015-03/documents/competency-policy-aaia-new.pdf or a copy may also be requested by contacting the EPA Project Officer for this award. D. Leveraging Leveraging: The recipient agrees to provide the proposed leveraged funding, including any voluntary cost-share contribution or overmatch, that is described in its proposal dated 2/15/2023. If the proposed leveraging does not materialize during the period of award performance, and the recipient does not provide a satisfactory explanation, the Agency may consider this factor in evaluating future proposals from the recipient. In addition, if the proposed leveraging does not materialize during the period of award performance then EPA may reconsider the legitimacy of the award; if EPA determines that the recipient knowingly or recklessly provided inaccurate information regarding the leveraged funding the recipient described in its proposal dated 2/15/2023 EPA may take action as authorized by 2 CFR Part 200 and/or 2 CFR Part 180 as applicable. Voluntary Cost-Share or Overmatch This award and the resulting federal funding of $1,605,660 is based on estimated costs requested in the recipient's application dated 2/15/2023. Included in these costs is a voluntary cost-share contribution of $1,004,957 by the recipient in the form of a voluntary cost-share or overmatch (providing more than any minimum required cost-share) that the recipient included in its proposal dated 2/15/2023. The recipient must provide this voluntary cost-share contribution during performance of this award unless the EPA agrees otherwise in a modification to this agreement. While actual total costs may differ from the estimates in the recipient's application, EPA's participation shall not exceed the total amount of federal funds awarded. If the recipient fails to provide the voluntary cost-share contribution during the period of award performance, and EPA does not agree to modify the agreement to reduce the cost share, the recipient is in violation of the terms of the agreement. In addition to other remedies available under 2 CFR Part 200, the Agency may consider this factor in evaluating future proposals from the recipient. In addition, if the voluntary cost-share contribution does not materialize during the period of award performance then EPA may reconsider the legitimacy of the award; if EPA determines that the recipient knowingly or recklessly provided inaccurate information regarding the voluntary cost-share or overmatch the recipient described in its proposal dated 2/15/2023. EPA may take action as authorized by 2 CFR Part 200 and/or 2 CFR Part 180 as applicable. E. Equipment Disposition In accordance with 2 CFR 200.313, when original or replacement equipment acquired under this agreement is no longer needed for the original project or program or for other activities currently or previously supported by EPA, the recipient must follow the following disposition instruction: (1) Items of equipment with a current per unit fair market value of $5,000 or less may be retained, sold or otherwise disposed of with no further obligation to the EPA. F. Use of Logos If the EPA logo is appearing along with logos from other participating entities on websites, outreach materials, or reports, it must not be prominently displayed to imply that any of the recipient or subrecipient's activities are being conducted by the EPA. Instead, the EPA logo should be accompanied with a statement indicating that the [Insert Recipient or subrecipient NAME] received financial support from the EPA under an Assistance Agreement. More information is available at: https://www.epa.gov/stylebook/using-epa-seal-and-logo#policy G. Paperwork Reduction Act Notwithstanding any references to collection of information in the recipient's application or proposal for EPA funding, the scope of work for this cooperative agreement does not include a survey or other information collection of identical information from 10 or more parties. No EPA funds (directly paid by EPA or from the recipient's cost share) may be used for the design or administration of such an information collection, and EPA personnel may not participate in such activities. Reasonable costs for analyzing independently collected information and publishing the results of such information collections are allowable to the extent authorized in the EPA approved budget for this agreement. H. Substantial Involvement 186 SC - 00I17000 - 0 Page 8 EPA will be substantially involved in this agreement. Substantial involvement by the EPA Project Officer may include: 1) monthly telephone calls and other monitoring (monitoring (or meeting on an alternate schedule suggested by EPA's Project Officer), 2) reviewing project phases and providing approval to continue to the next phase, 3) reviewing and commenting on any documents, web content, or other materials developed under this agreement (the recipient will make final decisions on these matters), 4) approving substantive terms included in contracts or subawards (EPA's Project Officer will not suggest, recommend or direct the recipient to select any particular contractor or subrecipient except to the extent permitted in Section 10 of EPA's Subaward Policy). 5) reviewing and commenting on the programmatic progress reports 6) consultation with EPA regarding the selection of key personnel (EPA's involvement is limited to reviewing the technical qualifications of key personnel and the recipient will make the final decisions on selection. EPA's Project Officer will not suggest, recommend or direct the recipient to select any individual). 7) joint operational involvement, participation, and/or collaboration between EPA and the recipient. EPA's Project Officer or designee may provide data, advice, and information that will help the grantee carry out the agreement effectively. I.DURC/iDURC The recipient agrees to not initiate any life sciences research involving agents and toxins identified in Section 6.2.1 of theUnited States Government Policy for Institutional Oversight of Life Sciences Dual Use Research of Concern(iDURCPolicy)until appropriate review and clearance by the recipient institution's Institutional Review Entity (IRE). The recipient also agrees to temporarily suspend life sciences research in the event that, during the course of the research project, the IRE determines that the life sciences research meets the definition of DURC in theiDURCPolicy, and the recipient agrees to notify the EPA Institutional Contact for Dual Use Research (ICDUR) (DURC@epa. gov) of the institution's determination. J. Health and Safety Training The recipient agrees that all staff, contractors, or subrecipients involved in construction work will take or show evidence of having taken safety training for equipment such as balers, compacters, shredders, crushers, skid steers, recycling trucks, and similar equipment that may be purchased and used under the grant. 187 120324-TOT v052824 1 MASTER AGREEMENT #120324 CATEGORY: WůĂƐƟĐZĞĨƵƐĞĂŶĚZĞĐLJĐůŝŶŐŽŶƚĂŝŶĞƌƐǁŝƚŚZĞůĂƚĞĚdĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐ SUPPLIER: dŽƚĞƌ͕>> This Master Agreement (Agreement) is between Sourcewell, a Minnesota ƐĞƌǀŝĐĞĐŽŽƉĞƌĂƟǀĞlocated at 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479 (Sourcewell) and Toter, LLC, 841 Meacham Road, Statesville, NC 28677 (Supplier). Sourcewell is a ůŽĐĂůŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƐĞƌǀŝĐĞĐŽŽƉĞƌĂƟǀĞĐƌĞĂƚĞĚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞůĂǁƐŽĨƚŚĞ^ƚĂƚĞŽĨ DŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂ;DŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂ^ƚĂƚƵƚĞƐ^ĞĐƟŽŶϭϮϯ͘ϮϭͿŽīĞƌŝŶŐ a CŽŽƉĞƌĂƟǀĞPurchasing Program to eligible ƉĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚĞŶƟƟĞƐ. Under this Master Agreement entered with Sourcewell, Supplier will provide /ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐ to WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͛ƐCŽŽƉĞƌĂƟǀĞPurchasing Program. ƌƟĐůĞϭ͗ 'ĞŶĞƌĂůdĞƌŵƐ dŚĞ'ĞŶĞƌĂůdĞƌŵƐŝŶƚŚŝƐƌƟĐůĞϭĐŽŶƚƌŽůƚŚĞŽƉĞƌĂƟŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů ĂŶĚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚĂƉƉůLJƚŽĂůůƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐĞŶƚĞƌĞĚďLJ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐ͘^ƵďƐĞƋƵĞŶƚ ƌƟĐůĞƐƚŽƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĐŽŶƚƌŽůƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƐ ĂŶĚŽďůŝŐĂƟŽŶƐĚŝƌĞĐƚůLJďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂŶĚ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ;ƌƟĐůĞϮͿ͕ĂŶĚďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ;ƌƟĐůĞϯͿ͕ƌĞƐƉĞĐƟǀĞůLJ͘dŚĞƐĞƌƟĐůĞϭ 'ĞŶĞƌĂůdĞƌŵƐĐŽŶƚƌŽůŽǀĞƌĂŶLJĐŽŶŇŝĐƟŶŐƚĞƌŵƐ͘tŚĞƌĞƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŝƐƐŝůĞŶƚŽŶĂŶLJƐubject, WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJĂŶĚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌƌĞƚĂŝŶƚŚĞĂďŝůŝƚLJƚŽŶĞŐŽƟĂƚĞŵƵƚƵĂůůLJĂĐĐĞƉƚĂďůĞƚĞƌŵƐ. 1) WƵƌƉŽƐĞ͘ Pursuant to Minnesota law, tŚĞ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŽĂƌĚŽĨŝƌĞĐƚŽƌƐŚĂƐĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚ ĂŽŽƉĞƌĂƟǀĞ Purchasing Program designed to provide PĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐǁŝƚŚĂĐĐĞƐƐƚŽĐŽŵƉĞƟƟǀĞůLJĂǁĂƌĚĞĚ ĐŽŽƉĞƌĂƟǀĞƉƵƌĐŚĂƐŝŶŐagreements͘dŽĨĂĐŝůŝƚĂƚĞƚŚĞWƌŽŐƌĂŵ͕^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůhas awarded Supplier this ĐŽŽƉĞƌĂƟǀĞƉƵƌĐŚĂƐŝŶŐDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐĂĐŽŵƉĞƟƟǀĞƉƌŽĐƵƌĞŵĞŶƚƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŝŶƚĞŶĚĞĚƚŽ ŵĞĞƚĐŽŵƉůŝĂŶĐĞƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐŝŶĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚDŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂůĂǁĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĞĚ herein. 2) /ŶƚĞŶƚ͘ dŚĞŝŶƚĞŶƚŽĨƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŝƐƚŽĚĞĮŶĞƚŚĞƌŽůĞƐŽĨ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͕ĂŶĚ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJĂƐŝƚƌĞůĂƚĞƐƚŽ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͛ƐŽŽƉĞƌĂƟǀĞWƵƌĐŚĂƐŝŶŐWƌŽŐƌĂŵ͘ ϯͿ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJĐĐĞƐƐ͘ ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͛ƐCŽŽƉĞƌĂƟǀĞPurchasing Program Master Agreements are ĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞƚŽĞůŝŐŝďůĞƉƵďůŝĐĂŐĞŶĐŝĞƐ;WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐͿ. WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ͛ƐĂƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJƚŽĂĐĐĞƐƐ ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͛ƐCŽŽƉĞƌĂƟǀĞPurchasing PƌŽŐƌĂŵŝƐĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚƚŚƌŽƵŐŚƚŚĞůĂǁƐŽĨŝƚƐƌĞƐƉĞĐƟǀĞ ũƵƌŝƐĚŝĐƟŽŶ͘ 4) ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĐĐĞƐƐ͘ dŚĞ/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐŽīĞƌĞĚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŵĂLJďĞŵĂĚĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞƚŽĂŶLJ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚƐƚŚĂƚĂWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ͛ƐƵƐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŝƐĂƚƚŚĞ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ͛ƐƐŽůĞĐŽŶǀĞŶŝĞŶĐĞ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁŝůůĞĚƵĐĂƚĞŝƚƐƐĂůĞƐĂŶĚƐĞƌǀŝĐĞĨŽƌĐĞƐĂďŽƵƚ 188 120324-TOT v052824 2 ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĞůŝŐŝďŝůŝƚLJƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĂŶĚƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĂƟŽŶ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁŝůůďĞƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďůĞĨŽƌ ĞŶƐƵƌŝŶŐƐĂůĞƐĂƌĞǁŝƚŚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐ. 5) dĞƌŵ͘ dŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŝƐĞīĞĐƟǀĞƵƉŽŶƚŚĞĚĂƚĞŽĨƚŚĞĮŶĂůƐŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞďĞůŽǁ͘dŚĞƚĞƌŵŽĨƚŚŝƐ ŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŝƐĨŽƵƌ;ϰͿLJĞĂƌƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞĞīĞĐƟǀĞĚĂƚĞ͘dŚĞŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĞdžƉŝƌĞƐĂƚϭϭ͗ϱϵW͘D͘ĞŶƚƌĂů Time on April 4, 2029, ƵŶůĞƐƐŝƚŝƐĐĂŶĐĞůůĞĚŽƌĞdžƚĞŶĚĞĚĂƐĚĞĮŶĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘ a) džƚĞŶƐŝŽŶƐ͘ Sourcewell and Supplier may agree to up to three ;ϯͿ ĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůŽŶĞ-year extensions ďĞLJŽŶĚƚŚĞŽƌŝŐŝŶĂůĨŽƵƌ-LJĞĂƌƚĞƌŵ͘dŚĞƚŽƚĂůƉŽƐƐŝďůĞůĞŶŐƚŚŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚǁŝůůďĞƐĞǀĞŶ(7) LJĞĂƌƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞĞīĞĐƟǀĞĚĂƚĞ͘ b) džĐĞƉƟŽŶĂůŝƌĐƵŵƐƚĂŶĐĞƐ͘ ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůƌĞƚĂŝŶƐƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƚŽĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůĞdžƚĞŶƐŝŽŶƐĂƐ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƵŶĚĞƌĞdžĐĞƉƟŽŶĂůĐŝƌĐƵŵƐƚĂŶĐĞƐ͘ 6) ^ƵƌǀŝǀĂůŽĨdĞƌŵƐ͘ EŽƚǁŝƚŚƐƚĂŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͕ƚŚĞŽďůŝŐĂƟŽŶƐŽĨƚŚŝƐ ŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚǁŝůůĐŽŶƟŶƵĞƚŚƌŽƵŐŚƚŚĞƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞƉĞƌŝŽĚŽĨĂŶLJƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶĞŶƚĞƌĞĚbetween ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚĂŶLJWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJďĞĨŽƌĞƚŚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶĚĂƚĞ͘ 7) ^ĐŽƉĞ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŝƐĂǁĂƌĚĞĚĂDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚĞƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐŝĚĞŶƟĮĞĚŝŶRFP #ϭϮϬϯϮϰ ƚŽWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐ͘/Ŷ^ĐŽƉĞƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐŝŶĐůƵĚĞ͗ a) ZĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĂů͕ĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂů͕ĂŶĚŝŶƐƟƚƵƟŽŶĂů-ƐŝnjĞĚƌĞĨƵƐĞĂŶĚƌĞĐLJĐůŝŶŐĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĞƌƐ͕ĐŽůůĞĐƟŽŶďŝŶƐ͕ ĚƵŵƉƐƚĞƌƐ͕ĂŶĚĐĂƌƚƐŽĨƉƌŝŶĐŝƉĂůůLJŶŽŶ-ŵĞƚĂůůŝĐĐŽŵƉŽƐŝƟŽŶ͖ b) >ŝŌĂŶĚƟƉƉŝŶŐƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐĨŽƌƐƚĂƟŽŶĂƌLJĐĂƌƚƐĂŶĚĚƵŵƉƐƚĞƌƐ͖ c) DĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ͕ƌĞƉĂŝƌ͕ĂŶĚƐŝŵŝůĂƌƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐŽĨĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĞƌƐ͖ĂŶĚ͕ d) dĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐƌĞůĂƚĞĚƚŽƚŚĞŵĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚŽĨ͕ƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐĨŽƌ͕ĂŶĚͬŽƌƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĞƐƌĞůĂƚĞĚƚŽ ĐŽůůĞĐƟŽŶŽĨƌĞĨƵƐĞĂŶĚƌĞĐLJĐůŝŶŐŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚŝŶƐƵďƐĞĐƟŽŶƐĂ͘-c., above. 8) /ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐWƌŽƉŽƐĂůƚŽƚŚĞĂďŽǀĞƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞĚZ&Wis incorporated into this Master ŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘KŶůLJƚŚŽƐĞ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐWƌŽƉŽƐĂůĂŶĚǁŝƚŚŝŶ^ĐŽƉĞ;/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐͿĂƌĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĂŶĚŵĂLJďĞŽīĞƌĞĚƚŽWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐ. 9) /ŶĚĞĮŶŝƚĞYƵĂŶƟƚLJ͘ dŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĚĞĮŶĞƐĂŶŝŶĚĞĮŶŝƚĞƋƵĂŶƟƚLJŽĨƐĂůĞƐƚŽĞůŝŐŝďůĞ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐ. 10) WƌŝĐŝŶŐ͘ WƌŝĐŝŶŐŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶ;ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐWƌŝĐŝŶŐĂŶĚĞůŝǀĞƌLJĂŶĚWƌŝĐŝŶŐKīĞƌĞĚtĂďůĞƐͿĨŽƌĂůů/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐǁŝƚŚŝŶ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐWƌŽƉŽƐĂůŝƐŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚŝŶƚŽƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘ 11) EŽƚƚŽ džĐĞĞĚWƌŝĐŝŶŐ͘ Suppliers may not exceed the prices listed in the current Pricing List ŽŶĮůĞ with Sourcewell ǁŚĞŶŽīĞƌŝŶŐ/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐƚŽWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐ͘WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐŵĂLJ ƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĂĚũƵƐƚŵĞŶƚƐƚŽƉƌŝĐŝŶŐĚŝƌĞĐƚůLJĨƌŽŵ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞŶĞŐŽƟĂƟŽŶĂŶĚĞdžĞĐƵƟŽŶŽĨĂŶLJ ƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶ. 12) KƉĞŶDĂƌŬĞƚ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐŽƉĞŶŵĂƌŬĞƚƉƌŝĐŝŶŐprocess is included within its Proposal. 13) ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌZĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƟŽŶƐ͗ 189 120324-TOT v052824 3 i) ŽŵƉůŝĂŶĐĞ͘ Supplier represents and warrants it will provide all Included ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐ ƵŶĚĞƌƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŝŶĨƵůůĐŽŵƉůŝĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞĨĞĚĞƌĂů͕ƐƚĂƚĞ͕ĂŶĚůŽĐĂůůĂǁƐĂŶĚ ƌĞŐƵůĂƟŽŶƐ͘ ii) >ŝĐĞŶƐĞƐ͘ ƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁŝůůŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶĂǀĂůŝĚƐƚĂƚƵƐŽŶĂůůƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĨĞĚĞƌĂů͕ƐƚĂƚĞ͕ ĂŶĚůŽĐĂůůŝĐĞŶƐĞƐ͕ďŽŶĚƐ͕ĂŶĚƉĞƌŵŝƚƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞŽƉĞƌĂƟŽŶŽĨ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐǁŝƚŚ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐ͘WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐŵĂLJƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĂůůƌĞůĞǀĂŶƚĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĂƟŽŶĚŝƌĞĐƚůLJĨƌŽŵ Supplier. iii) ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌtĂƌƌĂŶƚƐ͘ Supplier warrants that ŽŶůLJ/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐŽĨŝƚƐŵĂŶƵĨĂĐƚƵƌĞ͕ ƐŽůĚďLJƚŚĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͕ŽƌďLJĂ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŽƌ͕ĨŽƌŶŽƌŵĂůĂŶĚŝŶƚĞŶĚĞĚƵƐĞĂŶĚ ƐĞƌǀŝĐĞĂŶĚĨŽƌƐƉĞĐŝĮĐƉĞƌŝŽĚƐĂŐĂŝŶƐƚŽƉĞƌĂƟŽŶĂůĨĂŝůƵƌĞĐĂƵƐĞĚďLJƉƌŽǀĞŶĚĞĨĞĐƟǀĞŵĂƚĞƌŝĂů ŽƌǁŽƌŬŵĂŶƐŚŝƉ͘ /ŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶ͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁĂƌƌĂŶƚƐƚŚĞ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐĂƌĞƐƵŝƚĂďůĞĨŽƌĂŶĚǁŝůůƉĞƌĨŽƌŵŝŶ ĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŽƌĚŝŶĂƌLJƵƐĞĨŽƌǁŚŝĐŚƚŚĞLJĂƌĞŝŶƚĞŶĚĞĚ͘ 14) ĂŶŬƌƵƉƚĐLJEŽƟĐĞƐ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĐĞƌƟĮĞƐĂŶĚǁĂƌƌĂŶƚƐŝƚŝƐŶŽƚĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůLJŝŶĂďĂŶŬƌƵƉƚĐLJƉƌŽĐĞĞĚŝŶŐ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŚĂƐĚŝƐĐůŽƐĞĚĂůůĐƵƌƌĞŶƚĂŶĚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚďĂŶŬƌƵƉƚĐLJƉƌŽĐĞĞĚŝŶŐƐǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞƉĂƐƚƐĞǀĞŶLJĞĂƌƐ ǁŝƚŚŝŶŝƚƐWƌŽƉŽƐĂů͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵƵƐƚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞŶŽƟĐĞŝŶǁƌŝƟŶŐƚŽ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŝĨŝƚĞŶƚĞƌƐĂďĂŶŬƌƵƉƚĐLJ ƉƌŽĐĞĞĚŝŶŐĂƚĂŶLJƟŵĞĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘ 15) ĞďĂƌŵĞŶƚĂŶĚ^ƵƐƉĞŶƐŝŽŶ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĐĞƌƟĮĞƐĂŶĚǁĂƌƌĂŶƚƐƚŚĂƚŶĞŝƚŚĞƌŝƚŶŽƌŝƚƐƉƌŝŶĐŝƉĂůƐĂƌĞ ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚůLJĚĞďĂƌƌĞĚ͕ƐƵƐƉĞŶĚĞĚ͕ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĨŽƌĚĞďĂƌŵĞŶƚ͕ĚĞĐůĂƌĞĚŝŶĞůŝŐŝďůĞ͕ŽƌǀŽůƵŶƚĂƌŝůLJĞdžĐůƵĚĞĚ ĨƌŽŵƉƌŽŐƌĂŵƐŽƉĞƌĂƚĞĚďLJƚŚĞ^ƚĂƚĞŽĨDŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂ͕ƚŚĞhŶŝƚĞĚ^ƚĂƚĞƐĨĞĚĞƌĂůŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞnt, or any WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĐĞƌƟĮĞƐĂŶĚǁĂƌƌĂŶƚƐƚŚĂƚŶĞŝƚŚĞƌŝƚŶŽƌŝƚƐƉƌŝŶĐŝƉĂůƐŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶ ĐŽŶǀŝĐƚĞĚŽĨĂĐƌŝŵŝŶĂůŽīĞŶƐĞƌĞůĂƚĞĚƚŽƚŚĞƐƵďũĞĐƚŵĂƩĞƌŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĨƵƌƚŚĞƌ warrants that it will pƌŽǀŝĚĞŝŵŵĞĚŝĂƚĞǁƌŝƩĞŶŶŽƟĐĞƚŽ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŝĨƚŚŝƐĐĞƌƟĮĐĂƟŽŶĐŚĂŶŐĞƐĂƚ ĂŶLJƟŵĞĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘ 16) WƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐĨŽƌŶŽŶ-hŶŝƚĞĚ^ƚĂƚĞƐĨĞĚĞƌĂůĞŶƟƚLJƉƌŽĐƵƌĞŵĞŶƚƐƵŶĚĞƌhŶŝƚĞĚ^ƚĂƚĞƐĨĞĚĞƌĂůĂǁĂƌĚƐ ŽƌŽƚŚĞƌĂǁĂƌĚƐ;ƉƉĞŶĚŝdžII ƚŽϮ͘&͘ZΑϮϬϬͿ͘ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐƚŚĂƚƵƐĞhŶŝƚĞĚ^ƚĂƚĞƐĨĞĚĞƌĂů ŐƌĂŶƚŽƌŽƚŚĞƌĨĞĚĞƌĂůĨƵŶĚŝŶŐƚŽƉƵƌĐŚĂƐĞƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐĨƌŽŵƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŵĂLJďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽ ĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŽĐƵƌĞŵĞŶƚƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐŽĨƚŚĞhŶŝĨŽƌŵĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ͕ŽƐƚWƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞƐĂŶĚƵĚŝƚZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĨŽƌ&ĞĚĞƌĂůǁĂƌĚƐ͕Ϯ͘&͘Z͘ΑϮϬϬ͘ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐŵĂLJŚĂǀĞĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐďĂƐĞĚŽŶƐƉĞĐŝĮĐĨƵŶĚŝŶŐƐŽƵƌĐĞƚĞƌŵƐŽƌ ĐŽŶĚŝƟŽŶƐ͘tŝƚŚŝŶƚŚŝƐ^ĞĐƟŽŶ͕ĂůůƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƐƚŽ͞ĨĞĚĞƌĂů͟ƐŚŽƵůĚďĞŝŶƚĞƌƉƌĞƚĞĚƚŽŵĞĂŶƚŚĞhŶŝƚĞĚ ^ƚĂƚĞƐĨĞĚĞƌĂůŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚ͘dŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐůŝƐƚĂƉƉůŝĞƐǁŚĞŶĂWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJĂĐĐĞƐƐĞƐ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛s /ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐǁŝƚŚhŶŝƚĞĚ^ƚĂƚĞƐĨĞĚĞƌĂůĨƵŶĚƐ͘ i) Yh> DW>KzD EdKWWKZdhE/dz͘ džĐĞƉƚĂƐŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚƵŶĚĞƌϰϭ͘&͘Z͘Α ϲϬ͕ĂůůĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƐƚŚĂƚŵĞĞƚƚŚĞĚĞĮŶŝƟŽŶŽĨ͞ĨĞĚĞƌĂůůLJĂƐƐŝƐƚĞĚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚ͟ŝŶϰϭ ͘&͘Z͘ΑϲϬ-ϭ͘ϯŵƵƐƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞƚŚĞĞƋƵĂůŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJĐůĂƵƐĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚƵŶĚĞƌϰϭ͘&͘Z͘ΑϲϬ-1.4(b), in accordance wiƚŚ džĞĐƵƟǀĞKƌĚĞƌϭϭϮϰϲ͕͞ ƋƵĂů ŵƉůŽLJŵĞŶƚKƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJ͟;ϯϬ&ZϭϮϯϭϵ͕ϭϮϵϯϱ͕ ϯ͘&͘Z͘Α͕ϭϵϲϰ-ϭϵϲϱŽŵƉ͕͘Ɖ͘ϯϯϵͿ͕ĂƐĂŵĞŶĚĞĚďLJ džĞĐƵƟǀĞKƌĚĞƌϭϭϯϳϱ͕͞ŵĞŶĚŝŶŐ džĞĐƵƟǀĞKƌĚĞƌϭϭϮϰϲZĞůĂƟŶŐƚŽ ƋƵĂů ŵƉůŽLJŵĞŶƚKƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJ͕͟ ĂŶĚŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƟŶŐ ƌĞŐƵůĂƟŽŶƐĂƚϰϭ͘&͘Z͘ΑϲϬ͕͞KĸĐĞŽĨ&ĞĚĞƌĂůŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽŵƉůŝĂŶĐĞWƌŽŐƌĂŵƐ͕ ƋƵĂů ŵƉůŽLJŵĞŶƚKƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJ͕ĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚŽĨ>ĂďŽƌ͘͟dŚĞĞƋƵĂůŽƉƉŽƌƚƵŶŝƚLJĐůĂƵƐĞŝƐŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚ ŚĞƌĞŝŶďLJƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞ͘ 190 120324-TOT v052824 4 ii) DAVIS-KEd͕^D E ;ϰϬh͘^͘͘Αϯϭϰϭ-ϯϭϰϴͿ͘ tŚĞŶƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚďLJĨĞĚĞƌĂů ƉƌŽŐƌĂŵůĞŐŝƐůĂƟŽŶ͕ĂůůƉƌŝŵĞĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚƐŝŶĞdžĐĞƐƐŽĨΨϮ͕ϬϬϬĂǁĂƌĚĞĚďLJŶŽŶ-ĨĞĚĞƌĂů ĞŶƟƟĞƐŵƵƐƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶĨŽƌĐŽŵƉůŝĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĂǀŝƐ-ĂĐŽŶĐƚ;ϰϬh͘^͘͘Αϯϭϰϭ- ϯϭϰϰ͕ĂŶĚϯϭϰϲ-ϯϭϰϴͿĂƐƐƵƉƉůĞŵĞŶƚĞĚďLJĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚŽĨ>ĂďŽƌƌĞŐƵůĂƟŽŶƐ;Ϯϵ͘&͘Z͘Αϱ͕ ͞>ĂďŽƌ^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐWƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƚŽŽŶƚƌĂĐƚƐŽǀĞƌŝŶŐ&ĞĚĞƌĂůůLJ&ŝŶĂŶĐĞĚĂŶĚƐƐŝƐƚĞĚ ŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶ͟Ϳ͘/ŶĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐƚĂƚƵƚĞ͕ĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐŵƵƐƚ ďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƚŽƉĂLJǁĂŐĞƐƚŽ ůĂďŽƌĞƌƐĂŶĚŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐƐĂƚĂƌĂƚĞŶŽƚůĞƐƐƚŚĂŶƚŚĞƉƌĞǀĂŝůŝŶŐǁĂŐĞƐƐƉĞĐŝĮĞĚŝŶĂǁĂŐĞ ĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶŵĂĚĞďLJƚŚĞ^ĞĐƌĞƚĂƌLJŽĨ>ĂďŽƌ͘/ŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶ͕ĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐŵƵƐƚďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƚŽƉĂLJ ǁĂŐĞƐŶŽƚůĞƐƐƚŚĂŶŽŶĐĞĂǁĞĞŬ͘dŚĞŶŽŶ-ĨĞĚĞƌĂůĞŶƟƚLJŵƵƐƚƉůĂĐĞĂĐŽƉLJŽĨƚŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚ ƉƌĞǀĂŝůŝŶŐǁĂŐĞĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶŝƐƐƵĞĚďLJƚŚĞĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚŽĨ>ĂďŽƌŝŶĞĂĐŚƐŽůŝĐŝƚĂƟŽŶ͘dŚĞ ĚĞĐŝƐŝŽŶƚŽĂǁĂƌĚĂĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐƵďĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŵƵƐƚďĞĐŽŶĚŝƟŽŶĞĚƵƉŽŶƚŚĞĂĐĐĞƉƚĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚĞ ǁĂŐĞĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶ͘dŚĞŶŽŶ-ĨĞĚĞƌĂůĞŶƟƚLJŵƵƐƚƌĞƉŽƌƚĂůůƐƵƐƉĞĐƚĞĚŽƌƌĞƉŽƌƚĞĚǀŝŽůĂƟŽŶƐƚŽ ƚŚĞĨĞĚĞƌĂůĂǁĂƌĚŝŶŐĂŐĞŶĐLJ͘dŚĞĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚƐŵƵƐƚĂůƐŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶĨŽƌĐŽŵƉůŝĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ ŽƉĞůĂŶĚ͞ŶƟ-<ŝĐŬďĂĐŬ͟Đƚ;ϰϬh͘^͘͘ΑϯϭϰϱͿ͕ĂƐƐƵƉƉůĞŵĞŶƚĞĚďLJĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚŽĨ>ĂďŽƌ regulaƟŽŶƐ;Ϯϵ͘&͘Z͘Αϯ͕͞ŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐĂŶĚ^ƵďĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐŽŶWƵďůŝĐƵŝůĚŝŶŐŽƌWƵďůŝĐtŽƌŬ &ŝŶĂŶĐĞĚŝŶtŚŽůĞŽƌŝŶWĂƌƚďLJ>ŽĂŶƐŽƌ'ƌĂŶƚƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞhŶŝƚĞĚ^ƚĂƚĞƐ͟Ϳ͘dŚĞĐƚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƐƚŚĂƚ ĞĂĐŚĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌŽƌƐƵďƌĞĐŝƉŝĞŶƚŵƵƐƚďĞƉƌŽŚŝďŝƚĞĚĨƌŽŵŝŶĚƵĐŝŶŐ͕ďLJĂŶLJ means, any person ĞŵƉůŽLJĞĚŝŶƚŚĞĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶ͕ĐŽŵƉůĞƟŽŶ͕ŽƌƌĞƉĂŝƌŽĨƉƵďůŝĐǁŽƌŬ͕ƚŽŐŝǀĞƵƉĂŶLJƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞ ĐŽŵƉĞŶƐĂƟŽŶƚŽǁŚŝĐŚŚĞŽƌƐŚĞŝƐŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞĞŶƟƚůĞĚ͘dŚĞŶŽŶ-ĨĞĚĞƌĂůĞŶƟƚLJŵƵƐƚƌĞƉŽƌƚĂůů ƐƵƐƉĞĐƚĞĚŽƌƌĞƉŽƌƚĞĚǀŝŽůĂƟŽŶƐƚŽƚŚĞĨĞĚĞƌĂůawarding agency. Supplier must comply with all ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞĂǀŝƐ-Bacon Act provisions. iii) KEdZdtKZ<,KhZ^E^& dz^dEZ^d;ϰϬh͘^͘͘ΑϯϳϬϭ-ϯϳϬϴͿ͘ tŚĞƌĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͕ĂůůĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚƐĂǁĂƌĚĞĚďLJƚŚĞŶŽŶ-ĨĞĚĞƌĂůĞŶƟƚLJŝŶĞdžĐĞƐƐŽĨΨϭϬϬ͕ϬϬϬƚŚĂƚ ŝŶǀŽůǀĞƚŚĞĞŵƉůŽLJŵĞŶƚŽĨŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐƐŽƌůĂďŽƌĞƌƐŵƵƐƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶĨŽƌĐŽŵƉůŝĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚ ϰϬh͘^͘͘ΑΑϯϳϬϮĂŶĚϯϳϬϰ͕ĂƐƐƵƉƉůĞŵĞŶƚĞĚďLJĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚŽĨ>ĂďŽƌƌĞŐƵůĂƟŽŶƐ;Ϯϵ͘&͘Z͘ΑϱͿ͘ hŶĚĞƌϰϬh͘^͘͘ΑϯϳϬϮŽĨƚŚĞĐƚ͕ĞĂĐŚĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌŵƵƐƚďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƚŽĐŽŵƉƵƚĞƚŚĞǁĂŐĞƐŽĨ ĞǀĞƌLJŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂŶĚůĂďŽƌĞƌŽŶƚŚĞďĂƐŝƐŽĨĂƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚǁŽƌŬǁĞĞŬŽĨϰϬŚŽƵƌƐ͘tŽƌŬŝŶĞdžĐĞƐƐŽĨ ƚŚĞƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚǁŽƌŬǁĞĞŬŝƐƉĞƌŵŝƐƐŝďůĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚƚŚĂƚƚŚĞǁŽƌŬĞƌŝƐĐŽŵƉĞŶƐĂƚĞĚĂƚĂƌĂƚĞŽĨŶŽƚ ůĞƐƐƚŚĂŶŽŶĞĂŶĚĂŚĂůĨƟŵĞƐƚŚĞďĂƐŝĐƌĂƚĞŽĨƉĂLJĨŽƌĂůůŚŽƵƌƐǁŽƌŬĞĚŝŶĞdžĐĞƐƐŽĨϰϬŚŽƵƌƐŝŶ ƚŚĞǁŽƌŬǁĞĞŬ͘dŚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŽĨϰϬh͘^͘͘ΑϯϳϬϰĂƌĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƚŽĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶǁŽƌŬĂŶĚ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚĂƚŶŽůĂďŽƌĞƌŽƌŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐŵƵƐƚďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƚŽǁŽƌŬŝŶƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƐŽƌƵŶĚĞƌǁŽƌŬŝŶŐ ĐŽŶĚŝƟŽŶƐǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞƵŶƐĂŶŝƚĂƌLJ͕ŚĂnjĂƌĚŽƵƐŽƌĚĂŶŐĞƌŽƵƐ͘dŚĞƐĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĚŽŶŽƚĂƉƉůLJƚŽ the purchases ŽĨƐƵƉƉůŝĞƐ͕ŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͕ŽƌĂƌƟĐůĞƐŽƌĚŝŶĂƌŝůLJĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞŽŶƚŚĞŽƉĞŶŵĂƌŬĞƚ͕Žƌ ĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚƐĨŽƌƚƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƟŽŶŽƌƚƌĂŶƐŵŝƐƐŝŽŶŽĨŝŶƚĞůůŝŐĞŶĐĞ͘dŚŝƐƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶŝƐŚĞƌĞďLJŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚ ďLJƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞŝŶƚŽƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĐĞƌƟĮĞƐƚŚĂƚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵŽĨĂŶĂǁĂƌĚĨŽƌĂůů ŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƐďLJ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůƌĞƐƵůƟŶŐĨƌŽŵƚŚŝƐƉƌŽĐƵƌĞŵĞŶƚƉƌŽĐĞƐƐ͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵƵƐƚĐŽŵƉůLJǁŝƚŚ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĂƐƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞĚĂďŽǀĞ͘ iv) Z/',d^dK/Es Ed/KE^D hE ZKEdZdKZ'Z D Ed͘ /ĨƚŚĞĨĞĚĞƌĂů ĂǁĂƌĚŵĞĞƚƐƚŚĞĚĞĮŶŝƟŽŶŽĨ͞ĨƵŶĚŝŶŐĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͟ƵŶĚĞƌϯϳ͘&͘Z͘ΑϰϬϭ͘Ϯ;ĂͿĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞĐŝƉŝĞŶƚ ŽƌƐƵďƌĞĐŝƉŝĞŶƚǁŝƐŚĞƐƚŽĞŶƚĞƌŝŶƚŽĂĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚǁŝƚŚĂƐŵĂůůďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĮƌŵŽƌŶŽŶƉƌŽĮƚ ŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƟŽŶƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚĞƐƵďƐƟƚƵƟŽŶŽĨƉĂƌƟĞƐ͕ĂƐƐŝŐŶŵĞŶƚŽƌƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞŽĨĞdžƉĞƌŝŵĞŶƚĂů͕ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂů͕ŽƌƌĞƐĞĂƌĐŚǁŽƌŬƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĂƚ͞ĨƵŶĚŝŶŐĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͕͟ƚŚĞƌĞĐŝƉŝĞŶƚŽƌƐƵďƌĞĐŝƉŝĞŶƚ ŵƵƐƚĐŽŵƉůLJǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŽĨϯϳ͘&͘Z͘ΑϰϬϭ͕͞ZŝŐŚƚƐƚŽ/ŶǀĞŶƟŽŶƐDĂĚĞďLJEŽŶƉƌŽĮƚ KƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƟŽŶƐĂŶĚ^ŵĂůůƵƐŝŶĞƐƐ&ŝƌŵƐhŶĚĞƌ'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚ'ƌĂŶƚƐ͕ŽŶƚƌĂĐƚƐĂŶĚŽŽƉĞƌĂƟǀĞ ŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƐ͕͟ĂŶĚĂŶLJŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƟŶŐƌĞŐƵůĂƟŽŶƐŝƐƐƵĞĚďLJƚŚĞĂǁĂƌĚŝŶŐĂŐĞŶĐLJ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ 191 120324-TOT v052824 5 ĐĞƌƟĮĞƐƚŚĂƚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵŽĨĂŶĂǁĂƌĚĨŽƌĂůůŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƐďLJ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůƌĞƐƵůƟŶŐĨƌŽŵƚŚŝƐ ƉƌŽĐƵƌĞŵĞŶƚƉƌŽĐĞƐƐ͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵƵƐƚĐŽŵƉůLJǁŝƚŚĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĂƐƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞĚĂďŽǀĞ͘ v) > E/Zd;ϰϮh͘^͘͘ΑϳϰϬϭ-ϳϲϳϭY͘ͿEd, & Z>td ZWK>>hd/KE KEdZK>d;ϯϯh͘^͘͘ΑϭϮϱϭ-ϭϯϴϳͿ͘ ŽŶƚƌĂĐƚƐĂŶĚƐƵďŐƌĂŶƚƐŽĨĂŵŽƵŶƚƐŝŶĞdžĐĞƐƐŽĨ ΨϭϱϬ͕ϬϬϬƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƚŚĞŶŽŶ-ĨĞĚĞƌĂůĂǁĂƌĚƚŽĂŐƌĞĞƚŽĐŽŵƉůLJǁŝƚŚĂůůĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐ͕ŽƌĚĞƌƐ ŽƌƌĞŐƵůĂƟŽŶƐŝƐƐƵĞĚƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽƚŚĞůĞĂŶŝƌĐƚ;ϰϮh͘^͘͘ΑϳϰϬϭ- ϳϲϳϭƋͿĂŶĚƚŚĞ&ĞĚĞƌĂů tĂƚĞƌWŽůůƵƟŽŶŽŶƚƌŽůĐƚĂƐĂŵĞŶĚĞĚ;ϯϯh͘^͘͘ΑϭϮϱϭ- ϭϯϴϳͿ͘sŝŽůĂƟŽŶƐŵƵƐƚďĞƌĞƉŽƌƚĞĚƚŽ ƚŚĞ&ĞĚĞƌĂůĂǁĂƌĚŝŶŐĂŐĞŶĐLJĂŶĚƚŚĞZĞŐŝŽŶĂůKĸĐĞŽĨƚŚĞ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůWƌŽƚĞĐƟŽŶŐĞŶĐLJ ; WͿ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĐĞƌƟĮĞƐƚŚĂƚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŝƚǁŝůůĐŽŵƉůLJǁŝƚŚĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĂƐƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞĚĂďŽǀĞ͘ vi) ZD EdE^h^W E^/KE; y hd/s KZ Z^ϭϮϱϰϵEϭϮϲϴϵͿ͘ A contract ĂǁĂƌĚ;ƐĞĞϮ͘&͘Z͘ΑϭϴϬ͘ϮϮϬͿŵƵƐƚŶŽƚďĞŵĂĚĞƚŽƉĂƌƟĞƐůŝƐƚĞĚŽŶƚŚĞŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚǁŝĚĞ ĞdžĐůƵƐŝŽŶƐŝŶƚŚĞ^LJƐƚĞŵĨŽƌǁĂƌĚDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ;^DͿ͕ŝŶĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞKDŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞƐ ĂƚϮ͘&͘Z͘ΑϭϴϬƚŚĂƚŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚ džĞĐƵƟǀĞKƌĚĞƌƐϭϮϱϰϵ;ϯ͘&͘Z͘ΑϭϵϴϲŽŵƉ͕͘Ɖ͘ϭϴϵͿĂŶĚ ϭϮϲϴϵ;ϯ͘&͘Z͘ΑϭϵϴϵŽŵƉ͕͘Ɖ͘ϮϯϱͿ͕͞ĞďĂƌŵĞŶƚĂŶĚ^ƵƐƉĞŶƐŝŽŶ͘͟^D džĐůƵƐŝŽŶƐĐŽŶƚĂŝŶƐ ƚŚĞŶĂŵĞƐŽĨƉĂƌƟĞƐĚĞďĂƌƌĞĚ͕ƐƵƐƉĞŶĚĞĚ͕ŽƌŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞĞdžĐůƵĚĞĚďLJĂŐĞŶĐŝĞƐ͕ĂƐǁĞůůĂƐƉĂƌƟĞƐ ĚĞĐůĂƌĞĚŝŶĞůŝŐŝďůĞƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂƚƵƚŽƌLJŽƌƌĞŐƵůĂƚŽƌLJĂƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJŽƚŚĞƌƚŚĂŶ džĞĐƵƟǀĞKƌĚĞƌϭϮϱϰϵ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĐĞƌƟĮĞƐƚŚĂƚŶĞŝƚŚĞƌŝƚŶŽƌŝƚƐƉƌŝŶĐŝƉĂůƐĂƌĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚůLJĚĞďĂƌƌĞĚ͕ƐƵƐƉĞŶĚĞĚ͕ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ĨŽƌĚĞďĂƌŵĞŶƚ͕ĚĞĐůĂƌĞĚŝŶĞůŝŐŝďůĞ͕ŽƌǀŽůƵŶƚĂƌŝůLJĞdžĐůƵĚĞĚĨƌŽŵƉĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŽŶďLJĂŶLJĨĞĚĞƌĂů department or agency. vii) BYRD ANTI->Kz/E'D ED Ed͕^D E ;ϯϭh͘^͘͘ΑϭϯϱϮͿ͘ Suppliers must ĮůĞĂŶLJƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĐĞƌƟĮĐĂƟŽŶƐ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌƐŵƵƐƚŶŽƚŚĂǀĞƵƐĞĚĨĞĚĞƌĂůĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĚĨƵŶĚƐƚŽƉĂLJ ĂŶLJƉĞƌƐŽŶŽƌŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƟŽŶĨŽƌŝŶŇƵĞŶĐŝŶŐŽƌĂƩĞŵƉƟŶŐƚŽŝŶŇƵĞŶĐĞĂŶŽĸĐĞƌŽƌĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞŽĨ ĂŶLJĂŐĞŶĐLJ͕ĂŵĞŵďĞƌŽĨŽŶŐƌĞƐƐ͕ŽĸĐĞƌŽƌĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞŽĨŽŶŐƌĞƐƐ͕ŽƌĂŶĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞŽĨĂ ŵĞŵďĞƌŽĨŽŶŐƌĞƐƐŝŶĐŽŶŶĞĐƟŽŶǁŝƚŚŽďƚĂŝŶŝŶŐĂŶLJĨĞĚĞƌĂůĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚ͕ŐƌĂŶƚ͕ŽƌĂŶLJŽƚŚĞƌ ĂǁĂƌĚĐŽǀĞƌĞĚďLJϯϭh͘^͘͘ΑϭϯϱϮ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌƐŵƵƐƚĚŝƐĐůŽƐĞĂŶLJůŽďbying with non-ĨĞĚĞƌĂůĨƵŶĚƐ ƚŚĂƚƚĂŬĞƐƉůĂĐĞŝŶĐŽŶŶĞĐƟŽŶǁŝƚŚŽďƚĂŝŶŝŶŐĂŶLJĨĞĚĞƌĂůĂǁĂƌĚ͘^ƵĐŚĚŝƐĐůŽƐƵƌĞƐĂƌĞĨŽƌǁĂƌĚĞĚ ĨƌŽŵƟĞƌƚŽƟĞƌƵƉƚŽƚŚĞŶŽŶ-ĨĞĚĞƌĂůĂǁĂƌĚ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌƐŵƵƐƚĮůĞĂůůĐĞƌƟĮĐĂƟŽŶƐĂŶĚĚŝƐĐůŽƐƵƌĞƐ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚďLJ͕ĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞĐŽŵƉůLJǁŝƚŚ͕ƚŚĞLJƌĚŶƟ->ŽďďLJŝŶŐŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚ;ϯϭh͘^͘͘ΑϭϯϱϮͿ͘ viii) Z KZZ d Ed/KEZ Yh/Z D Ed^͘To the extent applicable, Supplier must comply ǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƌĞĐŽƌĚƌĞƚĞŶƟŽŶƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚŝŶϮ͘&͘Z͘ΑϮϬϬ͘ϯϯϯ͘dŚĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĨƵƌƚŚĞƌ ĐĞƌƟĮĞƐƚŚĂƚŝƚǁŝůůƌĞƚĂŝŶĂůůƌĞĐŽƌĚƐĂƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚďLJϮ͘&͘Z͘ΑϮϬϬ͘ϯϯϯĨŽƌĂƉĞƌŝŽĚŽĨϯLJĞĂƌƐĂŌĞƌ grantees or ƐƵďŐƌĂŶƚĞĞƐƐƵďŵŝƚĮŶĂůĞdžƉĞŶĚŝƚƵƌĞƌĞƉŽƌƚƐŽƌƋƵĂƌƚĞƌůLJŽƌĂŶŶƵĂůĮŶĂŶĐŝĂů ƌĞƉŽƌƚƐ͕ĂƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͕ĂŶĚĂůůŽƚŚĞƌƉĞŶĚŝŶŐŵĂƩĞƌƐĂƌĞĐůŽƐĞĚ͘ ix) E Z'zWK>/zEKE^ Zsd/KEdKDW>/E ͘ To the extent applicable, ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵƵƐƚĐŽŵƉůLJǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŵĂŶĚĂƚŽƌLJƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĂŶĚƉŽůŝĐŝĞƐƌĞůĂƟŶŐƚŽĞŶĞƌŐLJĞĸĐŝĞŶĐLJ ǁŚŝĐŚĂƌĞĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĞĚŝŶƚŚĞƐƚĂƚĞĞŶĞƌŐLJĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶƉůĂŶŝƐƐƵĞĚŝŶĐŽŵƉůŝĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ ŶĞƌŐLJ WŽůŝĐLJĂŶĚŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶĐƚ͘ x) hzD Z/EWZKs/^/KE^KDW>/E ͘ To the extent applicable, Supplier must ĐŽŵƉůLJǁŝƚŚĂůůĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞƵLJŵĞƌŝĐĂŶĐƚ͘WƵƌĐŚĂƐĞƐŵĂĚĞŝŶĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞ ǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƵLJŵĞƌŝĐĂŶĐƚŵƵƐƚĨŽůůŽǁƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƉƌŽĐƵƌĞŵĞŶƚƌƵůĞƐĐĂůůŝŶŐĨŽƌĨƌĞĞĂŶĚ ŽƉĞŶĐŽŵƉĞƟƟŽŶ͘ 192 120324-TOT v052824 6 xi) ^^dKZ KZ^;Ϯ͘&͘Z͘ΑϮϬϬ͘ϯϯϲͿ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŐƌĞĞƐƚŚĂƚĚƵůLJĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚ ƌĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƟǀĞƐŽĨĂĨĞĚĞƌĂůĂŐĞŶĐLJŵƵƐƚŚĂǀĞĂĐĐĞƐƐƚŽĂŶLJŬƐ͕ĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ͕ƉĂƉĞƌƐĂŶĚ ƌĞĐŽƌĚƐŽĨ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌƚŚĂƚĂƌĞĚŝƌĞĐƚůLJƉĞƌƟŶĞŶƚƚŽ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐĚŝƐĐŚĂƌŐĞŽĨŝƚƐŽďůŝŐĂƟŽŶƐƵŶĚĞƌƚŚŝƐ ŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƵƌƉŽƐĞŽĨŵĂŬŝŶŐĂƵĚŝƚƐ͕ĞdžĂŵŝŶĂƟŽŶƐ͕ĞdžĐĞƌƉƚƐ͕ĂŶĚƚƌĂŶƐĐƌŝƉƟŽŶƐ͘dŚĞ ƌŝŐŚƚĂůƐŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞƐƟŵĞůLJĂŶĚƌĞĂƐŽŶĂďůĞĂĐĐĞƐƐƚŽ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐƉĞƌƐŽŶŶĞůĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƵƌƉŽƐĞŽĨ ŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁĂŶĚĚŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶƌĞůĂƟŶŐƚŽƐƵĐŚĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ͘ xii) WZKhZ D EdK&Z Ks Z Dd Z/>^;Ϯ͘&͘Z͘ΑϮϬϬ͘ϯϮϮͿ͘A non-ĨĞĚĞƌĂůĞŶƟƚLJ ƚŚĂƚŝƐĂƐƚĂƚĞĂŐĞŶĐLJŽƌĂŐĞŶĐLJŽĨĂƉŽůŝƟĐĂůƐƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶŽĨĂƐƚĂƚĞĂŶĚŝƚƐĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐŵƵƐƚ ĐŽŵƉůLJǁŝƚŚ^ĞĐƟŽŶϲϬϬϮŽĨƚŚĞ^ŽůŝĚtĂƐƚĞŝƐƉŽƐĂůĐƚ͕ĂƐĂŵĞŶĚĞĚďLJƚŚĞZĞƐŽƵƌĐĞ ŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶĂŶĚZĞĐŽǀĞƌLJĐƚ͘dŚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŽĨ^ĞĐƟŽŶϲϬϬϮŝŶĐůƵĚĞƉƌŽĐƵƌŝŶŐŽŶůLJŝƚĞŵƐ ĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚŝŶŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞƐŽĨƚŚĞ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůWƌŽƚĞĐƟŽŶŐĞŶĐLJ; WͿĂƚϰϬ͘&͘Z͘ΑϮϰϳƚŚĂƚ ĐŽŶƚĂŝŶƚŚĞŚŝŐŚĞƐƚƉĞƌĐĞŶƚĂŐĞŽĨƌĞĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐƉƌĂĐƟĐĂďůĞ͕ consistent with maintaining a ƐĂƟƐĨĂĐƚŽƌLJůĞǀĞůŽĨĐŽŵƉĞƟƟŽŶ͕ǁŚĞƌĞƚŚĞƉƵƌĐŚĂƐĞƉƌŝĐĞŽĨƚŚĞŝƚĞŵĞdžĐĞĞĚƐΨϭϬ͕ϬϬϬŽƌƚŚĞ ǀĂůƵĞŽĨƚŚĞƋƵĂŶƟƚLJĂĐƋƵŝƌĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌĞĐĞĚŝŶŐĮƐĐĂůLJĞĂƌĞdžĐĞĞĚĞĚΨϭϬ͕ϬϬϬ͖ƉƌŽĐƵƌŝŶŐ solid waste management services in a mĂŶŶĞƌƚŚĂƚŵĂdžŝŵŝnjĞƐĞŶĞƌŐLJĂŶĚƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƌĞĐŽǀĞƌLJ͖ ĂŶĚĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚŝŶŐĂŶĂĸƌŵĂƟǀĞƉƌŽĐƵƌĞŵĞŶƚƉƌŽŐƌĂŵĨŽƌƉƌŽĐƵƌĞŵĞŶƚŽĨƌĞĐŽǀĞƌĞĚŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ ŝĚĞŶƟĮĞĚŝŶƚŚĞ WŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞƐ͘ xiii) & Z>^ >;^Ϳ͕>K'K^͕E&>'^͘ The Supplier cannot use the seal(s), logos, crests, ŽƌƌĞƉƌŽĚƵĐƟŽŶƐŽĨŇĂŐƐŽƌůŝŬĞŶĞƐƐĞƐŽĨ&ĞĚĞƌĂůĂŐĞŶĐLJŽĸĐŝĂůƐǁŝƚŚŽƵƚƐƉĞĐŝĮĐƉƌĞ-approval. xiv) EKK>/'d/KEz& Z>'Ks ZED Ed͘ dŚĞh͘^͘ĨĞĚĞƌĂůŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚŝƐŶŽƚĂƉĂƌƚLJ ƚŽƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŽƌĂŶLJƉƵƌĐŚĂƐĞďLJĂWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJĂŶĚŝƐŶŽƚƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽĂŶLJŽďůŝŐĂƟŽŶƐ ŽƌůŝĂďŝůŝƟĞƐƚŽƚŚĞWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͕ŽƌĂŶLJŽƚŚĞƌƉĂƌƚLJƉĞƌƚĂŝŶŝŶŐƚŽĂŶLJŵĂƩĞƌ ƌĞƐƵůƟŶŐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŽƌĂŶLJƉƵƌĐŚĂƐĞďLJĂŶĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚƵƐĞƌ͘ xv) WZK'ZD&ZhE&>^ KZ&Zhh> Ed^dd D Ed^KZZ >d d^͘ The ŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞƐƚŚĂƚϯϭh͘^͘͘Αϯϴ;ĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞZĞŵĞĚŝĞƐĨŽƌ&ĂůƐĞůĂŝŵƐĂŶĚ ^ƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚƐͿĂƉƉůŝĞƐƚŽƚŚĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐĂĐƟŽŶƐƉĞƌƚĂŝŶŝŶŐƚŽƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŽƌĂŶLJƉƵƌĐŚĂƐĞďLJĂ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ͘ xvi) & Z> d͘ dŚĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĐĞƌƟĮĞƐƚŚĂƚŝƚŝƐŶŽŶ-ĚĞůŝŶƋƵĞŶƚŝŶŝƚƐƌĞƉĂLJŵĞŶƚŽĨĂŶLJ ĨĞĚĞƌĂůĚĞďƚ͘ džĂŵƉůĞƐŽĨƌĞůĞǀĂŶƚĚĞďƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚĞůŝŶƋƵĞŶƚƉĂLJƌŽůůĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌƚĂdžĞƐ͕ĂƵĚŝƚ ĚŝƐĂůůŽǁĂŶĐĞ͕ĂŶĚďĞŶĞĮƚŽǀĞƌƉĂLJŵĞŶƚƐ͘ xvii) KE&>/d^K&/Ed Z ^d͘ dŚĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵƵƐƚŶŽƟĨLJƚŚĞh͘^͘KĸĐĞŽĨ'ĞŶĞƌĂů^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ͕ ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͕ĂŶĚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJĂƐƐŽŽŶĂƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞŝĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŽƌĂŶLJĂƐƉĞĐƚƌĞůĂƚĞĚ ƚŽƚŚĞĂŶƟĐŝƉĂƚĞĚǁŽƌŬƵŶĚĞƌƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƌĂŝƐĞƐĂŶĂĐƚƵĂůŽƌƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůĐŽŶŇŝĐƚŽĨŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ(as ĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĚŝŶϮ͘&͘Z͘WĂƌƚϮϬϬͿ͘dŚĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵƵƐƚĞdžƉůĂŝŶƚŚĞĂĐƚƵĂůŽƌƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůĐŽŶŇŝĐƚŝŶ ǁƌŝƟŶŐŝŶƐƵĸĐŝĞŶƚĚĞƚĂŝůƐŽƚŚĂƚƚŚĞh͘^͘KĸĐĞŽĨ'ĞŶĞƌĂů^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ͕^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͕ĂŶĚ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJĂƌĞĂďůĞƚŽĂƐƐĞƐƐƚŚĞĂĐƚƵĂůŽƌƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůĐŽŶŇŝĐƚ͖ĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂŶLJĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂů ŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶĂƐŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJŽƌƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚ͘ xviii) h͘^͘ y hd/s KZ ZϭϯϮϮϰ͘ The Supplier, and its subcontractors, must comply with h͘^͘ džĞĐƵƟǀĞKƌĚĞƌϭϯϮϮϰĂŶĚh͘^͘>ĂǁƐƚŚĂƚƉƌŽŚŝďŝƚƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐǁŝƚŚĂŶĚƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶŽĨ ƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐĂŶĚƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŽŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůƐĂŶĚŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƟŽŶƐĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚĞƌƌŽƌŝƐŵ͘ 193 120324-TOT v052824 7 xix) WZK,//d/KEKE Zd/Ed > KDDhE/d/KE^Es/ K^hZs />>E ^ Zs/ ^KZ Yh/WD Ed͘ dŽƚŚĞĞdžƚĞŶƚĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĐĞƌƟĮĞƐƚŚĂƚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵŽĨ ƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŝƚǁŝůůĐŽŵƉůLJǁŝƚŚĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŽĨϮ͘&͘Z͘ΑϮϬϬ͘Ϯϭϲ͘ xx) KD ^d/WZ & Z E ^&KZWZKhZ D Ed^͘ To the extent applicable, Supplier ĐĞƌƟĮĞƐƚŚĂƚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁŝůůĐŽŵƉůLJǁŝƚŚĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŽĨϮ͘&͘Z͘ΑϮϬϬ͘ϯϮϮ͘ ƌƟĐůĞϮ͗ ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂŶĚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌKďůŝŐĂƟŽŶƐ dŚĞdĞƌŵƐŝŶƚŚŝƐƌƟĐůĞϮƌĞůĂƚĞƐƉĞĐŝĮĐĂůůLJƚŽ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂŶĚŝƚƐĂĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌ ŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚǁŝƚŚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐŽďůŝŐĂƟŽŶƐƚŚĞƌĞƵŶĚĞƌ͘ 1) ƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚ^ĞůůĞƌƐ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵƵƐƚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂĐƵƌƌĞŶƚŵĞĂŶƐƚŽǀĂůŝĚĂƚĞŽƌĂƵƚŚĞŶƟĐĂƚĞ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚĚĞĂůĞƌƐ͕ĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŽƌƐ͕ŽƌƌĞƐĞůůĞƌƐǁŚŝĐŚŵĂLJĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐŽĨ/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐŽīĞƌĞĚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŵĂLJƌĞƋƵĞƐƚƵƉĚĂƚĞĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶŝŶŝƚƐ ĚŝƐĐƌĞƟŽŶ͕ĂŶĚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŐƌĞĞƐƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶǁŝƚŚŝŶĂƌĞĂƐŽŶĂďůĞƟŵĞ͘ 2) WƌŽĚƵĐƚĂŶĚWƌŝĐĞŚĂŶŐĞƐZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵĂLJƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐĐŚĂŶŐĞƐ͕ ĂĚĚŝƟŽŶƐ͕ŽƌĚĞůĞƟŽŶƐĂƚĂŶLJƟŵĞ͘ůůƌĞƋƵĞƐƚƐŵƵƐƚďĞŵĂĚĞŝŶǁƌŝƟŶŐďLJƐƵďŵŝƫŶŐĂ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů WƌŝĐĞĂŶĚWƌŽĚƵĐƚŚĂŶŐĞZĞƋƵĞƐƚ&ŽƌŵƚŽ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͘ƚĂŵŝŶŝŵƵŵ͕ƚŚĞƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŵƵƐƚ͗ x /ĚĞŶƟĨLJƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŶƵŵďĞƌ͖ x ůĞĂƌůLJƐƉĞĐŝĨLJƚŚĞƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚĐŚĂŶŐĞ͖ x WƌŽǀŝĚĞƐƵĸĐŝĞŶƚĚĞƚĂŝůƚŽũƵƐƟĨLJƚŚĞƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚĐŚĂŶŐĞ͖ x /ŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůůLJůŝƐƚĂůů/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐĂīĞĐƚĞĚďLJƚŚĞƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚĐŚĂŶŐĞ͕ĂůŽŶŐǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ ƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚĐŚĂŶŐĞ;Ğ͘Ő͕͘ĂĚĚŝƟŽŶ͕ĚĞůĞƟŽŶ͕ƉƌŝĐĞĐŚĂŶŐĞͿ͖ĂŶĚ x /ŶĐůƵĚĞĂĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞƌĞƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚŽĨWƌŝĐŝŶŐ>ŝƐƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĞīĞĐƟǀĞĚĂƚĞŽĨƚŚĞŵŽĚŝĮĞĚƉƌŝĐŝŶŐ͕ ŽƌƉƌŽĚƵĐƚĂĚĚŝƟŽŶŽƌĚĞůĞƟŽŶ͘dŚĞŶĞǁƉƌŝĐŝŶŐƌĞƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚŵƵƐƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂůů/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐŽīĞƌĞĚ͕ĞǀĞŶĨŽƌƚŚŽƐĞŝƚĞŵƐǁŚĞƌĞƉƌŝĐŝŶŐƌĞŵĂŝŶƐƵŶĐŚĂŶŐĞĚ͘ ĨƵůůLJĞdžĞĐƵƚĞĚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůWƌŝĐĞĂŶĚWƌŽĚƵĐƚŚĂŶŐĞZĞƋƵĞƐƚ&ŽƌŵǁŝůůďĞĐŽŵĞĂŶĂŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚƚŽ ƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĂŶĚǁŝůůďĞŝŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚďLJƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞ͘ ϯͿ ƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚZĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƟǀĞ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁŝůůĂƐƐŝŐŶĂŶƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚZĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƟǀĞƚŽ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĨŽƌƚŚŝƐ ŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĂŶĚŵƵƐƚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƉƌŽŵƉƚŶŽƟĐĞƚŽ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŝĨƚŚĂƚƉĞƌƐŽŶŝƐĐŚĂŶŐĞĚ͘dŚĞƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚ ZĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƟǀĞǁŝůůďĞƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďůĞĨŽƌ͗ x DĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞĂŶĚŵĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͖ x dŝŵĞůLJƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƚŽĂůů^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂŶĚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŝŶƋƵŝƌŝĞƐ͖ĂŶĚ x WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŽŶŝŶƌĞǀŝĞǁƐǁŝƚŚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͘ ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůΖƐƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚZĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƟǀĞŝƐŝƚƐŚŝĞĨWƌŽĐƵƌĞŵĞŶƚKĸĐĞƌ͘ 4) WĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞZĞǀŝĞǁƐ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁŝůůƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŵŝŶŝŵƵŵŽĨŽŶĞƌĞǀŝĞǁǁŝƚŚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůƉĞƌ ĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚLJĞĂƌ͘dŚĞƌĞǀŝĞǁǁŝůůĐŽǀĞƌƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐƚŽWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐ͕ƉƌŝĐŝŶŐĂŶĚƚĞƌŵƐ͕ 194 120324-TOT v052824 8 ĂĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞĨĞĞƐ͕ƐĂůĞƐĚĂƚĂƌĞƉŽƌƚƐ͕ƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞŝƐƐƵĞƐ͕ƐƵƉƉůLJĐŚĂŝŶŝƐƐƵĞƐ͕ĐƵƐƚŽŵĞƌŝƐƐƵĞƐ͕ĂŶĚ ĂŶLJŽƚŚĞƌŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶ͘ 5) ^ĂůĞƐZĞƉŽƌƟŶŐZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŝƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĂƐĂŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĞůĞŵĞŶƚƚŽƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƚŽ ƌĞƉŽƌƚĂůůĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐǁŝƚŚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐƵƟůŝnjŝŶŐƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘&ĂŝůƵƌĞƚŽ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĂŶĚĂĐĐƵƌĂƚĞƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂƐĚĞĮŶĞĚŚĞƌĞŝŶǁŝůůďĞĂŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůďƌĞĂĐŚŽĨthe Agreement ĂŶĚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůƌĞƐĞƌǀĞƐƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƚŽƉƵƌƐƵĞĂůůƌĞŵĞĚŝĞƐĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĂƚůĂǁŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĐĂŶĐĞůůĂƟŽŶŽĨ this Agreement. 6) ZĞƉŽƌƟŶŐZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵƵƐƚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂŶĂĐƟǀŝƚLJƌĞƉŽƌƚŽĨĂůůƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐ ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚƵƟůŝnjŝŶŐƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘ZĞƉŽƌƚƐĂƌĞĚƵĞĂƚůĞĂƐƚŽŶĐĞĞĂĐŚĐĂůĞŶĚĂƌƋƵĂƌƚĞƌ;ZĞƉŽƌƟŶŐ WĞƌŝŽĚͿ͘ZĞƉŽƌƚƐŵƵƐƚďĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚŶŽůĂƚĞƌƚŚĂŶϰϱĐĂůĞŶĚĂƌĚĂLJƐĂŌĞƌƚŚĞĞŶĚŽĨĞĂch calendar ƋƵĂƌƚĞƌ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵĂLJƌĞƉŽƌƚŽŶĂŵŽƌĞĨƌĞƋƵĞŶƚďĂƐŝƐŝŶŝƚƐĚŝƐĐƌĞƟŽŶ͘ZĞƉŽƌƚƐŵƵƐƚďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚ ƌĞŐĂƌĚůĞƐƐŽĨƚŚĞĂŵŽƵŶƚŽĨĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĂƚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌ;ŝ͘Ğ͕͘ŝĨƚŚĞƌĞĂƌĞŶŽƐĂůĞƐ͕ Supplier must submit a ƌĞƉŽƌƚŝŶĚŝĐĂƟŶŐŶŽƐĂůĞƐǁĞƌĞŵĂĚĞͿ͘ dŚĞZĞƉŽƌƚŵƵƐƚĐŽŶƚĂŝŶƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐĮĞůĚƐ͗ x WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJEĂŵĞ;Ğ͘Ő͕͘ŝƚLJŽĨ^ƚĂƉůĞƐ,ŝŐŚǁĂLJĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚͿ͖ x WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJWŚLJƐŝĐĂů^ƚƌĞĞƚĚĚƌĞƐƐ͖ x WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŝƚLJ͖ x WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ^ƚĂƚĞͬWƌŽǀŝŶĐĞ͖ x WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŝƉͬWŽƐƚĂůŽĚĞ͖ x ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJĐĐŽƵŶƚEƵŵďĞƌ͖ x dƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶĞƐĐƌŝƉƟŽŶ͖ x dƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶWƵƌĐŚĂƐĞĚWƌŝĐĞ͖ x ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞ&ĞĞƉƉůŝĞĚ͖ĂŶĚ x ĂƚĞdƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶǁĂƐŝŶǀŽŝĐĞĚͬƐĂůĞǁĂƐƌĞĐŽŐŶŝnjĞĚĂƐƌĞǀĞŶƵĞďLJ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͘ /ĨĐŽůůĞĐƚĞĚďLJ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͕ƚŚĞZĞƉŽƌƚŵĂLJŝŶĐůƵĚĞƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐĮĞůĚƐĂƐĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ͗ x WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŽŶƚĂĐƚEĂŵĞ͖ x WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŽŶƚĂĐƚ ŵĂŝůĚĚƌĞƐƐ͖ x WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŽŶƚĂĐƚdĞůĞƉŚŽŶĞEƵŵďĞƌ͖ 7) ĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞ&ĞĞ͘ /ŶĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƟŽŶĨŽƌƚŚĞƐƵƉƉŽƌƚĂŶĚƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚďLJ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ ǁŝůůƉĂLJĂŶĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞ&ĞĞƚŽ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŽŶĂůůĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐƚŽWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐ ƵƟůŝnjŝŶŐƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁŝůůŝŶĐůƵĚĞŝƚƐĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞ&ĞĞǁŝƚŚin its proposed pricing. ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵĂLJŶŽƚĚŝƌĞĐƚůLJĐŚĂƌŐĞWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐƚŽŽīƐĞƚƚŚĞĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞ&ĞĞ͘ 8) &ĞĞĂůĐƵůĂƟŽŶ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞ&ĞĞƉĂLJĂďůĞƚŽ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůǁŝůůďĞĐĂůĐƵůĂƚĞĚĂƐĂƐƚĂƚĞĚ ƉĞƌĐĞŶƚĂŐĞ;ůŝƐƚĞĚŝŶ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐWƌŽƉŽƐĂůͿŽĨĂůůĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐƵƟůŝnjŝŶŐƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌ ŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞƉƌĞĐĞĚŝŶŐZĞƉŽƌƟŶŐWĞƌŝŽĚ͘&ŽƌĐĞƌƚĂŝŶĐĂƚĞŐŽƌŝĞƐ͕ĂŇĂƚĨĞĞŵĂLJďĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ͘dŚĞĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞ&ĞĞǁŝůůďĞƐƚĂƚĞĚŝŶ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐWƌŽƉŽƐĂů͘ 9) &ĞĞZĞŵŝƩĂŶĐĞ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁŝůůƌĞŵŝƚĨĞĞƚŽ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŶŽůĂƚĞƌƚŚĂŶϰϱĐĂůĞŶĚĂƌĚĂLJƐĂŌĞƌƚŚĞĐůŽƐĞ ŽĨƚŚĞƉƌĞĐĞĚŝŶŐĐĂůĞŶĚĂƌƋƵĂƌƚĞƌŝŶĐŽŶũƵŶĐƟŽŶǁŝƚŚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐZĞƉŽƌƟŶŐWĞƌŝŽĚŽďůŝŐĂƟŽŶƐ ĚĞĮŶĞĚŚĞƌĞŝŶ͘WĂLJŵĞŶƚƐƐŚŽƵůĚŶŽƚĞƚŚĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐŶĂŵĞĂŶĚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů-assigned Agreement ŶƵŵďĞƌŝŶƚŚĞŵĞŵŽ͖ĂŶĚŵƵƐƚďĞĞŝƚŚĞƌŵĂŝůĞĚƚŽ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂďŽǀĞ͞ƩŶ͗ĐĐŽƵŶƚƐZĞĐĞŝǀĂďůĞ͟Žƌ 195 120324-TOT v052824 9 ƌĞŵŝƩĞĚĞůĞĐƚƌŽŶŝĐĂůůLJƚŽ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͛ƐďĂŶŬŝŶŐŝŶƐƟƚƵƟŽŶƉĞƌ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͛Ɛ&ŝŶĂŶĐĞĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ ŝŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶƐ͘ 10) EŽŶĐŽŵƉůŝĂŶĐĞ͘ ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůƌĞƐĞƌǀĞƐƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚƚŽƐĞĞŬĂůůƌĞŵĞĚŝĞƐĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĂƚůĂǁĨŽƌƵŶƉĂŝĚŽƌ ƵŶĚĞƌƉĂŝĚĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞ&ĞĞƐĚƵĞƵŶĚĞƌƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘&ĂŝůƵƌĞƚŽƌĞŵŝƚƵŶĚŝƐƉƵƚĞĚƉĂLJŵĞŶƚ͕ ĚĞůŝŶƋƵĞŶƚƵŶĚŝƐƉƵƚĞĚƉĂLJŵĞŶƚƐ͕ƵŶĚĞƌƉĂLJŵĞŶƚƐŽĨƵŶĚŝƐƉƵƚĞĚĂŵŽƵŶƚƐ͕ŽƌŽƚŚĞƌŵĂƚĞƌĚĞǀŝĂƟŽŶƐ ĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŵĂLJďĞĚĞĞŵĞĚĂŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůďƌĞĂĐŚĂŶĚŵĂLJƌĞƐƵůƚŝŶ ĐĂŶĐĞůůĂƟŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĂŶĚĚŝƐďĂƌŵĞŶƚĨƌŽŵĨƵƚƵƌĞŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘ 11) ƵĚŝƚZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘ Pursuant to Minn. Stat. Α ϭϲ͘Ϭϱ͕ƐƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶϱ͕ƚŚĞŬƐ͕ƌĞĐŽƌĚƐ͕ ĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ͕ĂŶĚĂĐĐŽƵŶƟŶŐƉƌŽĐĞĚƵƌĞƐĂŶĚƉƌĂĐƟĐĞƐƌĞůĞǀĂŶƚƚŽƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĂƌĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽ ĞdžĂŵŝŶĂƟŽŶďLJ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂŶĚƚŚĞDŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂ^ƚĂƚĞƵĚŝƚŽƌĨŽƌĂŵŝŶŝŵƵŵŽĨƐŝdžLJĞĂƌƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞĞŶĚ ŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŐƌĞĞƐƚŽĨƵůůLJĐŽŽƉĞƌĂƚĞǁŝƚŚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŝŶĂƵĚŝƟŶŐƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐƵŶĚĞƌ ƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƚŽĞŶƐƵƌĞĐŽŵƉůŝĂŶĐĞǁŝƚŚƉƌŝĐŝŶŐƚĞƌŵƐ͕ĐŽƌƌĞĐƚĐĂůĐƵůĂƟŽŶĂŶĚƌĞŵŝƩĂŶĐĞŽĨ ĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞ&ĞĞƐ͕ĂŶĚǀĞƌŝĮĐĂƟŽŶ ŽĨƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐĂƐŵĂLJďĞƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚďLJĂWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŽƌ Sourcewell. 12) ƐƐŝŐŶŵĞŶƚ͕dƌĂŶƐĨĞƌ͕ĂŶĚĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞŚĂŶŐĞƐ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵĂLJŶŽƚĂƐƐŝŐŶŽƌŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞƚƌĂŶƐĨĞƌŝƚƐ ƌŝŐŚƚƐŽƌŽďůŝŐĂƟŽŶƐƵŶĚĞƌƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚǁŝƚŚŽƵƚƚŚĞƉƌŝŽƌǁƌŝƩĞŶĐŽŶƐĞŶƚŽĨ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͘^ƵĐŚ consent will not be unreasonably withheld. Sourcewell reserves the right to unilaterally assign all or ƉŽƌƟŽŶƐŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚǁŝƚŚŝŶŝƚƐƐŽůĞĚŝƐĐƌĞƟŽŶƚŽĂĚĚƌĞƐƐĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞƌĞƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌŝŶŐƐ͕ŵĞƌŐĞƌƐ͕ ĂĐƋƵŝƐŝƟŽŶƐ͕ŽƌŽƚŚĞƌĐŚĂŶŐĞƐƚŽƚŚĞZĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďůĞWĂƌƚLJĂŶĚŶĂŵĞĚŝŶƚŚĞŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘ŶLJƉƌŽŚŝďŝƚĞĚ assignment is ŝŶǀĂůŝĚ͘hƉŽŶƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŵĂLJŵĂŬĞĂĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞĐŚĂŶŐĞƐƚŽĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ ĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĂƟŽŶƐƵĐŚĂƐŶĂŵĞĐŚĂŶŐĞƐ͕ĂĚĚƌĞƐƐĐŚĂŶŐĞƐ͕ĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŶŽŶ-material updates as ĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶŝƚƐƐŽůĞĚŝƐĐƌĞƟŽŶ͘ ϭϯͿ ŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚƐ͘ ŶLJŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůĐŚĂŶŐĞƚŽƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŵƵƐƚďĞĞdžĞĐƵƚĞĚŝŶǁƌŝƟŶŐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚĂŶ ĂŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚĂŶĚǁŝůůŶŽƚďĞĞīĞĐƟǀĞƵŶƟůŝƚŚĂƐďĞĞŶĚƵůLJĞdžĞĐƵƚĞĚďLJƚŚĞƉĂƌƟĞƐ͘ 14) tĂŝǀĞƌ͘ &ĂŝůƵƌĞďLJĞŝƚŚĞƌƉĂƌƚLJƚŽĞŶĨŽƌĐĞĂŶLJƌŝŐŚƚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚǁŝůůŶŽƚďĞĚĞĞŵĞĚĂ ǁĂŝǀĞƌŽĨƐƵĐŚƌŝŐŚƚŝŶƚŚĞĞǀĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞĐŽŶƟŶƵĂƟŽŶŽƌƌĞƉĞƟƟŽŶŽĨƚŚĞĐŝƌĐƵŵƐƚĂŶĐĞƐŐŝǀŝŶŐƌŝƐĞƚŽ such right. 15) ŽŵƉůĞƚĞŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘ dŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƌĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƐƚŚĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚďĞƚǁĞĞŶƚŚĞƉĂƌƟĞƐĨŽƌ ƚŚĞƐĐŽƉĞĂƐĚĞĮŶĞĚŚĞƌĞŝŶ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŵĂLJĞŶƚĞƌŝŶƚŽƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞǁƌŝƩĞŶĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƐ ƌĞůĂƟŶŐƐƉĞĐŝĮĐĂůůLJƚŽƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐŽƵƚƐŝĚĞŽĨƚŚĞƐĐŽƉĞŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘ 16) ZĞůĂƟŽŶƐŚŝƉŽĨ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂŶĚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͘ This Agreement does not create a partnership, joint ǀĞŶƚƵƌĞ͕ŽƌĂŶLJŽƚŚĞƌƌĞůĂƟŽŶƐŚŝƉƐƵĐŚĂƐĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞ͕ŝŶĚĞƉĞŶĚĞŶƚĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌ͕ŵĂƐƚĞƌ-servant, or principal-agent. 17) /ŶĚĞŵŶŝĮĐĂƟŽŶ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵƵƐƚŝŶĚĞŵŶŝĨLJ͕ĚĞĨĞŶĚ͕ƐĂǀĞ͕ĂŶĚŚŽůĚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚŚĞŝƌĂŐĞŶƚƐ ĂŶĚĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞƐ͕ŚĂƌŵůĞƐƐĨƌŽŵĂŶLJĐůĂŝŵƐŽƌĐĂƵƐĞƐŽĨĂĐƟŽŶ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĂƩŽƌŶĞLJƐ͛ĨĞĞƐŝŶĐƵƌƌĞĚďLJ ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͕ĂƌŝƐŝŶŐŽƵƚŽĨĂŶLJĂĐƚŽƌŽŵŝƐƐŝŽŶŝŶƚŚĞƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐ Agreement by the Supplier ŽƌŝƚƐĂŐĞŶƚƐŽƌĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞƐ͖ƚŚŝƐŝŶĚĞŵŶŝĮĐĂƟŽŶŝŶĐůƵĚĞƐŝŶũƵƌLJŽƌĚĞĂƚŚƚŽƉĞƌƐŽŶ;ƐͿŽƌƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ ĂůůĞŐĞĚƚŽŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶĐĂƵƐĞĚďLJƐŽŵĞĚĞĨĞĐƚŝŶĚĞƐŝŐŶ͕ĐŽŶĚŝƟŽŶ͕ŽƌƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞŽĨ/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐƵŶĚĞƌƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƚŽƚŚĞĞdžƚĞŶƚƚŚĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶƵƐĞĚĂĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽ ƚŚĞŝƌƐƉĞĐŝĮĐĂƟŽŶƐ͘^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͛ƐƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďŝůŝƚLJǁŝůůďĞŐŽǀĞƌŶĞĚďLJƚŚĞ^ƚĂƚĞŽĨDŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂ͛ƐdŽƌƚ 196 120324-TOT v052824 10 >ŝĂďŝůŝƚLJĐƚ;DŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂ^ƚĂƚƵƚĞƐŚĂƉƚĞƌϰϲϲͿĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞůĂǁ͘/EEK s Edt/>>^hWW>/ Z >/> &KZEz>K^^K&h^ ͕Z s Eh ͕KZWZK&/d͕KZ&KZEzKE^ Yh Ed/>͕/E/ Ed>͕ /E/Z d͕KZ y DW>ZzD' ^͕t, d, ZZ/^/E'KhdK&Z ,K&KETRACT, TORT ;/E>h/E'E '>/' E Ϳ͕KZKd, Zt/^ ͕Z 'Z> ^^K&t, d, Z^h,D' t^ &KZ ^ > Et, d, ZKZEKdd, /E DE/d t^s/^ K&d, WK^^//>/dzK&^hz D' ^͘ 18) ĂƚĂWƌĂĐƟĐĞƐ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŝƐƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞDŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂ 'ŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚĂƚĂWƌĂĐƟĐĞƐĐƚ͕DŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂ^ƚĂƚƵƚĞƐŚĂƉƚĞƌϭϯ͘ƐŝƚĂƉƉůŝĞƐƚŽĂůůĚĂƚĂĐƌĞĂƚĞĚĂŶĚ ŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶĞĚŝŶƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵĂLJďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŽĨƚŚŝƐ chapter. 19) 'ƌĂŶƚŽĨ>ŝĐĞŶƐĞ͘ a) ƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͗ i) ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌWƌŽŵŽƟŽŶ͘ Sourcewell grants to Supplier a royalty-ĨƌĞĞ͕ǁŽƌůĚǁŝĚĞ͕ŶŽŶ-exclusive ƌŝŐŚƚĂŶĚůŝĐĞŶƐĞƚŽƵƐĞƚŚĞƚƌĂĚĞŵĂƌŬ;ƐͿƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚƚŽ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌďLJ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŝŶĂĚǀĞƌƟƐŝŶŐ͕ ƉƌŽŵŽƟŽŶĂůŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͕ĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶĂůƐŝƚĞƐĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƵƌƉŽƐĞŽĨŵĂƌŬĞƟŶŐ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͛Ɛ Agreement with Supplier. ii) ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůWƌŽŵŽƟŽŶ͘ Supplier grants to Sourcewell a royalty-ĨƌĞĞ͕ǁŽƌůĚǁŝĚĞ͕ŶŽŶ- ĞdžĐůƵƐŝǀĞƌŝŐŚƚĂŶĚůŝĐĞŶƐĞƚŽƵƐĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐƚƌĂĚĞŵĂƌŬƐŝŶĂĚǀĞƌƟƐŝŶŐ͕ƉƌŽŵŽƟŽŶĂů ŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͕ĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶĂůƐŝƚĞƐĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƵƌƉŽƐĞŽĨŵĂƌŬĞƟŶŐ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚǁŝƚŚ Sourcewell. b) >ŝŵŝƚĞĚZŝŐŚƚŽĨ^ƵďůŝĐĞŶƐĞ͘ dŚĞƌŝŐŚƚĂŶĚůŝĐĞŶƐĞŐƌĂŶƚĞĚŚĞƌĞŝŶŝŶĐůƵĚĞƐĂůŝŵŝƚĞĚƌŝŐŚƚŽĨĞĂĐŚ ƉĂƌƚLJƚŽŐƌĂŶƚƐƵďůŝĐĞŶƐĞƐƚŽƚŚĞŝƌƌĞƐƉĞĐƟǀĞƐƵďƐŝĚŝĂƌŝĞƐ͕ĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŽƌƐ͕ĚĞĂůĞƌƐ͕ƌĞƐĞůůĞƌƐ͕ ŵĂƌŬĞƟŶŐƌĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƟǀĞƐ͕ƉĂƌƚŶĞƌƐ͕ŽƌĂŐĞŶƚƐ;ĐŽůůĞĐƟǀĞůLJ͞WĞƌŵŝƩĞĚ^ƵďůŝĐĞŶƐĞĞƐ͟ͿŝŶ ĂĚǀĞƌƟƐŝŶŐ͕ƉƌŽŵŽƟŽŶĂů͕ŽƌŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶĂůŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƵƌƉŽƐĞŽĨŵĂƌŬĞƟŶŐƚŚĞWĂƌƟĞƐ͛ ƌĞůĂƟŽŶƐŚŝƉ͘ŶLJƐƵďůŝĐĞŶƐĞŐƌĂŶƚĞĚǁŝůůďĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞƚĞƌŵƐĂŶĚĐŽŶĚŝƟŽŶƐŽĨƚŚŝƐƌƟĐůĞ͘ ĂĐŚƉĂƌƚLJǁŝůůďĞƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďůĞĨŽƌĂŶLJďƌĞĂĐŚŽĨƚŚŝƐƐĞĐƟŽŶďLJĂŶLJŽĨƚŚĞŝƌƌĞƐƉĞĐƟǀĞ sublicensees. c) hƐĞ͖YƵĂůŝƚLJŽŶƚƌŽů͘ i) EĞŝƚŚĞƌƉĂƌƚLJŵĂLJĂůƚĞƌƚŚĞŽƚŚĞƌƉĂƌƚLJ͛ƐƚƌĂĚĞŵĂƌŬƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞĨŽƌŵƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚĂŶĚŵƵƐƚ ĐŽŵƉůLJǁŝƚŚƌĞŵŽǀĂůƌĞƋƵĞƐƚƐĂƐƚŽƐƉĞĐŝĮĐƵƐĞƐŽĨŝƚƐƚƌĂĚĞŵĂƌŬƐŽƌůŽŐŽƐ͘ ii) ĂĐŚƉĂƌƚLJĂŐƌĞĞƐƚŽƵƐĞ͕ĂŶĚƚŽĐĂƵƐĞŝƚƐWĞƌŵŝƩĞĚ^ƵďůŝĐĞŶƐĞĞƐƚŽƵƐĞ͕ƚŚĞŽƚŚĞƌƉĂƌƚLJ͛Ɛ ƚƌĂĚĞŵĂƌŬƐŽŶůLJŝŶŐŽŽĚĨĂŝƚŚĂŶĚŝŶĂĚŝŐŶŝĮĞĚŵĂŶŶĞƌĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƐƵĐŚƉĂƌƚLJ͛ƐƵƐĞŽĨ ƚŚĞƚƌĂĚĞŵĂƌŬƐ͘ ĂĐŚƉĂƌƚLJŵĂLJŵĂŬĞǁƌŝƩĞŶŶŽƟĐĞƚŽƚŚĞŽƚŚĞƌƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶg misuse under ƚŚŝƐƐĞĐƟŽŶ͘dŚĞŽīĞŶĚŝŶŐƉĂƌƚLJǁŝůůŚĂǀĞϯϬĚĂLJƐŽĨƚŚĞĚĂƚĞŽĨƚŚĞǁƌŝƩĞŶŶŽƟĐĞƚŽĐƵƌĞ ƚŚĞŝƐƐƵĞŽƌƚŚĞůŝĐĞŶƐĞͬƐƵďůŝĐĞŶƐĞǁŝůůďĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƚĞĚ͘ d) dĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶ͘ hƉŽŶƚŚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĨŽƌĂŶLJƌĞĂƐŽŶ͕ĞĂĐŚƉĂƌƚLJ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐ WĞƌŵŝƩĞĚ^ƵďůŝĐĞŶƐĞĞƐ͕ǁŝůůŚĂǀĞϯϬĚĂLJƐƚŽƌĞŵŽǀĞĂůůdƌĂĚĞŵĂƌŬƐĨƌŽŵƐŝŐŶĂŐĞ͕ǁĞďƐŝƚĞƐ͕ĂŶĚ ƚŚĞůŝŬĞďĞĂƌŝŶŐƚŚĞŽƚŚĞƌƉĂƌƚLJ͛ƐŶĂŵĞŽƌůŽŐŽ;ĞdžĐĞƉƟŶŐ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͛ƐƉƌĞ-printed ĐĂƚĂůŽŐŽĨ ƐƵƉƉůŝĞƌƐǁŚŝĐŚŵĂLJďĞƵƐĞĚƵŶƟůƚŚĞŶĞdžƚƉƌŝŶƟŶŐͿ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵƵƐƚƌĞƚƵƌŶĂůůŵĂƌŬĞƟŶŐĂŶĚ ƉƌŽŵŽƟŽŶĂůŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƐŝŐŶĂŐĞ͕ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚďLJ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͕ŽƌĚŝƐƉŽƐĞŽĨŝƚĂĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽ ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͛ƐǁƌŝƩĞŶĚŝƌĞĐƟŽŶƐ͘ 197 120324-TOT v052824 11 20) sĞŶƵĞĂŶĚ'ŽǀĞƌŶŝŶŐůĂǁďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂŶĚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌKŶůLJ͘ dŚĞƐƵďƐƚĂŶƟǀĞĂŶĚƉƌŽĐĞĚƵƌĂů ůĂǁƐŽĨƚŚĞ^ƚĂƚĞŽĨDŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂǁŝůůŐŽǀĞƌŶƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂŶĚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͘sĞŶƵĞ ĨŽƌĂůůůĞŐĂůƉƌŽĐĞĞĚŝŶŐƐĂƌŝƐŝŶŐŽƵƚŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂŶĚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁŝůůďĞŝŶ ĐŽƵƌƚŽĨĐŽŵƉĞƚĞŶƚũƵƌŝƐĚŝĐƟŽŶǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞ^ƚĂƚĞŽĨDŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂ͘dŚŝƐƐĞĐƟŽŶĚŽĞƐŶŽƚĂƉƉůLJƚŽĂŶLJ ĚŝƐƉƵƚĞďĞƚǁĞĞŶ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ͘dŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƌĞƐĞƌǀĞƐƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚĨŽƌ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJƚŽŶĞŐŽƟĂƚĞƚŚŝƐƚĞƌŵƚŽǁŝƚŚŝŶĂŶLJƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ͘ 21) ^ĞǀĞƌĂďŝůŝƚLJ͘ /ĨĂŶLJƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŝƐĨŽƵŶĚďLJĂĐŽƵƌƚŽĨĐŽŵƉĞƚĞŶƚũƵƌŝƐĚŝĐƟŽŶƚŽďĞ ŝůůĞŐĂů͕ƵŶĞŶĨŽƌĐĞĂďůĞ͕ŽƌǀŽŝĚƚŚĞŶďŽƚŚƉĂƌƟĞƐǁŝůůďĞƌĞůŝĞǀĞĚĨƌŽŵĂůůŽďůŝŐĂƟŽŶƐĂƌŝƐŝŶŐĨƌŽŵƚŚĂƚ ƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶ͘/ĨƚŚĞƌĞŵĂŝŶĚĞƌŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŝƐĐĂƉĂďůĞŽĨďĞŝŶŐƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĞĚ͕ŝƚǁŝůůŶŽƚďĞĂīĞĐƚĞĚ ďLJƐƵĐŚĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶŽƌĮŶĚŝŶŐĂŶĚŵƵƐƚďĞĨƵůůLJƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĞĚ͘ 22) /ŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞŽǀĞƌĂŐĞ͘ At its own expense, Supplier must maintain valid insurance policy(ies) during ƚŚĞƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚǁŝƚŚŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞĐŽŵƉĂŶLJ;ŝĞƐͿůŝĐĞŶƐĞĚŽƌĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚƚŽĚŽ ďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐŝŶƚŚĞ^ƚĂƚĞŽĨDŝŶŶĞƐŽƚĂŚĂǀŝŶŐĂŶ͞D ^d͟ƌĂƟŶŐŽĨ- ŽƌďĞƩĞƌ͕ǁŝƚŚĐŽverage and ůŝŵŝƚƐŽĨŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞŶŽƚůĞƐƐƚŚĂŶƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐ͗ a) ŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂů'ĞŶĞƌĂů>ŝĂďŝůŝƚLJ/ŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁŝůůŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞĐŽǀĞƌŝŶŐŝƚƐŽƉĞƌĂƟŽŶƐ͕ with coverage on an occurrence basis, and must be subject to terms no less broad than the /ŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐKĸĐĞ;͞/^K͟ͿŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂů'ĞŶĞƌĂů>ŝĂďŝůŝƚLJ&Žƌŵ'ϬϬϬϭ;ϮϬϬϭŽƌŶĞǁĞƌ ĞĚŝƟŽŶͿ͕ŽƌĞƋƵŝǀĂůĞŶƚ͘ƚĂŵŝŶŝŵƵŵ͕ĐŽǀĞƌĂŐĞŵƵƐƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞůŝĂďŝůŝƚLJĂƌŝƐŝŶŐĨƌŽŵƉƌĞŵŝƐĞƐ͕ ŽƉĞƌĂƟŽŶƐ͕ďŽĚŝůLJŝŶũƵƌLJĂŶĚƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJĚĂŵĂŐĞ͕ŝŶĚĞƉĞŶĚĞŶƚĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐ͕ƉƌŽĚƵĐƚƐ-completed ŽƉĞƌĂƟŽŶƐŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶĚĞĨĞĐƚ͕ĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚƵĂůůŝĂďŝůŝƚLJ͕ďůĂŶŬĞƚĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚƵĂůůŝĂďŝůŝƚLJ͕ĂŶĚ ƉĞƌƐŽŶĂůŝŶũƵƌLJĂŶĚĂĚǀĞƌƟƐŝŶŐŝŶũƵƌLJ͘ůůƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚůŝŵŝƚƐ͕ƚĞƌŵƐĂŶĚĐŽŶĚŝƟŽŶƐŽĨĐŽǀĞƌĂŐĞŵƵƐƚ ďĞŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘ x Ψϭ͕ϱϬϬ͕ϬϬϬĞĂĐŚŽĐĐƵƌƌĞŶĐĞŽĚŝůLJ/ŶũƵƌLJĂŶĚWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJĂŵĂŐĞ x Ψϭ͕ϱϬϬ͕ϬϬϬWĞƌƐŽŶĂůĂŶĚĚǀĞƌƟƐŝŶŐ/ŶũƵƌLJ x ΨϮ͕ϬϬϬ͕ϬϬϬĂŐŐƌĞŐĂƚĞĨŽƌƉƌŽĚƵĐƚƐůŝĂďŝůŝƚLJ-ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚŽƉĞƌĂƟŽŶƐ x ΨϮ͕ϬϬϬ͕ϬϬϬŐĞŶĞƌĂůĂŐŐƌĞŐĂƚĞ b) ĞƌƟĮĐĂƚĞƐŽĨ/ŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞ͘ WƌŝŽƌƚŽĞdžĞĐƵƟŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵƵƐƚĨƵƌŶŝƐŚƚŽ ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂĐĞƌƟĮĐĂƚĞŽĨŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞ͕ĂƐĞǀŝĚĞŶĐĞŽĨƚŚĞŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚŝƐ ŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘WƌŝŽƌƚŽĞdžƉŝƌĂƟŽŶŽĨƚŚĞƉŽůŝĐLJ;ŝĞƐͿ͕ƌĞŶĞǁĂůĐĞƌƟĮĐĂƚĞƐŵƵƐƚďĞŵĂŝůĞĚƚŽ Sourcewell, 202 12th Street Northeast, P.O. Box 219, Staples, MN 56479 or provided to in an ĂůƚĞƌŶĂƟǀĞŵĂŶŶĞƌĂƐĚŝƌĞĐƚĞĚďLJ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͘dŚĞĐĞƌƟĮĐĂƚĞƐŵƵƐƚďĞƐŝŐŶĞĚďLJĂƉĞƌƐŽŶ ĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚďLJƚŚĞŝŶƐƵƌĞƌ;ƐͿƚŽďŝŶĚĐŽǀĞƌĂŐĞŽŶƚŚĞŝƌďĞŚĂůĨ͘ &ĂŝůƵƌĞŽĨ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌƚŽŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶƚŚĞ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞĂŶĚĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĂƟŽŶŵĂLJĐŽŶƐƟƚƵƚĞĂŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůďƌĞĂĐŚ͘ c) ĚĚŝƟŽŶĂů/ŶƐƵƌĞĚ ŶĚŽƌƐĞŵĞŶƚĂŶĚWƌŝŵĂƌLJĂŶĚEŽŶ-ĐŽŶƚƌŝďƵƚŽƌLJ/ŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞůĂƵƐĞ͘ Supplier ĂŐƌĞĞƐƚŽůŝƐƚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůů͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐŝƚƐŽĸĐĞƌƐ͕ĂŐĞŶƚƐ͕ĂŶĚĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞƐ͕ĂƐĂŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůŝŶƐƵƌĞĚ ƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůŐĞŶĞƌĂůůŝĂďŝůŝƚLJŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞƉŽůŝĐLJǁŝƚŚƌĞƐƉĞĐƚƚŽůŝĂďŝůŝƚLJĂƌŝƐŝŶŐ ŽƵƚŽĨĂĐƟǀŝƟĞƐ͕͞ŽƉĞƌĂƟŽŶƐ͕͟Žƌ͞ǁŽƌŬ͟ƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĞĚďLJŽƌŽŶďĞŚĂůĨŽĨ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͕ĂŶĚƉƌŽĚƵĐƚƐ ĂŶĚĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚŽƉĞƌĂƟŽŶƐŽĨ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͘dŚĞƉŽůŝĐLJƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶ;ƐͿŽƌĞŶĚŽƌƐĞŵĞŶƚ;ƐͿŵƵƐƚĨƵƌƚŚĞƌ provide that coverage is primary and not excess over or contributory with any other valid, ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͕ĂŶĚĐŽůůĞĐƟďůĞŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞŽƌƐĞůĨ-ŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞŝŶĨŽƌĐĞĨŽƌƚŚĞĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůŝŶƐƵƌĞĚƐ͘ d) tĂŝǀĞƌŽĨ^ƵďƌŽŐĂƟŽŶ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁĂŝǀĞƐĂŶĚŵƵƐƚƌĞƋƵŝƌĞ;ďLJĞŶĚŽƌƐĞŵĞŶƚŽƌŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞͿĂůůŝƚƐ ŝŶƐƵƌĞƌƐƚŽǁĂŝǀĞƐƵďƌŽŐĂƟŽŶƌŝŐŚƚƐĂŐĂŝŶƐƚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůŝŶƐƵƌĞĚƐĨŽƌůŽƐƐĞƐ 198 120324-TOT v052824 12 ƉĂŝĚƵŶĚĞƌƚŚĞŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞƉŽůŝĐŝĞƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚďLJƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚŽƌŽƚŚĞƌŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƚŽ ƚŚĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŽƌŝƚƐƐƵďĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐ͘dŚĞǁĂŝǀĞƌŵƵƐƚĂƉƉůLJƚŽĂůůĚĞĚƵĐƟďůĞƐĂŶĚͬŽƌƐĞůĨ-insured ƌĞƚĞŶƟŽŶƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƚŽƚŚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚŽƌĂŶLJŽƚŚĞƌŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞŵĂŝŶtained by the Supplier or its ƐƵďĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐ͘tŚĞƌĞƉĞƌŵŝƩĞĚďLJůĂǁ͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵƵƐƚƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŝŵŝůĂƌǁƌŝƩĞŶĞdžƉƌĞƐƐǁĂŝǀĞƌƐ ŽĨƐƵďƌŽŐĂƟŽŶĂŶĚŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞĐůĂƵƐĞƐĨƌŽŵĞĂĐŚŽĨŝƚƐƐƵďĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐ͘ e) hŵďƌĞůůĂͬ džĐĞƐƐ>ŝĂďŝůŝƚLJͬ^ >&-/E^hZ Z d Ed/KE͘ dŚĞůŝŵŝƚƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚďLJƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĐĂŶ ďĞŵĞƚďLJĞŝƚŚĞƌƉƌŽǀŝĚŝŶŐĂƉƌŝŵĂƌLJƉŽůŝĐLJŽƌŝŶĐŽŵďŝŶĂƟŽŶǁŝƚŚƵŵďƌĞůůĂͬĞdžĐĞƐƐůŝĂďŝůŝƚLJ ƉŽůŝĐLJ;ŝĞƐͿ͕ŽƌƐĞůĨ-ŝŶƐƵƌĞĚƌĞƚĞŶƟŽŶ͘ ϮϯͿ dĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶĨŽƌŽŶǀĞŶŝĞŶĐĞ͘ Sourcewell or Supplier may terminate this Agreement upon 60 ĐĂůĞŶĚĂƌĚĂLJƐΖǁƌŝƩĞŶŶŽƟĐĞƚŽƚŚĞŽƚŚĞƌWĂƌƚLJ͘dĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽƚŚŝƐƐĞĐƟŽŶǁŝůůŶŽƚƌĞůŝĞǀĞ ƚŚĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐŽďůŝŐĂƟŽŶƐƵŶĚĞƌƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĨŽƌĂŶLJƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐĞŶƚĞƌĞĚǁŝƚŚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚƚŚĞĚĂƚĞŽĨƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƌĞƉŽƌƟŶŐĂŶĚƉĂLJŵĞŶƚŽĨĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞ&ĞĞƐ͘ 24) dĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶĨŽƌĂƵƐĞ͘ ŝƚŚĞƌƉĂƌƚLJŵĂLJƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƚĞƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƵƉŽŶƉƌŽǀŝĚŝŶŐǁƌŝƩĞŶŶŽƟĐĞŽĨ ŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůďƌĞĂĐŚƚŽƚŚĞŽƚŚĞƌƉĂƌƚLJ͘EŽƟĐĞŵƵƐƚĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞƚŚĞďƌĞĂĐŚŝŶƌĞĂƐŽŶĂďůĞĚĞƚĂŝůĂŶĚƐƚĂƚĞ ƚŚĞŝŶƚĞŶƚƚŽƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƚĞƚŚĞŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘hƉŽŶƌĞĐĞŝƉƚŽĨEŽƟĐĞ͕ƚŚĞƌĞĐŝƉŝĞŶƚǁŝůů ŚĂǀĞϯϬĐĂůĞŶĚĂƌ ĚĂLJƐŝŶǁŚŝĐŚŝƚŵƵƐƚĐƵƌĞƚŚĞďƌĞĂĐŚ͘dĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽƚŚŝƐƐĞĐƟŽŶǁŝůůŶŽƚƌĞůŝĞǀĞƚŚĞ ďƌĞĂĐŚŝŶŐƉĂƌƚLJƵŶĚĞƌƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĨŽƌĂŶLJƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐĞŶƚĞƌĞĚǁŝƚŚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐ ƚŚƌŽƵŐŚƚŚĞĚĂƚĞŽĨƚĞƌŵŝŶĂƟŽŶ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƌĞƉŽƌƟŶŐĂŶĚƉĂLJŵĞŶƚŽĨĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟǀĞ&ĞĞƐ͘ ƌƟĐůĞϯ͗ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌKďůŝŐĂƟŽŶƐƚŽWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐ dŚĞdĞƌŵƐŝŶƚŚŝƐƌƟĐůĞϯƌĞůĂƚĞƐƉĞĐŝĮĐĂůůLJƚŽ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚĂWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJǁŚĞŶĞŶƚĞƌŝŶŐ ƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐƵƟůŝnjŝŶŐƚŚĞ'ĞŶĞƌĂůdĞƌŵƐĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘ƌƟĐůĞϭ'ĞŶĞƌĂůdĞƌŵƐ ĐŽŶƚƌŽůŽǀĞƌĂŶLJĐŽŶŇŝĐƚǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐƌƟĐůĞϯ͘tŚĞƌĞ this Master Agreement is silent on any subject, WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJĂŶĚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌƌĞƚĂŝŶƚŚĞĂďŝůŝƚLJƚŽŶĞŐŽƟĂƚĞŵƵƚƵĂůůLJĂĐĐĞƉƚĂďůĞƚĞƌŵƐ͘ 1) YƵŽƚĞƐƚŽWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌƐĂƌĞĞŶĐŽƵƌĂŐĞĚƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂůůƉƌŝĐŝŶŐŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƟŽŶ ƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚĞƚŽƚĂůĐŽƐƚŽĨĂĐƋƵŝƐŝƟŽŶǁŚĞŶƋƵŽƟŶŐƚŽĂWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌƐĂŶĚ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐĂƌĞĞŶĐŽƵƌĂŐĞĚƚŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂůůĐŽƐƚƐƉĞĐŝĮĐĂůůLJĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚŽƌŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚǁŝthin ƚŚĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĂůĂŶĚ/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐǁŝƚŚŝŶƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ͘ 2) ^ŚŝƉƉŝŶŐ͕ĞůŝǀĞƌLJ͕ĐĐĞƉƚĂŶĐĞ͕ZĞũĞĐƟŽŶ͕ĂŶĚtĂƌƌĂŶƚLJ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĂůŵĂLJŝŶĐůƵĚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ƚĞƌŵƐƌĞůĂƟŶŐƚŽƐŚŝƉƉŝŶŐ͕ĚĞůŝǀĞƌLJ͕ŝŶƐƉĞĐƟŽŶ͕ĂŶĚĂĐĐĞƉƚĂŶĐĞͬƌĞũĞĐƟŽŶĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌƌĞůĞǀĂŶƚƚĞƌŵƐ ŽĨƚĞŶĚĞƌĞĚ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŵĂLJŶĞŐŽƟĂƚĞĮŶĂůƚĞƌŵƐĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĨŽƌƚŚĞ ƐƉĞĐŝĮĐƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƌĞůĂƟŶŐƚŽŶŽŶ-ĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƟŽŶ͕ƐŚŝƉƉŝŶŐ͕ĚĞůŝǀĞƌLJ͕ŝŶƐƉĞĐƟŽŶ͕ ĂĐĐĞƉƚĂŶĐĞͬƌĞũĞĐƟŽŶŽĨƚĞŶĚĞƌĞĚ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐ͕ĂŶĚǁĂƌƌĂŶƚLJĐŽǀĞƌĂŐĞĨŽƌ/ŶĐůƵĚĞĚ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐ͘^ƵĐŚ terms may include, but are not lŝŵŝƚĞĚƚŽ͕ĐŽƐƚƐ͕ƌŝƐŬŽĨůŽƐƐ͕ƉƌŽƉĞƌƉĂĐŬĂŐŝŶŐ͕ŝŶƐƉĞĐƟŽŶƌŝŐŚƚƐĂŶĚ ƟŵĞůŝŶĞƐ͕ĂĐĐĞƉƚĂŶĐĞŽƌƌĞũĞĐƟŽŶƉƌŽĐĞĚƵƌĞƐ͕ĂŶĚƌĞŵĞĚŝĞƐĂƐŵƵƚƵĂůůLJĂŐƌĞĞĚŝŶĐůƵĚĞŶŽƟĐĞ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ͕ƌĞƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚ͕ƌĞƚƵƌŶŽƌĞdžĐŚĂŶŐĞƉƌŽĐĞĚƵƌĞƐ͕ĂŶĚĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚĐŽƐƚƐ͘ ϯͿ ƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞdĂdžĞƐ͘ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŝƐƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďůĞĨŽƌŶŽƟĨLJŝŶŐƐƵƉƉůŝĞƌŽĨŝƚƐƚĂdž-exempt status and ĨŽƌƉƌŽǀŝĚŝŶŐ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌǁŝƚŚĂŶLJǀĂůŝĚƚĂdž-ĞdžĞŵƉƟŽŶĐĞƌƟĮĐĂƟŽŶ;ƐͿŽƌƌĞůĂƚĞĚĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĂƟŽŶ͘ 199 120324-TOT v052824 13 4) KƌĚĞƌŝŶŐWƌŽĐĞƐƐĂŶĚWĂLJŵĞŶƚ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛ƐŽƌĚĞƌŝŶŐƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĂŶĚĂĐĐĞƉƚĂďůĞĨŽƌŵƐŽĨƉĂLJŵĞŶƚĂƌĞ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶŝƚƐWƌŽƉŽƐĂů͘WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƟĞƐǁŝůůďĞƐŽůĞůLJƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďůĞĨŽƌƉĂLJŵĞŶƚƚŽ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ ĂŶĚ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůǁŝůůŚĂǀĞŶŽůŝĂďŝůŝƚLJĨŽƌĂŶLJƵŶƉĂŝĚŝŶǀŽŝĐĞŽĨĂŶLJWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚy. 5) dƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ͘ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŵĂLJƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƚŚĞƵƐĞŽĨŝƚƐŽǁŶĨŽƌŵƐƚŽĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞ ƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐĚŝƌĞĐƚůLJǁŝƚŚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌƵƟůŝnjŝŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵƐĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͛Ɛ ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚĨŽƌŵĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƐŵĂLJďĞŽīĞƌĞĚĂƐƉĂƌƚŽĨŝƚƐWƌŽƉŽƐĂů͘^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ ŵĂLJĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĂŶĚĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶƐƵƟůŝnjŝŶŐĂŶLJƚLJƉĞŽĨƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐĂƐŵƵƚƵĂůůLJ ĂŐƌĞĞĚ͘/ŶĂŶLJƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĞŶƚĞƌĞĚƵƟůŝnjŝŶŐƚŚŝƐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͕^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŵƵƐƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞƐƉĞĐŝĮĐƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞƚŽƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚďLJŶƵŵďĞƌĂŶĚƚŽWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ͛ƐƵŶŝƋƵĞ^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůĂĐĐŽƵŶƚŶƵŵďĞƌ͘ 6) ĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůdĞƌŵƐĂŶĚŽŶĚŝƟŽŶƐWĞƌŵŝƩĞĚ͘ WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJĂŶĚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌŵĂLJŶĞŐŽƟĂƚĞĂŶĚ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůƚĞƌŵƐĂŶĚĐŽŶĚŝƟŽŶƐǁŝƚŚŝŶƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĂƟŽŶĂƐŵƵƚƵĂůůLJĂŐƌĞĞĚ͘^ƵĐŚ terms may supplant or supersede this Master Agreement when necessary and as mutually ĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚďLJWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJĂŶĚƚŚĞ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌ͘^ŽƵƌĐĞǁĞůůŚĂƐĞdžƉƌĞƐƐůLJƌĞƐĞƌǀĞĚƚŚĞƌŝŐŚƚĨŽƌ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJƚŽĂĚĚƌĞƐƐĂŶLJŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐǁŝƚŚŝŶƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ not expressly included within this DĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐďƵƚŶŽƚůŝŵŝƚĞĚƚŽƚƌĂŶƐĂĐƟŽŶ ĐĂŶĐĞůůĂƟŽŶ͕ĚŝƐƉƵƚĞƌĞƐŽůƵƟŽŶ͕ŐŽǀĞƌŶŝŶŐůĂǁĂŶĚǀĞŶƵĞ͕ŶŽŶ-ĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƟŽŶ͕ŝŶƐƵƌĂŶĐĞ͕ĚĞĨĞŶƐĞ ĂŶĚŝŶĚĞŵŶŝƚLJ͕ĨŽƌĐĞŵĂũĞƵƌĞ͕ĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƚĞƌŵƐĂƐŵƵƚƵĂůůLJĂŐƌĞĞĚ͘ 7) ^ƵďƐĞƋƵĞŶƚŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƐĂŶĚ^ƵƌǀŝǀĂů͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŵĂLJĞŶƚĞƌŝŶƚŽĂƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞ ĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƚŽĨĂĐŝůŝƚĂƚĞůŽŶŐ-ƚĞƌŵƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞŽďůŝŐĂƟŽŶƐƵƟůŝnjŝŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵƐŽĨƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌ ŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĂƐŵƵƚƵĂůůLJĂŐƌĞĞĚ͘^ƵĐŚĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƐŵĂLJƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĨŽƌĂƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞƉĞƌŝŽĚĞdžƚĞŶĚŝŶŐ beyond thĞĨƵůůƚĞƌŵŽĨƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚĂƐĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚŝŶƚŚĞĚŝƐĐƌĞƟŽŶŽĨWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ͘ 8) WĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐĚĚĞŶĚƵŵƐ͘ ^ƵƉƉůŝĞƌĂŶĚWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJŵĂLJĞŶƚĞƌĂWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐĚĚĞŶĚƵŵŽƌ ƐŝŵŝůĂƌĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĞdžƚĞŶĚŝŶŐĂŶĚƐƵƉƉůĞŵĞŶƟŶŐƚŚĞƚĞƌŵƐŽĨƚŚŝƐDĂƐƚĞƌŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚƚŽĨĂĐŝůŝƚĂƚĞ ĂĚŽƉƟŽŶĂƐŵĂLJďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚďLJĂWĂƌƟĐŝƉĂƟŶŐ ŶƟƚLJ͘ Sourcewell Toter, LLC LJ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ LJ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ :ĞƌĞŵLJ^ĐŚǁĂƌƚnj >ĂƵƌĂW͘,ƵďďĂƌĚ dŝƚůĞ͗ŚŝĞĨWƌŽĐƵƌĞŵĞŶƚKĨĨŝĐĞƌ dŝƚůĞ͗ŝƌĞĐƚŽƌŽĨDƵŶŝĐŝƉĂů^ĂůĞƐ ĂƚĞ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ ĂƚĞ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ 200 5)33ODVWLF5HIXVHDQG5HF\FOLQJ&RQWDLQHUVZLWK 5HODWHG7HFKQRORJ\6ROXWLRQV 9HQGRU'HWDLOV &RPSDQ\1DPH 7RWHU//& $GGUHVV 0HDFKDP5RDG 6WDWHVYLOOH1RUWK&DUROLQD &RQWDFW .HOOLH&ODUN (PDLO WRWHUELGV#WRWHUFRP 3KRQH )D[ +67 6XEPLVVLRQ'HWDLOV &UHDWHG2Q 7XHVGD\2FWREHU 6XEPLWWHG2Q 7XHVGD\'HFHPEHU 6XEPLWWHG%\ .HOOLH&ODUN (PDLO WRWHUELGV#WRWHUFRP 7UDQVDFWLRQ DF D GHHD HDG 6XEPLWWHU V,3$GGUHVV Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 201 6SHFLILFDWLRQV 7DEOH 3URSRVHU,GHQWLW\ $XWKRUL]HG5HSUHVHQWDWLYHV 1RW6FRUHG *HQHUDO,QVWUXFWLRQV DSSOLHVWRDOO7DEOHV 6RXUFHZHOOSUHIHUVDEULHIEXWWKRURXJKUHVSRQVHWRHDFKTXHVWLRQ'RQRWPHUHO\DWWDFK DGGLWLRQDOGRFXPHQWVWR\RXUUHVSRQVHZLWKRXWDOVRSURYLGLQJDVXEVWDQWLYHUHVSRQVH'RQRWOHDYHDQVZHUVEODQN UHVSRQG³1$´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¶VFRUSRUDWHRUJDQL]DWLRQDIILOLDWLRQ /LQH ,WHP 4XHVWLRQ 5HVSRQVH 3URYLGHௐWKHௐOHJDOௐQDPHௐRIௐWKHௐ3URSRVHUௐ DXWKRUL]HGௐWRௐVXEPLWௐWKLVௐ3URSRVDO 7RWHUௐ//& ,QௐWKHௐHYHQWௐRIௐDZDUGௐLVௐWKLVௐHQWLW\ௐWKHௐ 5HVSRQVLEOHௐ6XSSOLHUௐWKDWௐZLOOௐH[HFXWHௐWKHௐ PDVWHUௐDJUHHPHQWௐZLWKௐ6RXUFHZHOO"ௐ<ௐRUௐ1 <HV ,GHQWLI\ௐDOOௐVXEVLGLDULHVௐ'%$ௐDXWKRUL]HGௐ DIILOLDWHVௐDQGௐDQ\ௐRWKHUௐHQWLW\ௐWKDWௐZLOOௐEHௐ UHVSRQVLEOHௐIRUௐRIIHULQJௐDQGௐSHUIRUPLQJௐGHOLYHU\ௐ RIௐ6ROXWLRQVௐZLWKLQௐWKLVௐ3URSRVDOௐ LHௐ 5HVSRQVLEOHௐ6XSSOLHU V ௐWKDWௐZLOOௐH[HFXWHௐDௐPDVWHUௐDJUHHPHQWௐZLWKௐ6RXUFHZHOO 7RWHUௐ//& VௐDIILOLDWHVௐDUHௐLWVௐ:DVWHTXLSௐVLVWHUௐFRPSDQLHVௐ&RQWDLQHU3URVௐDQGௐ ZDVWHZDUH ௐKRZHYHUௐ7RWHUௐ//&ௐLVௐWKHௐ5HVSRQVLEOHௐ6XSSOLHUௐWRௐH[HFXWHௐWKLVௐPDVWHUௐ DJUHHPHQWௐZLWKௐ6RXUFHZHOO 3URYLGHௐ\RXUௐ&$*(ௐFRGHௐRUௐ8QLTXHௐ(QWLW\ௐ ,GHQWLILHUௐ 6$0 8QLTXHௐ(QWLW\ௐ,' ௐ6-)15%3(7&=ௐ&$*(ௐ&RGH ௐ= < 3URYLGHௐ\RXUௐ1$,&6ௐFRGHௐDSSOLFDEOHௐWRௐ 6ROXWLRQVௐSURSRVHG ௐ3ODVWLFVௐ0DWHULDOௐDQGௐ5HVLQௐ0DQXIDFWXULQJௐ ௐ3ODVWLFௐ7UDVKௐ&DQVௐௐ$OOௐ 2WKHUௐ3ODVWLFVௐ3URGXFWௐ0DQXIDFWXULQJௐ ௐ:DVWHௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐ ௐ6DQLWDWLRQௐ 6HUYLFHVௐ ௐ5HIXVHௐ6\VWHPVௐ ௐ5HF\FOLQJௐ(TXLSPHQWௐ ௐ6\VWHPVௐௐ 7UDQVIHUௐ6WDWLRQௐ&RPSDFWRUVௐௐ6ROLGௐ:DVWHௐ&ROOHFWLRQ 3URSRVHUௐ3K\VLFDOௐ$GGUHVV ௐ0HDFKDPௐ5Gௐ6WDWHVYLOOHௐ1&ௐ 3URSRVHUௐZHEVLWHௐDGGUHVVௐ RUௐDGGUHVVHV ZZZWRWHUFRP 3URSRVHU Vௐ$XWKRUL]HGௐ5HSUHVHQWDWLYHௐ QDPHௐWLWOHௐDGGUHVVௐHPDLOௐDGGUHVVௐ ௐSKRQH ௐ 7KHௐ UHSUHVHQWDWLYHௐPXVWௐKDYHௐDXWKRULW\ௐWRௐVLJQௐ WKHௐ³3URSRVHU¶Vௐ$VVXUDQFHௐRIௐ&RPSOLDQFH´ௐRQௐ EHKDOIௐRIௐWKHௐ3URSRVHU /DXUDௐ3ௐ+XEEDUGௐ'LUHFWRUௐRIௐ0XQLFLSDOௐ6DOHVௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐ0HDFKDPௐ5RDGௐ6WDWHVYLOOHௐ1RUWKௐ&DUROLQDௐௐOKXEEDUG#ZDVWHTXLSFRPௐ 3URSRVHU VௐSULPDU\ௐFRQWDFWௐIRUௐWKLVௐSURSRVDOௐ QDPHௐWLWOHௐDGGUHVVௐHPDLOௐDGGUHVVௐ ௐSKRQH /DXUDௐ3ௐ+XEEDUGௐ'LUHFWRUௐRIௐ0XQLFLSDOௐ6DOHVௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐ ௐ0HDFKDPௐ5RDGௐ6WDWHVYLOOHௐ1RUWKௐ&DUROLQDௐௐOKXEEDUG#ZDVWHTXLSFRPௐ 3URSRVHU VௐRWKHUௐFRQWDFWVௐIRUௐWKLVௐSURSRVDOௐLIௐ DQ\ௐ QDPHௐWLWOHௐDGGUHVVௐHPDLOௐDGGUHVVௐ ௐ SKRQH .HOOLHௐ.ௐ&ODUNௐ6Uௐ0DQDJHUௐRIௐ%LGVௐDQGௐ&RQWUDFWVௐௐ0HDFKDPௐ5RDGௐ6WDWHVYLOOHௐ 1RUWKௐ&DUROLQDௐௐNFODUN#WRWHUFRPௐ ௐ([Wௐ 7DEOH$ )LQDQFLDO9LDELOLW\DQG0DUNHWSODFH6XFFHVV 3RLQWV /LQH ,WHP 4XHVWLRQ 5HVSRQVH Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 202 3URYLGHௐDௐEULHIௐKLVWRU\ௐRIௐ\RXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐ LQFOXGLQJௐ\RXUௐFRPSDQ\¶VௐFRUHௐYDOXHVௐ EXVLQHVVௐSKLORVRSK\ௐDQGௐLQGXVWU\ௐORQJHYLW\ௐ UHODWHGௐWRௐWKHௐUHTXHVWHGௐ6ROXWLRQV 7RWHUௐKDVௐEHHQௐLQௐFRQWLQXRXVௐRSHUDWLRQௐVLQFHௐ ௐRULJLQDOO\ௐDVௐDௐVXEVLGLDU\ௐRIௐ 5XEEHUPDLGௐ,QFRUSRUDWHGௐௐ2XUௐKHDGTXDUWHUVௐLVௐLQௐ1RUWKௐ&DUROLQDௐௐ7KHௐFRPSDQ\ௐZDVௐ RUJDQL]HGௐDVௐDௐSULYDWHௐFRUSRUDWLRQௐLQௐ ௐDVௐ$SSOLHGௐ3URGXFWVௐ,QFௐDQGௐFKDQJHGௐ WKHௐQDPHௐWRௐ7RWHUௐ,QFRUSRUDWHGௐLQௐ ௐௐ,Qௐௐ7RWHUௐZDVௐDFTXLUHGௐE\ௐ:DVWHTXLSௐDQGௐEHFDPHௐLWVௐODUJHVWௐDFTXLVLWLRQௐDWௐWKHௐWLPHௐௐ:DVWHTXLSௐLVௐWKHௐOHDGLQJௐ1RUWKௐ$PHULFDQௐPDQXIDFWXUHUௐRIௐZDVWHௐKDQGOLQJௐDQGௐUHF\FOLQJௐHTXLSPHQWௐIRFXVHGௐRQௐ PDQXIDFWXULQJௐH[SHUWLVHௐDQGௐSURGXFWௐLQQRYDWLRQௐௐ7RWHUௐDQGௐRWKHUௐ:DVWHTXLSௐGLYLVLRQVௐ SRVLWLRQௐRXUௐSDUHQWௐFRPSDQ\ௐWRௐRIIHUௐDௐIXOOௐOLQHௐRIௐSURGXFWVௐV\VWHPVௐDQGௐVROXWLRQVௐWRௐ FROOHFWௐDQGௐWUDQVSRUWௐMXVWௐDERXWௐDQ\ௐW\SHௐRIௐZDVWHௐDQGௐUHF\FODEOHVௐDQGௐ7RWHUௐSURGXFWVௐ KDYHௐEHHQௐLQFOXGHGௐLQௐDௐSDVWௐ:DVWHTXLSௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐFRQWUDFWௐௐ:DVWHTXLSௐLVௐNQRZQௐ DVௐWKHௐ$OO,Q2QHௐZDVWHௐHTXLSPHQWௐFRPSDQ\ௐZLWKௐWKHௐ7RWHUௐGLYLVLRQ VௐFRQWDLQHUVௐ NQRZQௐDVௐ%XLOWௐIRUௐ([WUHPHV )URPௐWKHௐYHU\ௐILUVWௐFRQWDLQHUௐSURGXFHGௐE\ௐRXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐ7RWHUௐKDVௐILUVWௐVWXGLHVௐWKHௐ QHHGVௐRIௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ(QWLWLHVௐௐ(DFKௐUHTXLUHVௐUHOLDEOHௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐIRUௐ%HVWௐ 9DOXHௐௐ5HSODFLQJௐLWHPVௐDQGௐLQFXUULQJௐDGGLWLRQDOௐVHUYLFHVௐDQGௐFRVWVௐLVௐQRWௐEHVWௐXVHௐ RIௐIXQGLQJௐSHRSOHௐUDZௐPDWHULDOVௐDQGௐRWKHUௐUHVRXUFHVௐDQGௐQHLWKHUௐLVௐELGGLQJௐ UHSHDWHGO\ௐௐ7RWHUௐVHHNVௐWRௐEHௐWKHௐILUVWௐDQGௐEHVWௐVROXWLRQௐLQௐHYHU\ௐVLWXDWLRQௐHDUQLQJௐ WKHௐ$OO,Q2QHௐFDWFKௐSKUDVHௐE\ௐGHOLYHULQJௐULJKWௐZKHQௐ\RXௐQHHGௐLWௐ 7RWHUௐLQWURGXFHGௐDQௐDXWRPDWHGௐFDUWௐV\VWHPௐIRUௐFXUEVLGHௐJDUEDJHௐFROOHFWLRQௐLQௐWKHௐ VௐHDUQLQJௐXVௐRXUௐZHOOGHVHUYHGௐUHSXWDWLRQௐDVௐWKHௐJRWRௐFDUWௐEUDQGௐIRUௐWKHௐ FROOHFWLRQௐRIௐZDVWHௐUHF\FOLQJௐDQGௐRUJDQLFVௐௐ:HௐIRFXVௐRQௐGHYHORSLQJௐSURGXFWVௐWKDWௐ FRPELQHௐSUDFWLFDOௐFRQYHQLHQFHௐH[WUHPHௐGXUDELOLW\ௐDQGௐORQJWHUPௐYDOXHௐWKURXJKௐSURYHQௐ LQGXVWU\ௐOHDGLQJௐSHUIRUPDQFHௐDQGௐZDUUDQW\ௐௐ7RGD\ௐZHௐVHUYHௐZDVWHௐKDXOHUVௐDQGௐ PXQLFLSDOLWLHVௐDVௐZHOOௐDVௐFRPPHUFLDOௐLQGXVWULDOௐDQGௐLQVWLWXWLRQDOௐFXVWRPHUVௐWKURXJKௐ UHJLRQDOௐPDQXIDFWXULQJGLVWULEXWLRQௐIDFLOLWLHVௐORFDWHGௐLQௐ6WDWHVYLOOHௐ1&ௐ KHDGTXDUWHUV ௐ$FXQDௐ0H[LFR ௐDQGௐ'HOௐ5LRௐ7;ௐௐ,WௐLVௐLPSRUWDQWௐWRௐQRWHௐWKDWௐZHௐDUHௐGHGLFDWHGௐWRௐWKHௐZDVWHௐLQGXVWU\ௐQRWௐPDQXIDFWXULQJௐIRUௐDQ\ௐRWKHUௐLQGXVWU\ 2XUௐFRPSDQ\ VௐFRUHௐYDOXHVௐLQFOXGH ௐௐ:HௐDOZD\VௐDFWௐZLWKௐVDIHW\ௐKRQHVW\ௐDQGௐLQWHJULW\ ௐௐ:HௐVHUYHௐFXVWRPHUVௐWRௐWRWDOௐVDWLVIDFWLRQௐE\ௐGHOLYHULQJௐYDOXHௐRULHQWHGௐPDUNHWௐ ௐOHDGLQJௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHV ௐௐ:HௐDFWௐTXLFNO\ௐEXWௐWKRXJKWIXOO\ ௐௐ:HௐLGHQWLI\ௐDQGௐLPSURYHௐWKHௐWKLQJVௐWKDWௐPDWWHUௐPRVWௐௐ:HௐSURYLGHௐFKDOOHQJLQJௐRSSRUWXQLWLHVௐZLWKௐFOHDUௐH[SHFWDWLRQVௐௐ:HௐHPEUDFHௐFKDQJH ௐௐ:HௐPDNHௐFRPPLWPHQWVௐDQGௐNHHSௐWKHPௐHDUQௐWUXVWௐDQGௐFUHDWHௐUHVSHFW :KDWௐDUHௐ\RXUௐFRPSDQ\¶VௐH[SHFWDWLRQVௐLQௐWKHௐHYHQWௐRIௐDQௐDZDUG"7RWHUௐDQWLFLSDWHVௐDௐTXLFNௐWUDQVLWLRQௐIURPௐRXUௐFXUUHQWௐFRQWUDFWௐWRௐDௐQHZௐDQGௐLPSURYHGௐFRQWUDFWௐௐ2XUௐVDOHVௐIRUFHௐGHDOHUVௐDQGௐGLVWULEXWRUVௐDUHௐUHDG\ௐWRௐVHOOௐDQGௐSURYLGHௐ VROXWLRQVௐVHDPOHVVO\ௐWRௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUV ௐQHHGVௐௐ:HௐDOUHDG\ௐKDYHௐWKHௐIDPLOLDULW\ௐWRROVௐ DQGௐVWDIILQJௐLQௐSODFHௐWRௐFRQWLQXRXVO\ௐSURPRWHௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐFRQWUDFWௐLQௐWKHௐ PDUNHWSODFHௐDPRQJௐH[LVWLQJௐDQGௐSRWHQWLDOௐFXVWRPHUVௐDQGௐWRௐVKRZFDVHௐRXUௐSURGXFWVௐ DQGௐVHUYLFHVௐDVௐWRWDOௐVROXWLRQVௐXVLQJௐWKLVௐFRQWUDFWௐௐ7RWHUௐZRXOGௐFRQWLQXHௐDQGௐLQFUHDVHௐ SURPRWLRQௐLQௐWKLVௐZD\ௐWKURXJKRXWௐWKHௐFRQWUDFWௐWHUPௐௐ7RWHUௐZLOOௐLQYROYHௐDQGௐLPSURYHௐRXUௐ GHDOHUௐDQGௐGLVWULEXWRUௐQHWZRUNV ௐXQGHUVWDQGLQJௐRIௐKRZௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐVDWLVILHVௐWKHௐELGGLQJSURSRVDOௐSURFHVVHVௐRIௐFXVWRPHUVௐDQGௐDOORZVௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐWRௐREWDLQௐSURGXFWௐWKH\ௐZDQWௐDQGௐGHVHUYHௐZKLFKௐDOVRௐJDLQVௐIRUௐ7RWHUௐDௐFRPSHWLWLYHௐDGYDQWDJHௐௐ:Hௐ LQWHQGௐWRௐFRQWLQXHௐUHYHQXHௐJURZWKௐE\ௐFRQWLQXLQJௐWRௐJDLQௐPDUNHWௐVKDUH 'HPRQVWUDWHௐ\RXUௐILQDQFLDOௐVWUHQJWKௐDQGௐVWDELOLW\ௐZLWKௐPHDQLQJIXOௐGDWDௐ7KLVௐFRXOGௐ LQFOXGHௐVXFKௐLWHPVௐDVௐILQDQFLDOௐVWDWHPHQWVௐ 6(&ௐILOLQJVௐFUHGLWௐDQGௐERQGௐUDWLQJVௐOHWWHUVௐ RIௐFUHGLWௐDQGௐGHWDLOHGௐUHIHUHQFHௐOHWWHUVௐ 8SORDGௐVXSSRUWLQJௐGRFXPHQWVௐ DVௐDSSOLFDEOH ௐ LQௐWKHௐGRFXPHQWௐXSORDGௐVHFWLRQௐRIௐ\RXUௐ UHVSRQVHௐ'2ௐ127ௐ3529,'(ௐ$1<ௐ7$;ௐ,1)250$7,21ௐ25ௐ3(5621$//<ௐ,'(17,),$%/(ௐ,1)250$7,21 7KHௐDWWDFKHGௐ2UJDQL]DWLRQDOௐ&KDUWௐVKRZVௐ7RWHUௐ//&¶VௐUHODWLRQVKLSௐWRௐ:DVWHTXLSௐ//&ௐDQGௐXOWLPDWHO\ௐWRௐ3DWULRWௐ&RQWDLQHUௐ&RUSௐௐ3DWULRWௐ&RQWDLQHUௐ&RUSௐLVௐWKHௐOHYHOௐRIௐ RZQHUVKLSௐZKHUHௐZHௐSURGXFHௐRXUௐILQDQFLDOௐVWDWHPHQWVௐDQGௐUHSRUWௐHDUQLQJVௐDQGௐZHௐ WKHUHIRUHௐKDYHௐDWWDFKHGௐDௐFRS\ௐRIௐRXUௐPRVWௐUHFHQWௐXQDXGLWHGௐILQDQFLDOVௐௐ$VௐDௐ SULYDWHO\ௐKHOGௐFRPSDQ\ௐRXUௐILQDQFLDOௐVWDWHPHQWVௐDUHௐSURSULHWDU\ௐWUDGHௐVHFUHWVௐDQGௐZHௐ WDNHௐJUHDWௐOHQJWKVௐWRௐSURWHFWௐWKHௐFRQILGHQWLDOLW\ௐRIௐWKLVௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐE\ௐUHVWULFWLQJௐ GLVFORVXUHௐRIௐWKLVௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐWRௐWKRVHௐWKDWௐKDYHௐDௐQHHGௐWRௐNQRZௐIRUௐDௐVSHFLILFௐ SXUSRVHௐ W\SLFDOO\ௐWKURXJKௐQRQGLVFORVXUHௐDJUHHPHQWV ௐ7RWHUௐ//&ௐLVௐSURYLGLQJௐWKHVHௐILQDQFLDOௐVWDWHPHQWVௐDVௐUHTXLUHGௐE\ௐWKHௐ5)3ௐWHUPVௐDQGௐWUXVWVௐWKDWௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐZLOOௐQRWௐSRVWௐWKLVௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐIRUௐSXEOLFௐYLHZLQJௐDQGௐSURYLGHௐ7RWHUௐZLWKௐQRWLFHௐLIௐDௐ)2,$ௐ UHTXHVWௐLVௐPDGHௐIRUௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐWKDWௐZRXOGௐLQFOXGHௐWKHVHௐILQDQFLDOௐVWDWHPHQWV :KDWௐLVௐ\RXUௐ86ௐPDUNHWௐVKDUHௐIRUௐWKHௐ6ROXWLRQVௐWKDWௐ\RXௐDUHௐSURSRVLQJ":KLOHௐ7RWHU VௐH[DFWௐPDUNHWௐVKDUHௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐLVௐFRPSDQ\ௐFRQILGHQWLDOௐDQGௐFULWLFDOௐWRௐRXUௐVWUDWHJ\ௐIRUௐVXFFHVVௐZHௐFDQௐVKDUHௐPRUHௐDERXWௐRXUௐPDUNHWௐSRVLWLRQௐ%DVHGௐRQௐ RXUௐLQWHUQDOௐHVWLPDWHVௐZHௐGHWHUPLQHGௐWKDWௐ7RWHUௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐFRQVLVWHQWO\ௐHQMR\VௐDௐWRSௐ ௐSRVLWLRQௐLQௐWKHௐ86ௐPDUNHWௐ7RWHUௐ3UR3URGXFWVௐPDLQWDLQVௐDௐWRSௐௐSRVLWLRQௐLQௐWKHௐ86ௐ PDUNHW :KDWௐLVௐ\RXUௐ&DQDGLDQௐPDUNHWௐVKDUHௐIRUௐWKHௐ 6ROXWLRQVௐWKDWௐ\RXௐDUHௐSURSRVLQJ" :KLOHௐ7RWHU VௐH[DFWௐPDUNHWௐVKDUHௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐ,VௐFRPSDQ\ௐFRQILGHQWLDOௐDQGௐFULWLFDOௐWRௐ RXUௐVWUDWHJ\ௐIRUௐVXFFHVVௐZHௐFDQௐVKDUHௐPRUHௐDERXWௐRXUௐPDUNHWௐSRVLWLRQௐ(YHQௐWKRXJKௐ WKHௐ&DQDGLDQௐPDUNHWௐLVௐQRWௐWUDFNHGௐDVௐWKRURXJKO\ௐDVௐWKHௐ86ௐPDUNHWௐZHௐEHOLHYHௐ 7RWHUௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐDOVRௐKROGVௐDௐWRSௐௐSRVLWLRQௐLQௐWKHௐ&DQDGLDQௐPDUNHWௐ:HௐZRXOGௐOLNHௐ WRௐFRQWLQXHௐWRௐJURZௐRXUௐ&DQDGLDQௐPDUNHWௐVKDUHௐE\ௐFRQWLQXLQJௐWRௐWU\ௐDQGௐFRQYLQFHௐ &DQDGLDQௐPXQLFLSDOLWLHVௐWRௐXWLOL]HௐRXUௐFRQWUDFWௐZLWKௐWKHௐKHOSௐRIௐJURXSVௐOLNHௐ50$ Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 203 'LVFORVHௐDOOௐFXUUHQWௐDQGௐFRPSOHWHGௐEDQNUXSWF\ௐ SURFHHGLQJVௐIRUௐ3URSRVHUௐDQGௐDQ\ௐLQFOXGHGௐ SRVVLEOHௐ5HVSRQVLEOHௐ3DUW\ௐZLWKLQௐWKHௐSDVWௐ VHYHQௐ\HDUVௐ3URSRVHUௐPXVWௐSURYLGHௐQRWLFHௐLQௐZULWLQJௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐLIௐLWௐHQWHUVௐDௐEDQNUXSWF\ௐSURFHHGLQJௐDWௐDQ\ௐWLPHௐGXULQJௐWKHௐSHQGHQF\ௐ RIௐWKLVௐ5)3ௐHYDOXDWLRQ 1RQH +RZௐLVௐ\RXUௐRUJDQL]DWLRQௐEHVWௐGHVFULEHG ௐLVௐLWௐDௐPDQXIDFWXUHUௐDௐGLVWULEXWRUGHDOHUUHVHOOHUௐRUௐ DௐVHUYLFHௐSURYLGHU"ௐௐ$QVZHUௐWKHௐTXHVWLRQௐWKDWௐ EHVWௐDSSOLHVௐWRௐ\RXUௐRUJDQL]DWLRQௐHLWKHUௐD ௐRUௐ E D ௐௐௐௐ,Iௐ\RXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐLVௐEHVWௐGHVFULEHGௐDVௐDௐ GLVWULEXWRUGHDOHUUHVHOOHUௐ RUௐVLPLODUௐHQWLW\ ௐ SURYLGHௐ\RXUௐZULWWHQௐDXWKRUL]DWLRQௐWRௐDFWௐDVௐDௐGLVWULEXWRUGHDOHUUHVHOOHUௐIRUௐWKHௐPDQXIDFWXUHUௐRIௐWKHௐSURGXFWVௐSURSRVHGௐLQௐWKLVௐ5)3ௐ,Iௐ DSSOLFDEOHௐLVௐ\RXUௐGHDOHUௐQHWZRUNௐ LQGHSHQGHQWௐRUௐFRPSDQ\ௐRZQHG" E ௐௐௐௐ,Iௐ\RXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐLVௐEHVWௐGHVFULEHGௐDVௐDௐ PDQXIDFWXUHUௐRUௐVHUYLFHௐSURYLGHUௐGHVFULEHௐ \RXUௐUHODWLRQVKLSௐZLWKௐ\RXUௐVDOHVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHௐ IRUFHௐDQGௐZLWKௐ\RXUௐGHDOHUௐQHWZRUNௐLQௐGHOLYHULQJௐWKHௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐSURSRVHGௐLQௐWKLVௐ5)3ௐ$UHௐWKHVHௐLQGLYLGXDOVௐ\RXUௐ HPSOR\HHVௐRUௐWKHௐHPSOR\HHVௐRIௐDௐWKLUGௐSDUW\" 7RWHUௐ//&ௐ,VௐDௐPDQXIDFWXUHUௐDQGௐVHUYLFHௐSURYLGHUௐZLWKௐDௐQHWZRUNௐRIௐGLVWULEXWRUVௐDQGௐGHDOHUVௐDQGௐEHVWௐIDOOௐZLWKLQௐLWHPௐEௐ7KHௐPDMRULW\ௐRIௐ7RWHUௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐVDOHVௐDUHௐ PDGHௐGLUHFWO\ௐLQௐ1RUWKௐ$PHULFDௐE\ௐDXJPHQWLQJௐRXUௐ6DOHVௐIRRWSULQWௐIURPௐ Vௐௐ 5HJLRQDOௐ6DOHVௐ0DQDJHUVௐ 560 ௐWRௐௐ560VௐFXUUHQWO\ௐSOXVௐIURPௐௐWRௐௐ'LYLVLRQௐ 6DOHVௐ'LUHFWRUVௐௐ0XQLFLSDOௐ6DOHVௐ'LUHFWRUௐDQGௐௐ9LFHௐ3UHVLGHQWௐRIௐ6DOHVௐ:HௐDOVRௐ UHO\ௐRQௐZHOOௐHVWDEOLVKHGௐGHDOHUVௐLQௐFHUWDLQௐVWDWHVௐZKRௐDLGௐLQௐGHYHORSLQJௐQHZௐEXVLQHVVௐ DQGௐSURYLGHௐDGGLWLRQDOௐVXSSRUWௐVHUYLFHVௐWRௐ7RWHUௐDFURVVௐWKHௐ86ௐDQGௐ&DQDGDௐ2XUௐ 560VௐGHDOHUௐQHWZRUNௐDQGௐVHUYLFHௐSURYLGHUVௐDUHௐIXOO\ௐVXSSRUWHGௐE\ௐDௐWHDPௐRIௐ&XVWRPHUௐ6DWLVIDFWLRQௐ6SHFLDOLVWVௐ&DOOௐ6SHFLDOLVWVௐDWௐWKHௐ:DVWHTXLSௐ&DOOௐ&HQWHUௐDVௐZHOOௐDVௐDௐGHGLFDWHGௐ%LG&RQWUDFWVௐVWDIIௐDQGௐDௐVSHFLILFௐ4XDOLW\:DUUDQW\ௐ7HDPௐ$OOௐ GHDOHUVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHௐSURYLGHUVௐDUHௐLQGHSHQGHQWௐWKLUGSDUW\ௐFRQWUDFWRUVௐDQGௐHPSOR\ௐWKHLUௐ RZQௐWHDPVௐFRQVLVWLQJௐRIௐVDOHVௐVHUYLFHௐDQGௐZDUUDQW\ௐVWDIIௐ7RWHUௐ3URௐ3URGXFWVௐDUHௐ UHSUHVHQWHGௐE\ௐWKLUGௐSDUW\ௐVDOHVௐDJHQWVௐDQGௐGHDOHUV ,IௐDSSOLFDEOHௐSURYLGHௐDௐGHWDLOHGௐH[SODQDWLRQௐRXWOLQLQJௐWKHௐOLFHQVHVௐDQGௐFHUWLILFDWLRQVௐWKDWௐ DUHௐERWKௐUHTXLUHGௐWRௐEHௐKHOGௐDQGௐDFWXDOO\ௐ KHOGௐE\ௐ\RXUௐRUJDQL]DWLRQௐ LQFOXGLQJௐWKLUGௐ SDUWLHVௐDQGௐVXEFRQWUDFWRUVௐWKDWௐ\RXௐXVH ௐLQௐ SXUVXLWௐRIௐWKHௐEXVLQHVVௐFRQWHPSODWHGௐE\ௐWKLVௐ 5)3 7RWHUௐKDVௐDSSOLFDEOHௐOLFHQVHVௐWRௐRSHUDWHௐLQௐWKHௐ6WDWHௐRIௐ1RUWKௐ&DUROLQDௐWKHௐVWDWHௐRIௐRXUௐKHDGTXDUWHUVௐ:HௐREWDLQௐOLFHQVHVௐLQௐPXQLFLSDOLWLHVௐDQGௐORFDOLWLHVௐLQௐZKLFKௐZHௐDUHௐ UHTXLUHGௐE\ௐFRQWUDFWVௐWRௐUHJLVWHUௐDQGௐREWDLQௐOLFHQVHVௐDVௐUHTXLUHGௐ:HௐRSHUDWHௐ IDFLOLWLHVௐWKDWௐDUHௐ26+$ௐFRPSOLDQWௐRXUௐUROOௐFDUWVௐIRUௐUHVLGHQWLDOௐXVHௐPHHWௐRUௐH[FHHGௐ WKHௐ$PHULFDQௐ1DWLRQDOௐ6WDQGDUGVௐ,QVWLWXWHௐ $16, ௐ6WDQGDUGVௐWRௐHQVXUHௐFRQVLVWHQWௐ TXDOLW\ௐDQGௐVDIHW\ ௐ$16,ௐௐௐ:DVWHௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐௐ6DIHW\ௐ5HTXLUHPHQWVௐ DQGௐௐௐ:DVWHௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐௐ&RPSDWLELOLW\ௐ'LPHQVLRQVௐ2XUௐUROOௐFDUWVௐKDYHௐ EHHQௐLQGHSHQGHQWO\ௐFHUWLILHGௐZLWKௐ:LQGௐ7XQQHOௐ7HVWLQJௐRIௐHPSW\ௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐE\ௐQDWLRQDOO\ௐUHFRJQL]HGௐVFKRROVௐRIௐDHURQDXWLFDOௐHQJLQHHULQJௐDQGௐZHOOௐDVௐWKHௐLQWHUDJHQF\ௐ*UL]]O\ௐ%HDUௐ&RPPLWWHHௐ ,*%& ௐDSSURYDOௐRIௐ7RWHUௐ%HDUௐ&DUWVௐ:HௐFRQFHQWUDWHௐRQௐ FHUWLILFDWLRQVௐDQGௐOLFHQVHVௐWKDWௐDUHௐPHDQLQJIXOௐDQGௐDGYDQWDJHRXVௐWRௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ $JHQFLHVௐ FHUWLI\LQJௐVDIHW\ௐGXUDELOLW\ௐUHOLDELOLW\ௐIXQFWLRQDOLW\ௐDQGௐWKHௐOLNH 'LVFORVHௐDOOௐFXUUHQWௐDQGௐSDVWௐGHEDUPHQWVௐRUௐ VXVSHQVLRQVௐIRUௐ3URSRVHUௐDQGௐDQ\ௐLQFOXGHGௐ SRVVLEOHௐ5HVSRQVLEOHௐ3DUW\ௐZLWKLQௐWKHௐSDVWௐ VHYHQௐ\HDUVௐ3URSRVHUௐPXVWௐSURYLGHௐQRWLFHௐLQௐ ZULWLQJௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐLIௐLWௐHQWHUVௐDௐGHEDUPHQWௐ RUௐVXVSHQVLRQௐVWDWXVௐDQ\ௐWLPHௐGXULQJௐWKHௐ SHQGHQF\ௐRIௐWKLVௐ5)3ௐHYDOXDWLRQ 1RQH Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 204 'HVFULEHௐDQ\ௐUHOHYDQWௐLQGXVWU\ௐDZDUGVௐRUௐ UHFRJQLWLRQௐWKDWௐ\RXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐKDVௐUHFHLYHGௐLQௐ WKHௐSDVWௐILYHௐ\HDUV $VௐWKHௐSDUHQWௐFRPSDQ\ௐRIௐ7RWHUௐ:DVWHTXLSௐDQGௐ7RWHUௐKDYHௐUHFHLYHGௐVHYHUDOௐ UHFRJQLWLRQV ௐ,Qௐௐ7RWHUௐZDVௐQRPLQDWHGௐIRUௐWKHௐ&RROHVWௐ7KLQJௐ0DGHௐLQௐ1&ௐE\ௐWKHௐ1&ௐ &KDPEHUௐFHOHEUDWHVௐ1RUWKௐ&DUROLQD VௐPRVWௐHFRQRPLFDOO\ௐYLWDOௐDQGௐHQGXULQJௐLQGXVWULHVௐDQGௐDOORZVௐWKHௐSXEOLFௐWRௐQRPLQDWHௐDQGௐYRWHௐIRUௐIDYRULWHௐSURGXFWVௐPDQXIDFWXUHGௐLQௐ1RUWKௐ&DUROLQD ௐ(DFKௐ\HDUௐ DQGௐPDQ\ௐ\HDUVௐUXQQLQJ ௐ7RWHUௐLVௐFRQVLVWHQWO\ௐQDPHGௐQDPHGௐE\ௐ3ODVWLFVௐ 1HZVௐDVௐWKHௐWRSௐUDQNHGௐURWDWLRQDOௐPROGHUௐSODVWLFௐFRQWDLQHUVௐLQௐ1RUWKௐ$PHULFDௐDQGௐ DOVRௐDPRQJௐWKHௐWRSௐௐURWDWLRQDOௐPROGHUVௐLQௐ1RUWKௐ$PHULFDௐRYHUDOO ௐ,QௐௐRXUௐVLVWHUௐGLYLVLRQௐ:DVWHEXLOWௐUHFHLYHGௐDQௐLQWHUQDWLRQDOௐ*2/'ௐGRW&200ௐ DZDUGௐIRUௐLWVௐWUDQVIRUPDWLYHௐGLJLWDOௐSUHVHQFHௐLQௐSDUWQHUVKLSௐZLWKௐ$PHULFDQHDJOHFRPௐ DQGௐ2UR&RPPHUFHௐௐ7KLVௐDZDUGௐKRQRUVௐH[FHOOHQFHௐLQௐZHEௐFUHDWLYLW\ௐDQGௐGLJLWDOௐFRPPXQLFDWLRQௐDQGௐDOVRௐUHFRJQL]HVௐWKHௐWLPHௐDQGௐHIIRUWௐ:DVWHEXLOWௐLQYHVWHGௐWRௐEXLOGௐDௐVFDODEOHௐG\QDPLFௐDQGௐLQWHJUDWHGௐVROXWLRQௐWRௐIL[ௐSUREOHPVௐIRUௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐIRUௐ :DVWHEXLOWௐDQGௐDOOௐFRQFHUQHGௐLQௐ:DVWHTXLS VௐH&RPPHUFHGRW&20ௐHQGHDYRUVௐௐ :DVWHEXLOWௐLVௐWKHௐZDVWHௐLQGXVWU\ VௐRQOLQHௐVRXUFHௐIRUௐZDVWHௐHTXLSPHQWௐVXSSOLHVௐDQGௐ UHSODFHPHQWௐSDUWVௐIRUௐUHIXVHௐWUXFNVௐUROORIIௐKRLVWVௐFRPSDFWRUVௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐPRUH ௐLQௐௐWKHௐ1DWLRQDOௐ:DVWHௐ ௐ5HF\FOLQJௐ$VVRFLDWLRQ Vௐ:RPHQ Vௐ&RXQFLOௐDZDUGHGௐ %OXHௐ5LEERQௐWRௐ7RWHU VௐH[KLELWௐKLJKOLJKWLQJௐWKHௐGHWDLOHGௐKLVWRU\ௐDQGௐJURZWKௐRIௐWKHௐ :DVWHௐ ௐ5HF\FOLQJௐ,QGXVWU\ௐௐ,QVSLUDWLRQௐIRUௐWKHௐH[KLELWௐZDVௐ/DXUDௐ+XEEDUG Vௐ7RWHU Vௐ'LUHFWRUௐRIௐ0XQLFLSDOௐ6DOHVௐDQGௐWKHQௐFRQVWUXFWHGௐE\ௐ7RGGௐ:ULJKWௐ(QJLQHHULQJௐ 0DQDJHUௐLQௐFRQMXQFWLRQௐZLWKௐ$SSDODFKLDQௐ0DFKLQHௐDௐORQJWLPHௐ7RWHUௐVXSSOLHUௐRIௐ&DUWௐ /LIWHUVௐDQGௐSDUWVௐ ௐௐ ([HFXWLYHௐ7HDPௐ$ZDUGV ௐ:DVWHௐௐDZDUGHGௐ7RWHU Vௐ%ULWWDQ\ௐ7D\ORUௐ5HJLRQDOௐ6DOHVௐ0DQDJHUௐWRௐWKHௐௐ FODVVௐRIௐ³ௐXQGHUௐ´ௐDZDUGVௐௐ&KDQFHௐ+HQQLJௐ5HJLRQDOௐ6DOHVௐ0DQDJHUௐZDVௐDOVRௐQDPHGௐWRௐWKHௐௐ&ODVVௐௐௐ7KHௐSURJUDPௐUHFRJQL]HVௐLQVSLULQJௐDQGௐLQQRYDWLYHௐSURIHVVLRQDOVௐXQGHUௐWKHௐDJHௐRIௐௐZKRVHௐZRUNௐLQௐZDVWHௐUHF\FOLQJௐDQGௐRUJDQLFVௐKDVௐ PDGHௐDௐVLJQLILFDQWௐFRQWULEXWLRQௐWRௐWKHௐZDVWHௐDQGௐUHF\FOLQJௐLQGXVWU\ :KDWௐSHUFHQWDJHௐRIௐ\RXUௐVDOHVௐDUHௐWRௐWKHௐJRYHUQPHQWDOௐVHFWRUௐLQௐWKHௐSDVWௐWKUHHௐ\HDUV"7RWHU VௐVDOHVௐWRௐWKHௐJRYHUQPHQWDOௐVHFWRUௐIURPௐௐZHUHௐDSSUR[LPDWHO\ௐ :KDWௐSHUFHQWDJHௐRIௐ\RXUௐVDOHVௐDUHௐWRௐWKHௐ HGXFDWLRQௐVHFWRUௐLQௐWKHௐSDVWௐWKUHHௐ\HDUV" :KLOHௐ7RWHUௐKDVௐVDOHVௐWRௐHGXFDWLRQௐFXVWRPHUVௐ7RWHUௐGRHVௐQRWௐWUDFNௐWKHௐHGXFDWLRQௐ VHFWRU /LVWௐDOOௐVWDWHௐFRRSHUDWLYHௐSXUFKDVLQJௐ DJUHHPHQWVௐWKDWௐ\RXௐKROGௐ:KDWௐLVௐWKHௐDQQXDOௐ VDOHVௐYROXPHௐIRUௐHDFKௐRIௐWKHVHௐDJUHHPHQWௐ RYHUௐWKHௐSDVWௐWKUHHௐ\HDUV" 2XUௐDQQXDOௐVDOHVௐYROXPHVௐRQௐWKHௐDJJUHJDWHௐIRUௐVWDWHௐDQGௐQDWLRQDOௐFRRSHUDWLYHௐ SXUFKDVLQJௐFRQWUDFWVௐKDVௐJURZQௐZLWKௐRXUௐFRQWLQXRXVௐFRPPLWPHQWௐRXWUHDFKௐDQGௐ GLOLJHQFHௐWRௐSURYLGHௐQHZௐDQGௐFRQVLVWHQWௐVROXWLRQVௐIRUௐPHPEHUௐDJHQFLHVௐWKURXJKௐRXUௐ FRRSHUDWLYHௐFRQWUDFWVௐRYHUௐWKHௐSDVWௐWKUHHௐ\HDUV ௐௐRYHUௐௐௐLQFUHDVHௐRIௐRYHUௐ ௐௐRYHUௐௐௐLQFUHDVHௐRIௐRYHUௐ ௐௐRYHUௐௐௐLQFUHDVHௐRIௐQHDUO\ௐ ௐௐLVௐHVWLPDWHGௐWRௐVXUSDVVௐௐLQௐVDOHVௐRIIௐWKLVௐFRQWUDFW 5HVWULFWLRQVௐXQGHUௐWKHௐUHVSHFWLYHௐFRRSHUDWLYHௐSXUFKDVLQJௐDJUHHPHQWVௐSUHYHQWௐRXUௐ DELOLW\ௐWRௐVSHFLILFDOO\ௐLGHQWLI\ௐDQQXDOௐVDOHVௐYROXPHVௐIRUௐHDFKௐVXFKௐFRQWUDFW /LVWௐDQ\ௐ*6$ௐFRQWUDFWVௐRUௐ6WDQGLQJௐ2IIHUVௐ DQGௐ6XSSO\ௐ$UUDQJHPHQWVௐ 626$ ௐWKDWௐ\RXௐ KROGௐ:KDWௐLVௐWKHௐDQQXDOௐVDOHVௐYROXPHௐIRUௐ HDFKௐRIௐWKHVHௐFRQWUDFWVௐRYHUௐWKHௐSDVWௐWKUHHௐ \HDUV" 1RQH 7DEOH% 5HIHUHQFHV7HVWLPRQLDOV /LQH,WHP6XSSO\UHIHUHQFHLQIRUPDWLRQIURPWKUHHFXVWRPHUVZKRDUHHOLJLEOHWREH6RXUFHZHOOSDUWLFLSDWLQJHQWLWLHV (QWLW\1DPH &RQWDFW1DPH 3KRQH1XPEHU 3ULQFHௐ*HRUJH Vௐ&RXQW\ௐ0DU\ODQG 7LPRWK\ௐ5LFKDUGV &LW\ௐRIௐ0HPSKLVௐ7HQQHVVHH 3KLOOLSௐ'DYLV &LW\ௐRIௐ)RUWௐ:RUWKௐ7H[DV &KULVWLDQௐ+DUSHU 7DEOH $ELOLW\WR6HOODQG'HOLYHU6ROXWLRQV 3RLQWV 'HVFULEH\RXUFRPSDQ\¶VFDSDELOLW\WRPHHWWKHQHHGVRI6RXUFHZHOOSDUWLFLSDWLQJHQWLWLHVDFURVVWKH86DQG&DQDGDDVDSSOLFDEOH<RXU UHVSRQVHVKRXOGDGGUHVVLQGHWDLODWOHDVWWKHIROORZLQJDUHDV ORFDWLRQVRI\RXUQHWZRUNRIVDOHVDQGVHUYLFHSURYLGHUVWKHQXPEHURI ZRUNHUV IXOOWLPHHTXLYDOHQWV LQYROYHGLQHDFKVHFWRUZKHWKHUWKHVHZRUNHUVDUH\RXUGLUHFWHPSOR\HHV RUHPSOR\HHVRIDWKLUGSDUW\ DQGDQ\RYHUODSEHWZHHQWKHVDOHVDQGVHUYLFHIXQFWLRQV /LQH ,WHP 4XHVWLRQ 5HVSRQVH Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 205 6DOHVௐIRUFH ,Qௐௐ7RWHUௐH[SDQGHGௐWKHௐVDOHVௐWHDPௐIURPௐௐWRௐௐ5HJLRQDOௐ6DOHVௐ0DQDJHUVௐDOOௐ EDVHGௐLQௐNH\ௐORFDWLRQVௐWKURXJKRXWௐWKHௐFRXQWU\ௐZKRௐZLOOௐEHௐUHVSRQVLEOHௐIRUௐILHOGௐVXSSRUWௐ RIௐDOOௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐPHPEHUVௐ7KHVHௐLQGXVWU\ௐH[SHUWVௐSHUIRUPௐDOOௐDFWLRQVௐQHFHVVDU\ௐWRௐ SURGXFHௐDௐVXSHULRUௐOHYHOௐRIௐVDOHVௐLQFOXGLQJௐEXWௐQRWௐOLPLWHGௐWR ௐPDNLQJௐVDOHVௐFDOOVௐQHFHVVDU\ௐWRௐFRYHUௐWHUULWRU\ௐDVVLVWLQJௐZLWKௐWHVWௐSURJUDPVௐDVVLVWௐZLWKௐPXQLFLSDOௐFRQWUDFWௐLVVXHVௐXQLTXHௐSURGXFWௐDSSOLFDWLRQVௐDQGௐDOOௐRWKHUௐILHOGௐVHUYLFHௐLVVXHVௐௐ7KH\ௐPD\ௐDOVRௐ EHௐUHVSRQVLEOHௐIRUௐUHSRUWLQJௐFRQWUDFWௐXSGDWHVௐWRௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ$JHQFLHVௐDVௐZHOOௐDVௐ IRUHFDVWLQJௐODUJHௐSURMHFWVௐFRRUGLQDWLQJௐQRQFRUHௐSURJUDPௐLWHPVௐDQGௐJHQHUDOௐFRQWUDFWௐ IDFLOLWDWLRQௐௐ 7RWHUௐDOVRௐKDVௐLQௐSODFHௐௐ5HJLRQDOௐ6DOHVௐ'LUHFWRUVௐRYHUௐWKHௐDERYHௐ0DQDJHUVௐZLWKௐ VXSSRUWௐIURPௐWKHௐ'LUHFWRUௐRIௐ0XQLFLSDOௐ6DOHVௐDQGௐWKHௐ%LG&RQWUDFWௐWHDPௐௐ7RWHU¶VௐH[HFXWLYHௐOHYHOௐHQVXUHௐWKDWௐORQJௐWHUPௐVWUDWHJLFௐSDUWQHUௐLVVXHVௐVXFKௐDVௐRQJRLQJௐFRVWௐUHGXFWLRQVௐDQGௐQHZௐSURGXFWௐLQQRYDWLRQVௐDUHௐSXUVXHGௐDJJUHVVLYHO\ 7RWHUௐDOVRௐKDVௐDQௐ,QVLGHௐ6DOHVௐ7HDPௐVXSSRUWLQJௐWKHௐDERYHௐWRௐSURYLGHௐTXRWLQJௐDQGௐ DVVLVWDQFHௐDVௐQHHGHGௐௐ7KHUHௐDUHௐௐ,QVLGHௐ6DOHVௐVWDIIௐOHGௐE\ௐௐPDQDJHUௐSRVLWLRQௐௐ 7KLVௐWHDPௐH[WHQGVௐDOOௐRIௐ:DVWHTXLS¶Vௐ6DOHVௐ7HDPVௐLQFOXGLQJௐ7RWHUௐVDOHVௐWRௐSURYLGHௐ FHQWUDOO\ௐORFDWHGௐVXSSRUWௐIRUௐDFURVVௐ1RUWKௐ$PHULFDௐDQGௐEH\RQG 7RWHUௐZLOOௐFRQWLQXHௐWRௐXVHௐRXUௐEHVWௐUHVRXUFHVௐRIௐWLPHௐH[SHULHQFHௐDQGௐSHUVRQQHOௐWRௐ VXFFHVVIXOO\ௐVXSSRUWௐDQGௐJURZௐWKLVௐFRQWUDFWௐௐ:HௐSURYLGHௐRQJRLQJௐWUDLQLQJௐWRௐFDUU\ௐRXWௐ WKHௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐRIௐWKHௐFRQWUDFWௐDQGௐUHTXLUHௐDOOௐQHZௐVDOHVௐUHSVௐDWWHQGௐDௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ 8QLYHUVLW\ௐRUௐVLPLODUௐHYHQWௐLQௐWKHLUௐWHUULWRU\ 'HVFULEHௐWKHௐQHWZRUNௐRIௐ$XWKRUL]HGௐ6HOOHUVௐ ZKRௐZLOOௐGHOLYHUௐ6ROXWLRQVௐLQFOXGLQJௐGHDOHUVௐ GLVWULEXWRUVௐUHVHOOHUVௐDQGௐRWKHUௐGLVWULEXWLRQௐ PHWKRGV 7RWHU Vௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐ'LYLVLRQௐKDVௐZHOOௐHVWDEOLVKHGௐGHDOHUVௐLQௐFHUWDLQௐVWDWHVௐZKRௐDLGௐLQௐ GHYHORSLQJௐQHZௐEXVLQHVVௐDQGௐSURYLGHௐDGGLWLRQDOௐVXSSRUWௐVHUYLFHVௐWRௐ7RWHUௐDFURVVௐWKHௐ 86ௐDQGௐ&DQDGDௐ7RWHU Vௐ3URௐ3URGXFWVௐ'LYLVLRQௐKDVௐDௐQHWZRUNௐRIௐDSSUR[LPDWHO\ௐௐ LQGHSHQGHQWௐGHDOHUVௐDQGௐDSSUR[LPDWHO\ௐௐQDWLRQDOௐGLVWULEXWRUVௐௐ2XUௐGHDOHUௐQHWZRUNௐ DQGௐVHUYLFHௐSURYLGHUVௐDUHௐIXOO\ௐVXSSRUWHGௐE\ௐRXUௐVDOHVௐVHUYLFHௐDQGௐZDUUDQW\ௐWHDPV 6HUYLFHௐIRUFH $VௐDIILOLDWHVௐXQGHUௐWKLVௐFRQWUDFWௐ7RWHUௐXWLOL]HVௐRXUௐ:DVWHTXLSௐVLVWHUௐFRPSDQ\ௐFDOOHGௐ &RQWDLQHU3URVௐWKDWௐSURYLGHVௐVHUYLFHVௐUHODWLYHௐWRௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐWKURXJKRXWௐWKHௐ8QLWHGௐ 6WDWHVௐ&RQWDLQHU3URVௐHPSOR\VௐDௐQXPEHUௐRIௐLQGLYLGXDOVௐDWௐPXOWLSOHௐOHYHOVௐWRௐPDQDJHௐ DQGௐRSHUDWHௐWKHௐVHUYLFHVௐUHTXHVWHGௐ7KHVHௐLQGLYLGXDOVௐUDQJHௐIURPௐ'LUHFWRUVௐ3URMHFWௐ 0DQDJHUVௐ3URMHFWௐ&RRUGLQDWRUVௐ3URMHFWௐ6XSHUYLVRUVௐ/HDGVௐ6DOHVௐHWFௐ&RQWDLQHU3URVௐDOVRௐXWLOL]HVௐPXOWLSOHௐWKLUGSDUW\ௐYHQGRUVௐWRௐDVVLVWௐLQௐSURMHFWVௐDFURVVௐWKHௐ86ௐDQGௐ&DQDGDௐ7KHUHௐLVௐQRௐSURMHFWௐWRRௐ/DUJHௐRUௐWRRௐ6PDOOௐ /LNHZLVHௐZHௐXWLOL]HௐRXUௐ:DVWHTXLSௐVLVWHUௐGLYLVLRQௐFDOOHGௐZDVWHZDUHௐWRௐVXSSO\ௐ WHFKQRORJ\ௐ 5),'ௐSULPDULO\ ௐDQGௐUHODWHGௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐௐ6HUYLFHVௐPD\ௐLQFOXGHௐ WUDLQLQJVௐZLWKௐKDQGVௐRQௐZDONWKURXJKVௐ VDQGER[HVௐDQGௐ0HPEHU VௐSXUFKDVHGௐSURGXFWV ௐ DQGௐRWKHUௐVHUYLFHௐVXSSRUWௐLVௐDYDLODEOHௐௐ:HௐVHHNௐWRௐDVVLVWௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ0HPEHUVௐWRௐ JHWௐWKHௐPRVWௐIURPௐDOOௐSXUFKDVHVௐRIIௐWKLVௐFRQWUDFWௐDQGௐDFURVVௐ:DVWHTXLSௐDVௐZKDWௐZHௐFRQVLGHUௐ7KHௐ5LJKWௐ7KLQJௐ7Rௐ'RௐVLQFHௐHYHU\ௐGROODUௐLQௐDௐSXUFKDVHௐPXVWௐFRXQWௐDQGௐVXSSRUWௐLVௐNH\ௐIRUௐSXUFKDVHUV ௐQHHGV 'HVFULEHௐWKHௐRUGHULQJௐSURFHVVௐ,IௐRUGHUVௐZLOOௐEHௐKDQGOHGௐE\ௐGLVWULEXWRUVௐGHDOHUVௐRUௐRWKHUVௐH[SODLQௐWKHௐUHVSHFWLYHௐUROHVௐRIௐWKHௐ 3URSRVHUௐDQGௐRWKHUV 2XUௐJHQHUDOௐRXWOLQHௐIRUௐRUGHUௐSURFHVVLQJௐLV ௐ7RWHUௐSUHSDUHVௐSURSRVDOௐGRFXPHQWVௐEDVHGௐRQௐSURGXFWௐVHOHFWLRQௐE\ௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHU ௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ$ZDUGHGௐ&RQWUDFWௐORJRௐTXRWHௐLVௐSURYLGHGௐWRௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐPHPEHUௐ XWLOL]LQJௐRXUௐ6DOHV)RUFHFRPௐ&50ௐ &XVWRPHUௐ5HODWLRQVKLSௐ0DQDJHPHQW ௐV\VWHP ௐ8SRQௐTXRWHௐDFFHSWDQFHௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHUௐLVVXHVௐDௐ:ULWWHQௐ3XUFKDVHௐ2UGHUௐ WRௐ7RWHUௐௐ ௐ2UGHUௐLVௐHQWHUHGௐHOHFWURQLFDOO\ௐLQWRௐWKHௐ7RWHUௐ'&50ௐRUGHUௐHQWU\ௐV\VWHP ௐ2UGHUௐGHWDLOVௐDUHௐFRQILUPHGௐLQௐZULWLQJௐE\ௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐZLWKௐDQௐ2UGHUௐ&RQILUPDWLRQௐDQGௐ0DUNLQJVௐ$SSURYDOVௐ)RUPVௐ2QFHௐVLJQHGௐRUGHUௐDFNQRZOHGJHPHQWௐLVௐUHFHLYHGௐRUGHUௐLVௐUHOHDVHGௐIRUௐSURGXFWLRQௐ SODQQLQJௐIRUௐDௐSURGXFWLRQௐWLPHIUDPH 2UGHUௐLVௐSURGXFHGௐWRௐUHTXLUHGௐVSHFLILFDWLRQV 7RWHUௐORJLVWLFVௐWHDPGULYHU V ௐFRQWDFWVௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHUௐWRௐVFKHGXOHௐGHOLYHU\ 2UGHUௐLVௐGHOLYHUHGௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHU ௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHUௐLVௐLQYRLFHG ௐ5HSRUWௐRIௐ6DOHVௐLVௐJHQHUDWHGௐRXWௐRIௐWKHௐ7RWHUௐ&50ௐIRUௐVSHFLILFௐUHSRUWLQJௐSHULRGVௐDVௐQHHGHG ௐ6DOHVௐIURPௐWKHௐ&50ௐDUHௐUHSRUWHGௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐDQGௐDGPLQLVWUDWLYHௐIHHௐLVௐSDLGௐ SHUௐWKHௐSHUFHQWDJHௐWRௐEHௐGHWHUPLQHGௐE\ௐWLPHௐRIௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ$ZDUG&RQWUDFWௐ SHUௐ FRQWUDFWௐHVWDEOLVKHGௐVFKHGXOH Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 206 'HVFULEHௐLQௐGHWDLOௐWKHௐSURFHVVௐDQGௐ SURFHGXUHௐRIௐ\RXUௐFXVWRPHUௐVHUYLFHௐ SURJUDPௐLIௐDSSOLFDEOHௐௐ,QFOXGHௐ\RXUௐ UHVSRQVHWLPHௐFDSDELOLWLHVௐDQGௐFRPPLWPHQWVௐDVௐZHOOௐDVௐDQ\ௐLQFHQWLYHVௐWKDWௐKHOSௐ\RXUௐSURYLGHUVௐPHHWௐ\RXUௐVWDWHGௐ VHUYLFHௐJRDOVௐRUௐSURPLVHV 7RWHU Vௐ&XVWRPHUௐ6HUYLFHௐWHDPௐVWULYHVௐWRௐEHௐWKHௐEHVWௐLQௐWKHௐEXVLQHVVௐE\ௐFRQVLVWHQWO\ௐ DQGௐSURDFWLYHO\ௐWHQGLQJௐWRௐWKHௐQHHGVௐRIௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐ:HௐKDYHௐVLJQLILFDQWௐH[SHULHQFHௐ LQௐVHUYLFLQJௐERWKௐODUJHௐDQGௐVPDOOௐPXQLFLSDOௐDQGௐSULYDWHO\RZQHGௐDFFRXQWVௐELJௐER[ௐ UHWDLOHUVௐVXFKௐDVௐ7KHௐ+RPHௐ'HSRWௐ/RZHVௐ:DOPDUWௐ7UXH9DOXHௐDQGௐDGGLWLRQDOௐUHWDLOHUVௐ%HFDXVHௐRIௐWKHௐH[WHQVLYHௐFXVWRPHUௐEDVHௐDQGௐWKHLUௐH[SHFWDWLRQVௐZHௐSURYLGHௐULJRURXVௐMXVWLQWLPHௐGHOLYHU\ௐSHUIRUPDQFHௐDQGௐUHVSRQVLYHௐFXVWRPHUௐVHUYLFH :HௐFRQWLQXHௐWRௐEHOLHYHௐWKDWௐRXUௐFRPPLWPHQWௐWRௐRYHUDOOௐFXVWRPHUௐVDWLVIDFWLRQௐLVௐKRZௐZHௐ NHHSௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐKDSS\ௐ:HௐH[SHFWௐWKDWௐDOOௐFXVWRPHUVௐZLOOௐKDYHௐDௐJUHDWௐH[SHULHQFHௐ ZLWKௐRXUௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐXVௐ$VௐVXFKௐZHௐFRQWLQXHௐWRௐKROGௐWRௐRXUௐDGRSWHGௐFXVWRPHUௐ VHUYLFHௐFUHGR ௐ &200,70(17ௐ:HௐZLOOௐWUHDWௐDOOௐFXVWRPHUVௐZLWKௐUHVSHFWௐ UHJDUGOHVVௐRIௐVL]H ௐ ௐ:HௐZLOOௐIROORZௐXSௐZLWKௐ\RXௐXSRQௐUHFHLSWௐRIௐ\RXUௐRUGHUௐWRௐHQVXUHௐVDWLVIDFWLRQௐ ௐ:HௐZLOOௐUHVROYHௐDQ\ௐLVVXHVௐTXLFNO\ 6833257 ௐ:HௐZLOOௐSURYLGHௐDௐGHGLFDWHGௐ&XVWRPHUௐ6HUYLFHௐ6DWLVIDFWLRQௐ &66 ௐVSHFLDOLVWௐIRUௐHDFKௐ SDUWLFLSDWLQJௐPHPEHUௐ SOXVௐHDFKௐ&66ௐEDFNVௐRWKHUV ௐWHUULWRULHVௐWRௐHQVXUHௐVHDPOHVVௐVHUYLFH ௐ ௐ:HௐZLOOௐUHVSRQGௐTXLFNO\ௐRQௐTXRWHVௐ VDPHGD\ௐUHVSRQVHௐLQௐPRVWௐFDVHV ௐ ௐ:HௐZLOOௐSURYLGHௐDQௐRUGHUௐFRQILUPDWLRQௐ ZLWKLQௐௐKRXUV ௐ ௐ:HௐZLOOௐFDOOௐ\RXௐZLWKௐVKLSSLQJௐ ௐGHOLYHU\ௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐDQGௐSURYLGHௐHDUO\ௐQRWLILFDWLRQௐ VKRXOGௐWKHUHௐEHௐDQ\ௐLVVXHVௐZLWKௐ\RXUௐRUGHU (DFKௐ0HPEHUௐZLOOௐEHௐDVVLJQHGௐDௐGHGLFDWHGௐ&XVWRPHUௐ6DWLVIDFWLRQௐ6SHFLDOLVWௐ &66 ௐ$OOௐ&66VௐDUHௐFURVVWUDLQHGௐRQௐWKLVௐFRQWUDFWௐDQGௐWKH\ௐZLOOௐEHௐDYDLODEOHௐIRUௐEDFNXSௐDQGௐKLJKYROXPHௐVLWXDWLRQVௐ7KHௐ&66ௐWHDPௐLVௐPDQDJHGௐE\ௐ7RWHU Vௐ&XVWRPHUௐ6HUYLFHௐ 6XSHUYLVRUௐRQVLWHௐZLWKௐ&66VௐDWௐ7RWHUௐKHDGTXDUWHUVௐDQGௐDYDLODEOHௐWRௐKHOSௐLQௐDQ\ௐ VLWXDWLRQௐ&66VௐKDQGOHௐFXVWRPHUௐQHHGVௐSULRUௐWRௐGXULQJௐDQGௐDIWHUௐRUGHUVௐDUHௐSODFHGௐ ZLWKௐRXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐ5RXWLQHௐVHUYLFHVௐLQFOXGHௐDVVLVWLQJௐZLWKௐFXVWRPHUௐFKRLFHVௐTXRWLQJௐ HQWHULQJௐRUGHUVௐREWDLQLQJௐFXVWRPHUௐDSSURYDOVௐRQௐFXVWRPௐPDUNLQJVௐDQGௐIHDWXUHVௐ FRQVWDQWௐRUGHUௐWUDFNLQJௐZLWKௐSURGXFWLRQௐDQGௐWUDIILFௐGHSDUWPHQWVௐKDQGOLQJௐLQWULFDWHௐGHWDLOௐ RQௐODUJHௐDQGௐVPDOOௐRUGHUVSURMHFWVௐDQGௐVLWXDWLRQVௐVXFKௐDVௐGURSௐVKLSPHQWVௐDQGௐWLPLQJௐRIௐVKLSPHQWVௐDQGௐSUREOHPௐVROYLQJௐZKHQௐRUGHUௐLVVXHVௐDULVHௐDQGௐZKHQௐWHFKQLFDOௐIHHGEDFNௐLVௐREWDLQHGௐ 7KHௐ:DUUDQW\ௐSHULRGௐEHJLQVௐDWௐWKHௐGDWHௐRIௐRULJLQDOௐSXUFKDVHௐ7RWHU¶Vௐ:DUUDQW\ௐ0DQDJHUௐ SURFHVVHVௐ:DUUDQW\ௐ&ODLPVௐDQGௐLVVXHVௐWRௐSURYLGHௐDFFXUDWHௐDQGௐH[SHGLWHGௐVHUYLFHௐWRௐ DOOௐFXVWRPHUVௐ :HௐKDYHௐVXSSOLHUVௐZHௐKDYHௐZRUNHGௐZLWKௐIRUௐPDQ\ௐ\HDUVௐDQGௐZHௐKDYHௐGHYHORSHGௐUHODWLRQVKLSVௐDQGௐVHWௐDJUHHPHQWVௐDVௐQHHGHGௐWRௐPDLQWDLQௐDௐOHYHOௐRIௐFRPPLWPHQWௐIURPௐ WKHPௐWRௐVXSSO\ௐZKDWௐLVௐQHHGHGௐDQGௐZKHQௐIRUௐRQWLPHௐGHOLYHULHVௐWRௐ7RWHUௐWKDWௐGRௐQRWௐ KROGௐXSௐRUGHUVௐDQGௐSURFHVVHVௐௐ:HௐKDYHௐZRUNHGௐZLWKௐPDQ\ௐRIௐWKHVHௐVXSSOLHUVௐIRUௐ PDQ\ௐ\HDUVௐௐ7RWHUௐDOVRௐKDVௐEDFNXSௐVXSSOLHUVௐHVWDEOLVKHGௐDVௐDGGHGௐLQVXUDQFHௐZHௐ KDYHௐZKDWௐLVௐQHHGHGௐDWௐDOOௐWLPHV 'HVFULEHௐ\RXUௐDELOLW\ௐDQGௐZLOOLQJQHVVௐWRௐ SURYLGHௐ\RXUௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐWRௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐSDUWLFLSDWLQJௐHQWLWLHV 7RWHUௐKDVௐHQMR\HGௐWKHௐSULYLOHJHௐRIௐZRUNLQJௐZLWKௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐVLQFHௐௐDQGௐDUHௐH[FLWHGௐ DERXWௐWKHௐRSSRUWXQLW\ௐWRௐFRQWLQXHௐRXUௐUHODWLRQVKLSௐZLWKௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐDQGௐWKHLUௐSDUWLFLSDWLQJௐ HQWLWLHVௐ:HௐKDYHௐH[WHQVLYHௐH[SHULHQFHௐPDUNHWLQJௐFRRSHUDWLYHௐSXUFKDVLQJௐDJUHHPHQWVௐ ZLWKௐDௐKLJKௐGHJUHHௐRIௐVXFFHVVௐWKDWௐKDVௐUHVXOWHGௐLQௐVXFFHVVIXOௐVDOHVௐWRௐRYHUௐௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐSDUWLFLSDWLQJௐDJHQFLHVௐ 7RWHU¶VௐH[HFXWLYHௐOHDGHUVKLSௐDQGௐVDOHVௐWHDPௐDUHௐIXOO\ௐLQYHVWHGௐDQGௐDOOௐUHVRXUFHVௐௐDUHௐLQௐSODFHௐIRUௐDௐVHDPOHVVௐWUDQVLWLRQௐ2XUௐELGFRQWUDFWௐWHDPௐDQGௐ5HJLRQDOௐ6DOHVௐ 0DQDJHUVௐDUHௐYHU\ௐIDPLOLDUௐZLWKௐWKHௐFRQWUDFWௐDQGௐUHDG\ௐWRௐSURPRWHௐDௐQHZௐFRQWUDFWௐWRௐ H[LVWLQJௐDQGௐQHZௐDJHQFLHVௐ,IௐDZDUGHGௐZHௐZRXOGௐQRWLI\ௐH[LVWLQJௐFXVWRPHUVௐLPPHGLDWHO\ௐ VRௐWKH\ௐFDQௐVHDPOHVVO\ௐWUDQVLWLRQௐIURPௐSXUFKDVLQJௐRIIௐRXUௐFXUUHQWௐFRQWUDFWௐWRௐRXUௐQHZௐ FRQWUDFW 'HVFULEHௐ\RXUௐDELOLW\ௐDQGௐZLOOLQJQHVVௐWRௐ SURYLGHௐ\RXUௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐWRௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐSDUWLFLSDWLQJௐHQWLWLHVௐLQௐ&DQDGD 7RWHUௐFXUUHQWO\ௐSURYLGHVௐRXUௐFRPSOHWHௐOLQHௐRIௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐWRௐ&DQDGLDQௐ HQWLWLHVௐௐ:HௐKDYHௐEHHQௐIRUWXQDWHௐWRௐKDYHௐRXUௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐFRQWUDFWௐDGRSWHGௐE\ௐ&DQRHௐ DQGௐKDYHௐEHHQௐYHU\ௐSOHDVHGௐZLWKௐWKHௐLQFUHDVHௐLQௐLQWHUHVWௐDQGௐDFWLYLW\ௐLQௐ&DQDGD ,GHQWLI\ௐDQ\ௐJHRJUDSKLFௐDUHDVௐRIௐWKHௐ8QLWHGௐ 6WDWHVௐRUௐ&DQDGDௐWKDWௐ\RXௐZLOOௐ127ௐEHௐIXOO\ௐ VHUYLQJௐWKURXJKௐWKHௐSURSRVHGௐDJUHHPHQW 1RQH ,GHQWLI\ௐDQ\ௐDFFRXQWௐW\SHௐRIௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ (QWLW\ௐZKLFKௐZLOOௐQRWௐKDYHௐIXOOௐDFFHVVௐWRௐ \RXUௐ6ROXWLRQVௐLIௐDZDUGHGௐDQௐDJUHHPHQWௐ DQGௐWKHௐUHDVRQLQJௐIRUௐWKLV 1RQH 'HILQHௐDQ\ௐVSHFLILFௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐRUௐ UHVWULFWLRQVௐWKDWௐZRXOGௐDSSO\ௐWRௐRXUௐ SDUWLFLSDWLQJௐHQWLWLHVௐLQௐ+DZDLLௐDQGௐ$ODVNDௐ DQGௐLQௐ86ௐ7HUULWRULHV 7RWHUௐFXUUHQWO\ௐVHUYHVௐDOOௐWKHVHௐDUHDVௐZLWKௐDOOௐRIௐRXUௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐGRHVௐQRWௐKDYHௐDQ\ௐ VSHFLILFௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐRUௐUHVWULFWLRQV Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 207 :LOOௐ3URSRVHUௐH[WHQGௐWHUPVௐRIௐDQ\ௐDZDUGHGௐ PDVWHUௐDJUHHPHQWௐWRௐQRQSURILWௐHQWLWLHV" <HV 7DEOH 0DUNHWLQJ3ODQ 3RLQWV /LQH,WHP 4XHVWLRQ 5HVSRQVH 'HVFULEHௐ\RXUௐPDUNHWLQJௐVWUDWHJ\ௐIRUௐ SURPRWLQJௐWKLVௐRSSRUWXQLW\ௐௐ8SORDGௐ UHSUHVHQWDWLYHௐVDPSOHVௐRIௐ\RXUௐ PDUNHWLQJௐPDWHULDOVௐ LIௐDSSOLFDEOH ௐLQௐ WKHௐGRFXPHQWௐXSORDGௐVHFWLRQௐRIௐ\RXUௐ UHVSRQVH 2XUௐPDUNHWLQJௐVWUDWHJ\ௐXWLOL]HVௐERWKௐGLJLWDOௐDQGௐSULQWௐSODWIRUPVௐLQFOXGLQJௐSDLGௐDQGௐRUJDQLFௐ SRVWLQJௐRQௐVRFLDOௐPHGLDௐ7KLVௐZLOOௐSULRULWL]HௐRXWUHDFKௐWKURXJKௐNH\ௐLQGXVWU\ௐSXEOLFDWLRQVௐOLNHௐ $PHULFDQௐ&LW\ௐ ௐ&RXQW\ௐDQGௐ*RYHUQPHQWௐ3URGXFWௐ1HZVௐ:HௐZLOOௐIRVWHUௐRXUௐSDUWQHUVKLSௐZLWKௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐDFURVVௐVHOHFWௐPHGLDௐFKDQQHOVௐE\ௐSXEOLVKLQJௐSUHVVௐUHOHDVHVௐDQGௐWDUJHWHGௐFRQWHQWௐ GHVLJQHGௐWRௐUHDFKௐNH\ௐPDUNHWௐVHJPHQWVௐ7KLVௐPHVVDJLQJௐZLOOௐIRFXVௐRQௐWDUJHWLQJௐ3XEOLFௐ :RUNVௐ0XQLFLSDOLWLHVௐDQGௐRWKHUௐVHFWRUVௐZKHUHௐRXUௐFROODERUDWLRQௐDGGVௐVLJQLILFDQWௐYDOXH :DVWHTXLSௐZLOOௐSUHGRPLQDQWO\ௐKLJKOLJKWௐRXUௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐSDUWQHUVKLSௐDWௐWKHௐWUDGHௐVKRZVௐZHௐ DWWHQGௐ7RௐFDOOௐDWWHQWLRQௐWRௐWKLVௐUHODWLRQVKLSௐZHௐZLOOௐGLVSOD\ௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐORJRௐRQௐVKRZௐ PDWHULDOVௐOLNHௐEDQQHUௐVWDQGVௐDQGௐOLWHUDWXUHௐDWௐPDMRUௐUHJLRQDOௐDQGௐQDWLRQDOௐHYHQWV 7KHௐ7RWHUௐ%LGVௐDQGௐ&RQWUDFWVௐ'HSDUWPHQWௐLVௐDௐNH\ௐFRPSRQHQWௐLQௐFRPPXQLFDWLQJௐRXUௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐSDUWQHUVKLSௐE\ௐLQFRUSRUDWLQJௐWKHLUௐORJRௐDQGௐUHOHYDQWௐGHWDLOVௐLQWRௐTXRWHVௐDQGௐ RXWUHDFKௐHIIRUWVௐ7KLVௐDSSURDFKௐZLOOௐDLGௐLQௐJURZLQJௐ6RXUFHZHOO VௐUHDFKௐLQWRௐXQGHUVHUYHGௐPDUNHWVௐDQGௐUDLVHௐDZDUHQHVVௐLQௐQHZௐVHFWRUV :HௐZLOOௐFRQWLQXHௐWRௐHPSKDVL]HௐWKHௐYDOXHௐEURXJKWௐWRௐWKHௐLQGXVWULHVௐZHௐVHUYHௐDFURVVௐRXUௐZHEௐ SURSHUWLHVௐ7KHௐSODQௐWRௐIHDWXUHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐZLOOௐOLNHO\ௐLQFOXGHௐDௐOLQNௐEDFNௐWRௐ 6RXUFHZHOO VௐZHEVLWHௐWRௐHQKDQFHௐYLVLELOLW\ௐDQGௐGULYHௐHQJDJHPHQWௐLQௐWKLVௐYDOXDEOHௐSDUWQHUVKLS 'HVFULEHௐ\RXUௐXVHௐRIௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐDQGௐ GLJLWDOௐGDWDௐ HJௐVRFLDOௐPHGLDௐ PHWDGDWDௐXVDJH ௐWRௐHQKDQFHௐ PDUNHWLQJௐHIIHFWLYHQHVV :DVWHTXLS VௐPXOWLIDFHWHGௐPDUNHWLQJௐVWUDWHJ\ௐOHYHUDJHVௐYDULRXVௐFKDQQHOVௐWRௐPD[LPL]HௐYLVLELOLW\ௐ E\ௐERRVWLQJௐEUDQGௐDZDUHQHVVௐDQGௐGULYLQJௐFXVWRPHUௐHQJDJHPHQWௐ:HௐFRQGXFWௐUHVHDUFKௐWRௐ LGHQWLI\ௐHIIHFWLYHௐRUJDQLFௐDQGௐSDLGௐVHDUFKௐWHUPVௐWKDWௐUHVRQDWHௐZLWKௐRXUௐWDUJHWௐDXGLHQFHௐDQGௐ LQFRUSRUDWHௐWKHVHௐLQVLJKWVௐLQWRௐWKHௐFRQWHQWௐRQௐRXUௐEUDQGHGௐZHEVLWHVௐ:HௐXVHௐWKLVௐ LQIRUPDWLRQௐWRௐGHYHORSௐDௐFRPSUHKHQVLYHௐOLVWௐRIௐNH\ZRUGVௐIRUௐRXUௐSDLGௐVHDUFKௐHIIRUWVௐWKDWௐ HQKDQFHௐRXUௐRUJDQLFௐSURJUDP 7KURXJKௐUREXVWௐWUDFNLQJௐPHWKRGVௐZHௐJDLQௐDௐFOHDUௐXQGHUVWDQGLQJௐRIௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUV ௐRQOLQHௐ EHKDYLRUVௐMREௐWLWOHVௐDQGௐORFDWLRQVௐ7KLVௐGDWDௐHQDEOHVௐXVௐWRௐUHWDUJHWௐYLVLWRUVௐDQGௐFUHDWHௐ ORRNDOLNHௐDXGLHQFHௐVHJPHQWVௐIRUௐH[SDQGHGௐDGௐSODFHPHQWVௐ$GGLWLRQDOO\ௐZHௐXVHௐ870ௐ SDUDPHWHUVௐDQGௐFXVWRPௐUHGLUHFWVௐWRௐFDSWXUHௐSHUVRQDOௐLQWHUDFWLRQVௐZLWKௐRXUௐEUDQGV $OOௐWKLVௐGDWDௐFRQWULEXWHVௐWRௐEXLOGLQJௐGHWDLOHGௐDXGLHQFHௐVHJPHQWVௐRQௐVRFLDOௐSODWIRUPVௐ7KLVௐ DOORZVௐXVௐWRௐDFFXUDWHO\ௐWDUJHWௐNH\ௐSURIHVVLRQDOVௐRQௐ/LQNHG,Qௐ0HWDௐDQGௐRWKHUௐFKDQQHOVௐIRUௐRXUௐSDLGௐVRFLDOௐLQௐDGGLWLRQௐWRௐRWKHUௐFDPSDLJQV ([DPSOHVௐLQFOXGH )DFHERRNௐ0HWDGDWD $XGLHQFHௐ'HPRJUDSKLFV ௐ$JHௐORFDWLRQௐLQWHUHVWVௐJHQGHU (QJDJHPHQWௐ0HWULFV ௐ/LNHVௐVKDUHVௐFRPPHQWVௐFOLFNWKURXJKௐUDWHVௐDQGௐSRVWௐUHDFK 9LVLWRUௐ'DWD ௐ5HSHDWௐYLVLWRUVௐYVௐQHZௐYLVLWRUVௐWLPHௐVSHQWௐRQௐWKHௐSDJHௐDQGௐERXQFHௐUDWH /LQNHG,Qௐ0HWDGDWD $XGLHQFHௐ'HWDLOV ௐ-REௐWLWOHVௐLQGXVWU\ௐFRPSDQ\ௐVL]HௐDQGௐJHRJUDSKLFௐGDWD (QJDJHPHQWௐ,QVLJKWV ௐ/LNHVௐVKDUHVௐFRPPHQWVௐDQGௐFOLFNWKURXJKௐUDWHV &DPSDLJQௐ0HWULFV ௐ&RQYHUVLRQௐUDWHVௐLPSUHVVLRQVௐDQGௐFOLFNWKURXJKௐUDWHV :DVWHTXLSௐ:HEVLWHௐ3URSHUWLHVௐ0HWDGDWD 9LVLWRUௐ'DWD ௐ8QLTXHௐYLVLWRUVௐUHWXUQLQJௐYLVLWRUVௐSDJHVௐSHUௐVHVVLRQௐVHVVLRQௐGXUDWLRQ 6RXUFH0HGLXP ௐ,GHQWLILHVௐWUDIILFௐVRXUFHVௐ RUJDQLFௐSDLGௐUHIHUUDOௐFDPSDLJQ %HKDYLRUௐ0HWULFV ௐ3DJHVௐYLHZHGௐH[LWௐSDJHVௐERXQFHௐUDWHௐDQGௐIRUPௐVXEPLVVLRQV &RQYHUVLRQௐ'DWD ௐ7UDFNVௐSURGXFWௐSDJHௐYLHZVௐGRZQORDGௐDFWLRQVௐDQGௐFRPSOHWHGௐIRUPV %DQQHUௐ$GVௐ0HWDGDWD &DPSDLJQௐ'DWD ௐ,PSUHVVLRQVௐFOLFNWKURXJKௐUDWHVௐDQGௐFRQYHUVLRQௐUDWHV/HDGௐ6RXUFHௐ,QIRUPDWLRQ ௐ7UDFNVௐOHDGௐRULJLQௐWKURXJKௐFDPSDLJQVௐEDQQHUௐDGVௐDQGௐNH\ZRUGV$XGLHQFHௐ7DUJHWLQJ ௐ7DUJHWௐGHPRJUDSKLFVௐ DJHௐORFDWLRQௐLQWHUHVWV 6DOHVௐ&\FOHௐ7UDFNLQJ ௐ/HDGௐSURJUHVVLRQௐLQௐ6DOHVIRUFHௐIURPௐLQTXLU\ௐWRௐVDOH Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 208 ,Qௐ\RXUௐYLHZௐZKDWௐLVௐ6RXUFHZHOO¶VௐUROHௐ LQௐSURPRWLQJௐDJUHHPHQWVௐDULVLQJௐRXWௐRIௐ WKLVௐ5)3"ௐ+RZௐZLOOௐ\RXௐLQWHJUDWHௐDௐ 6RXUFHZHOODZDUGHGௐDJUHHPHQWௐLQWRௐ\RXUௐVDOHVௐSURFHVV" ,QௐSURPRWLQJௐDJUHHPHQWVௐIURPௐWKLVௐ5)3ௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐSURYLGHVௐIRXQGDWLRQDOௐVXSSRUWௐE\ௐ OHYHUDJLQJௐLWVௐHVWDEOLVKHGௐFUHGLELOLW\ௐDQGௐRXWUHDFKௐFDSDELOLWLHVௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐFDQௐDPSOLI\ௐWKHௐ DJUHHPHQW VௐYLVLELOLW\ௐWKURXJKௐLWVௐQHWZRUNௐDQGௐFRPPXQLFDWLRQௐFKDQQHOVௐ7KXVௐHQVXULQJௐ SRWHQWLDOௐFXVWRPHUVௐDUHௐLQIRUPHGௐRIௐWKHௐEHQHILWVௐDQGௐVWUHDPOLQHGௐSXUFKDVLQJௐSURFHVVHVௐWKDWௐDUHௐDYDLODEOHௐWRௐWKHP 7RWHUௐDSSUHFLDWHVௐWKHௐOHYHOௐRIௐXQGHUVWDQGLQJௐRIௐRXUௐLQGXVWU\ௐDQGௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ(QWLW\&XVWRPHUௐ EDVHௐDQGௐKDVௐKDGௐWKHௐLQQDWHௐDELOLW\ௐWRௐLQWHUIDFHௐZLWKௐERWKௐWRௐDVVLVWௐDQGௐSURPRWHௐௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐFRQWUDFWVௐௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐKDVௐSURYLGHGௐGDWDௐIRUௐVDOHVௐIURPௐRWKHUௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ &RQWUDFWVௐXVHGௐE\ௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ(QWLWLHVௐWRௐVXSSRUWௐRXUௐSRVLWLRQௐLQௐGLIILFXOWௐVDOHVௐௐ7KLVௐ DVVLVWDQFHௐZLOOௐFRQWLQXHௐWRௐEHௐYDOXDEOHௐWRௐ7RWHUௐௐ7KHௐWULDQJXODUௐUHODWLRQVKLSௐEHWZHHQௐ 3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ$JHQFLHVௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐDQGௐ7RWHUௐLVௐMXVWௐWKHௐVROXWLRQௐQHHGHGௐIRUௐDOOௐFRQFHUQHG 7RWHUௐZLOOௐWDNHௐDௐSURDFWLYHௐDSSURDFKௐWRௐLQWHJUDWHௐDௐ6RXUFHZHOODZDUGHGௐDJUHHPHQWௐLQWRௐRXUௐ VDOHVௐSURFHVVௐ,QFRUSRUDWLQJௐWKLVௐDJUHHPHQWௐLQWRௐRXUௐVDOHVௐVWUDWHJ\ௐZLOOௐHGXFDWHௐRXUௐ 5HJLRQDOௐ6DOHVௐ0DQDJHUVௐRQௐLWVௐYDOXHௐDQGௐKRZௐWRௐHIIHFWLYHO\ௐFRPPXQLFDWHௐWKHௐEHQHILWVௐWRௐ SRWHQWLDOௐFOLHQWV $GGLWLRQDOO\ௐZHௐZLOOௐOHYHUDJHௐWKHௐ:DVWHTXLSௐ0DUNHWLQJௐWHDPௐWRௐVXSSRUWௐWKLVௐHIIRUWௐWKURXJKௐ GLJLWDOௐPHGLDௐFDPSDLJQVௐWDUJHWHGௐHPDLOௐFRPPXQLFDWLRQVௐSURGXFWௐVKRZFDVHVௐDQGௐSURPRWLRQDOௐHYHQWVௐ%\ௐFUHDWLQJௐVSHFLILFௐDXGLHQFHௐVHJPHQWVௐLQௐRXUௐ&50ௐDQGௐXVLQJௐWDLORUHGௐ PHVVDJLQJௐZH OOௐHQJDJHௐUHOHYDQWௐLQGXVWULHVௐDQGௐVSHFLILFௐMREௐWLWOHVௐZLWKௐSHUVRQDOL]HGௐFRQWHQW 7KLVௐLQWHJUDWHGௐDSSURDFKௐDOORZVௐXVௐWRௐVHDPOHVVO\ௐSURPRWHௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐDJUHHPHQWௐ PD[LPL]LQJௐLWVௐLPSDFWௐDQGௐGULYLQJௐJUHDWHUௐDGRSWLRQௐDPRQJௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐ7KURXJKௐ FRQVLVWHQWௐWUDFNLQJௐDQGௐIHHGEDFNௐZHௐZLOOௐEHௐDEOHௐWRௐDGMXVWௐRXUௐVWUDWHJ\ௐWRௐDGYDQWDJHRXVO\ௐ PHHWௐ6RXUFHZHOO VௐREMHFWLYHVௐDQGௐRXUௐFOLHQWV ௐQHHGV $UHௐ\RXUௐ6ROXWLRQVௐDYDLODEOHௐWKURXJKௐ DQௐHSURFXUHPHQWௐRUGHULQJௐSURFHVV"ௐ,Iௐ VRௐGHVFULEHௐ\RXUௐHSURFXUHPHQWௐ V\VWHPௐDQGௐKRZௐJRYHUQPHQWDOௐDQGௐHGXFDWLRQDOௐFXVWRPHUVௐKDYHௐXVHGௐLW 'XHௐWRௐWKHௐVSHFLDOL]HGௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐDQGௐFXVWRPL]DWLRQVௐRIௐ7RWHUௐSURGXFWVௐZHௐGRௐQRWௐ RSHUDWHௐWKURXJKௐDQௐHSURFXUHPHQWௐRUGHULQJௐSODWIRUPௐ+RZHYHUௐZHௐDFFHSWௐSXUFKDVHௐRUGHUVௐ E\ௐPDLOௐID[ௐDQGௐRXUௐGHGLFDWHGௐHPDLOௐDGGUHVVௐ WRWHUSR#ZDVWHTXLSFRP ௐ:HௐFDQௐJHQHUDWHௐ SXUFKDVHௐRUGHUVௐIURPௐGUDIWௐFDUWVௐWKDWௐ7RWHUௐKDVௐHQWHUHGௐLQWRௐWKHௐ$ULEDௐ6XSSOLHUௐ6ROXWLRQVௐDQGௐSURYLGHௐLQYRLFLQJௐIRUௐFXVWRPHUVௐXVLQJௐ$ULEDௐ $GGLWLRQDOO\ௐZHௐKDYHௐWKHௐFDSDELOLW\ௐWRௐHQWHUௐRUGHUௐXSGDWHVௐ VXFKௐDVௐGHOLYHU\ௐLQIRUPDWLRQ ௐ DQGௐLQYRLFHVௐLQௐVHOHFWௐFXVWRPHUV ௐHSURFXUHPHQWௐV\VWHPVௐDQGௐLQWHUPXQLFLSDOௐSODWIRUPVௐ7KLVௐ IOH[LELOLW\ௐHQDEOHVௐXVௐWRௐZRUNௐFORVHO\ௐZLWKௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐWRௐPHHWௐWKHLUௐQHHGV 7DEOH$ 9DOXH$GGHG$WWULEXWHV 3RLQWV /LQH ,WHP 4XHVWLRQ 5HVSRQVH 'HVFULEHௐDQ\ௐSURGXFWௐHTXLSPHQWௐ PDLQWHQDQFHௐRUௐRSHUDWRUௐWUDLQLQJௐ SURJUDPVௐWKDWௐ\RXௐRIIHUௐWRௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐSDUWLFLSDWLQJௐHQWLWLHVௐ ,QFOXGHௐGHWDLOVௐVXFKௐDVௐZKHWKHUௐ WUDLQLQJௐLVௐVWDQGDUGௐRUௐRSWLRQDOௐ ZKRௐSURYLGHVௐWUDLQLQJௐDQGௐDQ\ௐFRVWVௐWKDWௐDSSO\ 7RWHUௐRIIHUVௐSODQWௐWRXUVௐIRUௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐXSRQௐUHTXHVWௐDQGௐRXUௐVWDIIௐLVௐRQௐKDQGௐIRUௐWURXEOH VKRRWLQJௐLVVXHVௐZLWKௐFRQWDLQHUVௐRUௐVHUYLFHVௐ,QௐWKHௐILHOGௐௐ:HௐRIIHUௐDVVHPEO\ௐLQVWUXFWLRQVௐXSRQௐ UHTXHVWௐDQGௐDWௐWKHௐHQGௐRIௐHDFKௐSURMHFWௐIRUௐFRQWDLQHUVௐEHLQJௐVHUYLFHGௐ5HSDLUVௐDQGௐVLPSOHௐ DQGௐFDQௐEHௐH[SODLQHGௐLQௐௐSDJHௐLQVWUXFWLRQௐVKHHWVௐEXWௐDOVRௐFDQௐKDSSHQௐLQௐSHUVRQௐௐ$IWHUௐ HYHU\ௐFDUWௐUROORXWௐSURMHFWௐIRUௐPXQLFLSDOௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ(QWLWLHVௐDQGௐXSRQௐUHTXHVWௐLQௐSHUVRQௐ LQVWUXFWLRQௐFDQௐRFFXUௐXVXDOO\ௐUHTXLULQJௐௐPLQXWHVௐRUௐOHVVௐGXHௐWRௐWKHௐH[FHOOHQWௐGHVLJQௐRIௐWKHௐ SURGXFWVௐSURYLGHGௐDWௐQRௐFKDUJHௐWRௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐௐ7RWHUௐRIIHUVௐ:DVWHTXLS VௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQVௐ&XVWRPHUVௐZKRௐVXEVFULEHௐIRUௐDௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐ RIIHULQJௐZLOOௐUHFHLYHௐDௐVWDQGDUGL]HGௐXVHUௐRQOLQHௐWUDLQLQJௐ7KLVௐXVHUௐWUDLQLQJௐZLOOௐEHௐSHUIRUPHGௐ E\ௐ:DVWHTXLS VௐSURGXFWௐVSHFLDOLVWVௐIRUௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQVௐDQGௐDGGUHVVHVௐWKHௐPDMRUௐ IXQFWLRQDOLWLHVௐRIௐWKHௐVRIWZDUHௐDQGௐKDUGZDUHௐVROXWLRQVௐZKLFKௐDUHௐLQWHQGHGௐWRௐEHௐXWLOL]HGௐE\ௐ WKHௐFXVWRPHUௐௐ$GGLWLRQDOௐWUDLQLQJௐSURJUDPVௐDUHௐDYDLODEOHௐZLWKௐSULFLQJௐRQௐUHTXHVWௐ3ULFLQJௐ GHSHQGVௐRQௐVFRSHௐDQGௐOHQJWKௐRIௐWKHௐUHTXHVWHGௐWUDLQLQJ V ௐ$IWHUௐWKHௐWUDLQLQJௐVWDQGDUGL]HGௐ XVHUௐJXLGHOLQHVௐZLOOௐEHௐDYDLODEOHௐDWௐQRௐFKDUJHௐ )RUௐ7RWHU Vௐ3URIHVVLRQDOௐ0HPEHUV ௐ7RWHUௐ3URௐQDWLRQDOௐDQGௐORFDOௐVDOHVௐUHSUHVHQWDWLYHVௐFDQௐ SURYLGHௐWUDLQLQJௐDQGௐVHOOLQJௐVXSSRUWௐZKHQௐQHHGHGௐௐ3ODQWௐWRXUVௐDUHௐDYDLODEOHௐIRUௐFXVWRPHUVௐ XSRQௐUHTXHVWௐDQGௐRXUௐVWDIIௐLVௐRQௐKDQGௐIRUௐWURXEOHVKRRWLQJௐLVVXHVௐZLWKௐFRQWDLQHUVௐRUௐVHUYLFHV :DVWHTXLS VௐVWHHOௐFRQWDLQHUVௐSODQWௐLQௐ(DJOHYLOOHௐ71ௐKDVௐHVWDEOLVKHGௐDௐZHOGLQJௐDQGௐMREௐ WUDLQLQJௐSURJUDPௐIRUௐLWVௐVWDUWLQJௐHPSOR\HHVௐEXWௐRIIHUHGௐDOVRௐWKHௐWKHௐFRPPXQLW\ௐௐ7KHௐSURJUDPௐRIIHUVௐZHOGLQJௐDQGௐRWKHUௐFHUWLILFDWLRQVௐWRௐJURZௐORFDOௐLQGLYLGXDOVௐDQGௐIDPLOLHVௐZKHQௐWKH\ௐHDUQௐPDUNHWDEOHௐMREௐVNLOOVௐIRUௐVROLGௐHPSOR\PHQWௐௐ:DVWHTXLSௐKLUHVௐWUDLQHGௐLQGLYLGXDOVௐRXWௐRIௐWKLVௐ SURJUDPௐDVௐZHOOௐDVௐDௐ:LQ:LQௐIRUௐDOO :DVWHTXLSௐXWLOL]HVௐDௐOLEUDU\ௐZLWKௐKXQGUHGVௐRIௐWUDLQLQJௐDYDLODELOLWLHVௐIRUௐLWVௐHPSOR\HHVௐZLWKௐIUHHௐ DFFHVVௐWRௐSURIHVVLRQDOௐWUDLQLQJVௐRQௐWRSLFVௐVXFKௐDVௐVDIHW\ௐGLYHUVLW\ௐFRQIOLFWௐUHVROXWLRQௐ VRIWZDUHௐWUDLQLQJௐDQGௐDௐYDVWௐDUUD\ௐRIௐWRSLFVௐWRௐFKRRVHௐIURPௐௐ:KLOHௐWDVNௐDVVLJQPHQWVௐDUHௐ PDGHௐIRUௐUHYLHZௐRIௐWRSLFVௐHPSOR\HHVௐFDQௐDYDLOௐWKHPVHOYHVௐRIௐDFFODLPHGௐSUHVHQWHUVௐDQGௐWRSLFVௐRIௐFRQFHUQௐRUௐLQWHUHVWௐௐIRUௐDௐFRQILGHQWௐSURIHVVLRQDOௐDQGௐNQRZOHGJHDEOHௐHPSOR\HHௐEDVH Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 209 'HVFULEHௐDQ\ௐWHFKQRORJLFDOௐ DGYDQFHVௐWKDWௐ\RXUௐSURSRVHGௐ 6ROXWLRQVௐRIIHU :DVWHTXLS VௐVWHHOௐFRQWDLQHUVௐSODQWௐLQௐ(DJOHYLOOHௐ71ௐKDVௐHVWDEOLVKHGௐDௐZHOGLQJௐDQGௐMREௐ WUDLQLQJௐSURJUDPௐIRUௐLWVௐVWDUWLQJௐHPSOR\HHVௐEXWௐWKLVௐSURJUDPௐLVௐDOVRௐRIIHUHGௐDOVRௐWKHௐWKHௐ FRPPXQLW\ௐௐ7KHௐSURJUDPௐRIIHUVௐZHOGLQJௐDQGௐRWKHUௐFHUWLILFDWLRQVௐWRௐJURZௐORFDOௐLQGLYLGXDOVௐDQGௐ IDPLOLHVௐZKHQௐWKH\ௐHDUQௐPDUNHWDEOHௐMREௐVNLOOVௐIRUௐVROLGௐHPSOR\PHQWௐௐ:DVWHTXLSௐKLUHVௐWUDLQHGௐLQGLYLGXDOVௐRXWௐRIௐWKLVௐSURJUDPௐDVௐZHOOௐDVௐDௐ:LQ:LQௐIRUௐDOO $OOௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQVௐDUHௐEDVHGௐRQௐPRGHUQௐWHFKQLFDOௐDQGௐWHFKQRORJLFDOௐLQIUDVWUXFWXUHVௐWRௐ HQVXUHௐDௐVXVWDLQDEOHௐDQGௐIXWXUHௐRULHQWHGௐVROXWLRQௐODQGVFDSHௐ7KHVHௐLQIUDVWUXFWXUHVௐDUHௐDOVRௐ ODLGௐRXWௐWRௐEHௐKLJKO\ௐDYDLODEOHௐDQGௐGDWDௐVHFXULW\ௐKDVௐEHHQௐLPSOHPHQWHGௐLQௐGHSWKௐ&RPSDUHGௐ WRௐRWKHUௐVROXWLRQVௐDQGௐRIIHULQJVௐLQௐWKHௐLQGXVWU\ௐWKHUHௐDUHௐQRௐV\VWHPௐRUௐVHUYHUௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐ RQௐWKHௐPHPEHUௐVLGHௐDVௐORQJௐDVௐDௐPRGHUQௐEURZVHUௐLVௐXVHGௐWRௐDFFHVVௐWKHௐVRIWZDUHௐ VROXWLRQVௐ$OOௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQVௐDUHௐGHYHORSHGௐWRௐEHௐDVௐXVHUௐIULHQGO\ௐDVௐSRVVLEOHௐDQGௐWKHௐLPSOHPHQWDWLRQௐSURFHVVௐLVௐVWUHDPOLQHGௐWRௐWKHௐPD[LPXPௐ:HௐRIIHUௐWKHVHௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQVௐWRௐLQFUHDVHௐUHYHQXHௐDQGௐJDLQௐPDUNHWௐVKDUHௐUHGXFHௐFRVWVௐSURYLGHௐJUHDWHUௐVWHZDUGVKLSௐRIௐ VWDIIௐWLPHHIIRUWVௐUHVRXUFHVௐDQGௐLPSURYHௐFXVWRPHUௐH[SHULHQFHVௐRYHUDOOௐௐ 2UJDQLFVௐFROOHFWLRQௐVWUHVVHVௐFDUWVௐEHFDXVHௐWKHௐGHQVLW\ௐRIௐIRRGௐZDVWHௐ ௐSRXQGVJDOORQ ௐLVௐ PXFKௐKLJKHUௐWKDQௐWKDWௐRIௐPXQLFLSDOௐVROLGௐZDVWHௐ JDUEDJH ௐDQGௐUHF\FODEOHVௐ PD[ௐRIௐௐ SRXQGVJDOORQ ௐௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐPHPEHUௐDJHQFLHVௐQHHGLQJௐWRௐFROOHFWௐUHVLGHQWLDOௐDQGௐFRPPHUFLDOௐ IRRGௐZDVWHௐVKRXOGௐQRWௐIDFHௐWKHௐGHFLVLRQௐRIௐGHSOR\LQJௐVPDOOௐWZRௐZKHHOௐFDUWVௐWKDWௐGRௐQRWௐKDYHௐVXIILFLHQWௐORDGௐUDWLQJௐIRUௐWKHௐDSSOLFDWLRQௐௐ,QௐRUGHUௐWRௐSURYLGHௐPHPEHUௐDJHQFLHVௐZLWKௐVDIHௐDQGௐ XVHIXOௐIRRGௐZDVWHௐFDUWVௐ7RWHUௐRIIHUVௐDௐXQLTXHௐOLQHௐRIௐௐௐDQGௐௐJDOORQௐDXWRPDWHGௐ 2UJDQLFVௐFDUWVௐWKDWௐDUHௐORDGௐUDWHGௐDQGௐLQGHSHQGHQWO\ௐFHUWLILHGௐWRௐUHJXODUO\ௐUHFHLYHௐDQGௐGXPSௐ IRRGௐZDVWHௐDWௐWKHௐDERYHPHQWLRQHGௐKLJKHUௐGHQVLW\ௐRIௐௐSRXQGVJDOORQௐௐ,QௐDGGLWLRQௐZHௐ RIIHUௐFRPSOHPHQWDU\ௐFRQWDLQHUVௐWRௐLQFOXGHௐDௐௐ*DOORQௐELQௐIRUௐFROOHFWLRQௐRIௐIRRGௐZDVWHௐLQௐWKHௐ UHVLGHQW¶VௐNLWFKHQௐDQGௐDௐௐJDOORQௐPDQXDOௐELQௐIRUௐFXUEVLGHௐFROOHFWLRQௐ7RWHUௐDOVRௐRIIHUVௐௐDQGௐ ௐ&XELFௐ<DUGௐ)(/VௐZLWKௐKLJKHUௐORDGௐUDWLQJVௐWRௐKDQGOHௐKHDY\ௐIRRGௐZDVWHௐ 2QO\ௐ7RWHUௐRIIHUVௐDௐIXOO\ௐDXWRPDWHGௐOLGௐODWFKௐ'XUD/DWFKௐWKDWௐODWFKHVௐDXWRPDWLFDOO\ௐZKHQௐWKHௐOLGௐ LVௐGURSSHGௐRSHQVௐZLWKௐRQHௐILQJHUௐDQGௐRSHQVௐDXWRPDWLFDOO\ௐZKHQௐWKHௐFDUWௐLVௐGXPSHGௐE\ௐWKHௐ WUXFNௐௐ'XUD/DWFKௐPHHWVௐWKHௐORQJௐUHTXHVWHGௐLQGXVWU\ௐGHPDQGௐIRUௐWKHௐUHWXUQௐWRௐDௐODWFKLQJௐFDUWௐ EXWௐZLWKRXWௐLQWHUIHULQJௐZLWKௐIXOO\ௐDXWRPDWHGௐFROOHFWLRQ ,Qௐௐ7RWHUௐGHYHORSHGௐDௐௐ&XELFௐ<DUGௐSODVWLFௐ)URQWௐ/RDGௐ&RQWDLQHUௐ )/ ௐWRௐFRPSOHPHQWௐ WKHௐDOUHDG\ௐHVWDEOLVKHGௐௐௐDQGௐௐ&XELFௐ<DUGௐ)/ௐFRQWDLQHUVௐௐ7KLVௐௐFXELFௐ\DUGௐFRQWDLQHUௐLVௐSRSXODUௐLQௐVKDUHGௐZDVWHௐFROOHFWLRQௐIRUௐPXOWLKRXVLQJௐXQLWௐDSSOLFDWLRQVௐௐ7KHௐFRQWDLQHUௐZLOOௐKROGௐDURXQGௐௐVWDQGDUGௐJDOORQௐWUDVKௐEDJVௐDQGௐH[WHQGVௐWKHௐWLPHIUDPHVௐIRUௐFROOHFWLRQௐ HYHQWVௐWKURXJKௐWLPH 7RWHU3URௐUROOHGௐRXWௐDௐQHZௐWLOWௐWUXFNௐGHVLJQௐZLWKௐH[WUDGXUDEOHௐURWRௐPROGHGௐERG\ௐDQGௐVOLPPHUௐ GHVLJQௐIRUௐLPSURYHGௐPDQHXYHUDELOLW\ௐWKURXJKௐFRPPHUFLDOௐGRRUZD\VௐDQGௐLQVHWௐZKHHOVௐDOORZௐ WKHௐFRQWDLQHUVௐWRௐEHௐQHVWHGௐZKHQௐIXOO\ௐDVVHPEOHGௐIRUௐHDVLHUௐVKLSSLQJௐDQGௐVWRUDJHௐௐ ௐ7RWHUௐSDUWLFLSDWHGௐLQௐRXUௐSDUHQWௐFRPSDQ\ Vௐ,QWHUQVKLSௐ3URJUDPௐVSHFLDOO\ௐGHVLJQHGௐWRௐSURYLGHௐVWXGHQWVௐDQGௐUHFHQWௐJUDGXDWHVௐZLWKௐLQFUHGLEOHௐFDUHHUUHODWHGௐH[SHULHQFHVௐௐ:KLOHௐZHௐVWULYHௐWRௐ JLYHௐWKHVHௐVWXGHQWVௐWUDQVIHUUDEOHௐVNLOOVௐQHWZRUNLQJௐRSSRUWXQLWLHVௐDQGௐVWURQJௐSURIHVVLRQDOௐ SRUWIROLRVௐWKHVHௐSDLGௐVXPPHUௐLQWHUQVKLSVௐDOVRௐEHQHILWௐRXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐZLWKௐIUHVKௐLGHDVௐIURPௐDௐ WHFKௐVDYY\ௐJHQHUDWLRQ 7RWHUௐFRQWLQXRXVO\ௐUHVHDUFKHVௐDQGௐLPSOHPHQWVௐQHZHUௐUHVLQVௐIRUௐJUHDWHUௐGXUDELOLW\ௐDQGௐ PROGDELOLW\ௐSURGXFLQJௐFDUWVௐWKDWௐDUHௐWRXJKHUௐWKDQௐHYHUௐௐ:HௐFRQVLVWHQWO\ௐGHOLYHUௐRQௐGXUDELOLW\ௐZLWKௐFXVWRPHUVௐUHSRUWLQJௐVHUYLFHௐOLIHௐPXFKௐORQJHUௐWKDQௐKHௐ ௐ\HDUVௐRIௐDYHUDJHௐVHUYLFHௐOLIHௐRIௐFRPSHWLWRUௐFDUWVௐRZQHGௐE\ௐVXUYH\HGௐHQWLWLHVௐGUDPDWLFDOO\ௐORZHULQJௐWKHௐFDUERQௐIRRWSULQWௐE\ௐ ORQJHYLW\ௐDORQHௐDQGௐWKHௐDGGHGௐDGYDQWDJHௐRIௐLQFOXVLRQௐRIௐUHF\FOHGௐFRQWHQWௐௐ7KLVௐLVௐDQௐ RQJRLQJௐFRPPLWPHQWௐIRUௐRXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐDQGௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐZLGHQLQJௐWKHௐHQYLURQPHQWDOௐ VXVWDLQDELOLW\ௐIRRWSULQWௐIRUௐXVௐERWKௐZKLOHௐLQWHJUDWLQJௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐWRௐPDLQWDLQௐFRQWDLQHUV ௐ/LIHௐ &\FOHVௐKLJK 7KHVHௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQVௐLQFUHDVHௐUHYHQXHௐDQGௐJDLQௐPDUNHWௐVKDUHௐUHGXFHௐFRVWVௐSURYLGHௐJUHDWHUௐVWHZDUGVKLSௐRIௐVWDII VௐWLPHௐHIIRUWVௐDQGௐUHVRXUFHVௐDQGௐLPSURYHௐFXVWRPHUௐH[SHULHQFHVௐRYHUDOOௐDQGௐZKHQௐFRXSOHGௐZLWKௐWKHௐHDVHௐRIௐXVHௐZLWKௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ$JHQFLHVௐ UHFHLYHௐWKHVHௐEHQHILWVௐZLWKௐDௐFRQWUDFWௐWKDWௐVDWLVILHVௐWKHௐELGGLQJௐSURFHVV Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 210 'HVFULEHௐDQ\ௐ³JUHHQ´ௐLQLWLDWLYHVௐ WKDWௐUHODWHௐWRௐ\RXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐRUௐWRௐ \RXUௐ6ROXWLRQVௐDQGௐLQFOXGHௐDௐOLVWௐ RIௐWKHௐFHUWLI\LQJௐDJHQF\ௐIRUௐHDFK 2XUௐFRPSDQ\ௐLQLWLDWHGௐWKHௐ:DVWHTXLSௐ6XVWDLQDELOLW\ௐ5HSRUWௐZKLFKௐFRGLILHVௐDௐIRUPDOௐ VXVWDLQDELOLW\ௐSURJUDPௐ,Qௐ ௐDௐVPDOOௐWHDPௐSODQWHGௐWKHௐVHHGVௐIRUௐRXUௐVXVWDLQDELOLW\ௐ SURJUDPௐDQGௐHDFKௐ\HDUௐVLQFHௐWKHௐULSSOHௐRIௐSHRSOHௐDWௐWKHௐFRPSDQ\ௐDGGUHVVLQJௐVXVWDLQDELOLW\ௐ KDVௐZLGHQHGௐ )RUௐWKHௐSODQHWௐZHௐKDYHௐFRQWUROௐRYHUௐWKHௐSURGXFWVௐZHௐPDNHௐDQGௐKRZௐZHௐPDNHௐWKHPௐ /LIHF\FOHௐDVVHVVPHQWVௐKDYHௐKHOSHGௐXVௐGHHSO\ௐXQGHUVWDQGௐKRZௐRXUௐSURFHVVHVௐDQGௐSURGXFWVௐ LPSDFWௐWKHௐHQYLURQPHQWௐ%HFDXVHௐRQHௐRIௐRXUௐELJJHVWௐLPSDFWVௐLVௐLQௐWKHௐUDZௐPDWHULDOVௐZHௐ VRXUFHௐZHௐVHWௐDௐJRDOௐWRௐUHGXFHௐWKHௐYLUJLQௐUHVLQௐZHௐPDQXIDFWXUHௐZLWKௐDWௐ7RWHUௐ ZKLOHௐ PDLQWDLQLQJௐRXUௐLQGXVWU\OHDGLQJௐZDUUDQW\ ௐDQGௐODXQFKHGௐWKHௐ(95*UHHQௐFDUWௐZKLFKௐXVHVௐ ௐUHF\FOHGௐFRQWHQWௐLQௐWKHௐFDUWௐERG\ௐ7KLVௐ\HDUௐZHௐDUHௐDOVRௐLQWURGXFLQJௐWRௐWKHௐPDUNHWௐDௐ VWHHOௐFRQWDLQHUௐWKDWௐLVௐௐOLJKWHUௐEXWௐMXVWௐDVௐVWURQJௐ7KLVௐQRWௐRQO\ௐEULQJVௐDௐORZHUௐHQYLURQPHQWDOௐLPSDFWௐEXWௐLWௐZLOOௐDOVRௐDOORZௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐWRௐFDUU\ௐKHDYLHUௐORDGVௐDQGௐFRQVXPHௐOHVVௐIXHO (DFKௐ\HDUௐZHௐWDNHௐRQHௐPRUHௐVWHSௐWRௐHPEHGௐSHRSOHௐDQGௐSODQHWௐLQWRௐRXUௐEXVLQHVVௐ2XUௐFURVV IXQFWLRQDOௐ&25(ௐ6WHHULQJௐ&RPPLWWHHௐHQVXUHVௐWKDWௐZHௐVHOHFWௐWKHௐULJKWௐSULRULWLHVௐXQGHUVWDQGௐ XQLQWHQGHGௐFRQVHTXHQFHVௐRYHUFRPHௐXQH[SHFWHGௐFKDOOHQJHVௐDQGௐKROGௐHDFKௐRWKHUௐ DFFRXQWDEOHௐ 2XUௐ&DS([ௐDQGௐQHZௐSURGXFWௐGHYHORSPHQWௐDSSURYDOௐSURFHVVHVௐLQFOXGHVௐSODQHWௐFRQVLGHUDWLRQVௐ $QGௐLQௐௐRXUௐEXVLQHVVௐOHDGHUVௐVWDUWHGௐSUHVHQWLQJௐJUHHQKRXVHௐJDVௐHPLVVLRQVௐLQௐRXUௐ PRQWKO\ௐEXVLQHVVௐUHYLHZVௐIRUௐRXUௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐ7UXFNVௐGLYLVLRQVௐ :HௐEDVHௐRXUௐ3ODQHWௐGDWDௐRQௐWKHௐ*UHHQKRXVHௐ*DVௐ *+* ௐ3URWRFROௐ&RUSRUDWHௐ6WDQGDUGௐ EHFDXVHௐLWௐLVௐJOREDOௐTXDQWLWDWLYHO\ௐULJRURXVௐDQGௐFRQVLVWHQWௐZLWKௐKRZௐRWKHUௐFRPSDQLHVௐ FDOFXODWHௐWKHLUௐHPLVVLRQV $OWKRXJKௐXQGHUௐWKHௐ*+*ௐSURWRFROௐRXUௐRUJDQL]DWLRQDOௐERXQGDU\ௐLQFOXGHVௐDOOௐWKUHHௐRIௐRXUௐ GLYLVLRQVௐ 3DUWVௐ ௐ6HUYLFHௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐ7UXFNV ௐZH¶YHௐEHHQௐIRFXVHGௐRQௐRXUௐ7UXFNVௐDQGௐ &RQWDLQHUVௐPDQXIDFWXULQJௐEHFDXVHௐWKH\ௐDUHௐRXUௐODUJHVWௐVRXUFH RIௐHPLVVLRQV :HௐLQFOXGHௐRXUௐ6FRSHௐௐDQGௐௐHPLVVLRQVௐLQௐRXUௐPRQWKO\ௐEXVLQHVVௐUHYLHZVௐIRUௐRXUௐ &RQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐ7UXFNVௐGLYLVLRQVௐDQGௐKDYHௐLPSURYHGௐRXUௐGDWDௐFROOHFWLRQௐFDOFXODWLRQௐDQGௐYLVXDOL]DWLRQௐSURFHVVHVௐVLJQLILFDQWO\ 2XUௐ6FRSHௐௐHPLVVLRQVௐFRPSULVHௐVWDWLRQDU\ௐFRPEXVWLRQௐWRௐKHDWௐRXUௐSODQWVௐDQGௐRSHUDWHௐ PDFKLQHU\ௐIXHOLQJௐRQVLWHௐYHKLFOHVௐOLNHௐIRUNOLIWVௐDQGௐZHOGLQJௐ2XUௐ6FRSHௐௐHPLVVLRQVௐDUHௐ HOHFWULFLW\ :HௐWUDFNௐRXUௐDEVROXWHௐHPLVVLRQVௐWKHௐWRWDOௐHPLVVLRQVௐSURGXFHGௐIURPௐRXUௐIDFLOLWLHVௐDVௐZHOOௐDVௐ RXUௐLQWHQVLW\ௐHPLVVLRQVௐZKLFKௐZHௐFDOFXODWHௐE\ௐGLYLGLQJௐWKHௐDEVROXWHௐHPLVVLRQVௐLQௐDௐPRQWKௐE\ௐWKHௐZHLJKWௐRIௐSURGXFWVௐZHௐPDGHௐWKDWௐPRQWKௐ7KLVௐHQDEOHVௐXVௐWRௐFRPSDUHௐDFURVVௐIDFLOLWLHVௐ DQGௐJDXJHௐRXUௐHIILFLHQF\ௐIURPௐD VWDQGDUGL]HGௐSHUVSHFWLYH ,QௐௐRXUௐDEVROXWHௐHPLVVLRQVௐDQGௐLQWHQVLW\ௐHPLVVLRQVௐVOLJKWO\ௐLPSURYHGௐSULPDULO\ௐIURPௐ LPSURYHPHQWVௐLQௐWKHௐHOHFWULFௐJULGVௐRXUௐSODQWVௐRSHUDWHௐRQ 2XUௐLQWHQVLW\ௐHPLVVLRQVௐLQFUHDVHGௐPDUJLQDOO\ௐWKLVௐ\HDUௐGULYHQௐE\ௐRXUௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐPDQXIDFWXULQJௐDQGௐSDUWLDOO\ௐRIIVHWௐE\ௐRXUௐ7UXFNௐPDQXIDFWXULQJ ,QௐௐRXUௐ6FRSHௐௐDEVROXWHௐHPLVVLRQVௐLQFUHDVHGௐPRVWO\ௐGXHௐWRௐVWDWLRQDU\ௐFRPEXVWLRQௐ RIIVHWௐVOLJKWO\ௐE\ௐLPSURYHPHQWVௐLQௐRXUௐ6FRSHௐௐDEVROXWHௐHPLVVLRQVௐIURPௐJULGௐLPSURYHPHQWV Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 211 ,GHQWLI\ௐDQ\ௐWKLUGSDUW\ௐLVVXHGௐHFR ODEHOVௐUDWLQJVௐRUௐFHUWLILFDWLRQVௐWKDWௐ \RXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐKDVௐUHFHLYHGௐIRUௐWKHௐ 6ROXWLRQVௐLQFOXGHGௐLQௐ\RXUௐ3URSRVDOௐUHODWHGௐWRௐHQHUJ\ௐHIILFLHQF\ௐRUௐFRQVHUYDWLRQௐOLIHF\FOHௐGHVLJQௐ FUDGOHWRFUDGOH ௐRUௐRWKHUௐ JUHHQVXVWDLQDELOLW\ௐIDFWRUV 7RௐXQGHUVWDQGௐWKHௐFRPSOHWHௐHQYLURQPHQWDOௐLPSDFWௐRIௐRXUௐSURGXFWVௐZHௐZRUNௐZLWKௐDௐFRQVXOWDQWௐ RQௐFUDGOHWRJUDYHௐOLIHF\FOHௐDVVHVVPHQWVௐ /&$V ௐZKLFKௐVFLHQWLILFDOO\ௐPHDVXUHௐWKHௐFDUERQௐ IRRWSULQWௐRIௐRXUௐSURGXFWVௐ7KLVௐLQFOXGHVௐWKHௐUDZௐPDWHULDOVௐZHௐVRXUFHௐLQERXQGௐWUDQVSRUWDWLRQௐWRௐ RXUௐIDFLOLWLHVௐPDQXIDFWXULQJௐRXUௐSURGXFWVௐGLVWULEXWLQJௐRXUௐSURGXFWVௐWKHௐXVHௐRIௐRXUௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐWKHௐHQGௐRIௐOLIHௐDQGௐFRPSOLHVௐZLWKௐ,62ௐௐVWDQGDUGVௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐ ௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐ ௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐ ௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐௐ ௐ)URPௐERWKௐRXUௐ7RWHUௐ/&$ௐDQGௐRXUௐQHZௐ6WHHOௐ/&$ௐWKHௐPDMRULW\ௐRIௐHPLVVLRQVௐIURPௐRXUௐ SURGXFWVௐFRPHVௐIURPௐWKHௐUDZௐPDWHULDOVௐZHௐVRXUFHௐ:H¶YHௐWXUQHGௐZKDWௐZHௐOHDUQHGௐIURPௐ VSUHDGVKHHWVௐDQGௐPRGHOVௐLQWRௐWKHௐUHDOௐZRUOGௐZLWKௐSURGXFWVௐGHVLJQHGௐWRௐUHGXFHௐWKHௐUDZௐPDWHULDOVௐZHௐPDQXIDFWXUHௐZLWKௐDQGௐWKHUHIRUHௐWKHௐPRVWௐLPSRUWDQWௐSDUWௐRIௐRXUௐFRQWDLQHUV¶ௐFDUERQௐIRRWSULQW )URPௐRXUௐ7RWHUௐ/&$ௐZHௐOHDUQHGௐWKDWௐௐRIௐDௐFDUW¶VௐFDUERQௐIRRWSULQWௐFRPHVௐIURPௐXVLQJௐ YLUJLQௐUHVLQௐ UHVLQௐWKDW¶VௐEUDQGௐQHZ ௐVRௐZHௐVHWௐDௐJRDOௐWRௐUHGXFHௐWKHௐDPRXQWௐRIௐYLUJLQௐUHVLQௐ LQௐRXUௐFDUWVௐE\ௐௐZLWKRXWௐFRPSURPLVLQJௐWKHௐZDUUDQW\ௐ :LWKௐDௐFRPPRQௐJRDOௐRXUௐ(QJLQHHULQJௐDQGௐ4XDOLW\ௐWHDPVௐGHVLJQHGௐWKHௐILUVWௐFDUWௐERG\ௐRQௐWKHௐPDUNHWௐWRௐXVHௐDOOௐ3,5ௐDQGRUௐ3&5ௐLQௐWKHௐFDUWௐERG\ௐ,W¶Vௐ DYDLODEOHௐLQௐDௐEODFNௐERG\ௐRQO\ௐSDVVHVௐWKHௐVDPHௐZDUUDQW\ௐWHVWVௐDVௐDOOௐRIௐRXUௐRWKHUௐ7RWHUௐ SURGXFWVௐDQGௐKDVௐDௐFDUERQௐIRRWSULQWௐWKDW¶VௐௐORZHUௐWKDQௐDௐVWDQGDUGௐ7RWHUௐFDUWௐZLWKௐDOOௐ YLUJLQௐUHVLQ :KDWௐXQLTXHௐDWWULEXWHVௐGRHVௐ\RXUௐ FRPSDQ\ௐ\RXUௐSURGXFWVௐRUௐ\RXUௐ VHUYLFHVௐRIIHUௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ SDUWLFLSDWLQJௐHQWLWLHV"ௐ:KDWௐPDNHVௐ \RXUௐSURSRVHGௐVROXWLRQVௐXQLTXHௐLQௐ \RXUௐLQGXVWU\ௐDVௐLWௐDSSOLHVௐWRௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐSDUWLFLSDWLQJௐHQWLWLHV" 21(ௐ6723ௐ6+23 7RWHUௐLVௐRZQHGௐE\ௐRXUௐSDUHQWௐFRPSDQ\ௐ:DVWHTXLSௐWKHௐZDVWHௐLQGXVWU\¶VௐRQHௐVWRSௐVKRSௐZLWKௐ ௐLQGXVWU\ௐOHDGLQJௐEUDQGVௐ:HௐDUHௐWKHௐOHDGLQJௐPDQXIDFWXUHUௐRIௐZDVWHௐKDQGOLQJௐHTXLSPHQWௐLQௐ 1RUWKௐ$PHULFDௐ2XUௐFRPSDQ\ௐKDVௐDௐQHWZRUNௐRIௐH[SHUWLVHௐDQGௐDௐUHSXWDWLRQௐIRUௐVHUYLFHௐDQGௐ LQQRYDWLRQௐ7KHௐ:DVWHTXLSௐSRUWIROLRௐLQFOXGHVௐTXDOLW\ௐEUDQGVௐIURPௐWKHௐSURGXFWLRQௐRIௐFDUWVௐ FRQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐFRPSDFWRUVௐWRௐUHIXVHௐWUXFNVௐSDUWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHௐ:LWKௐDௐ³FDQௐGR´ௐDSSURDFKௐ WUXVWௐ:DVWHTXLSௐWRௐEHௐ\RXUௐ³$OOLQ2QH´ௐHTXLSPHQWௐVHUYLFHௐDQGௐSDUWVௐSURYLGHU 3ULQFHௐ*HRUJH Vௐ&RXQW\ௐLVௐRQHௐRIௐPDQ\ௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ$JHQFLHVௐWKDWௐQRWௐRQO\ௐSUHIHUVௐ7RWHUௐ 3URGXFWVௐDQGௐ6HUYLFHVௐEXWௐWKH\ௐDOVRௐKDYHௐVWDWHGௐDௐGHILQLWHௐSUHIHUHQFHௐIRUௐWKHௐHDVHௐRIௐ SXUFKDVLQJௐZLWKௐRXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐRYHUDOOௐXWLOL]LQJௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ&RQWUDFWVௐIRUௐERWKௐ6WHHOௐ :DVWHTXLS ௐ DQGௐ3ODVWLFVௐ 7RWHU ௐDVௐ2QH6WRS6KRSSLQJ &$57ௐ6,=(6ௐ72ௐ0((7ௐ&86720(5ௐ1(('6 7RWHU¶VௐSDWHQWHGௐ(95ௐFDUWVௐ ௐௐௐௐௐௐௐDQGௐ ௐJDOORQVௐSOXVௐRXUௐQHZௐ8QLYHUVDOௐVHULHVௐWRௐLQFOXGHௐ ௐௐDQGௐௐJDOORQௐFDUWVௐDUHௐFRPSDWLEOHௐZLWKௐVHPLௐDQGௐIXOO\ௐ DXWRPDWHGௐUHIXVHௐWUXFNVௐLQௐ1RUWKௐ$PHULFDௐDQGௐDUHௐWKHௐ³:RUOG¶Vௐ7RXJKHVWௐ&DUWV´ௐௐ$OOௐDUHௐ PDQXIDFWXUHGௐLQௐIXOOௐFRQIRUPDQFHௐZLWKௐ$16,ௐ6WDQGDUGVௐ=ௐDQGௐ= %HVLGHVௐUROOௐFDUWVௐ7RWHUௐKDVௐDௐFRPSOHWHௐOLQHௐRIௐௐௐௐDQGௐௐFXELFௐ\DUGௐSODVWLFௐIURQWௐORDGௐ FRQWDLQHUVௐ(DFKௐFRQWDLQHUௐIHDWXUHV ௐVWHHOௐURGௐUHLQIRUFHPHQWௐULEEHGௐERWWRPௐZHDUௐFKLPHVௐ GRXEOHZDOOHGௐOLIWௐSRFNHWVௐLQWHJUDWHGௐEXPSHUVௐDQGௐPRUHௐ7KHVHௐIHDWXUHVௐDIIRUGௐFXVWRPHUVௐZLWKௐHQKDQFHGௐGXUDELOLW\ௐPD[LPXPௐSRFNHWௐVWUHQJWKௐSURWHFWLRQௐIRUௐORQJHUௐOLIHௐDQGௐPD[LPXPௐVSDFHௐIRUௐFXVWRPௐVLJQDJH 2XUௐVWDFNDEOHௐGHVLJQௐSURYLGHVௐEHWWHUௐWUXFNORDGVKLSPHQWௐDQGௐVWRUDJHௐHIILFLHQF\ௐDQGௐDUHௐHYHQௐ VWDFNDEOHQHVWDEOHௐZKHQௐWKHௐFRQWDLQHUௐLVௐIXOO\ௐDVVHPEOHGௐDQGௐUHDG\ௐIRUௐXVH %8,/7ௐ)25ௐ(;75(0(6 7RWHUௐFDUWVௐDUHௐPDQXIDFWXUHGௐWKURXJKௐRXUௐSURFHVVௐNQRZQௐDVௐ$GYDQFHGௐ5RWDWLRQDOௐ0ROGLQJௐWKDWௐDOORZVௐXVௐWRௐFUHDWHௐFDUWVௐWKDWௐDUHௐ%XLOWௐIRUௐ([WUHPHVௐ$GYDQFHGௐ5RWDWLRQDOௐ0ROGLQJௐHOLPLQDWHVௐEXLOWLQௐVWUHVVௐZHDNQHVVௐDQGௐEULWWOHQHVVௐDVVRFLDWHGௐZLWKௐLQMHFWLRQௐPROGHGௐSURGXFWVௐ ,QௐDGGLWLRQௐ7RWHU¶VௐXVHௐRIௐOLQHDUௐPHGLXPௐGHQVLW\ௐSRO\HWK\OHQHௐ 0'3( ௐLVௐVSHFLILFDOO\ௐ HQJLQHHUHGௐIRUௐWRXJKQHVVௐDQGௐKLJKLPSDFWௐUHVLVWDQFH ,QௐFRQWUDVWௐLQMHFWLRQPROGHGௐFDUWVௐDUHௐPDGHௐZLWKௐKLJKௐGHQVLW\ௐSRO\HWK\OHQHௐ +'3( ௐZKLFKௐLVௐ PRUHௐULJLGௐDQGௐEULWWOHௐௐ+'3(ௐKDVௐSRRUௐLPSDFWௐUHVLVWDQFHௐDQGௐKLJKௐQRWFKௐVHQVLWLYLW\ௐௐ7KHVHௐ SURSHUWLHVௐFRPELQHGௐZLWKௐKLJKௐVWUHVVௐPROGLQJௐPDNHௐDQௐLQMHFWLRQௐFDUWௐPRUHௐOLNHO\ௐWRௐFUDFNௐDQGௐVSOLWௐZKLOHௐLQௐVHUYLFH ,WௐLVௐLPSRUWDQWௐWRௐQRWHௐWKDWௐLWௐLVௐQRWௐQHFHVVDU\ௐWRௐDOWHUௐRUௐPRGLI\ௐWKHௐ$GYDQFHGௐ5RWDWLRQDOௐ 0ROGLQJௐSURFHVVௐQRUௐPDWHULDOVௐZKHQௐSURGXFLQJௐFDUWVௐIRUௐH[WUHPHO\ௐFROGௐRUௐH[WUHPHO\ௐKRWௐ FOLPDWHVௐௐௐ$JDLQௐRXUௐSURFHVVௐDQGௐVXSHULRUௐPDWHULDOVௐWRJHWKHUௐSURGXFHௐDௐFDUWௐWKDWௐLVௐ UHVLOLHQWௐDQGௐEHVWௐLQௐDௐFRPELQDWLRQௐRIௐH[WUHPHௐWHPSHUDWXUHVௐ Û&ௐWRௐÛ& ௐHVSHFLDOO\ௐLQௐ FROGௐFOLPDWHVௐHYHQௐZLWKௐULJRURXVௐWUHDWPHQWௐLQௐDXWRPDWHGௐFROOHFWLRQௐV\VWHPVௐௐ 7KLVௐLVௐDௐIDFWௐRIௐSRO\PHUௐVFLHQFHௐQRWௐVDOHVௐOLWHUDWXUHௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐDUHௐWKHௐ³%HVWௐ9DOXH´ௐWRௐ UHVLGHQWV $GYDQWDJHVௐRIௐ$GYDQFHGௐ5RWDWLRQDOௐ0ROGLQJ ௐ6XSHULRUௐWRXJKQHVVௐDQGௐGXUDELOLW\ ௐ6LQJOHSLHFHௐSURGXFWௐGHVLJQௐ±ௐQRௐVHDPV Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 212 ௐ&RQVLVWHQWௐZDOOௐWKLFNQHVV ௐ6WUHVVIUHHௐ]HURSUHVVXUHௐSURGXFW ௐ8QLTXHௐGHVLJQௐDQGௐVWUXFWXUDOௐFDSDELOLWLHVௐOLNHௐ5XJJHGௐ5LPௐQHVWDEOHௐZKHQௐIXOO\ௐDVVHPEOHGௐ DQGௐJUDQLWHௐILQLVKௐ89ௐVWDEOHௐ&XVWRPௐFRORUV ௐ&RUURVLRQௐDQGௐFKHPLFDOUHVLVWDQW ௐ$ELOLW\ௐWRௐPROGௐLQௐJUDSKLFV ,1'8675<ௐ/($',1*ௐ:$55$17< 5HFRJQL]HGௐWKURXJKRXWௐWKHௐLQGXVWU\ௐDVௐ7KHௐ:RUOG¶Vௐ7RXJKHVWௐ&DUWVௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐDUHௐ SURGXFHGௐXVLQJௐDௐSDWHQWHGௐVWUHVV䯈IUHHௐPROGLQJௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐNQRZQௐDVௐ$GYDQFHGௐ5RWDWLRQDOௐ0ROGLQJௐ7KLVௐPDQXIDFWXULQJௐSURFHVVௐUHVXOWVௐLQௐWRXJKHUௐPRUHௐGXUDEOHௐUHVLGHQWLDOௐFDUWVௐEDFNHGௐE\ௐ7RWHUௐZLWKௐௐ WZHOYH ௐ\HDUௐFDUWௐERG\ௐZDUUDQW\ௐௐ WHQ ௐ\HDUVௐRIௐFRYHUDJHௐRQௐDOOௐ RWKHUௐFDUWௐFRPSRQHQWVௐ7KLVௐZDUUDQW\ௐLVௐOLNHௐQRௐRWKHUௐPDQXIDFWXUHU¶VௐZDUUDQW\ௐLQGXVWU\ௐZLGHௐ (DV\ௐWRௐXVHௐDQGௐUHOLDEOHௐWKHௐZDUUDQW\ௐGHPRQVWUDWHVௐKRZௐZHௐFRQILGHQWO\ௐEDFNௐRXUௐFDUWV )URPௐ'D\ௐ2QH :KHQௐ\RXௐUHFHLYHௐ\RXUௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐWKH\ௐDUHௐHDVLO\ௐPDGHௐUHDG\ௐWRௐUROOௐ8QOLNHௐLQMHFWLRQௐ PROGHGௐFDUWVௐWKDWௐQHVWௐQRௐPRUHௐWKDQௐௐFDUWVௐKLJKௐEHFDXVHௐRIௐSURWUXGLQJௐZKHHOVௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐFDQௐEHௐVWDFNHGௐXSௐWRௐௐFDUWVௐKLJKௐDVௐWKH\ௐUHTXLUHௐIHZHUௐVTXDUHௐIHHWௐ ZLWKRXWௐODWFKHVௐLQVWDOOHG ௐ 7RWHUௐFDUWVௐFDQௐEHௐGHOLYHUHGௐ[ௐPRUHௐTXLFNO\ௐWKDQௐRWKHUௐEUDQGVௐE\ௐHOLPLQDWLQJௐWULSVௐZLWKௐPRUHௐ FDUWVௐSHUௐORDGௐ&LWLHVௐDQGௐKDXOHUVௐVDYHௐEHWZHHQௐ䯈ௐSHUௐFDUW ௐLQௐIXHOௐWUXFNௐXVDJHௐDQGௐ ODERUௐH[SHQVHVௐGXHௐWRௐ7RWHU¶VௐQHVWDELOLW\ௐIHDWXUH <($56ௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐDUHௐPDGHௐZLWKௐ$GYDQFHGௐ5RWDWLRQDOௐ0ROGLQJௐZKLFKௐPDNHVௐWKHPௐEXLOWௐIRUௐ WRXJKQHVVௐDQGௐPD[LPXPௐUHVLVWDQFHௐ :LWKௐௐRIௐWKHௐIDLOXUHௐUDWHௐFRPSDUHGௐWRௐLQMHFWLRQௐPROGHGௐFDUWVௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐJHQHUDWHௐIHZHUௐ FXVWRPHUௐFRPSODLQWVௐUHSDLUௐFDOOVௐDQGௐIHZHUௐSDUWௐSXUFKDVHVௐ2YHUௐWKHௐILUVWௐௐ\HDUVௐRIௐ RZQHUVKLSௐWKLVௐVDYLQJௐDPRXQWVௐWRௐDERXWௐௐWRௐௐSHUௐFDUWௐ 86' ௐ DORQJௐZLWKௐ\RXUௐKDSSLHUௐ FXVWRPHUV <($56ௐ䯈 2QO\ௐ7RWHUௐRIIHUVௐDௐ䯈<HDUௐERG\ௐZDUUDQW\ௐ'HVLJQHGௐWRௐNHHSௐZRUNLQJௐDIWHUௐRWKHUVௐIDLOௐWKH\ௐ DUHௐH[WUHPHO\ௐLPSDFWௐUHVLVWDQWௐ%\ௐKDYLQJௐIXOOௐERG\ௐSURWHFWLRQௐIRUௐௐDGGLWLRQDOௐ\HDUVௐ DVௐ FRPSDUHGௐWRௐRWKHUௐEUDQGV ௐ\RXௐFDQௐDYRLGௐUHSODFHPHQWௐFRVWVௐGXULQJௐ\HDUVௐௐDQGௐௐ7KRVHௐ VDYLQJVௐDUHௐௐWRௐௐSHUௐERG\ௐRUௐௐWRௐ FDUWௐ 86' <($56ௐ䯈:KLOHௐLQMHFWLRQௐFDUWVௐFODLPௐDௐ䯈\HDUௐVHUYLFHௐOLIHௐ7RWHUௐKDVௐௐ\HDUVௐRIௐH[SHULHQFHௐWKDWௐVD\Vௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐFRQVLVWHQWO\ௐODVWௐௐWRௐௐ\HDUVௐ,PDJLQHௐDYRLGLQJௐKDYLQJௐWRௐEX\ௐDௐUHSODFHPHQWௐ IOHHWௐRIௐLQMHFWLRQௐFDUWVௐDIWHUௐ\HDUௐௐ,IௐRQHௐKDOIௐRIௐ\RXUௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐZHUHௐWRௐODVWௐௐ\HDUVௐDQGௐ RQHௐKDOIௐZHUHௐWRௐODVWௐௐ\HDUVௐWKHௐ$YHUDJHௐ6DYLQJVௐRQௐ5HSODFHPHQWௐ&DUWௐ3XUFKDVHௐDQGௐ 'HOLYHU\ௐZRXOGௐEHௐFDUWௐ 86' $''ௐ,7ௐ83ௐ <RXௐFDQௐH[SHULHQFHௐ䯈FDUWௐLQௐGHOLYHU\ௐVDYLQJVௐSOXVௐ䯈FDUWௐLQௐFDUWௐPDLQWHQDQFHௐVDYLQJVௐSOXVௐ䯈ERG\ௐRUௐ䯈 FDUWௐIRUௐ\HDUVௐ䯈ௐDGGLWLRQDOௐERG\ௐZDUUDQW\ௐ\HDUVௐDQGௐFDUWௐIRUௐ ORQJHUௐVHUYLFHௐOLIHௐ7RWDOௐ6DYLQJVௐFRPHVௐWRௐDSSUR[LPDWHO\ௐௐWRௐௐSHUௐFDUWௐ 86' ,QௐDGGLWLRQௐWRௐWKHௐDERYHௐUROOௐFDUWௐZDUUDQW\ௐRXUௐ)URQWௐ/RDGௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐFDUU\ௐDௐௐ\HDUௐ FRQWDLQHUௐZDUUDQW\ௐ ௐGD\VௐIRUௐFDVWHUVௐDQGௐQRQSODVWLFௐFRPSRQHQWV ௐ 3$576ௐ,17(5&+$1*$%,/,7<,QௐDGGLWLRQௐWRௐRXUௐSURYHQௐORQJௐVHUYLFHௐOLIHௐDQGௐYHU\ௐORZௐUHSDLUௐUDWHௐNH\ௐSDUWVௐRQௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐDUHௐSULPDULO\ௐLQWHUFKDQJHDEOHௐDPRQJௐRXUௐYDULRXVௐFDUWௐVL]HV ௐZKHHOVௐVWRSௐEDUVௐDQGௐOLGௐ KDUGZDUHௐ7KLVௐVLPSOLILHVௐPDLQWHQDQFHௐDQGௐUHGXFHVௐSDUWVௐLQYHQWRU\FRVWV 5(&<&/$%,/,7< $OOௐRIௐWKHௐFRPSRQHQWVௐXWLOL]HGௐLQௐ7RWHUௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDUHௐIXOO\ௐ ௐUHF\FODEOHௐLQWRௐSURGXFWVௐRIௐ DௐOLNHௐRUௐVLPLODUௐQDWXUHௐ7KLVௐGHJUHHௐRIௐUHF\FODELOLW\ௐLVௐNQRZQௐLQௐWKHௐLQGXVWU\ௐDVௐSULPDU\ௐ UHF\FODELOLW\ௐ7KLVௐZLOOௐDOORZௐWKHௐRSWLRQௐWRௐVHOOௐWKHௐUHF\FODEOHௐPDWHULDOVௐLQWRௐWKHௐSODVWLFVVWHHOௐFRPPRGLW\ௐPDUNHWV 352)(66,21$/ௐ352'8&76 7RWHUௐPDQXIDFWXUHVௐDQௐHQWLUHௐOLQHௐRIௐ3URIHVVLRQDOௐ3URGXFWVௐ±ௐFRPPHUFLDOௐLQGXVWULDOௐDQGௐ VSHFLDOL]HGௐVXSHULRUௐFRQWDLQHUVௐௐ3URGXFWௐRIIHULQJVௐLQFOXGHௐ7ZR:KHHOHGௐDQGௐ&DVWHUௐ&DUWVௐ 2UJDQLFVௐ0HGLFDOௐ:DVWHௐDQGௐ6HFXUHௐ'RFXPHQWௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐ&DUWVௐZLWKௐVWDQGDUGௐVLQJOHZDOOௐ RUௐURWDWLRQDOO\ௐPROGHGௐGRXEOHZDOOௐOLGVௐIRUௐVHDOLQJௐRIIௐPHGLFDOௐZDVWHௐDQGௐRUJDQLFVௐ ZHW ௐ PDWHULDOVௐDQGௐIRUௐVHFXULQJௐFRQILGHQWLDOௐGRFXPHQWVௐௐ7KHVHௐFRQWDLQHUVௐPD\ௐEHௐWRZDEOHௐIRUௐDGGLWLRQDOௐHIILFLHQF\ௐDQGௐVDIHW\ௐLQௐPRYLQJௐZDVWHௐௐ7RWHUௐRIIHUVௐ$WODVௐFRPPHUFLDOJUDGHௐODUJH FDSDFLW\ௐ5XJJHGௐ5LPௐFDQVௐZLWKௐDௐGHWDFKDEOHௐOLGௐDQGௐDUHௐILWWHGௐIRUௐGROOLHVௐWRௐUROOௐDQGௐPRYHௐ Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 213 PDWHULDOVௐVPRRWKO\ௐௐ6OLPOLQHௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐ/LWWHUௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐSURYLGHௐHIIHFWLYHௐVXVWDLQDEOHௐ ZDVWHௐFROOHFWLRQௐIRUௐLQGXVWULDOௐFRPPHUFLDOௐDQGௐLQVWLWXWLRQDOௐLQVLGHௐDQGௐRXWVLGHௐDSSOLFDWLRQVௐ±ௐ DQGௐDUHௐDYDLODEOHௐLQௐDௐZLGHௐUDQJHௐRIௐVW\OHVௐIRUௐYDULHGௐHQYLURQPHQWVௐௐ&XEHௐ7UXFNVௐ7LOWௐ 7UXFNVௐDQGௐ0RELOHௐ7UXFNVௐDUHௐSHUIHFWௐRUௐPRYLQJௐODUJHௐKHDY\ௐPDWHULDOVௐDQGௐZDVWHௐWRௐLWVௐILQDOௐGHVWLQDWLRQௐIRUௐXVHௐRUௐGLVSRVDOௐௐ0DQ\ௐFRQWDLQHUVௐLQௐWKLVௐOLQHௐDUHௐDOVRௐWRZDEOHௐIRUௐHIILFLHQWௐDQGௐVDIHௐPRYHPHQWௐWRௐILQDOௐGLVSRVDOௐDUHDVௐௐ<RXௐZLOOௐILQGௐWKHVHௐYDULRXVௐSURGXFWVௐLQௐKRVSLWDOVௐ FROOHJHVXQLYHUVLWLHVௐUHVHDUFKௐIDFLOLWLHVௐPDQXIDFWXULQJௐLQGXVWULHVௐVWRUHௐHQYLURQPHQWVௐRIILFHVௐ SXEOLFௐVWUHHWVௐPDOOVௐVSRUWVௐDUHQDVௐFRQYHQWLRQௐFHQWHUVௐJDVௐVWDWLRQVௐDQGௐFRQYHQLHQFHௐVWRUHVௐ DQGௐSUDFWLFDOO\ௐDQ\ZKHUHௐ\RXௐPD\ௐYHQWXUH $66(0%/<ௐ ௐ'(/,9(5<ௐ6(59,&(6 5ROOௐFDUWVௐDQGௐFRQWDLQHUௐVHUYLFHVௐFDQௐEHௐSURYLGHGௐE\ௐ7RWHUௐZLWKௐRXUௐVLVWHUௐ:DVWHTXLSௐFRPSDQ\ௐ&RQWDLQHU3URVௐௐ2IIORDGLQJௐDVVHPEO\ௐDQGௐGLVWULEXWLRQௐRIௐFDUWVௐWRௐKRXVHKROGVௐPD\ௐEHௐDFFRPSOLVKHGௐDVௐLQGLYLGXDOௐVHUYLFHVௐRUௐDOOௐWKUHHௐVHUYLFHVௐWRJHWKHUௐௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ$JHQFLHVௐ PD\ௐUHTXLUHௐXQORDGLQJௐRIௐFDUWVௐXSRQௐGHOLYHU\ௐWRௐWKHௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐௐ$JHQF\¶VௐGHOLYHU\ௐVLWHௐ FRPSOHWHௐDVVHPEO\ௐRIௐFDUWVௐWRௐPDNHௐWKHPௐ³5HDG\ௐWRௐ5ROO´ௐWKHQௐGLVWULEXWLRQௐWRௐUHVLGHQFHVௐ DQGௐFRPPHUFLDOௐDGGUHVVHVௐௐ&RQWDLQHU3URVௐKDVௐFDSDELOLWLHVௐLQௐSODFHௐIRUௐWKHௐRSWLRQDOௐ VFDQQLQJௐRIௐ8+)ௐ5),'ௐ7DJVௐGXULQJௐGLVWULEXWLRQௐXVLQJௐ8+)ௐ+DQGKHOGௐ6FDQQHUVௐWKDWௐUHSRUWௐ GHOLYHU\ௐGDWDௐLQௐUHDOௐWLPHௐWRௐRXUௐZDVWHZDUHௐZHEௐSRUWDOௐDQGௐFRPSLOLQJௐWKDWௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐLQௐDௐ 'LVWULEXWLRQௐ5HSRUWௐ 7DJVௐFRRUGLQDWHGௐZLWKௐFDUWௐDGGUHVV ௐLQௐ([FHOௐIRUPDW :KHQHYHUௐDௐFLW\ZLGHௐLPSOHPHQWDWLRQௐLVௐUHTXLUHGௐIRUௐQHZௐFRQWDLQHUVௐZHௐZLOOௐPHHWௐRUௐH[FHHGௐ WKHௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ$JHQFLHV¶ௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐUHJDUGLQJௐDOOௐGHOLYHULHVௐௐ&RQWDLQHU3URVௐRIIHUVௐPDQ\ௐ YDOXHDGGHGௐEHQHILWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐWKDWௐZLOOௐHQVXUHௐDௐVPRRWKௐGHOLYHU\ௐDQGௐVXFFHVVIXOௐSURJUDPௐ LPSOHPHQWDWLRQ &/28'ௐ%$6('ௐ7(&+12/2*<ௐ62/87,216 ZDVWHZDUHௐLVௐ\RXUௐGLJLWDOௐSDUWQHUௐIRUௐSURGXFWVௐHTXLSPHQWௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐLQௐWKHௐZDVWHௐDQGௐUHF\FOLQJௐLQGXVWU\ௐ2XUௐFORXGEDVHGௐVROXWLRQVௐVXLWHௐDQGௐPRELOHௐDSSௐDOORZௐ\RXௐWRௐVWD\ௐLQIRUPHGௐ DQGௐVXSSRUWௐDFFXUDWHௐGHFLVLRQௐPDNLQJௐEDVHGௐRQௐWUDQVSDUHQWௐDQGௐUHOLDEOHௐGDWD :HௐGHVLJQHGௐZDVWHZDUHௐWRௐEHௐXVHGௐQRWௐRQO\ௐE\ௐDQ\ௐFRPSDQ\ௐLQௐWKHௐLQGXVWU\ௐEXWௐDOVRௐE\ௐ FLWLHVௐDQGௐPXQLFLSDOLWLHVௐWRௐSURYLGHௐHVVHQWLDOௐEXVLQHVVௐIXQFWLRQVௐOLNHௐLQYHQWRU\ௐDQGௐDVVHWௐ PDQDJHPHQWௐDVVHWௐORFDWLRQௐPRQLWRULQJௐPDLQWHQDQFHௐDQGௐVHUYLFHௐPDQDJHPHQWௐDVௐZHOOௐDVௐ VHUYLFHௐYHULILFDWLRQௐ,WௐFDQௐLQWHJUDWHௐVHDPOHVVO\ௐZLWKௐFXVWRPHUௐV\VWHPVௐSURYLGHௐFDUWௐWUDFNLQJௐPDQDJHௐZRUNௐRUGHUVௐYHULI\ௐVHUYLFHௐZRUNௐDQGௐPXFKௐPRUH /($6,1*ௐௐ23325781,7,(6 7RWHUௐLVௐDGHSWௐDWௐDVVLVWLQJௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐZLWKௐDௐOHDVLQJௐSURJUDPௐDOWHUQDWLYHௐWRௐDQௐRXWULJKWௐ SXUFKDVHௐDQGௐWKLVௐSURJUDPௐXWLOL]HVௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ&RQWUDFWௐIRUௐ/HDVLQJௐௐ1&/ௐ*RYHUQPHQWௐ &DSLWDOௐWD[H[HPSWௐPXQLFLSDOௐOHDVLQJௐ&RQWUDFWௐ1&/ௐ:HௐZRUNௐZLWKௐILQDQFLDOௐ LQVWLWXWLRQVௐWKDWௐVSHFLDOL]HௐLQௐPXQLFLSDOௐOHQGLQJௐVLWXDWLRQVௐDVௐWKLUGSDUW\ௐILQDQFLQJௐ:Hௐ XQGHUVWDQGௐWKHௐEHQHILWVௐRIௐOHDVLQJ ௐௐFRQVHUYDWLRQௐRIௐFDSLWDOௐEHWWHUௐWHUPVௐVLPSOLILHGௐUHFRUGௐNHHSLQJௐHDVLHUௐDOORFDWLRQௐRIௐFRVWௐEDQNௐOLQHVௐXQWRXFKHGௐFOHDQHUௐEDODQFHௐVKHHWVௐRYHUFRPLQJௐEXGJHWௐOLPLWVௐFRQYHQLHQFHௐHWF 'HVFULEHௐDGYDQFHPHQWVௐUHIOHFWHGௐLQௐWKHௐHTXLSPHQWௐRUௐSURGXFWVௐRIIHUHGௐVXFKௐDVௐVDIHW\ௐORQJHYLW\ௐRUௐ OLIHௐF\FOHௐFRVWௐPHDVXUHV 7RWHUௐFDUWVௐDQGௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDUHௐDQௐHQYLURQPHQWDOO\ௐVXVWDLQDEOHௐLQYHVWPHQWௐௐ$OWKRXJKௐRXUௐFDUWVௐDUHௐWKHௐ³:RUOG¶Vௐ7RXJKHVWௐ&DUWV´ௐDQGௐRXUௐFDUWVௐODVWௐIRUௐௐ\HDUVௐLQௐDFWLYHௐVHUYLFHௐOLIHௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐDUHௐௐUHF\FODEOHௐVXSSRUWLQJௐWKHௐUHF\FOLQJௐRIௐUHWLUHGௐFDUWVௐIRUௐPXQLFLSDOLWLHVௐ DQGௐVXVWDLQDEO\ௐFORVLQJௐWKHௐORRSௐEHWZHHQௐQHZௐFDUWVௐDQGௐUHWLUHGௐFDUWVௐZLWKௐWKHௐUHF\FOLQJௐRIௐ UHWLUHGௐFDUWVௐWKHQௐPROGLQJௐEDFNௐLQWRௐQHZௐFDUWVௐௐ$VௐDௐOHDGHUௐLQௐWKHௐHQYLURQPHQWDOௐLQGXVWU\ௐ ZHௐFRQVWDQWO\ௐVWULYHௐWRௐGRௐRXUௐSDUWௐLQௐEHLQJௐERWKௐDௐJRRGௐFRUSRUDWHௐFLWL]HQௐDQGௐDௐOHDGHUௐLQௐ QHZௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐWRௐLPSURYHௐRXUௐZRUOGௐௐ)HZHUௐFDUWௐIDLOXUHVௐPHDQVௐIHZHUௐFDUWVௐUHSODFHGௐWRௐ PDLQWDLQௐDௐSHUSHWXDOௐFDUWௐV\VWHPௐUHGXFHGௐYHKLFOHௐWUDIILFௐIRUௐVHUYLFHௐDQGௐIHZHUௐSRXQGVௐRIௐ UDZௐPDWHULDOVௐ SODVWLFௐDQGௐVWHHO ௐFRQVXPHGௐௐ:HௐDUHௐDOVRௐSURXGௐWRௐRIIHUௐPRUHௐFDUWVௐIURPௐWKHௐIDFWRU\ௐSHUௐWUXFNORDGௐWKDQௐPRVWௐFRPSHWLWRUVௐ RIWHQௐZLWKௐDௐKLJKHUௐOHYHOௐRIௐDVVHPEO\ௐIURPௐWKHௐIDFWRU\ ௐௐ7KLVௐZLOOௐUHGXFHௐWKHௐDPRXQWௐRIௐGHOLYHULHVௐQHHGHGௐWRௐIXOILOOௐ\RXUௐRUGHUVௐௐ,QௐVKRUWௐDௐ PRUHௐVXVWDLQDEOHௐSURJUDPௐUHVXOWVௐ\LHOGLQJௐDௐUHGXFHGௐLPSDFWௐRQௐRXUௐHQYLURQPHQW Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 214 'HVFULEHௐ\RXUௐRUJDQL]DWLRQ¶Vௐ DSSURDFKௐWRௐWKHௐFROOHFWLRQௐVWRUDJHௐ XVDJHௐRZQHUVKLSௐSURWHFWLRQௐ DFFHVVௐDQGௐULJKWVௐRIௐFXVWRPHUௐGDWDௐWKDWௐLVௐJDWKHUHGௐLQௐWKHௐQRUPDOௐFRXUVHௐRIௐGRLQJௐEXVLQHVV :HௐUHDOL]HௐWKHௐJURZLQJௐXOWLPDWHௐLPSRUWDQFHௐRIௐSURWHFWLRQௐZLWKௐFXVWRPHUௐGDWDௐDQGௐFRPSDQ\ௐ LQIRUPDWLRQ 'DWDௐ&ROOHFWLRQௐௐ:HௐFROOHFWௐGDWDௐLQௐRUGHUௐWRௐSURYLGHௐRXUௐJRRGVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐWRௐSURFHVVௐUHTXHVWVௐUHFHLYHGௐ LQFOXGLQJௐZDUUDQW\ௐUHTXHVWV ௐDQGௐWRௐSURYLGHௐVXSSRUWௐ:HௐGRௐQRWௐNQRZLQJO\ௐFROOHFWௐSHUVRQDOௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐIURPௐFKLOGUHQௐXQGHUௐௐ\HDUVௐRIௐDJHௐௐ$GGLWLRQDOௐUHDVRQVௐIRUௐ GDWDௐFROOHFWLRQௐPD\ௐEHௐYLHZHGௐLQௐRXUௐ3ULYDF\ௐ3ROLF\ௐDWௐZZZZDVWHTXLSFRPSULYDF\SROLF\ௐ7KLVௐ GDWDௐPD\ௐLQFOXGHௐSHUVRQDOO\ௐLGHQWLILDEOHௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐVXFKௐDVௐQDPHௐSRVWDOௐDGGUHVVௐHPDLOௐ DGGUHVVௐDQGௐWHOHSKRQHௐQXPEHUௐ,QIRUPDWLRQௐFROOHFWHGௐDXWRPDWLFDOO\ௐE\ௐRXUௐZHEVLWHௐRUௐV\VWHPVௐ PD\ௐLQFOXGHௐXVDJHௐGHWDLOVௐ,3ௐDGGUHVVHVௐEURZVHUௐW\SHௐRSHUDWLQJௐV\VWHPௐDQGௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐ FROOHFWHGௐWKURXJKௐFRRNLHVௐZHEௐEHDFRQVௐDQGௐRWKHUௐWUDFNLQJௐWHFKQRORJLHV 6WRUDJHௐௐ,QIRUPDWLRQௐ\RXௐSURYLGHௐWRௐXVௐLVௐVWRUHGௐRQௐRXUௐV\VWHPVௐXVLQJௐDWௐDௐPLQLPXPௐLQGXVWU\ௐVWDQGDUGௐGDWDௐVHFXULW\ௐSUDFWLFHVௐ$Q\ௐSD\PHQWௐWUDQVDFWLRQVௐDUHௐSURFHVVHGௐWKURXJKௐ WKLUGௐSDUW\ௐSURYLGHUVௐXVLQJௐ66/ௐDQGௐRWKHUௐHQFU\SWLRQௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐௐ ௐௐௐௐௐ 'DWDௐௐ:HௐXVHௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐWKDWௐZHௐFROOHFWௐLQFOXGLQJௐDQ\ௐSHUVRQDOௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐWRௐSURYLGHௐ LQIRUPDWLRQௐSURGXFWVௐRUௐVHUYLFHVௐWKDWௐDUHௐUHTXHVWHGௐIURPௐXVௐ:HௐSURYLGHௐRXUௐWKLUGSDUW\ௐ YHQGRUVௐVHUYLFHௐSURYLGHUVௐDQGௐFRQWUDFWRUVௐZLWKௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐLQௐRUGHUௐWRௐVHUYLFHௐRXUௐDFFRXQWVௐ RUௐSURYLGHௐUHSDLUZDUUDQW\ௐVHUYLFHVௐIRUௐSURGXFWVௐSXUFKDVHGௐIURPௐXVௐௐௐௐௐ 2ZQHUVKLSௐDQGௐ5LJKWVௐௐ:DVWHTXLSௐFXVWRPHUVௐRZQௐWKHLUௐRZQௐSHUVRQDOௐGDWDௐ:DVWHTXLSௐ IROORZVௐDOOௐDSSOLFDEOHௐORFDOௐVWDWHௐDQGௐIHGHUDOௐSULYDF\ௐODZVௐLQFOXGLQJௐWKHௐ&DOLIRUQLDௐ&RQVXPHUௐ 3ULYDF\ௐ$FWௐ &&3$ ௐௐ&XVWRPHUVௐDQGௐRWKHUVௐPD\ௐFRQWDFWௐ:DVWHTXLSௐDWௐDQ\ௐWLPHௐWRௐFRQILUPௐ FRUUHFWௐRUௐGHOHWHௐWKHLUௐSHUVRQDOௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐSURYLGHGௐWRௐXVௐDVௐDOORZHGௐE\ௐDSSOLFDEOHௐODZ ௐௐௐௐ 7KHௐDERYHௐUHSUHVHQWVௐDௐVXPPDU\ௐRIௐNH\ௐ3ULYDF\ௐ3ROLF\ௐWHUPVௐUHOHYDQWௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOO¶Vௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ$JHQFLHVௐௐ3OHDVHௐYLVLWௐKWWSV ZZZZDVWHTXLSFRPSULYDF\SROLF\ௐWRௐYLHZௐRXUௐIXOOௐ3ULYDF\ௐ3ROLFLHV 'HVFULEHௐKRZௐ\RXUௐRIIHULQJௐ HQFRXUDJHVIDFLOLWDWHVௐLQFUHDVHGௐSDUWLFLSDWLRQௐDQGௐHIILFLHQFLHVௐLQௐ UHF\FOLQJௐDQGௐGLYHUVLRQௐSURJUDPV 5HF\FOLQJௐUHTXLUHVௐIDUௐOHVVௐHQHUJ\ௐXVHVௐIHZHUௐQDWXUDOௐUHVRXUFHVௐDQGௐNHHSVௐZDVWHௐIURPௐ SLOLQJௐXSௐLQௐODQGILOOVௐ5HF\FOLQJௐRIIHUVௐVLJQLILFDQWௐHQHUJ\ௐVDYLQJVௐRYHUௐPDQXIDFWXULQJௐZLWKௐYLUJLQௐPDWHULDOVௐ IRUௐH[DPSOHௐPDQXIDFWXULQJௐZLWKௐUHF\FOHGௐDOXPLQXPௐFDQVௐXVHVௐ ௐSHUFHQWௐOHVVௐ HQHUJ\ ௐ5HF\FOLQJௐDQGௐEX\LQJௐUHF\FOHGௐSURGXFWVௐFUHDWHௐGHPDQGௐIRUௐPRUHௐUHF\FOHGௐSURGXFWVௐ GHFUHDVLQJௐZDVWHௐDQGௐKHOSLQJௐRXUௐHFRQRP\ௐ7RWHUௐVXSSOLHVௐSULYDWHௐKDXOHUVௐDQGௐUHF\FOHUVௐZLWKௐ FDUWௐIOHHWVௐIRUௐFROOHFWLRQௐVHUYLFHVௐ$GGLWLRQDOO\ௐ7RWHUௐZRUNVௐZLWKௐ0XQLFLSDOLWLHVௐDFURVVௐ1RUWKௐ $PHULFDௐWKDWௐUHFHLYHௐJUDQWௐIXQGLQJௐWRௐLPSOHPHQWௐDௐUHF\FOLQJௐSURJUDPௐVXFKௐDVௐ7KHௐ5HF\FOLQJௐ 3DUWQHUVKLSௐ6:,)5ௐ$'(0ௐ.HQWXFN\ௐ3ULGHௐ)XQGௐ5HF\FOLQJௐ*UDQWௐDQGௐ7KHௐ(3$ௐWRௐQDPHௐDௐ IHZௐ 2XUௐFRPSDQ\ௐIRFXVHVௐRQௐUHVHDUFKLQJௐJUDQWௐUHODWHGௐRSSRUWXQLWLHVௐDQGௐFROODERUDWLQJௐLQWHUQDOO\ௐ ZLWKௐWHDPௐPHPEHUVௐDQGௐH[WHUQDOO\ௐZLWKௐJRYHUQPHQWௐHQWLWLHVௐWRௐHGXFDWHௐDQGௐLPSOHPHQWௐ UHF\FOLQJௐSURJUDPVௐDFURVVௐWKHௐFRQWLQHQWௐ7RWHU VௐFURVVௐIXQFWLRQDOௐWHDPௐRIௐZDVWHௐLQGXVWU\ௐ H[SHUWVௐDUHௐNQRZOHGJHDEOHௐDERXWௐWKHௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐUHODWHGௐWRௐWKHௐDYDLODEOHௐUHF\FOLQJௐJUDQWௐ RSSRUWXQLWLHVௐWKDWௐKDYHௐEHHQௐLPSOHPHQWHGௐ2XUௐ7HDPௐ0HPEHUVௐZLOOௐZRUNௐZLWKௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ $JHQFLHVௐWRௐPHHWௐWKHௐRXWOLQHGௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐLQௐRXUௐUROOௐFDUWௐSURGXFWLRQ )RUௐLQVWDQFHௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐZLOOௐPHHWௐWKHௐ5HF\FOLQJௐ3DUWQHUVKLSௐZLWKௐFDUWVௐEHௐPDQXIDFWXUHGௐZLWKௐDௐPLQLPXPௐRIௐILYHௐSHUFHQWௐ ௐUHVLGHQWLDOௐSRVWFRQVXPHUௐSODVWLFௐFRQWHQWௐEDVHGௐRQௐWKHௐHQWLUHௐ PDVVௐRIௐWKHௐERG\ௐOLGௐDQGௐZKHHOVௐRIௐWKHௐFDUWVௐௐ7KLVௐUHVLQௐZLOOௐKDYHௐEHHQௐJHQHUDWHGௐE\ௐDௐ KRXVHKROGௐDQGௐFROOHFWHGௐIRUௐUHF\FOLQJௐE\ௐDௐFXUEVLGHௐRUௐGURSRIIௐUHF\FOLQJௐSURJUDPௐLQௐWKHௐ 8QLWHGௐ6WDWHVௐௐ7KLVௐUHTXLUHPHQWௐZLOOௐQRWௐEHௐPHWௐWKURXJKௐWKHௐXVHௐRIௐSRVWLQGXVWULDOௐSODVWLFVௐRUௐ SODVWLFௐVRXUFHGௐIURPௐHQGRIOLIHௐFDUWVௐRUௐELQVௐEXWௐWKHௐPDWHULDOௐZLOOௐFRQVLVWௐRIௐPDWHULDOௐWKDWௐ ZDVௐSXUFKDVHGௐFRQVXPHGௐDQGௐGLVSRVHGௐRIௐVROHO\ௐE\ௐDௐUHVLGHQWLDOௐKRXVHKROGௐLQௐWKHLUௐUROHௐDVௐ DQௐHQGXVHUௐRIௐDௐSURGXFWௐRUௐSDFNDJHௐWKDWௐKDVௐEHHQௐXVHGௐIRUௐLWVௐLQWHQGHGௐSXUSRVHௐDQGௐKDVௐVXEVHTXHQWO\ௐEHHQௐFROOHFWHGௐIRUௐUHF\FOLQJௐE\ௐDௐFXUEVLGHௐRUௐFURSRIIௐUHF\FOLQJௐSURJUDPௐLQௐWKHௐ8QLWHGௐ6WDWHVௐௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐZLOOௐDOVRௐEHௐPDQXIDFWXUHGௐXVLQJௐDQௐDGGLWLRQDOௐWZHQW\ௐSHUFHQWௐ ௐRIௐSRVWFRQVXPHUௐRUௐSRVWLQGXVWULDOௐUHF\FOHGௐFRQWHQW :KHQௐLWௐFRPHVௐWRௐFXUEVLGHௐUHF\FOLQJௐFROOHFWLRQௐVHUYLFHVௐZHௐZRUNௐZLWKௐ5HFRORJ\ௐ&DVHOODௐ ('&2ௐ:DVWHௐ3URௐ:DVWHௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐ6DQWHNௐ&5 5ௐDQGௐPDQ\ௐRWKHUௐKDXOLQJUHF\FOLQJௐ FRPSDQLHVௐYDU\LQJௐLQௐVL]HௐZLWKௐUHVRXUFHVௐUHDGLO\ௐLQௐSODFHௐIRUௐSURGXFWLRQௐDVVHPEO\ௐ GLVWULEXWLRQௐWRௐUHVLGHQWVௐFDUWௐPDLQWHQDQFHௐDQGௐUHWLUHGௐFDUWVௐUHF\FOLQJௐVHUYLFHVௐ &RQWDLQHU3URVௐRIIHUVௐFDUWௐUHPRYDOௐVHUYLFHVௐWRௐDVVLVWௐLQௐJHWWLQJௐROGௐFDUWVௐIURPௐUHVLGHQWVௐZKHQௐ QHZௐFDUWVௐDUHௐEHLQJௐLQWURGXFHGௐ:HௐZLOOௐFROOHFWௐDOOௐROGௐFDUWVௐIURPௐWKHௐUHVLGHQWVௐDGGUHVVHVௐ DQGௐUHWXUQௐWKHPௐWRௐDௐGHVLJQDWHGௐVLWHௐRIௐ\RXUௐFKRLFHௐ2SWLRQDOௐDGGLWLRQDOௐVHUYLFHVௐRIIHUHGௐDUHௐ WRௐVRUWௐJUDGHௐDQGௐVWDFNௐWKHௐROGௐFDUWVௐIRUௐIXWXUHௐXVDJH &RQWDLQHU3URVௐDOVRௐRIIHUVௐDௐUHF\FOLQJௐSURJUDPௐIRUௐROGௐFDUWVௐWKDWௐKDYHௐVHUYHGௐWKHLUௐXVHIXOௐOLIHௐ:HௐFDQௐVXSSO\ௐUHF\FOHUVௐORFDOௐWRௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ3XEOLFௐ$JHQFLHVௐDQGRUௐDUUDQJHௐIRUௐROGௐFDUWVௐWRௐEHௐGLVDVVHPEOHGௐORDGHGௐRXWௐDQGௐWUDQVSRUWHGௐWRௐDௐUHF\FOLQJௐIDFLOLW\ௐ7KLVௐSURJUDPௐRIIHUVௐ PRQH\ௐEDFNௐSHUௐUHF\FOHGௐSRXQGௐRIௐSODVWLFௐ7KLVௐDOVRௐDVVLVWVௐZLWKௐFXVWRPHUௐ'LYHUVLRQௐDQGௐ 6XVWDLQDELOLW\ௐLQLWLDWLYHV Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 215 ,GHQWLI\ௐLIௐ\RXUௐRIIHUHGௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐ VROXWLRQVௐDUHௐDYDLODEOHௐWKURXJKௐ PRELOHௐGHYLFHௐDSSOLFDWLRQVௐDQGௐ ZLWKௐZKLFKௐRSHUDWLQJௐV\VWHPVௐWKH\ௐDUHௐFRPSDWLEOH :DVWHTXLS VௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQVௐIRUௐ$VVHPEO\ௐ ௐ'LVWULEXWLRQௐ$VVHWௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐDQGௐ 6HUYLFHௐ9HULILFDWLRQௐDUHௐDYDLODEOHௐWKURXJKௐDௐZHEEDVHGௐSODWIRUPௐDQGௐDUHௐWKXVௐFRPSDWLEOHௐZLWKௐ WKHௐPDMRULW\ௐRIௐPRGHUQௐRSHUDWLQJௐV\VWHPVௐ$ௐPRGHUQௐZHEௐEURZVHUௐVXFKௐDVௐ*RRJOHௐ&KURPHௐ RUௐ)LUHIR[ௐLVௐUHFRPPHQGHGௐ,QௐDGGLWLRQௐWRௐWKLVௐDௐPRELOHௐDSSௐDOORZVௐIRUௐFUHZVௐLQௐWKHௐILHOGௐWRௐSHUIRUPௐZRUNௐRUGHUVௐVHUYLFHௐUHTXHVWVௐDQGௐGHOLYHULHVௐ7KHௐPRELOHௐDSSௐLVௐDYDLODEOHௐIRUௐPRGHUQௐ$QGURLGௐGHYLFHVௐ5),'ௐVFDQQLQJௐUHTXLUHVௐVSHFLILFௐKDUGZDUHௐZKLFKௐLVௐDYDLODEOHௐ WKURXJKௐWKLVௐFRQWUDFW 7DEOH% 9DOXH$GGHG$WWULEXWHV /LQH,WHP 4XHVWLRQ &HUWLILFDWLRQ 2IIHUHG &RPPHQW 6HOHFWௐDQ\ௐ:RPHQௐ RUௐ0LQRULW\ௐ%XVLQHVVௐ (QWLW\ௐ :0%( ௐ6PDOOௐ %XVLQHVVௐ(QWLW\ௐ 6%( ௐRUௐYHWHUDQௐ RZQHGௐEXVLQHVVௐFHUWLILFDWLRQVௐWKDWௐ\RXUௐ FRPSDQ\ௐRUௐKXEௐ SDUWQHUVௐKDYHௐ REWDLQHGௐ8SORDGௐ GRFXPHQWDWLRQௐDQGௐDௐ OLVWLQJௐRIௐGHDOHUVKLSVௐ +8%ௐSDUWQHUVௐRUௐUHVHOOHUVௐLIௐDYDLODEOHௐ6HOHFWௐDOOௐWKDWௐDSSO\ <HV 1R 7RWHUௐ//&ௐUHYLHZVௐDOOௐUHTXHVWVௐIRUௐ3URMHFWV%LGV3URSRVDOVௐWRௐ XQGHUVWDQGௐDQ\ௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐIRUௐXWLOL]LQJௐGLVDGYDQWDJHGௐ EXVLQHVVHVௐDVௐTXDOLILHGௐVXEFRQWUDFWRUVVXSSOLHUVௐௐ7RWHUௐLVௐQRWௐ DௐFHUWLILHGௐGLVDGYDQWDJHGௐ%LGGHUௐௐ+RZHYHUௐ7RWHUௐLVௐ FRPPLWWHGௐWRௐXWLOL]DWLRQௐRIௐGLVDGYDQWDJHGௐEXVLQHVVHVௐZKHQHYHUௐ SRVVLEOHௐDQGௐZHௐVHWௐRXWௐWRௐLGHQWLI\ௐSRVVLEOHௐXVHௐRIௐGLVDGYDQWDJHGௐEXVLQHVVHVௐRQௐDௐFDVHE\FDVHௐEDVLVௐLQௐDௐ FRQFHUWHGௐDWWHPSWௐWRௐPHHWௐUHTXHVWHGௐOHYHOVௐRIௐSDUWLFLSDWLRQௐ DQGௐLQௐDQௐRYHUDOOௐHIIRUWௐRIௐRXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐDWௐODUJHௐWRௐJURZௐDQGௐ VWUHQJWKHQௐVPDOOHUௐGLVDGYDQWDJHGௐEXVLQHVVHVௐௐ:HௐDOVRௐYDOXHௐ GLYHUVLW\ௐLQௐHPSOR\PHQWௐNQRZLQJௐWKDWௐRXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐDQGௐ FXVWRPHUVௐDUHௐVWUHQJWKHQHGௐE\ௐRXUௐLQGLYLGXDOLW\ௐDQGௐSXUSRVHIXOௐ GLVFXVVLRQௐDQGௐRXUௐFRQVLVWHQWO\ௐYLHZLQJௐLVVXHVௐDQGௐRSSRUWXQLWLHVௐZLWKௐFKRLFHVௐIURPௐPXOWLSOHௐDSSURDFKHVௐDQGௐFUHDWLYHௐVROXWLRQV ,QௐPRVWௐSURMHFWVௐWKHUHௐDUHௐSRVVLELOLWLHVௐIRUௐXVHௐRIௐ GLVDGYDQWDJHGௐEXVLQHVVHVௐௐ:HௐQRUPDOO\ௐVHDUFKௐIRUௐVSHFLILFௐ EXVLQHVVHVௐZLWKௐUHVRXUFHVௐWKDWௐPDWFKௐWKHௐIROORZLQJ ௐ2YHUWKHURDGௐWUXFNLQJௐRIௐFDUWVௐWRௐWKHௐFLW\ௐ IRRWௐWUDLOHUV ௐ3URMHFWௐPDQDJHPHQWௐRIௐGRRUWRGRRUௐGHOLYHU\ௐRIௐFDUWVௐWRௐUHVLGHQWVௐRUௐIRUௐRWKHUௐZRUNௐUHTXLUHG ௐ6XSSOLHVௐIRUNOLIWௐDQGRUௐWUXFNVௐIRUௐORFDOௐGHOLYHU\ௐRIௐFDUWVௐWRௐ UHVLGHQWVௐDQGௐRWKHUௐZRUNௐUHTXLUHG 7RWHUௐIXUWKHUௐYHWVௐGLVFRYHUHGௐGLVDGYDQWDJHGௐEXVLQHVVHVௐIRUௐ TXDOLILFDWLRQVௐWRௐSHUIRUPௐWKHௐZRUNௐDQGௐZHௐFRQVLGHUௐDOOௐFRVWௐ HIIHFWLYHௐSRVLWLYHௐUHVSRQVHVௐௐ,QௐWKLVௐ%LGௐWKHUHௐLVௐDQௐHQFRXUDJHPHQWௐWRௐXWLOL]HௐGLVDGYDQWDJHGௐEXVLQHVVHVௐௐ$QGௐDWௐ WKHௐVDPHௐWLPHௐWKHௐVFRSHௐRIௐZRUNௐIRUௐWKHௐFRQWUDFWௐRQO\ௐDIIRUGVௐ DQௐRSSRUWXQLW\ௐIRUௐVXEFRQWUDFWLQJௐZLWKௐ,WHPௐௐDERYHௐIRUௐ FRPPRQௐFDUULHUௐWUDQVSRUWDWLRQௐRIௐFDUWVௐIURPௐRXUௐSODQWௐWRௐWKHௐ &LW\ௐGHVWLQDWLRQௐௐௐ 7RWHUௐDOUHDG\ௐKDVௐDௐZRUNLQJௐUHODWLRQVKLSௐLQௐRXUௐGDLO\ௐEXVLQHVVௐZLWKௐWZRௐFRPPRQௐFDUULHUVௐ2QHௐ+RUQௐ7UDQVSRUWDWLRQௐ,QFௐDQGௐ5R\DOௐ([SUHVVௐ,QFௐௐ:HௐKDYHௐZRUNHGௐZLWKௐERWKௐFDUULHUVௐIRUௐ TXLWHௐDௐZKLOHௐQRZௐWRௐSURYLGHௐUHOLDEOHௐDQGௐTXDOLW\ௐVHUYLFHௐௐ 'RFXPHQWDWLRQௐRIௐ'%(ௐFHUWLILFDWLRQௐLVௐDYDLODEOHௐXSRQௐUHTXHVWௐ IRU ௐ2QHௐ+RUQௐ7UDQVSRUWDWLRQௐ±ௐ:%(ௐ&HUWLILHGௐE\ௐ1DWLRQDOௐ :RPHQ¶Vௐ%XVLQHVVௐ(QWHUSULVHௐௐ5R\DOௐ([SUHVVௐ,QFௐௐ6RXWKZHVWௐ0LQRULW\ௐ6XSSOLHUௐ'HYHORSPHQWௐ&RXQFLO $VLGHௐIURPௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐIRUௐSDUWLFLSDWLRQௐRIௐGLVDGYDQWDJHGௐ EXVLQHVVHVௐ7RWHUௐFRQWLQXRXVO\ௐGHPRQVWUDWHVௐRXUௐRYHUDOOௐ FRPPLWPHQWௐWRௐHPSOR\ௐDQGௐGRௐEXVLQHVVௐZLWKௐGLVDGYDQWDJHGௐ EXVLQHVVHVௐLQௐERWKௐVSHFLDOௐSURMHFWVௐDQGௐGDLO\ௐEXVLQHVVௐௐ)RUௐ H[DPSOHௐZHௐXVHௐDௐ:RPDQௐ2ZQHGௐ%XVLQHVVௐWRௐIXOILOOௐGDLO\ௐRIILFHௐDQGௐELGGLQJௐVXSSOLHVௐQHHGVௐDQGௐZHௐZRUNௐZLWKௐPDQ\ௐ GLVDGYDQWDJHGௐEXVLQHVVHVௐWRௐSHUIRUPௐWKHௐZRUNௐRIௐXQORDGLQJௐ DVVHPEO\ௐDQGௐGLVWULEXWLRQௐRIௐFDUWVௐ DQGௐUHODWHGௐVHUYLFHV ௐWRௐ 3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ$JHQFLHVௐZKHQௐUHTXLUHGௐE\ௐSURMHFWVௐ ,WHPVௐௐ DQGௐௐOLVWHGௐDERYH 0LQRULW\ௐ%XVLQHVVௐ (QWHUSULVHௐ 0%( <HV 1R 3OHDVHௐVHHௐ7RWHU VௐUHVSRQVHௐLQௐWKHௐDERYHௐTXHVWLRQௐௐ FRPPHQWௐER[ :RPHQௐ%XVLQHVVௐ (QWHUSULVHௐ :%( <HV 1R 3OHDVHௐVHHௐ7RWHU VௐUHVSRQVHௐLQௐWKHௐDERYHௐTXHVWLRQௐௐ FRPPHQWௐER[ Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 216 'LVDEOHG2ZQHGௐ %XVLQHVVௐ(QWHUSULVHௐ '2%( <HV 1R 3OHDVHௐVHHௐ7RWHU VௐUHVSRQVHௐLQௐWKHௐDERYHௐTXHVWLRQௐௐ FRPPHQWௐER[ 9HWHUDQ2ZQHGௐ %XVLQHVVௐ(QWHUSULVH 9%( <HV 1R 3OHDVHௐVHHௐ7RWHU VௐUHVSRQVHௐLQௐWKHௐDERYHௐTXHVWLRQௐௐ FRPPHQWௐER[ 6HUYLFH'LVDEOHGௐ 9HWHUDQ2ZQHGௐ %XVLQHVV 6'92% <HV 1R 3OHDVHௐVHHௐ7RWHU VௐUHVSRQVHௐLQௐWKHௐDERYHௐTXHVWLRQௐௐ FRPPHQWௐER[ 6PDOOௐ%XVLQHVVௐ (QWHUSULVHௐ 6%( <HV 1R 3OHDVHௐVHHௐ7RWHU VௐUHVSRQVHௐLQௐWKHௐDERYHௐTXHVWLRQௐௐ FRPPHQWௐER[ 6PDOOௐ'LVDGYDQWDJHGௐ %XVLQHVVௐ 6'% <HV 1R 3OHDVHௐVHHௐ7RWHU VௐUHVSRQVHௐLQௐWKHௐDERYHௐTXHVWLRQௐௐ FRPPHQWௐER[ :RPHQ2ZQHGௐ6PDOOௐ %XVLQHVVௐ :26% <HV 1R 3OHDVHௐVHHௐ7RWHU VௐUHVSRQVHௐLQௐWKHௐDERYHௐTXHVWLRQௐௐ FRPPHQWௐER[ 7DEOH 3ULFLQJ 3RLQWV 3URYLGHGHWDLOHGSULFLQJLQIRUPDWLRQLQWKHTXHVWLRQVWKDWIROORZEHORZ /LQH ,WHP 4XHVWLRQ 5HVSRQVH 'HVFULEHௐ\RXUௐSD\PHQWௐWHUPVௐDQGௐDFFHSWHGௐSD\PHQWௐ PHWKRGV ௐௐQHWௐௐGD\Vௐ7RWHUௐDFFHSWVௐ3FDUGௐSURFXUHPHQWVSD\PHQWVௐௐ2XUௐ SUHIHUUHGௐPHWKRGௐRIௐSD\PHQWௐLVௐZLUHௐ$&+ௐRUௐFKHFN 'HVFULEHௐDQ\ௐOHDVLQJௐRUௐILQDQFLQJௐRSWLRQVௐDYDLODEOHௐIRUௐXVHௐ E\ௐHGXFDWLRQDOௐRUௐJRYHUQPHQWDOௐHQWLWLHV $VௐDௐEHQHILWௐRIௐEHLQJௐDௐ:DVWHTXLSௐGLYLVLRQௐ7RWHUௐSURYLGHVௐDௐEULGJHௐ WRௐVROXWLRQVௐIRUௐHGXFDWLRQDOௐRUௐJRYHUQPHQWDOௐHQWLWLHVௐWRௐILQGௐOHDVLQJௐ DQGௐILQDQFLQJௐRSWLRQVௐWKURXJKௐ:DVWHTXLSௐ)LQDQFHௐZLWKௐRXUௐILQDQFHௐ SDUWQHUௐ1&/ௐ*RYHUQPHQWௐ&DSLWDOௐ 1&/ ௐWKHௐRQO\ௐOHDVLQJௐDQGௐ ILQDQFLQJௐFRPSDQ\ௐLQௐWKHௐQDWLRQௐZLWKௐDௐOHDVLQJௐDQGௐILQDQFLQJௐFRQWUDFWௐRQௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ &RQWUDFWௐ1&/ ௐௐ:HௐDUHௐSOHDVHGௐWRௐRIIHUௐ 1&/ VௐRYHUௐௐ\HDUVௐRIௐVSHFLDOL]LQJௐLQௐSURYLGLQJௐFRPSHWLWLYHௐ HTXLSPHQWௐILQDQFLQJௐSURJUDPVௐIRUௐHQWLWLHVௐDFURVVௐWKHௐQDWLRQௐSURYLGLQJௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐPHPEHUVௐDFFHVVௐWRௐILQDQFLQJௐWKDWௐPXOWLSOLHVௐWKHLUௐ SXUFKDVLQJௐSRZHUௐSRWHQWLDOO\ௐVL[IROGௐௐ:HௐXQGHUVWDQGௐWKDWௐIXQGVௐDUHQ Wௐ DOZD\VௐDYDLODEOHௐIRUௐQHZௐDQGௐDGHTXDWHௐHTXLSPHQWௐDQGௐWKHௐ7D[ ([HPSWௐ0XQLFLSDOௐILQDQFLQJௐRIIHUHGௐE\ௐ:DVWHTXLSௐ)LQDQFH1&/ௐWKURXJKௐ7RWHUௐDOORZVௐDJHQFLHVௐWRௐJHWௐWKDWௐHTXLSPHQWௐQRZௐWKURXJKௐPDQDJHDEOHௐLQVWDOOPHQWௐSD\PHQWVௐWKDWௐFRPHௐIURPௐWKHLUௐRSHUDWLQJௐ EXGJHWௐௐ:HௐEHOLHYHௐWKDWௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ7RWHU:DVWHTXLSௐ)LQDQFHௐDQGௐ 1&/ௐKDYHௐDௐFRPPRQௐJRDOௐWRௐSURYLGHௐVROXWLRQVௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ PHPEHUVௐWKDWௐZLOOௐVXEVWDQWLDOO\ௐDOWHUௐWKHௐIXWXUHௐIRUௐDOOௐLQௐWKHௐPRVWௐ SRVLWLYHௐZD\V 'HVFULEHௐDQ\ௐVWDQGDUGௐWUDQVDFWLRQௐGRFXPHQWVௐWKDWௐ\RXௐ SURSRVHௐWRௐXVHௐLQௐFRQQHFWLRQௐZLWKௐDQௐDZDUGHGௐDJUHHPHQWௐ RUGHUௐIRUPVௐWHUPVௐDQGௐFRQGLWLRQVௐVHUYLFHௐOHYHOௐ DJUHHPHQWVௐHWF ௐ8SORDGௐDOOௐWHPSODWHௐDJUHHPHQWVௐRUௐ WUDQVDFWLRQௐGRFXPHQWVௐZKLFKௐPD\ௐEHௐSURSRVHGௐWRௐ 3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ(QWLWLHV :KLOHௐGRLQJௐEXVLQHVVௐVHHPVௐWRௐEHௐDௐPHWLFXORXVௐWDVNௐIRUௐFRPSDQLHVௐ DQGௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ$JHQFLHVௐDOLNHௐ7RWHUௐVHHNVௐWRௐVWUHDPOLQHௐ SURFHVVHVௐIRUௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ$JHQFLHVௐDOOௐWKHௐZKLOHௐVHWWLQJௐHDFKௐXSௐ IRUௐVDIHௐXVHௐRIௐGDWDௐKLJKௐVHUYLFHௐOHYHOVௐDSSURYDOVௐRIௐRUGHUௐGHWDLOVௐ SULRUௐWRௐPDQXIDFWXUHௐDQGௐRWKHUௐIRUPVௐDQGௐSURFHVVHVௐௐ7KHVHௐ WUDQVDFWLRQௐGRFXPHQWVௐDUHௐHVWDEOLVKHGௐWRௐPDNHௐVRXQGௐEXVLQHVVௐVHQVHௐIRUௐRXUௐFRPSDQ\ௐDQGௐDOOௐFXVWRPHUVௐ([DPSOHVௐRIௐVRPHௐRIௐ WKHVHௐIRUPVௐDUHௐDWWDFKHGௐIRUௐ6RXUFHZHOO VௐSHUXVDO :HௐKDYHௐLQFOXGHGௐWKHௐIROORZLQJௐ6WDQGDUGௐ7UDQVDFWLRQௐ'RFXPHQWVௐLQௐ WKHௐILOHௐXSORDGௐVHFWLRQ ௐ&XVWRPHUௐ6HW8Sௐ)RUP ௐ:DVWHTXLSௐ&UHGLWௐ$SSOLFDWLRQௐ)RUPௐ&UHGLWௐ&DUGௐ$XWKRUL]DWLRQௐ)RUPௐ:DVWHTXLSௐ7HUPVௐDQGௐ&RQGLWLRQVௐRIௐ6DOH ௐ:DVWHTXLSௐ/LPLWHGௐ:DUUDQW\ௐZLWKௐ:DUUDQW\ௐ&ODLPVௐ3URFHGXUH 'Rௐ\RXௐDFFHSWௐWKHௐ3FDUGௐSURFXUHPHQWௐDQGௐSD\PHQWௐSURFHVV"ௐ,IௐVRௐLVௐWKHUHௐDQ\ௐDGGLWLRQDOௐFRVWௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ SDUWLFLSDWLQJௐHQWLWLHVௐIRUௐXVLQJௐWKLVௐSURFHVV" 7RWHUௐDFFHSWVௐ3FDUGௐSURFXUHPHQWVSD\PHQWVௐௐ2XUௐSUHIHUUHGௐPHWKRGௐRIௐSD\PHQWௐLVௐZLUHௐ$&+ௐRUௐFKHFN Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 217 'HVFULEHௐ\RXUௐSULFLQJௐPRGHOௐ HJௐOLQHLWHPௐGLVFRXQWVௐRUௐ SURGXFWFDWHJRU\ௐGLVFRXQWV ௐ3URYLGHௐGHWDLOHGௐSULFLQJௐGDWDௐ LQFOXGLQJௐVWDQGDUGௐRUௐOLVWௐSULFLQJௐDQGௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ GLVFRXQWHGௐSULFH ௐRQௐDOOௐRIௐWKHௐLWHPVௐWKDWௐ\RXௐZDQWௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐWRௐFRQVLGHUௐDVௐSDUWௐRIௐ\RXUௐ5)3ௐUHVSRQVHௐ,IௐDSSOLFDEOHௐSURYLGHௐDௐ6.8ௐIRUௐHDFKௐLWHPௐLQௐ\RXUௐSURSRVDOௐ 8SORDGௐ\RXUௐSULFLQJௐPDWHULDOVௐ LIௐDSSOLFDEOH ௐLQௐWKHௐ GRFXPHQWௐXSORDGௐVHFWLRQௐRIௐ\RXUௐUHVSRQVH 7RWHUௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐGRHVௐQRWௐKDYHௐVHWௐOLVWௐSULFLQJௐWKHUHIRUHௐZHௐDUHௐ RIIHULQJௐDௐOLQHௐLWHPௐFHLOLQJௐSULFLQJௐPRGHOௐWKDWௐLVௐFRPSDUDEOHௐWRௐRWKHUௐ FRRSHUDWLYHௐFRQWUDFWVௐDQGௐJLYHVௐXVௐWKHௐIOH[LELOLW\ௐWRௐSURYLGHௐ FRPSHWLWLYHௐSULFLQJௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOO VௐSDUWLFLSDWLQJௐDJHQFLHVௐZKLOHௐSURWHFWLQJௐXVௐIURPௐYRODWLOHௐIOXFWXDWLRQVௐLQௐUHVLQௐFRVWVௐௐ7KLVௐSULFLQJௐPRGHOௐDOLJQVௐZHOOௐZLWKௐRXUௐGHDOHUௐQHWZRUNௐDQGௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐLVௐWKHLUௐ SUHIHUUHGௐFRRSHUDWLYHௐFRQWUDFWௐௐ:HௐKDYHௐKDGௐJUHDWௐVXFFHVVௐXVLQJௐ WKLVௐVDPHௐSULFLQJௐPRGHOௐRQௐWKHௐFXUUHQWௐFRQWUDFW 7RWHUௐ3URௐ3URGXFWV ௐௐSULFLQJௐPRGHOௐLVௐDௐௐGLVFRXQWௐRIIௐOLVWௐSULFHௐௐ :HௐKDYHௐSURYLGHGௐDௐGHWDLOHGௐSULFHௐOLVWௐIRUௐDOOௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐWKDWௐLQFOXGHௐPRGHOௐQXPEHUVௐDQGௐGHVFULSWLRQVௐௐ(DFKௐSULFHௐJXLGHௐZLOOௐLQFOXGHௐRSWLRQVௐDYDLODEOHௐDVௐXSJUDGHVௐWRௐWKHௐEDVHௐSULFLQJௐIRUௐWKDWௐ VSHFLILFௐSURGXFWௐOLQH 4XDQWLI\ௐWKHௐSULFLQJௐGLVFRXQWௐUHSUHVHQWHGௐE\ௐWKHௐSULFLQJௐSURSRVDOௐLQௐWKLVௐUHVSRQVHௐ)RUௐH[DPSOHௐLIௐWKHௐSULFLQJௐLQௐ \RXUௐUHVSRQVHௐUHSUHVHQWVௐDௐSHUFHQWDJHௐGLVFRXQWௐIURPௐ 0653ௐRUௐOLVWௐVWDWHௐWKHௐSHUFHQWDJHௐRUௐSHUFHQWDJHௐUDQJH 7RWHUௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐ3URGXFWV ௐEHFDXVHௐWKHUHௐLVௐQRWௐDௐVHWௐOLVWௐSULFHௐRUௐ0653ௐIRUௐWKHVHௐSURGXFWVௐWKHUHௐDௐVHWௐGLVFRXQWௐWRௐTXDQWLI\ௐௐ:HௐKDYHௐ SURYLGHGௐLQFUHPHQWDOௐYROXPHௐGLVFRXQWVௐLQௐRXUௐSULFLQJௐVWUXFWXUHௐDQGௐ ZLOOௐRIIHUௐGLVFRXQWVௐRIIௐWKHௐEDVHௐSULFHௐIRUௐODUJHௐSURMHFWVௐZKHQௐ SRVVLEOHௐJLYLQJௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐWKHௐEHQHILWௐRIௐPDNLQJௐODUJHUௐSXUFKDVHVௐ DQGௐSHUPLWWLQJௐ7RWHUௐWKHௐRSSRUWXQLW\ௐWRௐEHௐIOH[LEOHௐLQௐFRPSHWLWLYHௐ VLWXDWLRQVௐDVௐUHTXLUHG 7RWHUௐ3URௐ3URGXFWV ௐௐSULFLQJௐLVௐDௐௐGLVFRXQWௐRIIௐOLVWௐSULFHௐDQGௐERWKௐOLVWௐSULFHௐDQGௐGLVFRXQWHGௐSULFHௐLVௐUHIOHFWHGௐRQௐWKHௐSULFHௐSDJHV 'HVFULEHௐDQ\ௐTXDQWLW\ௐRUௐYROXPHௐGLVFRXQWVௐRUௐUHEDWHௐ SURJUDPVௐWKDWௐ\RXௐRIIHU 7RWHUௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐ3URGXFWV ௐௐSULFLQJௐIRUௐ7RWHU VௐUHVLGHQWLDOௐSURGXFWVௐ LQFOXGHVௐLQFUHPHQWDOௐYROXPHௐGLVFRXQWVௐௐ)RUௐODUJHUௐSURMHFWVௐZHௐVHHNௐWRௐRIIHUௐGLVFRXQWVௐEDVHGௐRQௐTXDQWLW\ௐGHOLYHU\ௐWLPHIUDPHVௐDQGௐRWKHUௐ FLUFXPVWDQFHVௐWKDWௐPD\ௐDIIHFWௐSULFLQJௐ:HௐKDYHௐIRXQGௐWKDWௐRIIHULQJௐ GLVFRXQWVௐRIIௐWKHௐEDVHௐSULFHௐIRUௐODUJHௐSURMHFWVௐJLYHVௐXVௐWKHௐ RSSRUWXQLW\ௐWRௐEHௐIOH[LEOHௐLQௐFRPSHWLWLYHௐVLWXDWLRQVௐDVௐUHTXLUHG 3URSRVHௐDௐPHWKRGௐRIௐIDFLOLWDWLQJௐ³VRXUFHG´ௐSURGXFWVௐRUௐ UHODWHGௐVHUYLFHVௐZKLFKௐPD\ௐEHௐUHIHUUHGௐWRௐDVௐ³RSHQௐ PDUNHW´ௐLWHPVௐRUௐQRQFRQWUDFWHGௐLWHPVௐ)RUௐH[DPSOHௐ\RXௐ PD\ௐVXSSO\ௐVXFKௐLWHPVௐ³DWௐFRVW´ௐRUௐ³DWௐFRVWௐSOXVௐDௐ SHUFHQWDJH´ௐRUௐ\RXௐPD\ௐVXSSO\ௐDௐTXRWHௐIRUௐHDFKௐVXFKௐ UHTXHVW :HௐEHOLHYHௐZHௐKDYHௐWKHௐEURDGHVWௐUDQJHௐRIௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐIRUௐ ZDVWHௐDQGௐUHF\FOLQJௐFRQWDLQHUVௐLQௐWKHௐPDUNHWௐDQGௐKDYHௐLQFOXGHGௐDOOௐ RXUௐRIIHULQJVௐLQௐRXUௐSURSRVDOௐௐ$VௐDQ\ௐQHZௐSURGXFWVௐDUHௐGHYHORSHGௐ ZHௐZLOOௐUHDFKௐRXWௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐDQGௐUHTXHVWௐWKRVHௐEHௐDGGHGௐWRௐRXUௐ FRQWUDFWௐௐ$Q\ௐVRXUFHGௐSURGXFWVௐRUௐUHODWHGௐVHUYLFHVௐZLOOௐEHௐRIIHUHGௐ WRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHUVௐRQௐDௐ6XSSO\ௐ4XRWHௐEDVLVௐௐ:HௐZLOOௐSURYLGHௐ WKHௐPHPEHUௐZLWKௐDௐTXRWHௐIRUௐDOOௐLWHPVௐQRWௐOLVWHGௐRQௐRXUௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐFRQWUDFWௐ WKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ$GPLQLVWUDWLYHௐ)HHௐLVௐDQGRUௐZLOOௐEHௐLQFOXGHGௐ DVௐZLWKௐRWKHUௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐWRௐEHௐTXRWHGௐRIIௐWKLVௐ&RQWUDFW Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 218 ,GHQWLI\ௐDQ\ௐHOHPHQWௐRIௐWKHௐWRWDOௐFRVWௐRIௐDFTXLVLWLRQௐWKDWௐLVௐ 127ௐLQFOXGHGௐLQௐWKHௐSULFLQJௐVXEPLWWHGௐZLWKௐ\RXUௐUHVSRQVHௐ 7KLVௐLQFOXGHVௐDOOௐDGGLWLRQDOௐFKDUJHVௐDVVRFLDWHGௐZLWKௐDௐ SXUFKDVHௐWKDWௐDUHௐQRWௐGLUHFWO\ௐLGHQWLILHGௐDVௐIUHLJKWௐRUௐVKLSSLQJௐFKDUJHVௐ)RUௐH[DPSOHௐOLVWௐFRVWVௐIRUௐLWHPVௐOLNHௐSUHGHOLYHU\ௐLQVSHFWLRQௐLQVWDOODWLRQௐVHWௐXSௐPDQGDWRU\ௐWUDLQLQJௐ RUௐLQLWLDOௐLQVSHFWLRQௐ,GHQWLI\ௐDQ\ௐSDUWLHVௐWKDWௐLPSRVHௐVXFKௐ FRVWVௐDQGௐWKHLUௐUHODWLRQVKLSௐWRௐWKHௐ3URSRVHU :HௐKDYHௐWULHGௐWRௐEHௐH[WUHPHO\ௐWKRURXJKௐLQௐLQFOXGLQJௐSULFLQJௐWRௐFRYHUௐ DOOௐSURGXFWVௐRSWLRQVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐDௐFXVWRPHUௐPD\ௐQHHGௐZLWKௐWKHௐ SXUFKDVHௐRIௐZDVWHௐDQGௐUHF\FOLQJௐFRQWDLQHUVௐ+RZHYHUௐGXHௐWRௐWKHௐ XQLTXHௐQDWXUHௐRIௐRXUௐLQGXVWU\ௐWKHUHௐPD\ௐEHௐDௐIHZௐLQVWDQFHVௐZKHUHௐWKHௐWRWDOௐFRVWௐRIௐDFTXLVLWLRQௐLVௐQRWௐLQFOXGHGௐLQௐRXUௐSURSRVDOௐSULFLQJௐ,QVWDOODWLRQ ௐ'XHௐWRௐWKHௐFXVWRPL]HGௐQDWXUHௐRIௐRXUௐEXVLQHVVௐHDFKௐ FXVWRPHU¶VௐSURMHFWௐLQVWDOODWLRQௐLVௐXQLTXHௐDQGௐWKHUHIRUHௐTXRWHGௐ LQGLYLGXDOO\ௐௐ8QLTXHௐLQVWDOODWLRQVௐPD\ௐLQFOXGHௐDQGௐDUHௐQRWௐOLPLWHGௐWRௐ UHTXLUHPHQWVௐVXFKௐDVௐ5),'ௐWDLORUHGௐLQYHQWRU\ௐDQGௐFRQWDLQHUௐ PDQDJHPHQWௐV\VWHPVௐLQWHULPௐVWRUDJHௐRIௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDGGLWLRQDOௐODERUௐ IRUௐFXVWRPHUௐSUHIHUHQFHVௐDQGௐPRUHௐௐ$Q\ௐRIௐWKHVHௐSURGXFWVௐRUௐ VHUYLFHVௐRXWVLGHௐZKDWௐZHௐKDYHௐSURYLGHGௐLQௐRXUௐSURSRVDOௐZLOOௐEHௐ3ULFHGௐRQௐ5HTXHVWௐ$VVHPEO\ௐDQGௐ'HOLYHU\ ௐௐ6SHFLDOௐQHHGVௐIRUௐ$VVHPEO\ௐDQGௐ 'LVWULEXWLRQௐUHODWHGௐSURMHFWVௐZLOOௐEHௐ³3ULFHGௐRQௐ5HTXHVW´ௐGXHௐWRௐWKHௐ XQLTXHௐQHHGVௐRIௐPXQLFLSDOLWLHVௐIRUௐHDFKௐSURMHFWௐDWௐKDQGௐௐWKHௐVLWHௐ RUௐ³VWDJLQJௐDUHD´ௐLIௐSURYLGHGௐE\ௐ7RWHUௐZLOOௐEHௐ³3ULFHௐRQௐ5HTXHVW´ௐ DOVRௐGXHௐWRௐWKHௐXQLTXHௐQHHGVௐRIௐHDFKௐSURMHFWௐLQௐDGGLWLRQௐWRௐZLGHௐ SULFHௐYDULDEOHVௐIRUௐORFDWLRQVௐௐ&DUWௐ/LIWHUVௐIRUௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐ&ROOHFWLRQௐ 9HKLFOHVௐFDQௐEHௐLQVWDOOHGௐZLWKௐ³3ULFHௐRQௐ5HTXHVW´ௐௐ&DUWௐ/LIWHUVௐIRUௐ7RWHUௐ3URௐ3URGXFWVௐZLOOௐEHௐTXRWHGௐDQGௐLQVWDOOHGௐZLWKௐ³3ULFHௐRQௐ 5HTXHVW´ௐGXHௐWRௐWKHௐXQLTXHௐQHHGVௐRIௐHDFKௐSURMHFWௐௐ ௐ7D[HVௐ䯈ௐ/RFDOௐ6WDWHௐDQGௐ)HGHUDOௐ6DOHVௐRUௐ8VHௐ7D[HVௐRUௐDQ\ௐ DSSOLFDEOHௐIHUU\ௐFRVWVௐFXVWRPVௐGXWLHVௐOHYLHVௐDQGௐWD[HVௐDUHௐQRWௐ LQFOXGHGௐLQௐRXUௐSURSRVHGௐSULFLQJௐPRGHOVௐௐ,IௐUHTXLUHGௐWKHVHௐLWHPVௐ ZLOOௐEHௐDGGHGௐDWௐWLPHௐRIௐTXRWHௐௐ$OVRௐ&DQDGLDQௐ*67367+67ௐWD[HVௐ DUHௐQRWௐLQFOXGHGௐLQௐRXUௐSURSRVHGௐSULFLQJௐPRGHOVௐDQGௐDUHௐQRWௐSDLGௐE\ௐ:DVWHTXLSௐௐ,IௐUHTXLUHGௐWRௐEHௐSDLGௐE\ௐ:DVWHTXLSௐWKHQௐWKHௐ0HPEHUௐZLOOௐEHௐUHTXLUHGௐWRௐUHLPEXUVHௐ:DVWHTXLSௐIRUௐWKHVHௐWD[HV ௐ&DQDGLDQௐPHPEHUVௐPD\ௐUHTXLUHௐSULFLQJௐWRௐEHௐSURYLGHGௐLQௐ &DQDGLDQௐ'ROODUV&XUUHQF\ௐ &$' ௐௐ:KLOHௐRXUௐSULFLQJௐLVௐOLVWHGௐLQௐ 8QLWHGௐ6WDWHVௐ'ROODUV&XUUHQF\ௐ 86' ௐZHௐDUHௐFHUWDLQO\ௐDEOHௐWRௐ SURYLGHௐWKHௐ&$'ௐHTXLYDOHQWௐSULFLQJௐEDVHGௐRQௐRXUௐ86'ௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ SULFHௐOLVWௐDQGௐ)RUHLJQௐ([FKDQJHௐUDWHVௐIURPௐ%DQNௐRIௐ&DQDGDௐ UHVRXUFHV ,IௐIUHLJKWௐGHOLYHU\ௐRUௐVKLSSLQJௐLVௐDQௐDGGLWLRQDOௐFRVWௐWRௐWKHௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐSDUWLFLSDWLQJௐHQWLW\ௐGHVFULEHௐLQௐGHWDLOௐWKHௐ FRPSOHWHௐIUHLJKWௐVKLSSLQJௐDQGௐGHOLYHU\ௐSURJUDP 7RWHUௐLVௐVWUDWHJLFDOO\ௐORFDWHGௐLQௐWKHௐ86ௐZKLFKௐDOORZVௐXVௐWRௐEHVWௐ VHUYLFHௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐௐ:HௐKDYHௐH[WHQVLYHௐLPSRUWH[SRUWௐH[SHULHQFHௐ DQGௐDQௐH[SDQVLYHௐORJLVWLFVௐJURXSௐDYDLODEOHௐWRௐDVVLVWௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ 0HPEHUVௐௐ7RWHUௐLVௐDEOHௐWRௐLQYROYHௐRXWVLGHௐORJLVWLFௐFRPSDQLHVௐWRௐSDUWLFLSDWHௐLQௐVKLSSLQJௐE\ௐIUHLJKWௐKDXOHUFRPPRQௐFDUULHUௐVXEFRQWUDFWHGௐ RII䯈ORDGLQJௐDVVHPEO\ௐLQVWDOODWLRQௐDQGௐGLVWULEXWLRQௐDVௐUHTXLUHGௐE\ௐWKHௐ 0HPEHUௐQHHGVௐDQGௐGHPDQGVௐ:HௐZLOOௐHYDOXDWHௐHDFKௐRUGHUௐDVௐDௐ XQLTXHௐRSSRUWXQLW\ௐDQGௐFRQVLGHUௐWKHௐௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHUVௐRUGHUௐ YROXPHௐDQGௐORFDWLRQௐௐௐ&RVWௐRIௐVKLSSLQJGHOLYHU\ௐVKDOOௐEHௐSDLGௐE\ௐWKHௐ (QGௐ8VHUௐௐ&DOFXODWLRQVௐRIௐWKHௐIUHLJKWGHOLYHU\ௐFKDUJHVௐZLOOௐEHௐEDVHGௐ RQௐSUHYDLOLQJௐUDWHVௐDWௐWKHௐWLPHௐRIௐTXRWHௐDQGௐLQFOXGHGௐRQௐTXRWHௐDVௐDௐVHSDUDWHௐOLQHௐLWHPௐௐ7KLVௐFRVWௐZLOOௐQRWௐLQFOXGHௐWKHௐௐௐ$GPLQLVWUDWLYHௐ)HH 6SHFLILFDOO\ௐGHVFULEHௐIUHLJKWௐVKLSSLQJௐDQGௐGHOLYHU\ௐWHUPVௐRUௐ SURJUDPVௐDYDLODEOHௐIRUௐ$ODVNDௐ+DZDLLௐ&DQDGDௐRUௐDQ\ௐRIIVKRUHௐGHOLYHU\ :HௐXVHௐDௐFRPELQDWLRQௐRIௐFRQWUDFWHGௐPRWRUௐFDUULHUVௐDQGௐIUHLJKWௐ IRUZDUGHUVௐWRௐGHOLYHUௐVKLSPHQWVௐGHVWLQHGௐIRUௐ$ODVNDௐ+DZDLLௐDQGௐRWKHUௐRIIVKRUHௐORFDWLRQVௐVXFKௐDVௐEXWௐQRWௐH[FOXVLYHௐWRௐ3XHUWRௐ5LFRௐ :HௐDOVRௐKDYHௐGR]HQVௐRIௐFDUULHUVௐDOUHDG\ௐXQGHUௐFRQWUDFWௐWKDWௐ SDUWLFLSDWHௐLQௐGHOLYHULQJௐDOOௐPRGHVௐRIௐIUHLJKWௐDFURVVௐWKHௐ&DQDGLDQௐ SURYLQFHVௐ:HௐKDYHௐH[WHQVLYHௐLPSRUWH[SRUWௐH[SHULHQFHௐDQGௐDQௐ H[SDQVLYHௐORJLVWLFVௐJURXSௐDYDLODEOHௐWRௐDVVLVWௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ0HPEHUVௐௐ 7RWHUௐLVௐDEOHௐWRௐLQYROYHௐRXWVLGHௐORJLVWLFௐFRPSDQLHVௐWRௐSDUWLFLSDWHௐLQௐ VKLSSLQJௐE\ௐIUHLJKWௐKDXOHUFRPPRQௐFDUULHUௐVXEFRQWUDFWHGௐRII䯈ORDGLQJௐDVVHPEO\ௐLQVWDOODWLRQௐDQGௐGLVWULEXWLRQௐDVௐUHTXLUHGௐE\ௐ0HPEHUௐQHHGVௐDQGௐGHPDQGVௐௐ:HௐZLOOௐHYDOXDWHௐHDFKௐRUGHUௐDVௐDௐXQLTXHௐRSSRUWXQLW\ௐ DQGௐFRQVLGHUௐWKHௐௐ0HPEHUV ௐRUGHUௐYROXPHௐDQGௐORFDWLRQௐௐ1RWHௐWKDWௐ )UHLJKW ௐ&RVWௐRIௐVKLSSLQJGHOLYHU\ௐVKDOOௐEHௐSDLGௐE\ௐWKHௐ(QGௐ8VHUௐௐ &DOFXODWLRQVௐRIௐWKHௐIUHLJKWGHOLYHU\ௐFKDUJHVௐZLOOௐEHௐEDVHGௐRQௐSUHYDLOLQJௐ UDWHVௐDWௐWKHௐWLPHௐRIௐTXRWHௐDQGௐLQFOXGHGௐRQௐWKHௐTXRWHௐDVௐDௐVHSDUDWHௐ OLQHௐLWHPௐௐ7KLVௐFRVWௐZLOOௐQRWௐLQFOXGHௐWKHௐௐௐ$GPLQLVWUDWLYHௐ)HH Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 219 'HVFULEHௐDQ\ௐXQLTXHௐGLVWULEXWLRQௐDQGRUௐGHOLYHU\ௐPHWKRGVௐRUௐ RSWLRQVௐRIIHUHGௐLQௐ\RXUௐSURSRVDO 7RWHUௐKDVௐWKHௐDELOLW\ௐWRௐPHHWௐXQLTXHௐFXVWRPHUௐQHHGVௐZLWKௐ'ULYHUௐ $VVLVWDQFHௐ WUXFNௐGULYHUௐPRYHVௐSURGXFWௐWRௐWKHௐHQWUDQFHH[LWௐRIௐ ௐ WUXFNௐIRUௐFXVWRPHUௐWRௐUHPRYHௐRIIௐWKHௐWUDLOHU ௐOLIWௐJDWHVௐ WRௐPHHWௐ VSHFLDOௐFLUFXPVWDQFHVௐZLWKௐQRௐGRFNௐHWF ௐFRPELQHGௐORDGVௐ PXOWLVWRSௐFDSDELOLW\ௐWRௐGURSௐDWௐXSௐWRௐௐORFDWLRQVௐFORVHௐWRJHWKHU ௐௐௐ)RUௐRXUௐ3URௐ3URGXFWVௐDQGௐLQGLYLGXDOௐFXVWRPHUௐRUGHUVௐ &20ௐFXVWRPHUV ௐZHௐ SURYLGHௐGURSௐVKLSௐGHOLYHU\ௐௐ2EWDLQHGௐRYHUௐGHFDGHVௐZHௐKDYHௐ H[SHULHQFHௐLQௐWKHௐILHOGௐGHOLYHULQJௐWKHௐDVVHWVௐWRௐWKHLUௐILQDOௐORFDWLRQௐௐDௐ UHVLGHQW VௐGZHOOLQJௐ:HௐRIIHUௐDOOௐW\SHVௐRIௐGHOLYHU\ௐWRௐLQFOXGHௐDOOH\ௐ FXUEVLGHௐXSWRGRRUௐDQGௐVSHFLDOௐORFDWLRQௐGHOLYHULHVௐSHUௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐ RIௐFXVWRPHUVௐ:HௐUHFRJQL]HௐWKDWௐQRௐWZRௐSURMHFWVௐDUHௐDOLNHௐDQGௐWKDWௐ HYHU\ௐFXVWRPHUௐFRXOGௐKDYHௐVSHFLILFௐQHHGVௐ7KDWௐDOORZVௐXVௐWRௐEHௐIOH[LEOHௐWRௐPHHWௐWKRVHௐVSHFLILFௐQHHGVௐ:HௐGRௐWKLVௐE\ௐWKRURXJKO\ௐYHWWLQJௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐVFRSHௐRIௐZRUNௐ,QௐVLPSOHௐWHUPVௐ³:KDWௐDUHௐ\RXௐ WU\LQJௐWRௐDFFRPSOLVKௐDQGௐZKDWௐFKDOOHQJHVௐGRௐ\RXௐIRUHVHH´"ௐௐ:Hௐ EHOLHYHௐWKDWௐ'DWDௐLVௐ.LQJ"ௐ%HLQJௐDEOHௐWRௐGLVFXVVௐWKHௐSURMHFWௐZLWKௐ WKHௐFXVWRPHUௐDQGௐWRௐXQGHUVWDQGௐWKHௐGDWDௐDOORZVௐXVௐWRௐFXVWRPL]HௐRXUௐ VHUYLFHVௐWRௐSURYLGHௐWKHௐEHVWௐH[SHULHQFHௐ:HௐGRௐQRWௐSURYLGHௐ³FRRNLHௐ FXWWHU´ௐVHUYLFHVௐZHௐSURYLGHௐVROXWLRQV 7RWHUௐRIIHUVௐWKHௐLQGXVWU\¶VௐEHVWௐDQGௐPRVWௐXQLTXHௐGHOLYHU\ௐRSWLRQௐ)XOO\ௐ )DFWRU\ௐ$VVHPEOHGௐRUௐ³5HDG\ௐWRௐ5ROO´ௐௐ0HPEHUௐDJHQFLHVௐFDQௐIRUJHWௐ DERXWௐPLVVLQJௐSDUWVௐODFNௐRIௐDYDLODEOHௐODERUௐWRௐDVVHPEOHௐFDUWVௐDQGௐ RWKHUௐQRUPDOௐDVVHPEO\ௐUHODWHGௐLVVXHVௐௐ%HFDXVHௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐQHVWௐ ZKHQௐIXOO\ௐDVVHPEOHGௐQHDWௐDQGௐVDIHௐVWDFNVௐRIௐௐIXOO\ௐDVVHPEOHGௐ FDUWVௐKLJKௐPDNHௐWKHௐZRUNௐRIௐ3XEOLFௐ:RUNVௐDQGௐ6ROLGௐ:DVWHௐ 0DQDJHUVௐHDVLHUௐDQGௐPRUHௐSUHGLFWDEOHௐௐ)RUௐPHPEHUௐDJHQFLHVௐZKRௐZDQWௐWRௐSD\ௐOHVVௐIUHLJKWௐSHUௐFDUWௐRXUௐVWDQGDUGௐVKLSPHQWௐRIௐFDUWVௐ³UG¶Vௐ$VVHPEOHG´ௐPHDQVௐWKDWௐWKHௐRQO\ௐDVVHPEO\ௐLVௐDWWDFKLQJௐ WKHௐZKHHOVௐDIWHUௐFDUWVௐDUHௐGHOLYHUHGௐWRௐPHPEHUௐORFDWLRQVௐௐ7KHQௐWKHௐ FRVWௐVDYLQJVௐRIௐ1HVWDELOLW\ௐNLFNVௐLQௐDVௐXSௐWRௐWKUHHௐ ௐWLPHVௐDVௐPDQ\ௐ IXOO\ௐDVVHPEOHGௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐZLOOௐILWௐRQௐDௐFLW\ௐGHOLYHU\ௐWUXFNௐDVௐ FRPSDUHGௐWRௐDQ\ௐRWKHUௐEUDQGௐ QRQHௐDUHௐIXOO\ௐ1HVWDEOH 6SHFLILFDOO\ௐGHVFULEHௐDQ\ௐVHOIDXGLWௐSURFHVVௐRUௐSURJUDPௐWKDWௐ \RXௐSODQௐWRௐHPSOR\ௐWRௐYHULI\ௐFRPSOLDQFHௐZLWKௐ\RXUௐ SURSRVHGௐDJUHHPHQWௐZLWKௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ7KLVௐSURFHVVௐLQFOXGHVௐ HQVXULQJௐWKDWௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐSDUWLFLSDWLQJௐHQWLWLHVௐREWDLQௐWKHௐ SURSHUௐSULFLQJ 7RWHU VௐVDOHVௐWHDPௐZRUNVௐFORVHO\ௐZLWKௐHDFKௐFXVWRPHUௐWRௐLGHQWLI\ௐ VROXWLRQVௐDQGௐSURYLGHௐDௐTXRWHௐWKDWௐPHHWVௐWKHLUௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐௐ$OOௐ TXRWHVௐRIIௐRXUௐFXUUHQWௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐDJUHHPHQWௐLQFOXGHௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ ORJRௐDQGௐ&RQWUDFWௐQXPEHULQIRUPDWLRQௐRIௐUHIHUHQFHௐZKLFKௐFOHDUO\ௐ LGHQWLILHVௐWKDWௐWKHௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐFRQWUDFWௐLVௐEHLQJௐXVHGௐWRௐRXUௐLQWHUQDOௐ WHDPௐDQGௐFXVWRPHUVௐௐ4XRWHVௐJRௐWKURXJKௐDQௐLQWHUQDOௐDSSURYDOௐSURFHVVௐZKHUHௐSULFLQJௐLVௐYHULILHGௐEHIRUHௐEHLQJௐVHQWௐWRௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐௐ 2QFHௐWKHௐ0HPEHU Vௐ3XUFKDVHௐ2UGHUௐLVௐUHFHLYHGௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUௐ VHUYLFHௐWHDPௐFRGHVௐWKHௐRUGHUௐDVௐDௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐVDOHௐLQWRௐRXUௐRUGHUௐ HQWU\ௐV\VWHPௐ8VLQJௐWKLVௐFRGHௐZHௐFDQௐHDVLO\ௐJHQHUDWHௐUHSRUWVௐIURPௐ RXUௐRUGHUௐHQWU\ௐV\VWHPௐௐ$OOௐUHSRUWVௐDUHௐFKHFNHGௐIRUௐDFFXUDF\ௐE\ௐ FRPSDULQJௐWRௐTXRWHVௐIURPௐRXUௐ6DOHVIRUFHௐDSSOLFDWLRQௐWRௐHQVXUHௐWKHௐ RUGHUௐZDVௐFRGHGௐDSSURSULDWHO\ௐDQGௐLQFOXGHGௐLQௐWKHௐUHSRUWLQJ ,Iௐ\RXௐDUHௐDZDUGHGௐDQௐDJUHHPHQWௐSURYLGHௐDௐIHZௐH[DPSOHVௐ RIௐLQWHUQDOௐPHWULFVௐWKDWௐZLOOௐEHௐWUDFNHGௐWRௐPHDVXUHௐZKHWKHUௐ \RXௐDUHௐKDYLQJௐVXFFHVVௐZLWKௐWKHௐDJUHHPHQW 7RWHUௐGHYHORSVௐPRQWKO\ௐTXDUWHUO\ௐDQGௐDQQXDOௐWDUJHWVௐWRௐGULYHௐEXVLQHVVௐ WRௐLQFOXGHௐPXQLFLSDOௐVDOHVௐௐ7KLVௐLVௐWUDFNHGௐFORVHO\ௐWRௐPDNHௐVXUHௐRXUௐ VDOHVௐWHDPௐLVௐSURDFWLYHO\ௐZRUNLQJௐWRௐPHHWௐWKHVHVௐJRDOVௐ :HௐUHYLHZௐDQGௐWUDFNௐVDOHVௐRIIௐDOOௐGLUHFWO\ௐELGௐFRQWUDFWVௐYHUVXVௐ FRRSHUDWLYHௐFRQWUDFWVௐWRௐPDNHௐVXUHௐRXUௐVDOHVௐWHDPௐFRQWLQXHVௐWRௐOHDGௐ ZLWKௐFRRSHUDWLYHௐDJUHHPHQWVௐDQGௐLGHQWLI\ௐRSSRUWXQLWLHVௐWRௐGLVFXVVௐ FRRSHUDWLYHௐSXUFKDVLQJௐWRௐWKRVHௐPXQLFLSDOLWLHVௐWKDWௐDUHௐVWLOOௐJRLQJௐ WKURXJKௐWKHௐFXPEHUVRPHௐELGௐSURFHVVௐௐ :HௐDOVRௐUHYLHZௐDQQXDOௐVDOHVௐVSHFLILFௐWRௐVDOHVௐRIIௐWKHௐFRQWUDFWௐWRௐUHYLHZௐDQGௐFRPSDUHௐWRௐSULRUௐVDOHVௐKLVWRU\ௐWRௐGHWHUPLQHௐ<R<ௐWUHQGVௐௐ7KLVௐKDVௐVKRZQௐRXUௐJUHDWHVWௐPHDVXUHௐRIௐVXFFHVVௐZLWKௐFRQWLQXHGௐ<R<ௐ JURZWKௐIURPௐVDOHVௐRIIௐRXUௐFXUUHQWௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐFRQWUDFWௐLQFOXGLQJௐDOPRVWௐ GRXEOLQJௐVDOHVௐLQௐ 3URYLGHௐDௐSURSRVHGௐ$GPLQLVWUDWLRQௐ)HHௐSD\DEOHௐWRௐ 6RXUFHZHOOௐ7KHௐ)HHௐLVௐLQௐFRQVLGHUDWLRQௐIRUௐWKHௐVXSSRUWௐ DQGௐVHUYLFHVௐSURYLGHGௐE\ௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐ7KHௐSURSRVHௐDQௐ $GPLQLVWUDWLYHௐ)HHௐZLOOௐEHௐSD\DEOHௐWRௐ6RXUFHZHOOௐRQௐDOOௐ FRPSOHWHGௐWUDQVDFWLRQVௐWRௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ(QWLWLHVௐXWLOL]LQJௐWKLVௐ $JUHHPHQWௐ7KHௐ$GPLQLVWUDWLYHௐ)HHௐZLOOௐEHௐFDOFXODWHGௐDVௐDௐ VWDWHGௐSHUFHQWDJHௐRUௐIODWௐIHHௐDVௐPD\ௐEHௐDSSOLFDEOHௐRIௐDOOௐ FRPSOHWHGௐWUDQVDFWLRQVௐXWLOL]LQJௐWKLVௐ0DVWHUௐ$JUHHPHQWௐZLWKLQௐWKHௐSUHFHGLQJௐ5HSRUWLQJௐ3HULRGௐGHILQHGௐLQௐWKHௐ DJUHHPHQW 7RWHUௐLVௐSURSRVLQJௐDௐௐDGPLQLVWUDWLYHௐIHHௐWKDWௐLVௐFDOFXODWHGௐDQGௐ LQFOXGHGௐLQௐWKHௐFRQWUDFWௐGROODUௐDPRXQWௐIRUௐSURGXFWVௐOLVWHGௐLQௐRXUௐ SULFLQJௐVHFWLRQௐௐ3OHDVHௐQRWHௐWKDWௐIUHLJKWௐFRVWVௐZLOOௐQRWௐEHௐLQFOXGHGௐLQௐ WKLVௐIHH Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 220 7DEOH 3ULFLQJ2IIHUHG /LQH,WHP 7KH3ULFLQJ2IIHUHGLQWKLV3URSRVDOLV &RPPHQWV 7KHSULFLQJRIIHUHGLVDVJRRGDVRUEHWWHUWKDQSULFLQJW\SLFDOO\RIIHUHGWKURXJKH[LVWLQJFRRSHUDWLYHFRQWUDFWVVWDWH FRQWUDFWVRUDJHQFLHV 7RWHUௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐGRHVௐQRWௐ KDYHௐVHWௐOLVWௐSULFLQJ ௐ WKHUHIRUHௐZHௐDUHௐRIIHULQJௐDௐ OLQHLWHPௐFHLOLQJௐSULFLQJௐPRGHOௐ WKDWௐLVௐFRPSDUDEOHௐWRௐRWKHUௐ FRRSHUDWLYHௐFRQWUDFWVௐௐ7RWHU¶Vௐ3URௐ3URGXFWVௐGRHVௐKDYHௐVHWௐOLVWௐSULFLQJௐDQGௐLVௐSULFHGௐDWௐ ௐRIIௐ/LVWௐIRUௐWKHVHௐ SURGXFWVௐDOVRௐPHHWLQJௐRXUௐ SULFLQJௐGHVFULSWLRQௐFKRLFHௐIRUௐ WKLVௐTXHVWLRQ 7DEOH$ 'HSWKDQG%UHDGWKRI2IIHUHG6ROXWLRQV 3RLQWV /LQH ,WHP 4XHVWLRQ 5HVSRQVH 3URYLGHௐDௐGHWDLOHGௐGHVFULSWLRQௐRIௐDOOௐWKHௐ 6ROXWLRQVௐRIIHUHGௐLQFOXGLQJௐXVHGௐRIIHUHGௐLQௐ WKHௐSURSRVDO 7RWHUௐ//&ௐLVௐDௐ:DVWHTXLSௐEUDQGௐZKLFKௐLVௐDௐPDQXIDFWXUHUௐDQGௐPDUNHWHUௐRIௐKLJK TXDOLW\ௐSODVWLFௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐUHODWHGௐSURGXFWVௐVROHO\ௐGHGLFDWHGௐWRௐWKHௐZDVWHௐLQGXVWU\ௐ IRUௐUHVLGHQWLDOௐKDXOHUௐLQGXVWULDOௐFRPPHUFLDOௐDQGௐUHWDLOௐDFFRXQWVௐௐ:HௐDUHௐGHGLFDWHGௐWRௐWKHௐZDVWHௐLQGXVWU\ௐQRWௐPDQXIDFWXULQJௐIRUௐDQ\ௐRWKHUௐLQGXVWU\ௐ2XUௐSURGXFWVௐDUHௐEXLOWௐ WRௐODVWௐDQGௐPDQXIDFWXUHGௐXVLQJௐRXUௐ$GYDQFHGௐ5RWDWLRQDOௐ0ROGLQJௐSURFHVVௐZKLFKௐ UHVXOWVௐLQௐ%XLOWௐIRUௐ([WUHPHVௐVWURQJHUௐPRUHௐGXUDEOHௐSURGXFWVௐWKDQௐWKRVHௐIURPௐ LQMHFWLRQPROGHGௐPDQXIDFWXUHUVௐௐ2UௐFRPSDQ\ௐVLQFHௐௐKDVௐEDFNHGௐRXUௐUHVLGHQWLDOௐ UROOௐFDUWVௐZLWKௐDௐ\HDUௐFDUWௐERG\ௐZDUUDQW\ௐDQGௐௐ\HDUVௐRQௐDOOௐRWKHUௐFDUWVௐ FRPSRQHQWVௐௐ1RௐRWKHUௐPDQXIDFWXUHUEUDQGௐKDVௐVRXJKWௐWRௐSURYLGHௐDௐPDWFKLQJௐ VWDQGDUGௐZDUUDQW\ௐLQGXVWU\ZLGHௐௐ2XUௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDUHௐFDWHJRUL]HGௐLQWRௐWZRௐDUHDV ௐௐௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐ3URGXFWVௐDQGௐ6ROXWLRQVௐௐSULPDULO\ௐIRUௐPXQLFLSDOLWLHVJRYHUQPHQWௐHQWLWLHVௐ IRUௐZDVWHௐFROOHFWLRQௐௐௐ:HௐFDUWௐHQWLUHௐFLWLHVௐFRXQWLHVௐWRZQVKLSVௐSDULVKHVௐDQGௐ UHJLRQVௐZLWKௐFDUWVௐIRUௐUHIXVHௐUHF\FOLQJௐRUJDQLFVௐ\DUGௐZDVWHௐDQGௐRWKHUௐVSHFLDOL]HGௐ QHHGVௐௐ:HௐRIIHUௐWKHௐRSWLRQVௐDQGௐIHDWXUHVௐWRௐFXVWRPL]HௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐZKHQௐ FRPELQHGௐZLWKௐWKHௐDGYDQWDJHVௐRIௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐKDYHௐVXFFHVVIXOௐZDVWHௐ SURJUDPVௐௐ:HௐDOVRௐRIIHUௐWKHௐRSWLRQVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐVROXWLRQVௐWRௐURXQGௐRXWௐWKHௐ FXVWRPHUV ௐSURJUDPVௐZLWKௐOLIWHUVௐWRௐPRXQWௐRQWRௐFROOHFWLRQௐYHKLFOHVௐVSHFLDOௐUHF\FOLQJௐOLGௐIHDWXUHVௐDQGௐDௐVHHPLQJO\ௐHQGOHVVௐOLVWௐRIௐDYDLODEOHௐRSWLRQVௐEDVHGௐRQௐRXUௐORQJWHUPௐDQGௐFXUUHQWௐH[SHULHQFHௐZLWKௐFXVWRPHUௐQHHGVௐௐ6SHFLDOௐRSWLRQVௐIRUௐUROOௐFDUWVௐDUHௐ 8QORDGLQJௐ$VVHPEO\ௐDQGௐ'LVWULEXWLRQௐRIௐFDUWVௐWRௐPXQLFLSDOௐFXVWRPHUVௐ&DUWௐNHHSௐ WKHPௐUROOLQJ ௐDQGௐ7HFKQRORJ\5),'ௐLGHQWLILFDWLRQௐRIௐFDUWVௐWRௐWUDFNௐFDUWVௐDWௐPXQLFLSDOௐ SURSHUWLHVௐDQGௐPDLQWDLQௐLQYHQWRU\ௐWKURXJKௐWLPHௐZLWKௐWUDFNLQJௐRIௐFKDQJLQJௐORFDWLRQVௐ UHSDLUVௐFROOHFWLRQௐLVVXHVௐ FDUWௐZDVௐQRWௐDWௐWKHௐFXUEௐHWF ௐZKLFKௐKDVௐTXLWHௐVWUHDPOLQHGௐ 3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ$JHQFLHV ௐFDUWௐXVDJHௐZLWKௐHDVH ௐ3URௐ3URGXFWVௐDQGௐ6ROXWLRQVௐௐSULPDULO\ௐIRUௐLQGXVWULDOௐFRPPHUFLDOௐDQGௐLQVWLWXWLRQDOௐFXVWRPHUVௐZHௐKDYHௐGHVLJQHGௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐHQGWRHQGௐVROXWLRQVௐGHVLJQHGௐWRௐVDIHO\ௐ DQGௐHIILFLHQWO\ௐFROOHFWௐWUDQVSRUWௐDQGௐGLVSRVHௐRIௐZDVWHௐDQGௐUHF\FODEOHVௐௐ2XUௐ FRQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐZDVWHௐKDQGOLQJௐHTXLSPHQWௐRIIHUௐHQGWRHQGௐVROXWLRQVௐGHVLJQHGௐIRUௐ HGXFDWLRQDOௐKHDOWKFDUHௐIRRGௐVHUYLFHௐPDQXIDFWXULQJௐKRVSLWDOLW\ௐFRQYHQWLRQௐFHQWHUVௐ VWDGLXPVௐSXEOLFௐVSDFHVௐIDFLOLW\ௐPDQDJHPHQWௐUHWDLOௐ EDFNௐRIௐKRXVH ௐFRQVWUXFWLRQௐDQGௐ PRUH )RUௐDOOௐRXUௐRIIHULQJVௐZHௐVSHFLDOL]HௐLQௐFRQVXOWLQJௐZLWKௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐWRௐFUHDWHௐFXVWRPL]HGௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVROXWLRQVௐFRQVLGHULQJௐZDVWHௐVWUHDPVௐYROXPHௐVWDIILQJௐOD\RXWௐIRRWSULQWௐIORZௐHQYLURQPHQWDOௐUHTXLUHPHQWVௐDQGௐVWRUDJHௐOLPLWDWLRQVௐௐ8QOLNHௐ FRPSHWLWRUVௐZKRௐPD\ௐVHOOௐRIIWKHVKHOIௐSURGXFWVௐZHௐVSHFLDOL]HௐLQௐFRQVXOWLQJௐZLWKௐRXUௐ FXVWRPHUVௐWRௐFUHDWHௐFXVWRPL]HGௐZDVWHௐPDQDJHPHQWௐVROXWLRQVௐDQGௐZHௐRIIHUௐ WHFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQVௐLGHQWLILHGௐLQௐODWHUௐTXHVWLRQVௐZLWKLQௐWKLVௐSODWIRUP 6SHFLILFௐWRௐ7RWHUௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐ3URGXFWVௐDQGௐ6ROXWLRQVௐZHௐRIIHUௐDௐZLGHௐUDQJHௐRIௐ VHUYLFHV 5HFHLYLQJௐDQGௐ8QORDGLQJ ௐௐ5HFHLYHௐWKHௐORDGVௐDVௐWKH\ௐDUULYHௐIURPௐ7RWHUௐSHUௐDௐ SUHGHWHUPLQHGௐVKLSௐVFKHGXOHௐWKHQௐXQORDGௐWKHௐVWDFNVௐRIௐFDUWVௐDQGௐDUUDQJHௐWKHPௐRQௐ WKHௐFXVWRPHUௐVLWHௐE\ௐVL]HௐDQGௐZDVWHௐVWUHDPௐLIௐDSSOLFDEOH $VVHPEO\ ௐ$VVHPEOHௐWKHௐVWDFNVௐRIௐFDUWVௐLQௐSUHSDUDWLRQௐRIௐGHOLYHU\ௐWRௐWKHௐUHVLGHQWௐ DGGUHVVௐOLVWLQJௐRUௐIRUௐVWRUDJHௐDVௐGHWHUPLQHGௐLQௐWKHௐVFRSHௐRIௐZRUNௐPHHWLQJVௐ $VVHPEOHGௐFDUWVௐZLOOௐEHௐVWDFNHGௐDFFRUGLQJௐWRௐVL]HௐDQGௐZDVWHௐVWUHDPௐLIௐDSSOLFDEOH 'LVWULEXWLRQ ௐ'LVWULEXWLRQௐRIௐFDUWVௐWRௐWKHௐVHUYLFHௐDUHDௐUHVLGHQWVௐDVௐSUHGHWHUPLQHGௐ Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 221 GXULQJௐVFRSHௐRIௐZRUNௐPHHWLQJVௐ&DUWVௐZLOOௐJHQHUDOO\ௐEHௐSODFHGௐDWௐWKHௐFXUEVLGHௐRIௐWKHௐ DSSURSULDWHௐDGGUHVVௐXQOHVVௐVSHFLDOௐDWWHQWLRQௐLVௐFDOOHGௐRXWௐGXULQJௐWKHௐVFRSHௐPHHWLQJV 'DWDௐ&ROOHFWLRQௐௐ5HFRUGௐ6HULDOௐ1XPEHUV ௐௐ6HULDOௐQXPEHUVௐRIௐWKHௐFDUWௐGHOLYHUHGௐWRௐDௐ VSHFLILFௐDGGUHVVௐZLOOௐEHௐUHFRUGHGௐWRௐWKHௐDGGUHVVௐOLVWLQJௐSURYLGHGௐE\ௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐ7KLVௐZLOOௐDVVLVWௐFXVWRPHUVௐLQௐWUDFNLQJௐWKHLUௐDVVHWVௐLQௐWKHௐILHOGௐ8SRQௐFRPSOHWLRQௐRIௐWKHௐ SURMHFWௐZHௐZLOOௐSURYLGHௐFXVWRPHUVௐZLWKௐDௐFRPSOHWHGௐDGGUHVVௐOLVWLQJௐVKRZLQJௐWKHௐ DSSURSULDWHௐVHULDOௐQXPEHUௐRIௐWKHௐFDUWௐGHOLYHUHGௐWRௐHDFKௐDGGUHVVௐ7KLVௐZLOOௐEHௐGRQHௐ ZKHQௐDௐVLQJOHௐFDUWௐSHUௐDGGUHVVௐLVௐGHOLYHUHGௐDVௐZHOOௐDVௐZKHQௐPXOWLSOHௐFDUWVௐDQGௐ VWUHDPVௐDUHௐGHOLYHUHGௐWRௐDௐVLQJOHௐDGGUHVVௐ:KHQௐSURMHFWௐLVௐFRPSOHWHௐFXVWRPHUௐZLOOௐ KDYHௐWKHௐPRVWௐXSௐWRௐGDWHௐGDWDௐRQௐDVVHWVௐDQGௐZKHUHௐWKH\ௐDUHௐORFDWHG 'DWDௐ&ROOHFWLRQௐௐ5),'ௐ6FDQQLQJ ௐௐ5),'ௐWDJVௐZLOOௐEHௐVFDQQHGௐWRௐWKHௐDGGUHVVௐOLVWLQJௐSURYLGHGௐE\ௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐSHUௐHDFKௐFDUWௐGHOLYHUHGௐDQGௐDVVRFLDWHGௐWRௐWKDWௐSDUWLFXODUௐ DGGUHVVௐ:KHQௐ5),'ௐWDJVௐDUHௐVFDQQHGௐDVௐDௐGHOLYHU\ௐPHWKRGௐWKHௐIROORZLQJௐGDWDௐZLOOௐ DOVRௐEHௐFROOHFWHG ௐ5),'ௐWDJௐQXPEHUௐ6HULDOௐ1XPEHUௐWLPHௐVWDPSௐDQGௐJHRௐ FRRUGLQDWHVௐ7KLVௐZLOOௐDVVLVWௐFXVWRPHUௐLQௐWUDFNLQJௐWKHLUௐDVVHWVௐLQௐWKHௐILHOGௐ8SRQௐ FRPSOHWLRQௐRIௐWKHௐSURMHFWௐZHௐZLOOௐSURYLGHௐFXVWRPHUௐZLWKௐWKHௐFRPSOHWHGௐDGGUHVVௐOLVWLQJௐ VKRZLQJௐWKHௐDSSURSULDWHௐGDWDௐVHWௐRIௐWKHௐFDUWௐGHOLYHUHGௐWRௐHDFKௐDGGUHVVௐ7KLVௐZLOOௐEHௐ GRQHௐZKHQௐVLQJOHௐFDUWௐSHUௐDGGUHVVௐLVௐGHOLYHUHGௐDVௐZHOOௐDVௐZKHQௐPXOWLSOHௐFDUWVௐDQGௐVWUHDPVௐDUHௐGHOLYHUHGௐWRௐDQௐDGGUHVVௐ:KHQௐSURMHFWௐLVௐFRPSOHWHௐFXVWRPHUௐZLOOௐKDYHௐWKHௐPRVWௐXSௐWRௐGDWHௐGDWDௐRQௐDVVHWVௐDQGௐZKHUHௐWKH\ௐDUHௐORFDWHG 6WLFNHU/DEHOௐ$SSOLFDWLRQ ௐௐ$ௐFXVWRPHUௐSURYLGHGௐVWLFNHUODEHOௐZLOOௐEHௐDSSOLHGௐWRௐWKHௐ FDUWFRQWDLQHUௐDVௐGHVFULEHGௐLQௐVFRSHௐRIௐZRUNௐ7KLVௐFDQௐEHௐGRQHௐRQௐQHZௐSURMHFWௐ ZKHUHௐDOOௐQHZௐFDUWVௐUHFHLYHௐODEHOVWLFNHUௐSULRUௐWRௐGLVWULEXWLRQௐ2UௐODEHOVௐFDQௐEHௐ DSSOLHGௐWRௐFDUWVௐWKDWௐZHUHௐSUHYLRXVO\ௐLQௐWKHௐILHOG 2OGௐ&DUWௐ5HWULHYDO ௐௐ2OGௐFDUWVௐPD\ௐEHௐUHWULHYHGௐDQGௐEURXJKWௐEDFNௐWRௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐ VLWHௐIRUௐHLWKHUௐIXWXUHௐXVHௐRUௐGLVSRVDOௐ UHF\FOLQJ ௐ7KLVௐVHUYLFHௐFDQௐEHௐSURYLGHGௐLQௐ FRQMXQFWLRQௐZLWKௐQHZௐFDUWௐGHOLYHULHVௐWRௐHQVXUHௐQRௐGLVUXSWLRQௐRIௐZDVWHௐVHUYLFHVௐ $GGLWLRQDOௐLWHPVௐFDQௐEHௐFRQWUDFWHG ௐVRUWLQJௐRIௐROGௐFDUWVௐWRௐVSHFLILFDWLRQVௐGLVDVVHPEO\ௐ RIௐFDUWVௐWRௐEHௐUHF\FOHGௐORDGLQJௐRIௐFDUWVௐWRௐEHௐUHF\FOHGௐRQWRௐWUDLOHUVௐIRUௐWUDQVSRUWௐWRௐ UHF\FOHUௐ:HௐZRXOGௐPDQDJHௐWKHௐZKROHௐSURFHVVௐWRௐSURYLGHௐDௐVHDPOHVVௐVROXWLRQௐIRUௐ UHWULHYDOௐDQGௐGLVSRVDOௐRIௐDQ\ௐROGௐFDUWV 5RXWHௐ$XGLWV ௐௐ5RXWHௐDXGLWLQJௐVHUYLFHௐFRXOGௐLQFOXGH ௐDXGLWLQJௐVHUYLFHௐOHYHOVௐDXGLWLQJௐ LQFRPHௐURXWHௐ,'ௐYHULILFDWLRQௐZDVWHௐFKDUDFWHUL]DWLRQௐOLGௐIOLSVௐFRQWDPLQDWLRQௐPDWHULDOௐ ,'ௐHWFௐ:HௐZRXOGௐGHWHUPLQHௐ\RXUௐURXWHௐDXGLWLQJௐQHHGVௐDQGௐSURYLGHௐDௐSODQௐDQGௐWKHௐ DVVRFLDWHGௐFUHZVௐWRௐFRPSOHWHௐWKDWௐSODQௐ$WௐWKHௐHQGௐRIௐWKHௐSURMHFWௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐ ZRXOGௐKDYHௐDௐFOHDQVHGௐURXWHௐDQGௐDOOௐDVVRFLDWHGௐGDWDௐSRLQWVௐUHTXLUHGௐWRௐDGHTXDWHO\ௐ XQGHUVWDQGௐWKRVHௐURXWHVௐDQGௐKRZௐLWௐLVௐDIIHFWLQJௐWKHLUௐEXVLQHVV &RPPHUFLDOௐ%LQௐ'HOLYHU\ ௐௐ'HOLYHU\ௐRIௐFRPPHUFLDOௐELQௐ )(/¶VௐDQGௐ5(/¶V ௐWRௐDOOௐDVVRFLDWHGௐFRPPHUFLDOௐDGGUHVVHVௐ5HFHLYLQJௐRIௐFRPPHUFLDOௐELQVௐDQGௐDVVHPEOLQJௐ FRPPHUFLDOௐELQVௐLVௐDOVRௐRIIHUHGௐ-XVWௐDVௐZLWKௐWKHௐUHVLGHQWLDOௐGHOLYHULHVௐDௐVFRSHௐRIௐ ZRUNௐZLOOௐEHௐHVWDEOLVKHGௐWRௐSURYLGHௐDௐFRPSUHKHQVLYHௐVROXWLRQௐWRௐ\RXUௐFRPPHUFLDOௐELQௐ QHHGV &RPPHUFLDOௐ%LQௐ([FKDQJH ௐௐ([FKDQJHௐRIௐFRPPHUFLDOௐELQVௐ )(/¶VௐDQGௐ5(/¶V ௐIRUௐDOOௐ DVVRFLDWHGௐFRPPHUFLDOௐDGGUHVVHVௐ7KLVௐVHUYLFHௐSURYLGHVௐGHOLYHU\ௐRIௐQHZௐELQVௐDQGௐUHPRYDOௐRIௐROGௐELQVௐDWௐWKHௐVDPHௐWLPHௐ5HFHLYLQJௐGHOLYHUHGௐFRPPHUFLDOௐELQVௐDQGௐ DVVHPEOLQJௐFRPPHUFLDOௐELQVௐLVௐDOVRௐRIIHUHGௐ-XVWௐDVௐZLWKௐWKHௐUHVLGHQWLDOௐGHOLYHULHVௐDௐ VFRSHௐRIௐZRUNௐZLOOௐEHௐHVWDEOLVKHGௐWRௐSURYLGHௐDௐFRPSUHKHQVLYHௐVROXWLRQௐWRௐ\RXUௐ FRPPHUFLDOௐELQௐQHHGV &DUWௐ0DLQWHQDQFH ௐ&DUWௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐ6HUYLFHVௐDUHௐRIIHUHGௐWRௐSURYLGHௐDௐVHDPOHVVௐ VROXWLRQௐIRUௐDOOௐRIௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUௐFDUWௐPDLQWHQDQFHௐQHHGVௐ)URPௐQHZௐGHOLYHULHVௐFDUWௐUHPRYDOVௐFDUWௐUHSDLUVௐDQGௐPRUHௐZHௐSURYLGHௐSLHFHௐRIௐPLQGௐWKDWௐDOOௐUHVLGHQWௐUHTXHVWVௐZLOOௐEHௐIXOILOOHGௐZLWKLQௐWKHௐDJUHHGௐXSRQௐVHUYLFHௐOHYHOௐDJUHHPHQWௐௐ:HௐSURYLGHௐLQYHQWRU\ௐ OHYHOௐPDQDJHPHQWௐWRௐHQVXUHௐWKDWௐ\RXௐDOZD\VௐKDYHௐDVVHWVௐWRௐNHHSௐHDFKௐUHVLGHQWௐZLWKௐ WKHௐDSSURSULDWHௐFDUWVௐIRUௐZDVWHௐGLVSRVDOௐ$VVLVWௐLQௐPDQDJLQJௐZDUUDQW\ௐFODLPVௐDQGௐ NHHSLQJௐDOOௐFDUWVௐFOHDQHGௐDQGௐSUHSSHGௐIRUௐUHWXUQௐWRௐVHUYLFHௐ0DQDJLQJௐDOOௐSDUWVௐ DVVRFLDWHGௐZLWKௐWKHௐFDUWௐLQYHQWRU\ௐHQVXUHVௐFRVWௐVDYLQJVௐPD\ௐEHௐUHDOL]HGௐZLWKௐ UHSXUSRVLQJௐZKHUHௐDSSURSULDWHௐ+DYLQJௐDௐFDUWௐPDLQWHQDQFHௐSURYLGHUௐZLOOௐJLYHௐ\RXௐ SHDFHௐRIௐPLQGௐDQGௐSURGXFHௐFRVWௐVDYLQJV Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 222 :LWKLQௐWKLVௐ5)3ௐFDWHJRU\ௐWKHUHௐPD\ௐEHௐ VXEFDWHJRULHVௐRIௐVROXWLRQVௐ/LVWௐVXEFDWHJRU\ௐ WLWOHVௐWKDWௐEHVWௐGHVFULEHௐ\RXUௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐ VHUYLFHV 2XUௐ3URSRVDOௐLQFOXGHVௐ3ODVWLFௐ5HIXVHௐDQGௐ5HF\FOLQJௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐZLWKௐ5HODWHGௐ 7HFKQRORJ\ௐ6ROXWLRQVௐLQFOXGLQJ Dௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐFRPPHUFLDOௐDQGௐLQVWLWXWLRQDOVL]HGௐUHIXVHௐDQGௐUHF\FOLQJௐFRQWDLQHUVௐ FROOHFWLRQௐELQVௐGXPSVWHUVௐDQGௐFDUWVௐRIௐSULQFLSDOO\ௐQRQPHWDOOLFௐFRPSRVLWLRQ ௐ(95,,ௐ8QLYHUVDO1HVWDEOHௐ5ROOௐௐ&DUWVௐ8QLYHUVDOௐ5ROOௐ&DUWV ௐ2UJDQLFVௐ5ROOௐ&DUWV ௐ)XOO\ௐ$XWRPDWHGௐ%HDUௐ5HVLVWDQWௐ&DUWV ௐ)5ௐ)(/ௐ6HULHVௐ&RQWDLQHUV ௐ2UJDQLFVௐ)(/ௐ&RQWDLQHUV ௐ*DOORQௐ5HF\FOLQJௐ%LQV ௐ*DOORQௐ5HF\FOLQJௐ%LQVௐ6OLPOLQHௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐZLWKௐ$FFHVVRULHVௐ/LWWHUௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐZLWKௐ$FFHVVRULHV ௐ6TXDUHௐ&RQWDLQHUVௐZLWKௐ$FFHVVRULHV ௐ5RXQGௐ&DQVௐZLWKௐ$FFHVVRULHV Eௐ/LIWௐDQGௐWLSSLQJௐVROXWLRQVௐIRUௐVWDWLRQDU\ௐFDUWVௐDQGௐGXPSVWHUV ௐ7RWHUௐ8WLOLW\ௐ&DUWV ௐ&XEHௐ7UXFNV ௐ0RELOHௐ7UXFNVௐ7LOWௐ7UXFNV ௐ6WDWLRQDU\ௐ/LIWHUVௐZLWKௐ$FFHVVRULHV ௐ8QLYHUVDOௐ6WDWLRQDU\ௐ/LIWHUVௐZLWKௐ$FFHVVRULHV ௐ6DGGOHௐ6WDWLRQDU\ௐ/LIWHUVௐௐZLWKௐ$FFHVVRULHV ௐ&DQG\ௐ&DQHௐ6WDWLRQDU\ௐ/LIWHUVௐZLWKௐ$FFHVVRULHV ௐ5RYHUௐ0RELOHௐ/LIWHUVௐZLWKௐ$FFHVVRULHV ௐ5RXQGௐ&DQௐ0RELOHௐ/LIWHUVௐZLWKௐ$FFHVVRULHVFௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐUHSDLUௐDQGௐVLPLODUௐVHUYLFHVௐRIௐFRQWDLQHUV ௐDQGௐ$VVHPEO\ௐ ௐ'HOLYHU\ௐ6HUYLFHV ௐ8QORDGLQJௐDQGௐ$VVHPEO\ ௐ&DUWௐ5HPRYDOௐ6HUYLFHV ௐ5HF\FOLQJௐ6HUYLFHV ௐ5RXWHௐ$XGLWௐ6HUYLFHV ௐ5),'ௐ5HWURILWௐ6HUYLFHV ௐ6WLFNHULQJ/DEHOLQJௐ6HUYLFHVௐ0DLQWHQDQFHௐ&RQWUDFWௐ6HUYLFHVௐ&RPPHUFLDO%LQ&RQWDLQHUௐ([FKDQJHV Gௐ7HFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQVௐUHODWHGௐWRௐWKHௐPDQDJHPHQWௐRIௐSODQQLQJௐIRUௐDQGRUௐSURFHVVHVௐ UHODWHGௐWRௐFROOHFWLRQௐRIௐUHIXVHௐDQGௐUHF\FOLQJௐPDWHULDOVௐVROXWLRQVௐGHVFULEHGௐLQௐ VXEVHFWLRQVௐDFௐDERYHௐௐௐ :DVWHZDUHௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQVௐFORXGௐEDVHGௐVLPSOLVWLFௐGHVLJQௐWKDWௐSURYLGHVௐRQHௐ FRQYHQLHQWௐSODWIRUPௐIRU ௐ3URMHFWௐVROXWLRQVௐ,QYHQWRU\ௐFRQWURO ௐ5HSRUWLQJ ௐ&XVWRPHUௐ0DQDJHPHQW ௐ6HUYLFHௐ6FKHGXOLQJ $GGLWLRQDOO\ௐVXEFDWHJRULHVௐZLOOௐDGGUHVVௐFKDOOHQJHVௐZLWKௐDQ\ௐFXVWRPHUௐE\ௐSURYLGLQJௐ XVHUIULHQGO\ௐFRQWDLQHUVௐWRௐHIILFLHQWO\ௐFROOHFWௐZDVWHௐSOXVௐVXEFDWHJRULHVௐRIௐVROXWLRQVௐWRௐ SURYLGHௐHIIHFWLYHௐDXWRPDWHGௐFROOHFWLRQWUDQVSRUWDWLRQGLVSRVDOௐV\VWHPVHTXLSPHQWௐDQGௐPRUHௐௐ:HௐFDQௐDVVHPEOHௐGLVWULEXWHௐDQGௐPDLQWDLQௐHQWLUHௐIOHHWVௐRIௐFRQWDLQHUVௐ&RQWDLQHUௐXVHUVௐH[SHULHQFHௐHOLPLQDWLRQௐRIௐSRWHQWLDOௐLQMXU\ௐDQGௐLPSURYHGௐSURGXFWLYLW\ௐ ZLWKௐPHFKDQLFDOௐOLIWHUVGXPSHUVௐWRZLQJௐDQGௐRWKHUௐRSWLRQVௐFKRRVLQJௐIURPௐDௐVHHPLQJO\ௐ HQGOHVVௐSURYLVLRQௐRIௐVROXWLRQVௐௐ2XUௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐDVVLVWVௐFXVWRPHUVௐWRௐPDQDJHௐFDUWௐ IOHHWVௐDQGௐFRQWDLQHUௐPDLQWHQDQFHௐDQGௐLQYHQWRU\ௐௐ$VௐDௐVHUYLFHௐSURYLGHUௐZHௐDUHௐ SUHSDUHGௐWRௐRIIHUௐDQ\ௐFXVWRPL]HGௐVHUYLFHௐQHHGHGௐௐ:HௐUHDOL]HௐWKDWௐWKHௐZDVWHௐLQGXVWU\ௐ HQFRXQWHUVௐVRPHௐLQWHUHVWLQJௐRSSRUWXQLWLHVௐDQGௐZHௐDUHௐZLOOLQJௐWRௐZRUNௐZLWKௐHDFKௐ FXVWRPHUௐWRௐSURYLGHௐDௐVROXWLRQௐWRௐQHHGVௐDVௐWKH\ௐDULVHௐௐ1RௐMREௐLVௐWRRௐELJௐRUௐWRRௐVPDOO 7DEOH% 'HSWKDQG%UHDGWKRI2IIHUHG6ROXWLRQV ,QGLFDWHEHORZLIWKHOLVWHGW\SHVRUFODVVHVRI6ROXWLRQVDUHRIIHUHGZLWKLQ\RXUSURSRVDO3URYLGHDGGLWLRQDOFRPPHQWVLQWKHWH[WER[ SURYLGHGDVQHFHVVDU\ /LQH,WHP &DWHJRU\RU7\SH 2IIHUHG &RPPHQWV Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 223 5HVLGHQWLDOௐFRPPHUFLDOௐDQGௐLQVWLWXWLRQDOVL]HGௐ UHIXVHௐDQGௐUHF\FOLQJௐFRQWDLQHUVௐFROOHFWLRQௐELQVௐ GXPSVWHUVௐDQGௐFDUWVௐRIௐSULQFLSDOO\ௐQRQPHWDOOLFௐ FRPSRVLWLRQ <HV 1R 7RWHUௐ//&ௐLVௐDௐ:DVWHTXLSௐEUDQGௐ ZKLFKௐLVௐDௐPDQXIDFWXUHUௐDQGௐPDUNHWHUௐ RIௐKLJKTXDOLW\ௐSODVWLFௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐ UHODWHGௐSURGXFWVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐVROHO\ௐGHGLFDWHGௐWRௐWKHௐZDVWHௐLQGXVWU\ௐIRUௐUHVLGHQWLDOௐKDXOHUௐLQGXVWULDOௐ FRPPHUFLDOௐDQGௐUHWDLOௐDFFRXQWVௐ:Hௐ DUHௐGHGLFDWHGௐWRௐWKHௐZDVWHௐLQGXVWU\ௐ QRWௐPDQXIDFWXULQJௐIRUௐDQ\ௐRWKHUௐ LQGXVWU\ௐௐ2XUௐSURGXFWVௐDUHௐEXLOWௐWRௐ ODVWௐDQGௐPDQXIDFWXUHGௐXVLQJௐRXUௐ $GYDQFHGௐ5RWDWLRQDOௐ0ROGLQJௐSURFHVVௐZKLFKௐUHVXOWVௐLQௐ%XLOWௐIRUௐ([WUHPHVௐVWURQJHUௐPRUHௐGXUDEOHௐSURGXFWVௐWKDQௐ WKRVHௐIURPௐLQMHFWLRQPROGHGௐ PDQXIDFWXUHUV 2XUௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDUHௐFDWHJRUL]HGௐLQWRௐ WZRௐDUHDV ௐ5HVLGHQWLDOௐ3URGXFWVௐDQGௐ6ROXWLRQVௐௐSULPDULO\ௐIRUௐPXQLFLSDOLWLHVJRYHUQPHQWௐ HQWLWLHVௐIRUௐZDVWHௐFROOHFWLRQௐௐ :HௐFDUWௐHQWLUHௐFLWLHVௐFRXQWLHVௐ WRZQVKLSVௐSDULVKHVௐDQGௐUHJLRQVௐZLWKௐ FDUWVௐIRUௐUHIXVHௐUHF\FOLQJௐRUJDQLFVௐ \DUGௐZDVWHௐDQGௐRWKHUௐVSHFLDOL]HGௐ QHHGVௐௐ:HௐRIIHUௐWKHௐRSWLRQVௐDQGௐIHDWXUHVௐWRௐFXVWRPL]HௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐZKHQௐFRPELQHGௐZLWKௐWKHௐDGYDQWDJHVௐ RIௐ7RWHUௐFDUWVௐRXUௐFXVWRPHUVௐKDYHௐ VXFFHVVIXOௐZDVWHௐSURJUDPVௐௐ:HௐDOVRௐ RIIHUௐWKHௐRSWLRQVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHVௐ VROXWLRQVௐWRௐURXQGௐRXWௐWKHௐFXVWRPHUV ௐ SURJUDPVௐZLWKௐOLIWHUVௐWRௐPRXQWௐRQWRௐ FROOHFWLRQௐYHKLFOHVௐVSHFLDOௐUHF\FOLQJௐOLGௐIHDWXUHVௐDQGௐDௐVHHPLQJO\ௐHQGOHVVௐOLVWௐRIௐDYDLODEOHௐRSWLRQVௐEDVHGௐRQௐRXUௐ ORQJWHUPௐDQGௐFXUUHQWௐH[SHULHQFHௐZLWKௐ FXVWRPHUௐQHHGV ௐ3URௐ3URGXFWVௐDQGௐ6ROXWLRQVௐௐ SULPDULO\ௐIRUௐLQGXVWULDOௐFRPPHUFLDOௐ DQGௐLQVWLWXWLRQDOௐFXVWRPHUVௐZHௐKDYHௐ GHVLJQHGௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐHQGWRHQGௐVROXWLRQVௐGHVLJQHGௐWRௐVDIHO\ௐDQGௐ HIILFLHQWO\ௐFROOHFWௐWUDQVSRUWௐDQGௐ GLVSRVHௐRIௐZDVWHௐDQGௐUHF\FODEOHVௐௐ 2XUௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDQGௐZDVWHௐKDQGOLQJௐ HTXLSPHQWௐRIIHUௐHQGWRHQGௐVROXWLRQVௐ GHVLJQHGௐIRUௐHGXFDWLRQDOௐKHDOWKFDUHௐ IRRGௐVHUYLFHௐPDQXIDFWXULQJௐKRVSLWDOLW\ௐFRQYHQWLRQௐFHQWHUVௐVWDGLXPVௐSXEOLFௐVSDFHVௐIDFLOLW\ௐ PDQDJHPHQWௐUHWDLOௐ EDFNௐRIௐKRXVH ௐ FRQVWUXFWLRQௐDQGௐPRUH /LIWௐDQGௐWLSSLQJௐVROXWLRQVௐIRUௐVWDWLRQDU\ௐFDUWVௐDQGௐGXPSVWHUV <HV 1R 7RWHUௐDOVRௐRIIHUVௐOLIWௐDQGௐWLSSLQJௐVROXWLRQVௐIRUௐDWWDFKPHQWௐWRௐFROOHFWLRQௐ YHKLFOHVௐDQGௐDVௐVWDWLRQDU\ௐXQLWVௐZKLFKௐ FROOHFWௐDQGௐUHPRYHௐZDVWHௐIURPௐUROOௐ FDUWVௐORFDWHGௐDWௐKRXVHKROGVௐDQGௐ FRPPHUFLDOௐSURSHUWLHVௐDQGௐEXLOGLQJV Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 224 0DLQWHQDQFHௐUHSDLUௐDQGௐVLPLODUௐVHUYLFHVௐRIௐ FRQWDLQHUV <HV 1R 7RWHUௐRIIHUVௐVHUYLFHVௐDVௐSURYLGHGௐE\ௐ RXUௐ:DVWHTXLSௐVLVWHUௐGLYLVLRQௐ &RQWDLQHU3URVௐ7KLVௐGLYLVLRQௐLVௐDௐVSLQ RIIௐRIௐ7RWHUௐWRௐSURYLGHௐDOOௐPDQQHUௐRIௐUHODWLYHௐFDUWௐDQGௐFRQWDLQHUௐVHUYLFHVௐWRௐLQFOXGH ௐ ௐ$VVHPEO\ௐDQGௐ'LVWULEXWLRQௐRIௐ FRQWDLQHUௐRUGHUVௐDVVHPEOLQJௐHDFKௐ FRQWDLQHUௐDQGௐGLVWULEXWLQJௐWKHPௐ SURSHUW\ௐWRௐSURSHUW\ ௐ&DUWௐ5HPRYDOVௐDQGௐ([FKDQJHVௐௐ &RQWDLQHU3URVௐZLOOௐUHPRYHௐROGௐRUௐXQQHHGHGௐFDUWVௐDQGௐH[FKDQJHௐIRUௐDௐGLIIHUHQWௐVL]HௐFDUWௐLQௐFDVHVௐZKHUHௐ 3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ$JHQFLHVௐPD\ௐRIIHUௐ YDULRXVௐVL]HVௐDQGௐWKHௐDELOLW\ௐWRௐ H[FKDQJHௐROGௐFDUWVௐIRUௐQHZௐFDUWVௐRUௐ WKHௐDELOLW\ௐWRௐREWDLQௐDௐVL]HௐWKDWௐLVௐDௐ EHWWHUௐILWௐIRUௐWKHௐKRXVHKROG VௐQHHG ௐ8QORDGLQJௐௐ2IWHQௐDௐVHUYLFHௐSURYLGHGௐZLWKௐ$VVHPEO\ௐDQGௐ 'LVWULEXWLRQௐRIௐFDUWVௐWRௐSURSHUWLHVௐ XQORDGLQJௐFDQௐDOVRௐEHௐSURYLGHGௐDVௐDௐ VWDQGDORQHௐVHUYLFH ௐ5),'ௐDQGௐRWKHUௐW\SHVௐRIௐUHWURILWௐௐ IRUௐFDUWௐIOHHWVௐSXUFKDVHGௐLQௐWKHௐSDVWௐ DQGௐQRWௐLQFOXGLQJௐ5),'ௐ7DJVௐRUௐRWKHUௐXSGDWHVௐZHௐFDQௐDGGௐRUௐFKDQJHௐRXWௐLWHPVௐWRௐFDUWVௐDWௐHDFKௐKRPHௐLQௐDௐ PXQLFLSDOLW\ௐEULQJLQJௐWKHௐFDUWௐIOHHWௐXSௐ WRௐGDWH ௐ6WLFNHULQJ/DEHOLQJௐDQGௐ6SHFLDOL]HGௐ 2SWLRQVௐௐ:HௐFDQௐSURYLGHௐVSHFLDOௐ VHUYLFHVௐRIௐVWLFNHUௐDSSOLFDWLRQௐ DWWDFKLQJௐOLWHUDWXUHௐWRௐFDUWVௐ HLWKHUௐFXVWRPHUௐRUௐ7RWHUௐJHQHUDWHGௐHGXFDWLRQDOௐOLWHUDWXUH ௐDQGௐYDULRXVௐ RWKHUௐRSWLRQVௐWKDWௐFXVWRPL]HௐWKHௐ VFRSHௐRIௐZRUNௐWRௐKDQGOHௐ3DUWLFLSDWLQJௐ $JHQFLHVௐQHHGVௐLQௐGHWDLO 7HFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQVௐUHODWHGௐWRௐWKHௐPDQDJHPHQWௐRIௐ SODQQLQJௐIRUௐDQGRUௐSURFHVVHVௐUHODWHGௐWRௐFROOHFWLRQௐ RIௐUHIXVHௐDQGௐUHF\FOLQJௐPDWHULDOVௐVROXWLRQVௐ GHVFULEHGௐLQௐOLQHௐ ௐDERYH <HV 1R 7RWHUௐRIIHUVௐRXUௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQVௐ IRUௐFDUWௐDQGௐFRQWDLQHUௐGHOLYHULHVௐDQGௐ WKHௐVXEVHTXHQWௐPDQDJHPHQWௐRIௐWKHVHௐ DVVHWVௐ7KHௐFRPELQDWLRQௐRIௐDௐZHE EDVHGௐRSHUDWLRQVௐPDQDJHPHQWௐ VRIWZDUHௐDQGௐDௐPRELOHௐZRUNIRUFHௐ$SSௐDOORZVௐSODQQLQJௐDQGௐH[HFXWLRQௐRIௐGHOLYHULHVௐZRUNௐRUGHUVௐDQGௐVHUYLFHௐ UHTXHVWVௐKLJKO\ௐHIILFLHQWௐ0DMRUௐ IHDWXUHVௐRIௐWKHௐWHFKQRORJ\ௐRIIHULQJௐDUHௐ $VVHPEO\ௐ ௐ'LVWULEXWLRQௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐ ,QYHQWRU\ௐ0DQDJHPHQWௐDVௐZHOOௐDVௐ 6ROXWLRQVௐWRௐH[HFXWHௐVHUYLFHVௐLQௐWKHௐ ILHOGௐ :RUNௐ2UGHUVௐ6HUYLFHௐ5HTXHVWVௐHWF ௐ7KLVௐVROXWLRQௐDOVRௐSURYLGHVௐGDWDௐYLVXDOL]DWLRQௐDQGௐGDWDௐUHSRUWLQJௐWRROVௐ 7KHௐZHEEDVHGௐ6RIWZDUHௐVROXWLRQVௐ FRYHUVௐDOOௐUHTXLUHGௐSURFHVVHVௐIRUௐ GHOLYHU\ௐRIௐFDUWVௐDQGௐFRQWDLQHUVௐDVௐ ZHOOௐDVௐDVVHWௐPDQDJHPHQWௐ,Qௐ DGGLWLRQௐWRௐWKLVௐ:DVWHTXLS Vௐ WHFKQRORJ\ௐVROXWLRQௐFRPHVௐZLWKௐDௐPRELOHௐ$SSௐDQGௐWKHௐUHTXLUHGௐ +DUGZDUHௐ 6FDQQHUௐZLWKௐ5),'ௐDQGௐ %DUFRGHௐ5HDGHU ௐWRௐSHUIRUPௐVHUYLFHVௐ LQௐWKHௐILHOGௐௐ6HUYLFHௐ9HULILFDWLRQௐGDWDௐ FDQௐEHௐFROOHFWLRQௐE\ௐWKHௐPHDQVௐRIௐDௐ WUXFNPRXQWHGௐ5),'ௐ6\VWHPௐZKLFKௐ GHOLYHUVௐSRVLWLYHௐYHULILFDWLRQௐ 5),'ௐ5HDGV ௐ*36ௐ3RVLWLRQVௐDVௐZHOOௐDVௐGDWHௐDQGௐWLPHௐLQIRUPDWLRQௐRIௐWKHௐ VHUYLFHௐYHULILFDWLRQௐ7KHVHௐGDWDௐDUHௐ YLVXDOL]HGௐLQௐWKHௐZHEEDVHGௐSODWIRUP Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 225 Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC Exceptions to Terms, Conditions, or Specifications Form Only those Proposer Exceptions to Terms, Conditions, or Specifications that have been accepted by Sourcewell have been incorporated into the contract text. Documents Ensure your submission document(s) conforms to the following: 1. Documents in PDF format are preferred. Documents in Word, Excel, or compatible formats may also be provided. 2. Documents should NOT have a security password, as Sourcewell may not be able to open the file. It is your sole responsibility to ensure that the uploaded document(s) are not either defective, corrupted or blank and that the documents can be opened and viewed by Sourcewell. 3. Sourcewell may reject any response where any document(s) cannot be opened and viewed by Sourcewell. 4. If you need to upload more than one (1) document for a single item, you should combine the documents into one zipped file. If the zipped file contains more than one (1) document, ensure each document is named, in relation to the submission format item responding to. For example, if responding to the Marketing Plan category save the document as "Marketing Plan." Pricing - Sourcewell RFP 120324 - Toter LLC Pricing - 12-3-2024.pdf - Tuesday December 03, 2024 12:37:00 Financial Strength and Stability - Wastequip Financials (TRADE SECRET) October 2024.pdf - Tuesday December 03, 2024 13:00:48 Marketing Plan/Samples - Marketing Plan Samples- Toter.pdf - Tuesday December 03, 2024 12:35:40 WMBE/MBE/SBE or Related Certificates - Toter's Good Faith Effort.pdf - Tuesday December 03, 2024 12:10:38 Standard Transaction Document Samples - Standard Transaction Document Samples- Toter.pdf - Tuesday December 03, 2024 12:18:32 Requested Exceptions - Toter's Requested Exceptions.pdf - Tuesday December 03, 2024 12:10:52 Upload Additional Document - Toter's Product Literature and Other Items- Additional Documents.pdf - Tuesday December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¶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³6SHFLDOO\'HVLJQDWHG1DWLRQDOVDQG%ORFNHG3HUVRQV´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¶V$IILGDYLWKDYHWKHOHJDODXWKRULW\WRVXEPLWWKLV 3URSRVDORQEHKDOIRIWKH3URSRVHUDQGWKDWWKLVHOHFWURQLFDFNQRZOHGJPHQWKDVWKHVDPHOHJDOHIIHFWYDOLGLW\DQGHQIRUFHDELOLW\DVLI, KDGKDQGVLJQHGWKH3URSRVDO7KLVVLJQDWXUHZLOOQRWEHGHQLHGVXFKOHJDOHIIHFWYDOLGLW\RUHQIRUFHDELOLW\VROHO\EHFDXVHDQHOHFWURQLF VLJQDWXUHRUHOHFWURQLFUHFRUGZDVXVHGLQLWVIRUPDWLRQ/DXUD+XEEDUG'LUHFWRURI0XQLFLSDO6DOHV7RWHU//& Bid Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter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id Number: RFP 120324 Vendor Name: Toter, LLC 228 WQ-10400257 PHONE: 800-424-0422 FAX: 833-930-1124 1661 Frontera Rd, Del Rio, TX, 78840 Customer responsible for offloading containers.Special Instructions $66,348.50Grand Total $0.00Tax $6,096.00Shipping $60,252.50Subtotal FOB OriginShipping Terms Net 30 Days if credit has been establishedPayment Terms WQ-10400257 Please Reference Quote Number on all Purchase Orders Quote Number 10/30/2026Expiration Date 720-387-6696Salesperson Phone sortmayer@wastequip.comSalesperson Email Steve OrtmayerSalesperson Quick Ship 2143 Story Mill Rd Bozeman, MT 59715 USA Ship To City of BozemanShip To Name (406) 582-3235Phone rward@bozeman.netEmail PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 USA Bill To City of BozemanBill To Name Russ WardContact Name Sell To: Quote Information Product Product Description Description Selected Option Quantity Sales Price Total Price 64G Automated Bear Resistant Cart 64G Automated Bear Resistant Cart IGBC Certified 5YR Warranty Cart - $272 BHS - $0.50 Body color - $0.75 Lid color - $0.50 Snap on wheels - $0.50 ---Body Color - (718) Waste Blue ---Lid Color - (718) Waste Blue ---Body Hot Stamp on Both Sides (Existing) in White ---Wheels - 10in Snap-on ---Toter Serial Number Hot Stamped on Front of Cart Body in White ---2/3 Assembled with Lid (down), Stop Bar and Axle Factory Installed 70.00 $274.25 $19,197.50 96G Automated Bear Resistant Cart - Sourcewell 96G Automated Bear Resistant Cart - Sourcewell IGBC Certified 5YR Warranty Cart - $291 BHS - $0.50 Body color - $0.75 Lid color - $0.50 Snap on wheels - $0.50 ---Body Color - (718) Waste Blue ---Lid Color - (718) Waste Blue ---Body Hot Stamp on Both Sides (New) in White ---Wheels - 10in Snap-on ---Toter Serial Number Hot Stamped on Front of Cart Body in White ---2/3 Assembled with Lid (down), Stop Bar and Axle Factory Installed 140.00 $293.25 $41,055.00 Special Instructions Additional Information 229 WQ-10400257 PHONE: 800-424-0422 FAX: 833-930-1124 1661 Frontera Rd, Del Rio, TX, 78840 Please Reference Quote Number on all Purchase Orders Accepted By: ______________________________________________________ Company Name: ______________________________________________________ Date: ______________________________________________________ Purchase Order: ______________________________________________________ Sourcewell – Pricing and Products/Services offerings are based on the Sourcewell Co-Operative Contract with Toter, LLC (#120324-TOT, eff. 4/4/2025), and such Contract terms and conditions are incorporated herein by reference. Pricing and Products/Services changes may occur at any time with proper documentation, and subject to Sourcewell approval; therefore, offerings may change without written prior notice. Wastequip Product Limited Warranties, Disclaimers, Limitation of Liability and Remedies, and Limited Warranty Provisions apply to all purchases thereunder. Special Contract Information Pricing is based on your acceptance prior to the expiration of this Quote. Any differences to this Quote, including product specifications, quantities, and timing, may result in different pricing, freight or other costs. Due to volatility in petrochemical, steel and related Product material markets, actual prices and freight are subject to change. We reserve the right, by providing notice to you at any time before beginning Product manufacturing, to increase the price of the Product(s) to reflect any increase in the cost to us, regardless of whether such increase is due to any factor within or beyond our control (such as, without limitation, any increase in the costs of labor, materials, or other costs of manufacture or supply). Unless otherwise stated, materials and container sizes indicated on sales literature, invoices, price lists, quotations and delivery tickets are nominal sizes and representations – actual volume, Products and materials are subject to manufacturing and commercial variation and Wastequip’s practices and may vary from nominal sizes and materials. All prices are in US dollars; this Quote may not include all applicable taxes, brokerage fees or duties. If customer is not tax exempt, final tax calculations are subject to change. Pursuant to California Section 26275 of the Health and Safety Code, certain trash receptacles and storage containers must be marked with reflectors. Customers must disclose if such receptacles and containers are intended for use in California – if not disclosed, the receptacles and containers are not intended for use in California. Additional Information Our Quote serves as an offer to provide Products and/or services at the quantities and prices shown and is a good faith estimate, based on our understanding of your needs. By signing below, you accept this Quote and expressly agree to the Wastequip Terms & Conditions of Sale (“Wastequip’s Terms”) as of the date set forth in Section 1(b) of the Wastequip Terms, and no other terms. The Wastequip Terms are located at: , andhttps://www.wastequip.com/terms-conditions-sale are made a part of this Quote and any subsequent Purchase Order(s). The Wastequip Terms may be updated from time to time and are available by hard copy upon request. Any changes or deviations to the terms of this Quote, including any proposed or different terms in a Purchase Order submitted by you, are not effective and are rejected by Wastequip unless expressly agreed upon in writing by you and Wastequip. Additional Terms Signatures 230 WQ-10400256 PHONE: 800-424-0422 FAX: 833-930-1124 1661 Frontera Rd, Del Rio, TX, 78840 Our Quote serves as an offer to provide Products and/or services at the quantities and prices shown and is a good faith estimate, based on our understanding of your needs. By signing below, you accept this Quote and expressly agree to the Wastequip Terms & Conditions of Sale (“Wastequip’s Terms”) as of the date set forth in Section 1(b) of the Wastequip Additional Terms Customer responsible for offloading containers.Special Instructions $67,978.50Grand Total $0.00Tax $6,096.00Shipping $61,882.50Subtotal FOB OriginShipping Terms Net 30 Days if credit has been establishedPayment Terms WQ-10400256 Please Reference Quote Number on all Purchase Orders Quote Number 10/30/2026Expiration Date 720-387-6696Salesperson Phone sortmayer@wastequip.comSalesperson Email Steve OrtmayerSalesperson Quick Ship 2143 Story Mill Rd Bozeman, MT 59715 USA Ship To City of BozemanShip To Name (406) 582-3235Phone rward@bozeman.netEmail PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 USA Bill To City of BozemanBill To Name Russ WardContact Name Sell To: Quote Information Product Product Description Description Selected Option Quantity Sales Price Total Price 96G Automated Bear Resistant Cart - Sourcewell 96G Automated Bear Resistant Cart - Sourcewell IGBC Certified 5YR Warranty Cart - $291 BHS - $0.50 Body color - $0.75 Lid color - $0.50 Snap on wheels - $0.50 ---Body Color - (718) Waste Blue ---Lid Color - (718) Waste Blue ---Body Hot Stamp on Both Sides (New) in White ---Wheels - 10in Snap-on ---Toter Serial Number Hot Stamped on Front of Cart Body in White ---2/3 Assembled with Lid (down), Stop Bar and Axle Factory Installed 210.00 $293.25 $61,582.50 99 Plastics-Op-Die-Body ---One Time Die Charge for New Body Hot Stamp One time body hot stamp set up/die charge 1.00 $300.00 $300.00 Special Instructions Additional Information 231 WQ-10400256 PHONE: 800-424-0422 FAX: 833-930-1124 1661 Frontera Rd, Del Rio, TX, 78840 Please Reference Quote Number on all Purchase Orders Accepted By: ______________________________________________________ Company Name: ______________________________________________________ Date: ______________________________________________________ Purchase Order: ______________________________________________________ Sourcewell – Pricing and Products/Services offerings are based on the Sourcewell Co-Operative Contract with Toter, LLC (#120324-TOT, eff. 4/4/2025), and such Contract terms and conditions are incorporated herein by reference. Pricing and Products/Services changes may occur at any time with proper documentation, and subject to Sourcewell approval; therefore, offerings may change without written prior notice. Wastequip Product Limited Warranties, Disclaimers, Limitation of Liability and Remedies, and Limited Warranty Provisions apply to all purchases thereunder. Special Contract Information Pricing is based on your acceptance prior to the expiration of this Quote. Any differences to this Quote, including product specifications, quantities, and timing, may result in different pricing, freight or other costs. Due to volatility in petrochemical, steel and related Product material markets, actual prices and freight are subject to change. We reserve the right, by providing notice to you at any time before beginning Product manufacturing, to increase the price of the Product(s) to reflect any increase in the cost to us, regardless of whether such increase is due to any factor within or beyond our control (such as, without limitation, any increase in the costs of labor, materials, or other costs of manufacture or supply). Unless otherwise stated, materials and container sizes indicated on sales literature, invoices, price lists, quotations and delivery tickets are nominal sizes and representations – actual volume, Products and materials are subject to manufacturing and commercial variation and Wastequip’s practices and may vary from nominal sizes and materials. All prices are in US dollars; this Quote may not include all applicable taxes, brokerage fees or duties. If customer is not tax exempt, final tax calculations are subject to change. Pursuant to California Section 26275 of the Health and Safety Code, certain trash receptacles and storage containers must be marked with reflectors. Customers must disclose if such receptacles and containers are intended for use in California – if not disclosed, the receptacles and containers are not intended for use in California. Additional Information Terms, and no other terms. The Wastequip Terms are located at: , andhttps://www.wastequip.com/terms-conditions-sale are made a part of this Quote and any subsequent Purchase Order(s). The Wastequip Terms may be updated from time to time and are available by hard copy upon request. Any changes or deviations to the terms of this Quote, including any proposed or different terms in a Purchase Order submitted by you, are not effective and are rejected by Wastequip unless expressly agreed upon in writing by you and Wastequip. Signatures 232 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Natalie Meyer, Sustainability Program Manager Jamie Grabinski, Procurement Coordinator Cola Rowley, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT:Ratify the City Manager's Signature for the State of Montana Department of Environmental Quality for the Innovative Energy Engineering Studies for Local Governments Request for Applications for the Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Grant RECOMMENDATION:Ratify the City Manager's Signature for the State of Montana Department of Environmental Quality for the Innovative Energy Engineering Studies for Local Governments Request for Applications for the Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices: Prioritize long-term investment and maintenance for existing and new infrastructure. BACKGROUND:On October 16, 2026, the Sustainability Division submitted a grant application to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to complete a microgrid engineering study at the Bozeman Public Safety Center. The Request for Applications (RFA) is funded by DEQ as part of the State of Montana's application for funding under the U.S. Department of Energy's Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) State Energy Program. The DEQ intends to provide approximately $175,000 to eligible local government applicants for this RFA on a reimbursement basis according to completion and acceptance of project milestones. Local funding matches are not required. The City applied for a microgrid feasibility study, which is defined by the DEQ as a group of interconnected loads and distributed energy resources within clearly defined electrical boundaries that act as a single controllable entity with respect to the grid. It can operate in either grid-connected or in island mode, including entirely off-grid applications. The City's application proposes conducting a comprehensive microgrid engineering study for the Bozeman Public Safety Center, which houses the Police Department, Fire Station #1, Municipal Courts, Prosecution Offices, and Victim Services. It is built to serve as critical infrastructure and features the following distributed energy 233 resources: 264 kW solar photovoltaic (PV) array 750 kVA / 600 kW emergency diesel generator 2,000-gallon shared bulk diesel storage tank Advanced building management software 9 electric vehicle (EV) charging stations and electric vehicle fleet The study aims to build upon these investments to provide highly resilient power for emergency services while improving energy affordability. The study will primarily analyze integrating solar PV, a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) and bidirectional Vehicle-to-Building (V2B) discharge capabilities into the facility's upcoming building Energy Management System (EMS). Award announcements are expected by mid-November and successful applicants must complete their feasibility studies within twelve months. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:The City's application to the DEQ includes a request for the full project cost of $48,500 on a reimbursement basis. If awarded, the project will require a budget amendment to account for the unplanned expense and revenue. Attachments: Energy Study Application Form_City of Bozeman_Category B_Signed.pdf City of Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study - Category B.pdf Report compiled on: October 29, 2026 234 8 Energy Study Application Form Instructions This Application Form supplements the Energy Study Request for Applications (RFA). The RFA includes detailed information about project and application eligibility, funding schedule, cost-share and scoring criteria. Applicants must complete and upload this form to the Supplier’s Attachments page of the eMACS event by 2:00pm Mountain time on the application deadline. 1)Completed DEQ Energy Study application form with signature of individual from the lead applicant responsible for authorizing and overseeing completion of the project. Proposals that do not use theDEQ application form will not be considered for funding. Please make sure to check one of the twofunding category boxes below and save your application file using the naming requirement in Section 4 of the RFA.2)Any documentation to demonstrate selection of consultant or team that will carry out the study. Applicant Information Organization Name: _______________________________ Mailing Address: ________________________________________________________________ City: ____________ County: ____________ State: _____________ Zip Code: __________ Employer/Taxpayer ID (EIN/TIN): __________________ UEI (from SAM.gov): _______________ Authorized Representative Name: ______________________ Title: ______________________ E-mail: _________________________________ Phone: _______________________________ Alternate Representative Name: _____________________ Title: _______________________ E-mail: ________________________________ Phone: ________________________________ Is your organization/entity requesting funding for Category A or B? Category A: Hydroelectric assessment/feasibility study for irrigation canals, reservoirs and other Category B: Microgrid feasibility studies. A microgrid is a group of interconnected loads and distributed energy resources within clearly defined electrical boundaries that acts as a single controllable entity with respect to the grid. A microgrid can operate in either grid-connected or in island mode, including entirely off-grid applications. Description of Proposed Project Responses to the following questions will be used to evaluate and score this application. Incomplete applications will not be evaluated. The Project Scoring Criteria Matrix is in Section 3 of the Innovative Energy Engineering Studies for Local Governments RFA. 235 9 A. Project description & goals – Description of the study focus and how it might be used or is necessary to implement a future project. Description should include what technologies might be studied and the potential energy usage and energy costs impacts if implemented. How the study funded by this RFA fits into an overall strategy for the applicant. (150 points) B. Consultant or principle conducting study – Years of experience working on comparable studies/projects, references, demonstrate selection process of entity/team to carry out project. (100 points) 236 10 C.Project timeline – Provide a proposed schedule detailing the steps necessary for completing thestudy including expected dates for key project milestones such as start of study and project completion. All project milestones must be completed within 12 months of the contract executiondate. (50 points) D.Project budget – Detailed cost estimates for study and any other costs associated with the projectto be paid by the applicant or with the requested funding. (50 points) Application Acknowledgement Authorized Representative Name: ______________________ Title: _____________________ Authorized Representative Signature: ___________________ Date: _____________________ 237 Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Energy Office Innovative Energy Engineering Studies for Local Governments (IIJA) State Energy Program (SEP) through Federal Grant No.DE- EE0010083 Category B: Microgrid feasibility studies. Project Title: Bozeman Public Safety Center (PSC) Microgrid Engineering Study Applicant: City of Bozeman, Montana Engineering Consultant: Electric Peak Engineering Inc. Bozeman, Montana 238 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 2 Section A: Project Description & Goals Summary The City of Bozeman is requesting funding to conduct a comprehensive microgrid engineering study for the Bozeman Public Safety Center located at 901 N Rouse Ave. Built in 2022, the 91,000 square foot facility is situated on an 8.6 acre campus and houses the: ● Bozeman Police Department ● Fire Station #1 ● Municipal Courts ● Prosecution Offices ● Victim Services Built to serve as critical infrastructure, the facility features the following distributed energy resources (DER): ● 264 kW solar photovoltaic (PV) array ● 750 kVA / 600 kW Caterpillar C18 Emergency Diesel Generator ● 2,000-gallon shared bulk diesel storage tank ● Advanced building management software (Johnson Controls Metasys) ● 9 electric vehicle (EV) charging stations The City has a rapidly expanding electric vehicle fleet including: ● Eight Ford F-150 Lightnings ● Three passenger Toyota and Ford electric vehicles ● One Class 7 electric bucket truck (anticipated delivery May 2028) This engineering study aims to build upon these investments to elevate the facility into a primary municipal resilience hub for the City. To provide highly resilient power to the emergency services while improving energy affordability, the study will analyze integrating a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS), solar PV carport expansion, and bidirectional Vehicle-to-Building (V2B) discharge capabilities into the facility's upcoming Metasys 16.0 Energy Management System (EMS). 239 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 3 Past Performance Empirical 12-month billing records and historical 2024–2026 utility trends (NorthWestern Energy Account: 3849147-8, Meter: 2000254589, Rate E110-GS Secondary Demand) establish the facility's baseline energy profile: ● Summer Peak Demand: 217 kW (June-August cooling cycles) ● Winter Peak Demand: 146 kW (January-February baseload) ● Summer Peak Consumption: 73,440 kWh/month ● Winter Peak Consumption: 82,400 kWh/month ● Annual Electricity Purchases: $107,795 across the past twelve months (covering 819,680 kWh of energy consumption, cumulative monthly peak demand charges, and meter fees) ● The 70/30 Financial Footprint: ● Volumetric Energy Purchases ($0.0924/kWh): $75,775 annually (70.3% of total spend) for 819,680 kWh consumed. This volume represents the grid reliance targeted for offset by expanded solar generation paired with BESS energy shifting. ● Peak Demand Charges ($14.36/kW): $31,635 annually (29.3% of the bill) across monthly peaks ranging from 146 kW in winter to 217 kW in summer. These charges represent the peak capacity costs targeted for reduction through BESS peak shaving and Metasys 16.0 automated load rolling. ● Annual Customer Service Charge: $384 annually (0.4% of total spent). Crucially, because peak demand spikes can occur during periods of minimal or zero solar irradiance (such as cloud cover transitions or early evening shoulder hours), the existing 264 kW solar PV array provides limited demand charge mitigation. However, total monthly grid energy purchases (kWh) remain substantially lower than total on-site consumption, reflecting the solar array's strong contribution to offsetting baseline energy volume. Furthermore, because campus space heating is supplied by natural gas service (peaking between 800 and 1,000 MMBTU/month during winter months), peak electrical grid demand is concentrated almost entirely in summer cooling months. This seasonal cooling profile aligns directly with peak solar irradiance windows, reinforcing the technical and economic justification for co-optimizing energy storage with expanded solar capacity. 240 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 4 Resilience Plan Current Emergency Operations & Vulnerability During grid outages, the Public Safety Center isolates its critical first-floor emergency operations, dropping to an emergency base load of 100–150 kW. Currently, this load is powered exclusively by a 600 kW emergency backup generator. While the on-site 2,000 gallon diesel tank is nominally rated to power the generator for up to 48 hours at full load (600 kW) and up to 160 hours at 25% load (150 kW), the diesel tank is a shared resource across the campus. Without a BESS in place, the diesel generator is forced to rapidly respond to all power disruptions, from momentary, short-term grid blips to extended multi-day blackouts. This places unnecessary mechanical wear on the system and consumes critical fuel reserves for minor events. Additionally, standby diesel generators require spin-up lag time to accept load during a sudden outage, causing momentary power drops that jeopardize sensitive emergency communications, dispatch, and IT systems. Integrating a BESS eliminates these vulnerabilities by delivering near-instantaneous power transfer to critical loads during an outage, seamlessly bridging the transition to islanded microgrid operation. Stacking DERs for Extended Islanding Integrating a BESS with the facility’s solar PV and standby generator fundamentally transforms the microgrid's resilience capability. By stacking multiple energy storage technologies (BESS + diesel fuel) with distributed generation (solar PV + diesel generator), the facility can significantly extend its islanded run-time off the grid. During an extended outage, the BESS and solar PV will shoulder the emergency base load. The diesel generator will only be dispatched when battery depletion thresholds are met, allowing it to run at peak mechanical efficiency to recharge the batteries and power the facility, rather than constantly running in an inefficient, load-following state. This strategy substantially stretches the shared diesel fuel supply and creates important system redundancy. Mobile Vehicle-to-Building Resilience The study introduces an unparalleled layer of municipal resilience by leveraging the City’s electric vehicle fleet as a mobile energy reserve. During catastrophic grid and fuel disruptions, bidirectional EVs, specifically the eight Ford F-150 Lightnings, can operate 241 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 5 as mobile battery banks. These vehicles can capture excess solar generation, dynamically deploy across Bozeman for emergency response operations, and return to the facility to discharge their stored energy directly back into the microgrid via V2B technology. Microgrid Controls Upon grid loss, the existing Johnson Controls Metasys building management system executes automated priority load shedding, instantly dropping non-essential 2nd-floor mechanical loads to cap emergency demand at 100–150 kW. The planned upgrade to Metasys 16.0, which includes a comprehensive energy management system (EMS), will also allow the City to dynamically orchestrate DER co-optimization by balancing BESS discharging/charging, solar generation, V2B fleet reserves, and generator dispatch in real time. This will maximize continuous facility uptime during extended multi-day outages and reduce unnecessary equipment downtime. Regional Grid Stability Beyond protecting local emergency operations, this microgrid architecture directly enhances the resilience of the broader NorthWestern Energy regional electric grid. ● Peak Demand Dispersal & Solar Self-Consumption: The system will intelligently recharge the BESS by prioritizing the use of excess solar PV generation over purchasing power from the grid. Stored energy will then be discharged during NorthWestern Energy's peak utility windows (6:00–9:00 AM and 6:00–8:00 PM), effectively shifting load away from critical grid stress periods and mitigating surging regional power demand. ● Grid Stabilization: The stationary BESS also provides a rapid-response buffer that instantly absorbs short-duration, high-amperage power spikes (such as the facility's heavy chillers starting up), smoothing out the electrical load and eliminating voltage stress on the local utility infrastructure. Operational Expense (OpEx) Reduction Strategy Peak Demand Mitigation Empirical 12-month utility billing data reveals a key financial vulnerability for the facility: seasonal demand spikes under NorthWestern Energy’s GS-1 commercial tariff, driven by heavy summer chiller loads that push peak grid demand to 217 kW (compared to a winter peak of 146 kW). Under current tariff schedules, the fully loaded secondary demand rate is $14.36/kW (incorporating transmission, distribution, and associated 242 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 6 demand taxes), meaning peak capacity charges exceed $3,100 per month in the summer and total over $31,600 annually, roughly 30% of the campus electric bill. While the existing 264 kW solar PV array significantly reduces monthly volumetric energy purchases (which reach up to 82,400 kWh/month), it provides minimal peak demand charge mitigation during sudden drops in solar irradiance. On hot summer days, a momentary cloud cover transition forces an immediate, high-kW draw from the utility grid, setting a costly demand charge for the entire billing cycle. By integrating the BESS directly with Johnson Controls Metasys 16.0, the system will actively monitor net power demand and execute automated load rolling. When net demand threatens to exceed target thresholds, the EMS dynamically discharges stored battery energy while cycling heavy, flexible loads such as temporarily throttling EV fleet charging or staging chiller startups. This dual-pronged approach of BESS dispatch and automated load shedding actively buffers unpredictable solar drops and shaves peak demand charges, directly lowering monthly utility expenses. Maximizing Solar ROI While the facility offsets a portion of its gross energy needs, the Public Safety Center still purchases substantial volumetric energy from NorthWestern Energy (~820,000 kWh annually). Under the facility's strict zero-export interconnection agreement, any solar generation exceeding real-time building demand cannot be fed back into the regional utility grid. A core objective of this engineering study is to evaluate sub-hourly generation and load interval data to quantify existing solar curtailment, while modeling how a BESS can capture excess midday generation and extract it during morning, evening, and nighttime building cycles. Furthermore, establishing a BESS buffer removes the primary technical barrier to expanding campus solar capacity. Without energy storage, constructing proposed solar PV expansions, such as parking lot carport arrays, would risk increasing generation curtailment during bright midday windows. By pairing potential solar canopy expansions with BESS charging and Metasys 16.0 controls, the study will model how excess midday solar can be stored and extracted to directly displace the large volume of grid electricity currently purchased from NorthWestern Energy, offset EV fleet charging, and power critical loads during extended grid outages; all while maintaining strict zero export utility compliance. Operational Efficiency & Asset Longevity The facility's primary emergency power asset is a 750 kVA / 600 kW Caterpillar C18 diesel generator. Currently, this single unit serves as the sole backup power source for the facility’s isolated 100–150 kW emergency base load during grid outages, in addition 243 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 7 to undergoing mandatory weekly no-load/light-load exercise cycles. Operating a 600 kW prime-mover at 100–150 kW forces the engine into a severe low-load state (17% to 25% of rated capacity). In a Caterpillar C18 platform, prolonged operation below 30% load prevents cylinder temperatures from reaching complete combustion thresholds, driving severe exhaust manifold "wet-stacking" (unburned fuel accumulation), elevated soot and diesel particulate emissions, accelerated cylinder glazing, and reduced asset operating life. To resolve this operational inefficiency, the engineering study will model a Generator- BESS co-optimization use case. Under this architecture, the Caterpillar C18 generator will no longer run continuously in an inefficient load following state. Instead, the Metasys 16.0 EMS will dispatch the generator exclusively in high efficiency bulk charging cycles when battery storage reaches lower state-of-charge (SOC) thresholds. By loading the generator to its optimal 60% to 80% mechanical operating sweet spot (~370 to 480 kW), the unit burns fuel at peak thermodynamic efficiency to simultaneously power critical emergency operations while dumping surplus generation into the BESS. Once the BESS is recharged, the engine shuts down, returning the campus to clean, silent battery operation and substantially extending the runtime of the shared 2,000 gallon on-site fuel reserve. Rebates, Incentives & Tax Credits To ensure the project minimizes the financial burden on local taxpayers, the study’s techno-economic analysis will move beyond basic operational savings to evaluate comprehensive funding and incentive mechanisms. This includes explicitly modeling Section 48E tax credits for standalone BESS installations under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which remain highly favorable as legacy commercial solar incentives face accelerated expiration. Additionally, the analysis will evaluate utility demand response programs, potential grid-services compensation, and other state and federal funding streams to heavily offset future capital procurement costs. Project Readiness The City of Bozeman demonstrates immediate project readiness by leveraging existing, fully commissioned infrastructure and pre-engineered site provisions. The Public Safety Center was intentionally designed with physical site and structural provisions to accommodate microgrid assets, standalone BESS storage, and future solar canopy expansions. Furthermore, the facility’s baseline operational data, 264 kW solar array, and bidirectional EV fleet are active and operational today, while the Johnson Controls Metasys 16.0 control system upgrade which introduces native Energy Management 244 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 8 System (EMS) microgrid control logic not previously available is already planned for FY2028. This pre-engineered foundation and active municipal commitment eliminate preliminary site preparation hurdles, allowing the selected engineering team to immediately access operational data and execute the feasibility study without delay. Ultimately, because this proposal is anchored in operational municipal infrastructure rather than theoretical assumptions, it provides the Montana DEQ with an empirical, real-world case study and actionable engineering blueprint for municipal resilience across the state. 245 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 9 Goals # Goal Description 1 Provide Critical Operational Resilience Continuous, uninterrupted power for first-responder operations (Police, Fire #1, Dispatch, Courts) during grid outages. 2 Optimize Financial Performance Lower ongoing municipal utility and operating expenses, maximize the return on investment of campus energy assets, and extend backup generator lifespan. 3 Enhance Grid Reliability Reduce peak demand strain on local utility distribution infrastructure. 4 Advance Project Readiness Complete organizational and technical preparation required for capital procurement and construction grant execution. 5 Sustainability Reduce municipal greenhouse gas emissions, criteria air pollutants, and on-site diesel exhaust. Deliverables # Deliverable Description 1 Load Profile Analysis Comprehensive evaluation of sub-hourly interval data, demand profiling, and load prioritization for emergency scenarios. 2 Existing Infrastructure Assessment Physical and electrical capacity audit of main service gear, 264 kW PV array, 600 kW backup generator, bidirectional EV fleet infrastructure, and planned Metasys 16.0 BMS integration pathways. 3 Utility Interconnection Study Analysis of NorthWestern Energy rates and grid protection compliance (national electrical standards, anti-islanding, zero-export controls, and grid stabilization modeling). 4 DER Asset Sizing & Selection Technical capacity optimization for the BESS (kW/kWh) alongside proposed solar PV expansions, evaluating inverter architecture, battery chemistry, and combined generation-to-storage ratios under zero-export constraints. 5 Operational Modeling Dynamic simulation modeling for peak demand shaving, automated load rolling, zero-export solar capture, generator optimization, and V2B fleet integration. 6 Techno-Economic Analysis Itemized upfront capital costs and ongoing operational expense modeling, lifecycle cost-benefit analysis, and incentive evaluation. 7 Safety, Code & Permitting Review Evaluation of national fire safety code siting, environmental footprints, and structural requirements. 8 Conceptual Engineering Schematics Delivery of high level single-line diagrams, spatial site plans, and preliminary sequence of operations to support capital planning. 246 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 10 B. Consultant Conducting the Study The City of Bozeman selected Electric Peak Engineering Inc. to conduct the Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study after requesting proposals from two qualified professional engineering firms. Proposals were scored by staff representatives from City Engineering, Facilities Services, and Sustainability. Scoring criteria were based on project approach, qualifications of personnel, schedule, and related experience. This procurement approach meets and exceeds requirements under the City of Bozeman’s Procurement Policy for Architectural, Engineering, and Land Surveying Services, which is aligned with Section 18-8-212, Montana Code Annotated (MCA), allowing state or local public agencies to procure architectural, engineering, or land surveying services by direct negotiation if the estimated fees for the project is not to exceed $50,000. This approach complies with Department of Energy’s subrecipient grant requirements for federal awards under Title 2 of Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 200.320(2)(i) for simplified acquisition procedures where price or rate quotations were received from an adequate number of qualified sources. The City of Bozeman determined that two proposals were adequate for professional engineering services with an anticipated dollar threshold not to exceed $50,000. The Department of Energy does not appear to specify a fixed number of quotes for simplified acquisitions. Further, Title 2 of CFR 200.320(a)(1)(v), would allow the Department of Energy to approve an increase to the micro purchase threshold to $50,000 for low-risk auditees and public institutions, such as the City of Bozeman, where it is consistent with State law (see MCA 18-8-212). Firm Overview Electric Peak Engineering Inc. 7 W Main St. Ste 206D Bozeman, MT 59715 PH: 1.406.579.2970 www.epemt.com Electric Peak Engineering Inc. (also doing business as Electric Peak) is a licensed mechanical, electrical, and plumbing design and energy consulting firm based in Bozeman, Montana. Electric Peak delivers highly responsive, principal-led engineering. The team approaches energy infrastructure holistically, integrating mechanical, electrical, and control systems as a single operational unit. 247 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 11 Electric Peak provides the City of Bozeman with a proven track record in complex microgrids, battery energy storage systems, solar photovoltaic integration, and backup generation, uniquely positioning the firm to execute this DEQ Category B feasibility study. The firm's qualifications include: ● 25+ Years of licensed Professional Engineering (PE) experience in Montana. ● 100+ Microgrid & Standalone Power Deployments executed globally by firm principals and core strategic partners. ● 30+ MW of commercial solar and energy storage capacity engineered and deployed. ● NFPA 70 & NFPA 855 Expertise, specializing in BESS thermal runaway prevention, fire safety, and emergency system integration. Leadership Team More details about their team can be found at: www.epemt.com/team Paul Gentile, PE, PhD | Principal Mechanical Engineer Dr. Gentile is a Co-Founder and licensed Mechanical PE with over 20 years of experience. An MSU alumnus (BS, MS, PhD), former MSU engineering faculty member, professional engineering consultant, carpenter, and licensed marine electrician, he leads the firm in delivering practical MEP designs. Todd Cook, PE | Principal Mechanical Engineer Todd is a licensed Mechanical PE and Montana State University alumnus. His background includes engineering specialized HVAC systems for NAVSEA nuclear submarines, where zero-failure reliability is mandatory, and serving as University Engineer at MSU, managing institutional building infrastructure. Gina Gentile | Principal Gina is a Co-Founder of Electric Peak Engineering with a background in financial strategy and community infrastructure. A Montana State University Business Finance graduate, she brings expertise in financing opportunities that help make local projects economically viable. Adam Weisenstein PhD | Mechanical Engineer Dr. Weisenstein holds a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Montana State University with over 15 years of advanced energy storage and battery systems expertise. He optimizes standby power, battery storage, and resilient electrical integration for high-demand applications. 248 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 12 Nick Spicer FRGS BA Hons | Energy Consultant A former British Army officer with combat experience, Nick brings high-stakes discipline and operational execution to power systems design. As the founder of a successful solar and storage firm, he specializes in commercial solar PV, battery storage, and standby power systems engineered for extreme weather. Zachary Black | Infrastructure Engineer Zach brings extensive experience in high-density 3D LiDAR point clouds, advanced spatial analysis, and data modeling. Experienced as a Qualified Person on technical reports, he delivers accurate assessments and operational cost optimization across construction, mining, and infrastructure projects. Amanda Spicer | Energy Consultant Amanda specializes in business and project development for commercial energy projects. With a proven track record of building high-level partnerships across energy players, she delivers clear, measurable results and helps navigate complex project landscapes. Thomas Lilleyman CEng | Mechanical Engineer From military service to leading multi-million-dollar built environment projects, Tom brings over 15 years of mechanical engineering leadership. A Chartered Engineer, he specializes in high-performance HVAC and mechanical design for complex builds. LEADERSHIP REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE More details about their projects can be found at: www.epemt.com/projects Bridger Pines Public Water & Infrastructure Systems (Bozeman, MT) Off-grid solar PV and battery power engineering, DEQ regulatory support, and district leadership for the Bridger Pines County Water and Sewer District. The scope delivered autonomous, cold-weather power for central municipal water tank monitoring and well pump operations while assisting in regulatory efforts to lift a state-imposed building moratorium. Commercial Microgrids & Solar + BESS Deployments (Global) Over 30MW of solar capacity and 100+ microgrid deployments executed globally by Electric Peak consultants Nick Spicer, Amanda Spicer, and Thomas Lilleyman through their renewable energy firm, Your Eco. Through our core strategic partnership, Electric Peak Engineering brings this proven decade-long track record of utility interconnected solar, commercial battery storage (BESS), and high-stakes expeditionary power directly to US clients. 249 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 13 Sietsema Farms Biomass CHP Facility (Howard City, MI) Professional engineering support for a $3M biomass gasification plant in West Michigan. The project transformed an agricultural waste stream into a high-efficiency closed-loop energy system, supplying primary process heat and electric power to a commercial feed mill. Yellowstone Thermal Springs Research Stations (Yellowstone National Park, WY) Mechanical, process, and off-grid power engineering for advanced microbial research stations in Yellowstone National Park. The project delivered autonomous, non-invasive fluid handling and hyperspectral data capture systems under strict National Park Service environmental mandates. Bakken Oilfield Flare Gas Recovery (Bakken Formation, MT & ND) Principal leadership and research evaluating shale oil flare gas recovery. The project delivered comprehensive techno-economic modeling to assess distributed power generation, gas transport logistics, and on-site generation options under evolving environmental regulations. Glider Lane Light Manufacturing Facility (Belgrade, MT) Complete multi-discipline PE design, energy modeling, and field administration for this custom light manufacturing plant in Belgrade. The project spanned early BIM coordination, heavy trade management, and state/local permitting to deliver complete MEP and process systems tailored for high-hazard operations. 250 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 14 Professional References ● Dr. Paul E. Gannon ○ Professor, Chemical and Biological Engineering, Montana State University ○ +1 (406) 994.7380 ○ pgannon@montana.edu ○ Dr. Paul Gentile and Dr. Paul Gannon are long-term academic research collaborators and co-investigators on advanced energy systems, thermal engineering, and specialized technical studies. ● Dr. Neil Smith ○ General Manager, BVI Electricity Corporation ○ +1 (284) 340-8921 ○ neil.smith@bvielectricity.com ○ Nick Spicer and Amanda Spicer have provided design, development and delivery services to the BVI Electricity Corporation in order to decarbonise the British Virgin Islands and reduce stress on the grid through installing decentralised systems. ● Bob Galyen ○ Owner, Galyen Energy LLC. ○ National Distinguished Expert ○ NAATBatt International CTO ○ SAE International Fellow ○ +1 (317) 716-9326 ○ bob@galyenenergy.com ○ Dr. Adam Weisenstein has been working with Bob Galyen on advanced battery engineering projects for over 4 years with multiple companies including at Galyen Energy. 251 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 15 C. Project timeline Phase # Deliverables Start Week End Week Key Milestone 1. Discovery & Baseline (Jan 11-Feb 26, 2027) 1.1 Load Profile Analysis 1 4 Baseline Audit & Load Profile Report Submitted 1.2 Existing Infrastructure Assessment 1.3 City of Bozeman Review & Comment Period 5 6 Approval to Proceed 2. Interconnection & Sizing (Mar 1-Apr 9, 2027) 2.1 Utility Interconnection Study 7 10 Interconnection Strategy & BESS Sizing Memo Submitted 2.2 DER Asset Sizing & Selection 2.3 City of Bozeman Review & Comment Period 11 12 Approval to Proceed 3. Modeling & Economics (Apr 12-May 21, 2027) 3.1 Operational Modeling 13 16 Operational Use-Cases & Techno-Economic Report Submitted 3.2 Techno-Economic Analysis 3.3 City of Bozeman Review & Comment Period 17 18 Approval to Proceed 4. Conceptual Design (May 24-Jul 2, 2027) 4.1 Safety, Code & Permitting Review 19 22 Final Conceptual Design & Feasibility Study Submitted 4.2 Conceptual Engineering Schematics 4.3 City of Bozeman Review & Comment Period 23 24 Final Payment 252 Bozeman Public Safety Center Microgrid Engineering Study Page 16 D. Project Budget # Deliverable Principal PE Gen. Eng. Tota l Hrs Total Cost Invoice Amount Cumulative Billed 1 Load Profile Analysis 10 30 40 $ 5,500 2 Existing Infrastructure Assessment 10 20 30 $ 4,250 $ 9,750 20% 3 Utility Interconnection Study 10 20 30 $ 4,250 4 DER Asset Sizing & Selection 15 25 40 $ 5,750 $ 10,000 41% 5 Operational Modeling 15 45 60 $ 8,250 6 Techno-Economic Analysis 10 30 40 $ 5,500 $ 13,750 69% 7 Safety, Code & Permitting Review 10 20 30 $ 4,250 8 Conceptual Engineering Schematics 20 58 78 $ 10,750 $ 15,000 100% TOTALS 100 248 348 $ 48,500 $ 48,500 Principal Professional Engineer Rate $ 175.00 /hr General Engineering Rate $ 125.00 /hr Engineering Fees $ 48,500 City Cost Sharing $ - Requested DEQ Grant Amount $ 48,500 Municipal Cost Sharing While the City of Bozeman is requesting 100% grant funding for this initial engineering study, this request is leveraged against multi-million-dollar municipal investments already committed to the facility's energy infrastructure. The Public Safety Center was engineered with physical and structural provisions specifically designed for microgrid integration, alongside active baseline assets including a 264 kW solar PV array, a 600 kW standby generator, and bidirectional EV fleet infrastructure. Furthermore, the City has already planned and budgeted capital for the FY2028 Johnson Controls Metasys 16.0 control system upgrade which introduces Energy Management System (EMS) microgrid control logic out of the box. By supplying a fully commissioned, pre- engineered municipal asset as the baseline for this study, the City provides substantial non-grant capital backing that ensures maximum ROI for DEQ grant funds. 253 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Russ Smith, Stormwater Division Project Coordinator Shawn Kohtz, Utilities Director SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Professional Services Master Task Order Agreement with DOWL, LLC for One Year of On Call Planning, Engineering, and Construction Oversight Services Agreement for a Variety of Stormwater Division Infrastructure Projects MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Vendor/Contract RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to sign a Professional Services Master Task Order Agreement with DOWL, LLC to continue on-call planning, engineering, and construction oversight services for a variety of Stormwater Division infrastructure projects, with an end date of September 26th, 2027. STRATEGIC PLAN:6.1 Clean Water Supplies: Ensure adequate supplies of clean water for today and tomorrow. BACKGROUND:Stormwater Division needs include a qualified consultant to continue to assist with the planning, engineering, and construction oversight of a variety of infrastructure projects scheduled in the Division's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Examples of required services include hydraulic modeling, permitting, testing, surveying, engineering, and inspection. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:As directed by the Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:The Stormwater utility's approved CIP outlines $1,428,300 for projects from FY27-FY28, the span of the proposed contract extension. If required, this agreement would be used for a portion of an individual project's budget on professional services. Typically, professional services account for 15-30% of a project's overall budget; however, this percentage can vary depending on specific needs, project complexity, and internal capacity at project initiation. Not all Stormwater Division CIP projects will require services from DOWL, LLC. Engineering services are prioritized to be performed by City Engineering staff when capacity is available. Attachments: Engineering PSA for On-Call Services with DOWL 2026- 254 2027.pdf Report compiled on: October 23, 2026 255 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into _______ of 2026 ("Effective Date"), by and between the CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, a self-governing municipal corporation organized and existing under its Charter and the laws of the State of Montana, 121 North Rouse Street, Bozeman, Montana, with a mailing address of PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771, hereinafter referred to as "City," and DOWL, LLC with a mailing address of 1283 North 14th Ave, Suite 101, Bozeman, MT 59715, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant." The City and Consultant may be referred to individually as "Party" and collectively as "Parties." In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the receipt and sufficiency whereof being hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Purpose: City agrees to enter this Agreement with Consultant to perform for City a range of professional and technical services, as requested by the City through issuance of individual Task Orders. 2. Term/Effective Date: This Agreement is effective upon the date of its execution and will terminate on September 26, 2027. 3. Scope of Services: Consultant will perform the work and provide the services in accordance with the requirements of the Scope of Services. For conflicts between this Agreement and the Scope of Services, unless specifically provided otherwise, the Agreement governs. Consultant may, at its own risk, use or rely upon design elements and information ordinarily or customarily furnished by others, including, but not limited to, specialty contractors, Sub-consultants, manufacturers, suppliers, and publishers of technical standards. 4. Payment for Scope of Services: The terms of compensation to Contractor shall be agreed upon and included in each Task Order. City agrees to pay Contractor the amount specified in the individual Task Orders. Any alteration or deviation from the described services that involves additional costs above the Agreement amount will be performed by Contractor after written request by the City, and will become an additional charge over and above the amount listed in the Scope of Services. The City must agree in writing upon any additional charges. Professional Services Agreement — Engineering FY2024-2027 Page 1 of 12 256 5. Reimbursable Expenses: As defined in section 8 of this Agreement, for completion of the Scope of Services and approved Additional Services, reimbursable expenses shall be paid to the Consultant by the City in the actual amount of the costs incurred up to an amount not to exceed $ __________________ , which includes $ _________________________ for Sub-consultants hired by the Consultant and $ ___________________ for all other reimbursable expenses. The estimated reimbursable expenses are provided herewith as "Attachment 2". The administrative markup factor being applied by the Consultant for any of its Sub-consultants shall be indicated on Attachment 2 and be no higher than 1.05. 6. Additional Services: If the City requests Consultant to perform any Additional Services not otherwise provided for in this Agreement, City shall so instruct the Consultant in writing, and the Consultant shall perform, or direct its Sub-consultants to perform, such services necessary to complete the Additional Services requested. The City and Consultant shall mutually agree upon a basis of payment for the Additional Services requested prior to the Consultant proceeding with such Additional Services. 7. Times of Payments: The Consultant may submit monthly statements for the Scope of Services and approved Additional Services rendered and for Reimbursable Expenses incurred. The statements shall be based upon Consultant's estimate of the proportion of the total Scope of Services actually completed for each task at the time of billing. 8. Meaning of Terms: a. Additional Services: Additional Services means services resulting from significant changes in the general scope, extent or character of the Project or major changes in documentation previously accepted by the City where changes are due to causes beyond the Consultant's control. Additional Services can also mean providing other services not otherwise provided for in the Agreement that are substantially similar to and generally consistent with the nature of services contained in the Scope of Services. b. Agreement: As used herein the term "this Agreement" refers to the contents of this document and its Attachments and Exhibits attached hereto and referred to as if they were part of one and the same document. c. Direct Labor Costs: Direct Labor Costs used as a basis for payment mean the actual salaries and wages paid to all of the Consultant's personnel engaged directly on the Scope of Services but does not included indirect payroll related costs or fringe benefits. d. Reimbursable Expenses: Reimbursable expenses mean the actual expenses incurred by the Consultant or its Sub-consultants directly in connection with the Project, such as expenses for: transportation and subsistence incidental thereto; toll telephone calls; specialized technology or software subscription charges; reproduction of reports, technical memoranda, drawings, renderings and similar Project-related items. Professional Services Agreement — Engineering FY2024-2027 Page 2 of 12 257 e. Sub-consultants: Sub-consultants means any independent professional associates working on the Project that are not directly employed by the Consultant and have rather been hired by the Consultant to serve a particular role or offer a particular service for the Project. 9. Consultant's Representations: To induce City to enter into this Agreement, Consultant makes the following representations: a. Consultant has familiarized itself with the nature and extent of this Agreement, the Scope of Services, and with all local conditions and federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations that in any manner may affect cost, progress or performance of the Scope of Services. b. Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has the experience and ability to perform the services required by this Agreement; that it will perform the services in a professional, manner and with the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under the same conditions by professionals practicing in the same field at the same time in the same or similar locality; that it has the power to enter into and perform this Agreement and grant the rights granted in it; and that its performance of this Agreement shall not infringe upon or violate the rights of any third party, whether rights of copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity, libel, slander or any other rights of any nature whatsoever, or violate any federal, state and municipal laws. The City will not determine or exercise control as to general procedures or formats necessary to have these services meet this warranty. 10. Independent Contractor Status/Labor Relations: The parties agree that Consultant is an independent Contractor for purposes of this Agreement and is not to be considered an employee of the City for any purpose. Consultant is not subject to the terms and provisions of the City's personnel policies handbook and may not be considered a City employee for workers' compensation or any other purpose. Consultant is not authorized to represent the City or otherwise bind the City in any dealings between Consultant and any third parties. Consultant shall comply with the applicable requirements of the Workers' Compensation Act, Title 39, Chapter 71, Montana Code Annotated (MCA), and the Occupational Disease Act of Montana, Title 39, Chapter 71, MCA. Consultant shall maintain workers' compensation coverage for all members and employees of Consultant's business, except for those members who are exempted by law. 11. Indemnity/Waiver of Claims/Insurance: For other than professional services rendered, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant agrees to release, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its agents, representatives, employees, and officers (collectively referred to for purposes of this Section as the City) from and against any and all claims, demands, actions, fees and costs (including attorney's fees and the costs and fees of expert witness and consultants), and losses Professional Services Agreement — Engineering FY2024-2027 Page 3 of 12 258 to the extent caused by or resulting from or in any way related to: (i) the negligent, reckless, or intentional misconduct of the Consultant; or (ii) any negligent, reckless, or intentional misconduct of any of the Consultant's agents. For the professional services rendered, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless against claims, demands, suits, damages, losses, and expenses, including reasonable defense attorney fees, to the extent caused by the negligence or intentional misconduct of the Consultant or Consultant's agents or employees. Such obligations shall not be construed to negate, abridge, or reduce other rights or obligations of indemnity that would otherwise exist. The indemnification obligations of this Section must not be construed to negate, abridge, or reduce any common-law or statutory rights of the City as indemnitee which would otherwise exist as to such indemnitee(s). Consultant's indemnity under this Section shall be without regard to and without any right to contribution from any insurance maintained by City. Should the City be required to bring an action against the Consultant to assert its right to defense or indemnification under this Agreement or under the Consultant's applicable insurance policies required below the City shall be entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred in asserting its right to indemnification or defense but only if a court of competent jurisdiction determines the Consultant was obligated to defend the claim(s) or was obligated to indemnify the City for a claim(s) or any portion(s) thereof. In the event of an action filed against City resulting from the City's performance under this Agreement, the City may elect to represent itself and incur all costs and expenses of suit. Consultant also waives any and all claims and recourse against the City, including the right of contribution for loss or damage to person or property arising from, growing out of, or in any way connected with or incident to the performance of this Agreement except "responsibility for [City's] own fraud, for willful injury to the person or property of another, or for violation of law, whether willful or negligent" as per 28-2-702, MCA. These obligations shall survive termination of this Agreement and the services performed hereunder. In addition to and independent from the above, Consultant shall at Consultant's expense secure insurance coverage through an insurance company or companies duly licensed and authorized to conduct insurance business in Montana which insures the liabilities and obligations specifically assumed by the Consultant in this Section. The insurance coverage shall not contain any exclusion for liabilities specifically assumed by the Consultant in this Section. Professional Services Agreement — Engineering FY2024-2027 Page 4 of 12 259 The insurance shall cover and apply to all claims, demands, suits, damages, losses, and expenses that may be asserted or claimed against, recovered from, or suffered by the City without limit and without regard to the cause therefore and which is acceptable to the City. Consultant shall furnish to the City an accompanying certificate of insurance and accompanying endorsements in amounts not less than as follows: • Workers' Compensation — statutory; • Employers' Liability - $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate; • Commercial General Liability - $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate; • Automobile Liability - $1,000,000 property damage/bodily injury per accident; and • Professional Liability - $1,000,000 per claim; $2,000,000 annual aggregate. The above amounts shall be exclusive of defense costs. The City of Bozeman shall be endorsed as an additional or named insured on a primary non- contributory basis on both the Commercial General and Automobile Liability policies. The insurance and required endorsements must be in a form suitable to City and shall include no less than a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation or non-renewal. The City must approve all insurance coverage and endorsements prior to the Consultant commencing work. Consultant shall notify City within two (2) business days of Consultant's receipt of notice that any required insurance coverage will be terminated or Consultant's decision to terminate any required insurance coverage for any reason. 12. Termination for Consultant's Fault: a. If Consultant refuses or fails to timely do the work, or any part thereof, or fails to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement, or otherwise breaches any terms or conditions of this Agreement, the City may, by written notice, terminate this Agreement and the Consultant's right to proceed with all or any part of the work ("Termination Notice Due to Consultant's Fault"). The City may then take over the work and complete it, either with its own resources or by re-letting the contract to any other third party. b. In the event of a termination pursuant to this Section 12, Consultant shall be entitled to payment only for those services Consultant actually rendered. c. Any termination provided for by this Section 12 shall be in addition to any other remedies to which the City may be entitled under the law or at equity. d. In the event of termination under this Section 12, Consultant shall, under no circumstances, be entitled to claim or recover consequential, special, punitive, lost business opportunity, lost productivity, field office overhead, general conditions costs, or lost profits damages of any nature arising, or claimed to have arisen, as a result of the termination. Professional Services Agreement — Engineering FY2024-2027 Page 5 of 12 260 13. Termination for City's Convenience: a. Should conditions arise which, in the sole opinion and discretion of the City, make it advisable to the City to cease performance under this Agreement, the City may terminate this Agreement by written notice to Consultant ("Notice of Termination for City's Convenience"). The termination shall be effective in the manner specified in the Notice of Termination for City's Convenience and shall be without prejudice to any claims that the City may otherwise have against Consultant. b. Upon receipt of the Notice of Termination for City's Convenience, unless otherwise directed in the Notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease performance under this Agreement and make every reasonable effort to refrain from continuing work, incurring additional expenses or costs under this Agreement and shall immediately cancel all existing orders or contracts upon terms satisfactory to the City. Consultant shall do only such work as may be necessary to preserve, protect, and maintain work already completed or immediately in progress. c. In the event of a termination pursuant to this Section 13, Consultant is entitled to payment only for those services Consultant actually rendered on or before the receipt of the Notice of Termination for City's Convenience. d. The compensation described in Section 13(c) is the sole compensation due to Consultant for its performance of this Agreement. Consultant shall, under no circumstances, be entitled to claim or recover consequential, special, punitive, lost business opportunity, lost productivity, field office overhead, general conditions costs, or lost profits damages of any nature arising, or claimed to have arisen, as a result of the termination. 14. Limitation on Consultant's Damages; Time for Asserting Claim: a. In the event of a claim for damages by Consultant under this Agreement, Consultant's damages shall be limited to contract damages and Consultant hereby expressly waives any right to claim or recover consequential, special, punitive, lost business opportunity, lost productivity, field office overhead, general conditions costs, or lost profits damages of any nature or kind. b. In the event Consultant wants to assert a claim for damages of any kind or nature, Consultant shall provide City with written notice of its claim, the facts and circumstances surrounding and giving rise to the claim, and the total amount of damages sought by the claim, within thirty (30) days of the Consultant becoming aware of the facts and circumstances giving rise to the claim. In the event Consultant fails to provide such notice, Consultant shall waive all rights to assert such claim. 15. Representatives and Notices: a. City's Representative: The City's Representative for the purpose of this Agreement shall be Russell Smith, Project Coordinator, or such other individual as City shall designate in Professional Services Agreement — Engineering FY2024-2027 Page 6 of 12 261 writing. Whenever approval or authorization from or communication or submission to City is required by this Agreement, such communication or submission shall be directed to the City's Representative and approvals or authorizations shall be issued only by such Representative; provided, however, that in exigent circumstances when City's Representative is not available, Consultant may direct its communication or submission to other designated City personnel or agents as designated by the City in writing and may receive approvals or authorization from such persons. b. Consultant's Representative: The Consultant's Representative for the purpose of this Agreement shall be Greg Gabel, PE, Contract Manager, or such other individual as Consultant shall designate in writing. Whenever direction to or communication with Consultant is required by this Agreement, such direction or communication shall be directed to Consultant's Representative; provided, however, that in exigent circumstances when Consultant's Representative is not available, City may direct its direction or communication to other designated Consultant personnel or agents. c. Notices: All notices required by this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be provided to the Representatives named in this Section. Notices shall be deemed given when delivered, if delivered by courier to Party's address shown above during normal business hours of the recipient; or when sent, if sent by email or fax (with a successful transmission report) to the email address or fax number provided by the Party's Representative; or on the fifth business day following mailing, if mailed by ordinary mail to the address shown above, postage prepaid. 16. Permits: Consultant shall provide all notices, comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations, obtain all necessary permits, licenses, including a City of Bozeman business license, and inspections from applicable governmental authorities, and pay all fees and charges in connection therewith. 17. Laws and Regulations: Consultant shall comply fully with all applicable state and federal laws, regulations, and municipal ordinances including, but not limited to, all workers' compensation laws, all environmental laws including, but not limited to, the generation and disposal of hazardous waste, the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA), the safety rules, codes, and provisions of the Montana Safety Act in Title 50, Chapter 71, MCA, all applicable City, County, and State building and electrical codes, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and all nondiscrimination, affirmative action, and utilization of minority and small business statutes and regulations. 0. Nondiscrimination and Equal Pay: The Consultant agrees that all hiring by Consultant of persons performing this Agreement shall be on the basis of merit and qualifications. The Consultant will have a policy to provide equal employment opportunity in accordance with all applicable state and federal anti-discrimination laws, regulations, and contracts. The Consultant will not refuse employment to a person, bar a person from employment, or discriminate against a person in compensation or in a term, condition, or privilege of employment Professional Services Agreement — Engineering FY2024-2027 Page 7 of 12 262 because of race, color, religion, creed, political ideas, sex, age, marital status, national origin, actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, physical or mental disability, except when the reasonable demands of the position require an age, physical or mental disability, marital status or sex distinction. The Consultant shall be subject to and comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Section 140, Title 2, United States Code, and all regulations promulgated thereunder. Consultant represents it is, and for the term of this Agreement will be, in compliance with the requirements of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Section 39-3-104, MCA (the Montana Equal Pay Act). Consultant must report to the City any violations of the Montana Equal Pay Act that Consultant has been found guilty of within 60 days of such finding for violations occurring during the term of this Agreement. Consultant shall require these nondiscrimination terms of its subcontractors providing services under this Agreement. 18. Intoxicants; DOT Drug and Alcohol Regulations/Safety and Training: Consultant shall not permit or suffer the introduction or use of any intoxicants, including alcohol or illegal drugs, by any employee or agent engaged in services to the City under this Agreement while on City property or in the performance of any activities under this Agreement. Consultant acknowledges it is aware of and shall comply with its responsibilities and obligations under the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations governing anti-drug and alcohol misuse prevention plans and related testing. City shall have the right to request proof of such compliance and Consultant shall be obligated to furnish such proof. The Consultant shall be responsible for instructing and training the Consultant's employees and agents in proper and specified work methods and procedures. The Consultant shall provide continuous inspection and supervision of the work performed. The Consultant is responsible for instructing its employees and agents in safe work practices. 19. Modification and Assignability: This Agreement may not be enlarged, modified, amended or altered except by written agreement signed by both parties hereto. The Consultant may not subcontract or assign Consultant's rights, including the right to compensation or duties arising hereunder, without the prior written consent of the City. Any Sub-consultant or assignee will be bound by all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 20. Reports/Accountability/Public Information: Consultant agrees to develop and/or provide documentation as requested by the City demonstrating Consultant's compliance with the requirements of this Agreement. Consultant shall allow the City, its auditors, and other persons authorized by the City to inspect and copy its books and records for the purpose of verifying that the reimbursement of monies distributed to Consultant pursuant to this Agreement was used in compliance with this Agreement and all applicable provisions of federal, state, and Professional Services Agreement — Engineering FY2024-2027 Page 8 of 12 263 local law. The Consultant shall not issue any statements, releases or information for public dissemination without prior approval of the City. 22. Non-Waiver: A waiver by either party of any default or breach by the other party of any terms or conditions of this Agreement does not limit the other party's right to enforce such term or conditions or to pursue any available legal or equitable rights in the event of any subsequent default or breach. 23. Attorney's Fees and Costs: In the event it becomes necessary for either Party to retain an attorney to enforce any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement or to give any notice required herein, then the prevailing Party or the Party giving notice shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs, including fees, salary, and costs of in-house counsel including the City Attorney's Office staff. 24. Taxes: Consultant is obligated to pay all taxes of any kind or nature and make all appropriate employee withholdings. 25. Dispute Resolution: a. Any claim, controversy, or dispute between the parties, their agents, employees, or representatives shall be resolved first by negotiation between senior-level personnel from each party duly authorized to execute settlement agreements. Upon mutual agreement of the parties, the parties may invite an independent, disinterested mediator to assist in the negotiated settlement discussions. b. If the Parties are unable to resolve the dispute within thirty (30) days from the date the dispute was first raised, then such dispute may only be resolved in a court of competent jurisdiction in compliance with the Applicable Law provisions of this Agreement. 26. Survival: Consultant's indemnification shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement for the maximum period allowed under applicable law. 27. Headings: The headings used in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not be construed as a part of the Agreement or as a limitation on the scope of the particular paragraphs to which they refer. 28. Severability: If any portion of this Agreement is held to be void or unenforceable, the balance thereof shall continue in effect. 29. Applicable Law: The parties agree that this Agreement is governed in all respects by the laws of the State of Montana. 30. Binding Effect: This Agreement is binding upon and inures to the benefit of the heirs, legal representatives, successors, and assigns of the parties. Professional Services Agreement — Engineering FY2024-2027 Page 9 of 12 264 31. No Third-Party Beneficiary: This Agreement is for the exclusive benefit of the parties, does not constitute a third-party beneficiary agreement, and may not be relied upon or enforced by a third party. 32. Counterparts: This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, which together constitute one instrument. 33. Integration: This Agreement and all Exhibits attached hereto constitute the entire agreement of the parties. Covenants or representations not contained herein or made a part thereof by reference, are not binding upon the parties. There are no understandings between the parties other than as set forth in this Agreement. All communications, either verbal or written, made prior to the date of this Agreement are hereby abrogated and withdrawn unless specifically made a part of this Agreement by reference. 34. Standard of Care: In providing services under this Agreement, Consultant will perform in a manner consistent with the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the same profession currently practicing under similar circumstances. If any service should be found to be not in conformance with this standard, the Consultant shall, at the City's request, re-perform the service at its own expense. Consultant shall also, at its own expense, make such changes, modifications or additions to the project which are made necessary as a result of the initial non- performance or the re-performance of services. The City's rights herein are in addition to any other remedies the City may have under the law 35. Ownership and Reuse of Documents: Upon payment in full by City to Consultant for all monies due Consultant under this Agreement, Consultant's work products produced under this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City. The City's use, reuse, alteration, or modification of the work products will be at City's sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to Consultant or to its officers, directors, members, partners, agents, employees, and consultants. 36. Consent to Electronic Signatures: The Parties have consented to execute this Agreement electronically in conformance with the Montana Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, Title 30, Chapter 18, Part 1, MCA. 37. Web Accessibility and the Americans with Disabilities Act: Title II of the ADA prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in all services, programs, and activities offered or made available by the City. This includes ensuring that the City's communications with people with disabilities are as effective as its communications with others. Professional Services Agreement — Engineering FY2024-2027 Page 10 of 12 265 If the Consultant's Scope of Services includes the production of digital content, documents, or web applications for the City, Contractor must use both the City style guide when creating a design, and, as per recommendations found in Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, the content must also adhere to level A and AA Success Criteria and Conformance Requirements as defined by the current Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) (https://www.w3.org/WAI/). The City will not accept digital content that does not comply with WCAG A and AA guidelines. If the City refuses digital content because it is non-compliant with the City style guide, Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, and/or WCAG, Contractor will be required to make the digital content compliant and redelivered at no additional cost to the City. **** END OF AGREEMENT EXCEPT FOR SIGNATURES **** Professional Services Agreement — Engineering FY2024-2027 Page 11 of 12 266 In witness whereof, the Parties hereto do make and execute this Agreement. CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA CONSULTANT BY: BY: Chuck Winn, City Manager DATE: DATE: ATTEST: BY: Mike Maas, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: BY: Greg Sullivan, City Attorney Professional Services Agreement — Engineering FY2024-2027 Page 12 of 12 267 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Danae Giannetti, Engineer II Emiliano Esparza, Acting Director of Transportation and Engineering SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Professional Services Agreement with HDR Engineering for the Stucky Road Reconstruction Project from Fowler Avenue to South 19th Avenue MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Vendor/Contract RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Professional Services Agreement with HDR Engineering for the Stucky Road Reconstruction Project from Fowler Avenue to South 19th Avenue STRATEGIC PLAN:2.2 Infrastructure Investments: Strategically invest in infrastructure as a mechanism to encourage economic development. BACKGROUND:Reconstruction of Stucky Road between Fowler Avenue and South 19th Avenue is identified in the 2017 Transportation Master Plan (TMP) as MSN- 16 and in the FY2027-2031 Recommended Capital Improvements Program (CIP) as project SIF191 - Stucky: 19th to Fowler. Stucky Road is an important east west connection street in the southwest area of the city where new developments have outgrown the existing transportation infrastructure. This project will support the higher capacity of vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians anticipated due to substantial development immediately south of Stucky Road. This project also includes the design of city utilities including water and sewer pipelines within the project limits. HDR Engineering was selected for this project through a request for qualifications. The attached Professional Services Agreement (PSA) and Scope of Services covers the Pre-Design efforts for this project. Pre-Design includes data collection, community, engagement, and the development of concept designs. Future phases of the project will come to Commission as amendments to this PSA. Staff anticipates two future phases: Design and Bidding/Construction Administration. Staff reviewed the attached scope of services and fee and recommends authorizing the City Manager to sign the PSA. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. 268 ALTERNATIVES:None identified or recommended. FISCAL EFFECTS:The fee for this PSA is $528,102.87. Funds for SIF191 Stucky: 19th to Fowler are included in the recommended FY2027 Biennium Budget. Attachments: Professional Services Agreement_Stucky Rd 19th Recon_for signature.docx Exhibit A_Scope & Fee Proposal_Stucky Rd Recon Preliminary Design.pdf Report compiled on: October 26, 2026 269 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 1 of 17 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 10th day of November, 2026 (“Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, a self-governing municipal corporation organized and existing under its Charter and the laws of the State of Montana, 121 North Rouse Street, Bozeman, Montana, with a mailing address of PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771, hereinafter referred to as “City,” and, HDR Engineering, Inc., hereinafter referred to as “Contractor.” City and Contractor may be referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as “Parties.” In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the receipt and sufficiency whereof being hereby acknowledged, the Parties to this Agreement agree as follows: 1. Purpose: City agrees to enter this Agreement with Contractor to perform for City services described in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference made a part hereof. 2. Term/Effective Date: This Agreement is effective upon the Effective Date and will expire on the 10th day of November, 2028, unless earlier terminated in accordance with this Agreement. 3. Scope of Services: Contractor will perform the work and provide the services in accordance with the requirements of the Scope of Services. For conflicts between this Agreement and the Scope of Services, unless specifically provided otherwise, the Agreement governs. 4. Payment: City agrees to pay Contractor the amount specified in the Scope of Services. Any alteration or deviation from the described services that involves additional costs above the Agreement amount will be performed by Contractor after written request by City and will become an additional charge over and above the amount listed in the Scope of Services. City must agree in writing upon any additional charges. Cost shall include: 270 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 2 of 17 a. Cost. Cost is the actual cost of the work. Through the negotiations process, the OWNER establishes a ceiling or upper limit on a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract. Federal regulations (23 CFR 172) require a contract ceiling / upper limit in cost plus fixed fee contracts. b. Fixed Fee. Fix Fee is the negotiated fee and a set dollar amount in the agreement, including profit, of the Consultant. Up to the equivalent of percent of labor and overhead to the date of the invoice, the Consultant may claim partial payment of the Fixed Fee. If tasks within the Scope of Services are not completed, no Fixed Fee will be billed for those tasks. No Fixed Fee will be billed for construction engineering services that are not performed. Subject to the foregoing, the entirety of the Fixed Fee for tasks completed within the Scope of Services may be billed at Final Payment. c. Direct Costs. Direct costs shall be in conformance with 48 CFR Part 31, and the AASHTO Uniform Audit & Accounting Guide, and may include the cost of Subconsultants. The Consultant certifies that any projected salary rate increases included in the Proposal are based on reasonably on the Consultant’s usual and customary practices. Prior written approval of the OWNER is required for overtime compensation. d. Indirect Costs, applicable to Consultant and Subconsultants. Generally, after the execution of this agreement, the OWNER will give Notice of the Indirect Costs (IDC) rates that will be applied to this Agreement. Such notice is incorporated herein by the reference. The IDC rate and supporting documentation must be calculated and submitted in accordance with 23 CFR §172 using the cost principles of 48 CFR Part 31. The Consultant will establish the IDC rate based on the Consultant’s Accounting Period. In no event will the IDC rate cause an increase or decrease in the Fixed Fee. The Consultant must keep on file with the OWNER an accepted Certification of Indirect Costs. For purposes of compensation, the rights and obligations of the Consultant set forth in this Section shall apply to the Subconsultant. Each Subconsultant shall submit to the irrevocable commitment option specified by the Consultant. I. An Indirect Cost Rate is required, except when total compensation is less than or equal to Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000); and Consultant/Subconsultant does not have a current, OWNER-accepted indirect cost rate or cognizant audit; or Subconsultant is providing vendor-type services or contract labor and does not have a current, OWNER-accepted indirect costs rate or cognizant audit. II. An unaudited indirect cost rate is acceptable when the Total Compensation is less than or equal to Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000); and a Risk Assessment determines an unaudited indirect cost rate is acceptable. 271 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 3 of 17 III. An audited indirect cost rate is required when The Total Compensation is more than Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000); or a Risk Assessment determines that an audited indirect cost rate is required. IV. In unique cases, Negotiated or Provision Indirect Cost Rates may be used, as described in MDT’s Consultant Services Manual, if all parties agree. V. Due date. 1. Due date (Audited). If an audited indirect cost rate is required, within thirty (30) days of the date of an independent auditor’s report setting the consultant’s audited overhead rate, the new bona fide audited IDC rate must be submitted to the OWNER as part of the Risk Assessment Package. 2. Due date (Unaudited). If an unaudited indirect cost rate is required, within thirty (30) days of its calculation, a bona fide IDC rate must be submitted to the OWNER as part of the Risk Assessment Package. 3. At the OWNER’s sole discretion, the Consultant shall pay the OWNER liquidated damages at the rate of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) per day for each day after the Due Date. VI. Effective date. 4. The IDC rate expires one (1) year after the end of the Accounting Period. 5. Before the end of the Grace Period, defined as six (6) months following the expiration of the IDC rate, the Consultant shall submit a new IDC rate. 6. An IDC rate submitted within the Grace Period is effective as the first day of the month following the month of the OWNER’s letter of acceptance; except, an IDC rate not accepted by the OWNER by the end of the Grace Period is retroactive to the end of the Grace Period. 7. A bona fide IDC rate received after the expiration of the Grace Period is retroactive to the date it is received by the OWNER. 8. In the event the OWNER, in its sole discretion, determines that the submitted IDC rate is not bona fide the rate will be effective on the date accepted and will not be retroactive. 9. Failure by the Consultant to provide an IDC rate, as required herein, may result in a One Hundred Percent (100%) forfeiture of the IDC rate portion for services rendered after the Grace Period. VII. The Consultant shall commit, irrevocably for the duration of this Agreement, to one of two options: 1. Consultant’s IDC rate will remain fixed through the term of this Agreement. In the event of any extension of the term of this Agreement, then the 272 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 4 of 17 Consultant shall provide its new rate; or if a new rate is unavailable, then a new rate will be negotiated by the parties. 2. Following the same procedure as for the original submission, the Consultant’s IDC rate will be submitted annually, within the Grace Period. VIII. The Consultant may request exceptions to the requirements of this section on a case-by-case basis, and the OWNER will consider these exceptions. Any exceptions, if approved, must be in writing and must comply with all applicable laws, regulations, policies, and procedures. 5. Contractor’s Representations: To induce City to enter into this Agreement, Contractor represents and warrants: a. Contractor has familiarized itself with the nature and extent of this Agreement, the Scope of Services, and with all local conditions and federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations that in any manner may affect cost, progress, or performance of the Scope of Services. b. Contractor has the experience and ability to perform the services required by this Agreement. c. Contractor will perform the services in a professional, competent, and timely manner and with diligence and skill ordinarily used by members of Contractor’s profession under the same or similar circumstances at the same time and in the same locality. d. Contractor has the power to enter into and perform this Agreement. e. Contractor’s performance of this Agreement must not infringe upon or violate the rights of any third Party, whether rights of copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity, libel, slander, or any other rights of any nature whatsoever, or violate any federal, state, and municipal laws. Contractor agrees City will not determine or exercise control as to general procedures or formats necessary to have these services meet this warranty. 6. Independent Contractor Status: The Parties agree that Contractor is an independent contractor for purposes of this Agreement and is not to be considered an employee of City for any purpose. Contractor is not subject to the terms and provisions of City’s personnel policies handbook and is not considered a City employee for workers’ compensation or any other purpose. Contractor is not authorized to represent City or otherwise bind City in any dealings between Contractor and any third Parties. 273 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 5 of 17 Contractor must comply with the applicable requirements of the Workers’ Compensation Act, Title 39, Chapter 71, Montana Code Annotated (MCA), and the Occupational Disease Act of Montana, Title 39, Chapter 71, MCA. Contractor must maintain workers’ compensation coverage for all members and employees of Contractor’s business, except for those members who are exempted by law. Contractor must furnish City with copies showing one of the following: (1) a binder for workers’ compensation coverage by an insurer licensed and authorized to provide workers’ compensation insurance in the State of Montana; or (2) proof of exemption from workers’ compensation granted by law for independent contractors. 7. Prevailing Wage Requirements a. Montana Resident Preference. The nature of the work performed, or services provided, under this Contract meets the statutory definition of a "public works contract" in 18-2- 401, MCA. Unless superseded by federal law, Montana law requires that contractors and subcontractors give preference to the employment of Montana residents for any public works contract in excess of $25,000 for construction or non-construction services. Contractor must abide by the requirements set out in 18-2-401 through 18-2-432, MCA, and all administrative rules adopted under these statutes. The Commissioner of the Montana Department of Labor and Industry has established the resident requirements in accordance with 18-2-403 and 18-2-409, MCA. Any and all questions concerning prevailing wage and Montana resident issues should be directed to the Montana Department of Labor and Industry. b. Standard Prevailing Rate of Wages. In addition, unless superseded by federal law, all employees working on a public works contract must be paid prevailing wage rates in accordance with 18-2-401 through 18-2-432, MCA, and all associated administrative rules. Montana law requires that all public works contracts, as defined in 18-2-401, MCA, in which the total cost of the contract is greater than $25,000, contain a provision stating for each job classification the standard prevailing wage rate, including fringe benefits, travel, per diem, and zone pay that Contractors, subcontractors, and employers must pay during the public works contract. Wage rate adjustments for multiyear public works contracts are the sole responsibility of the Contractor and must be done in accordance with 18-2-417, MCA. 274 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 6 of 17 c. Notice of Wages and Benefits. Furthermore, 18-2-406, MCA, requires that all contractors, subcontractors, and employers who are performing work or providing services under a public works contract post in a prominent and accessible site on the project staging area or work area, no later than the first day of work and continuing for the entire duration of the contract, a legible statement of all wages and fringe benefits to be paid to the employees in compliance with 18-2-423, MCA. d. Wage Rates, Pay Schedule, and Records. 18-2-423, MCA, requires that employees receiving an hourly wage must be paid on a weekly basis. Each contractor, subcontractor, and employer must maintain payroll records in a manner readily capable of being certified for submission under 18-2-423, MCA, for not less than three years after Contractor's, subcontractor's, or employer's completion of work on the public works contract. 8. Labor Relations: If any labor problems or disputes arise during this Agreement, which cause any services to cease for any period of time, Contractor agrees to take immediate steps in its discretion, at its own expense and without expectation of reimbursement from City, to alleviate or resolve all such labor problems or disputes. Contractor bears all costs of any related legal action. Contractor must provide immediate relief to City so as to permit the services to continue at no additional cost to City. Contractor acknowledges and agrees that City will not be a Party to any labor disputes between Contractor and any subcontractors or third Parties. 9. Indemnity: For other than professional services rendered, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor agrees to release, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its agents, representatives, employees, and officers (collectively referred to for purposes of this Section as the City) from and against any and all claims, demands, actions, fees and costs (including attorney’s fees and the costs and fees of expert witness and consultants), losses, expenses, liabilities (including liability where activity is inherently or intrinsically dangerous) or damages of whatever kind or nature connected therewith and without limit and without regard to the cause or causes thereof or the negligence of any Party or Parties that may be asserted against, recovered from or suffered by the City occasioned by, growing or arising out of or resulting from or in any way related to: (i) the negligent, reckless, or intentional misconduct of Contractor; or (ii) any negligent, reckless, or intentional misconduct of any of Contractor’s agents. For the professional services rendered, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless against claims, demands, suits, damages, losses, and expenses, including reasonable defense attorney fees, to the extent caused by the negligence or intentional misconduct of Contractor or Contractor’s agents or employees. 275 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 7 of 17 For any labor problems or disputes or any delays or stoppages of work associated with such problems or disputes and for any claims regarding underpaid prevailing wages, Contractor must indemnify, defend, and hold the City harmless from any and all claims, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and liabilities arising out of, resulting from, or occurring. Contractor’s obligations in this Section must not be construed to negate, abridge, or reduce other rights or obligations of indemnity that would otherwise exist. The indemnification obligations of this Section must not be construed to negate, abridge, or reduce any common-law or statutory rights of the City as indemnitee(s) which would otherwise exist as to such indemnitee(s). Contractor’s indemnity under this Section must be without regard to and without any right to contribution from any insurance maintained by City. Should the City be required to bring an action against Contractor to assert its right to defense or indemnification under this Agreement or under Contractor’s applicable insurance policies required below, the City must be entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred in asserting its right to indemnification or defense but only if a court of competent jurisdiction determines Contractor was obligated to defend the claim(s) or was obligated to indemnify the City for a claim(s) or any portion(s) thereof. In the event of an action filed against the City resulting from the City’s performance under this Agreement, the City may elect to represent itself and incur all costs and expenses of suit. These obligations must survive termination of this Agreement and the services performed hereunder. 10. Insurance: In addition to and independent from Contractor’s indemnity obligations under Section 9, Contractor must, at Contractor’s expense, secure insurance coverage through an insurance company or companies duly licensed and authorized to conduct insurance business in Montana which insures the liabilities and obligations specifically assumed by Contractor in this Section. The insurance coverage must not contain any exclusion for liabilities specifically assumed by Contractor in Section 9. The insurance must be occurrence-based, and cover and apply to all claims, demands, suits, damages, losses, and expenses that may be asserted or claimed against, recovered from, or suffered by City without limit and without regard to the cause. Contractor must furnish to City an 276 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 8 of 17 accompanying certificate of insurance and accompanying endorsements in amounts not less than as follows: Workers’ Compensation – statutory; Employers’ Liability - $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 per aggregate; Commercial General Liability - $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 per aggregate; Automobile Liability - $1,000,000 per property damage claim and $1,000,000 per bodily injury claim; $2,000,000 per accident; and Professional Liability - $1,000,000 per claim; $2,000,000 per annual aggregate. The above amounts must be exclusive of defense costs. City must be endorsed as an additional insured on a primary non-contributory basis on the Commercial General, Employer’s Liability, and Automobile Liability policies. The insurance and required endorsements must be approved by City and must include no less than a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation or non- renewal. Contractor must notify City within two (2) business days of Contractor’s receipt of notice that any required insurance coverage will be terminated or Contractor’s decision to terminate any required insurance coverage for any reason. City must approve all insurance coverage and endorsements prior to Contractor commencing work. Alternative: Contractor must provide City a certificate of insurance prior to commencing work. City must approve the limits shown on the certificate prior to commencing work. City’s approval of the limits does not relieve Contractor of Contractor’s obligation to ensure the insurance meets the requirements. 11. Waiver of Claims: Contractor also waives any and all claims and recourse against City, including the right of contribution for loss or damage to person or property arising from, growing out of, or in any way connected with or incident to the performance of this Agreement except “responsibility for [City’s] own fraud, for willful injury to the person or property of another, or for violation of law, whether willful or negligent” as per 28-2-702, MCA. 12. Termination for Contractor’s Fault: a. If Contractor refuses or fails to timely do the work, or any part thereof, or fails to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement, or otherwise breaches any terms or conditions of this Agreement, City may, by written notice, terminate this Agreement and Contractor’s right to proceed with all or any part of the work (“Termination Notice Due to Contractor’s Fault”). City may then take over the work and complete it, either with its own resources or by re-letting the contract 277 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 9 of 17 to any other third Party. Contractor shall have seven (7) calendar days from receipt of written notice in which to cure the basis for termination identified in the notice. b. In the event of a termination pursuant to this Section 12, Contractor must be entitled to payment only for those services Contractor actually rendered. c. Any termination provided for by this Section 12 must be in addition to any other remedies to which City may be entitled under the law or at equity. d. In the event of termination under this Section 12, Contractor must, under no circumstances, be entitled to claim or recover consequential, special, punitive, lost business opportunity, lost productivity, field office overhead, general conditions costs, or lost profits damages of any nature arising, or claimed to have arisen, as a result of the termination. 13. Termination for City’s Convenience: a. Should conditions arise which, in the sole opinion and discretion of City, make it advisable to City to cease performance under this Agreement, City may terminate this Agreement by written notice to Contractor (“Notice of Termination for City’s Convenience”). The termination must be effective in the manner specified in the Notice of Termination for City’s Convenience and must be without prejudice to any claims that City may otherwise have against Contractor. b. Upon receipt of the Notice of Termination for City’s Convenience, unless otherwise directed in the Notice, Contractor must immediately cease performance under this Agreement and make every reasonable effort to refrain from continuing work, incurring additional expenses or costs under this Agreement and must immediately cancel all existing orders or contracts upon terms satisfactory to City. Contractor must do only such work as may be necessary to preserve, protect, and maintain work already completed or immediately in progress. c. In the event of a termination pursuant to this Section 13, Contractor is entitled to payment only for those services Contractor actually rendered on or before the receipt of the Notice of Termination for City’s Convenience. d. The compensation described in Section 13(c) is the sole compensation due to Contractor for its performance of this Agreement. Contractor must, under no circumstances, be entitled to claim or recover consequential, special, punitive, lost business opportunity, lost productivity, field office overhead, general conditions costs, or lost profits damages of any nature arising, or claimed to have arisen, as a result of the termination. 14. Intellectual Property and Ownership of Work Product: a. Title and Ownership Rights. Upon Contractor’s receipt of payment by City, City shall obtain title to and all ownership rights in all Work Product. “Work Product” includes all materials, 278 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 10 of 17 tangible or not, created in whatever medium pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to publications, promotional or educational materials, reports, manuals, specifications, drawings and sketches, computer programs, software and databases, schematics, marks, logos, graphic designs, notes, data and content, including but not limited to multimedia or images (graphics, audio, and video), matters and any combinations of, and all forms of intellectual property. b. Ownership of Work Product. Contractor must execute any documents or take any other actions as may reasonably be necessary, or as City may reasonably request, to perfect City’s ownership of any Work Product. Contractor must, at no cost to City, deliver to City, upon City request during the term of this Agreement or at its expiration or termination, a current copy of all Work Product in the form and on the media in use as of the date of City’s request, or such expiration or termination. c. Return of Physical Property. Upon expiration or termination of this Agreement, Contractor agrees to return to City all City property, including but not limited to any and all physical items such as documentation, records, and equipment, which is in Contractor’s possession or under Contractor’s control. Contractor must submit to City a detailed account of all of City’s property in its possession or under Contractor’s control. Contractor must return City’s property in a method acceptable to City within ten (10) working days. Unless otherwise mutually agreed upon by the Parties, at no time must any of City’s property be retained by Contractor upon expiration or termination of this Agreement. d. Return of Data. Upon expiration or termination of this Agreement, Contractor agrees to return to City all City data. Contractor must submit to City a detailed account of all of City’s data in its possession or under Contractor’s control. Contractor must return City’s data in a format acceptable to City within ten (10) working days. At no time must any data or processes that either belong to or are intended for use of City or its officers, agents, or employees, be copied, disclosed, or retained by Contractor upon expiration or termination of this Agreement. e. Destruction of Data. If requested by City, Contractor agrees to destroy all of City’s data in its possession. When requested by City to destroy City’s data, Contractor agrees to permanently delete the data and ensure that it is not recoverable, in accordance with National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) SP 800-88 “Media Sanitation Guidelines.” f. Certification. In all cases, Contractor will certify that all of City’s information processed during the performance of the services will be completely purged from all physical and electronic data storage with no output to be retained by Contractor at the time the work is completed, the Agreement is terminated, or upon written request of City. 15. Limitation on Contractor’s Damages; Time for Asserting Claim: a. In the event of a claim for damages by Contractor under this Agreement, Contractor’s 279 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 11 of 17 damages must be limited to contract damages and Contractor hereby expressly waives any right to claim or recover consequential, special, punitive, lost business opportunity, lost productivity, field office overhead, general conditions costs, or lost profits damages of any nature or kind. b. In the event Contractor wants to assert a claim for damages of any kind or nature, Contractor must provide City with written notice of its claim, the facts and circumstances surrounding and giving rise to the claim, and the total amount of damages sought by the claim, within thirty (30) days of the facts and circumstances giving rise to the claim. In the event Contractor fails to provide such notice, Contractor must waive all rights to assert such claim. 16. Representatives and Notices: a. City’s Representative: City’s Representative for the purpose of this Agreement must be Taylor Lonsdale (City of Bozeman Transportation Engineer) or such other individual as City must designate in writing. Whenever approval or authorization from or communication or submission to City is required by this Agreement, such communication or submission must be directed to City’s Representative and approvals or authorizations must be issued only by such Representative; provided, however, that in exigent circumstances when City’s Representative is not available, Contractor may direct its communication or submission to other designated City personnel or agents as designated by City in writing and may receive approvals or authorization from such persons. b. Contractor’s Representative: Contractor’s Representative for the purpose of this Agreement must be Tim Erickson or such other individual as Contractor must designate in writing. Whenever direction to or communication with Contractor is required by this Agreement, such direction or communication must be directed to Contractor’s Representative; provided, however, that in exigent circumstances when Contractor’s Representative is not available, City may direct its direction or communication to other designated Contractor personnel or agents. c. Notices: All notices required by this Agreement must be in writing and must be provided to the Representatives named in this Section. Notices must be deemed given when delivered, if delivered by courier to Party’s address shown above during normal business hours of the recipient; or when sent, if sent by email or fax (with a successful transmission report) to the email address or fax number provided by the Party’s Representative; or on the fifth business day following mailing, if mailed by ordinary mail to the address shown above, postage prepaid. 17. Permits: Contractor must provide all notices, comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations, obtain all necessary permits, licenses, including a City of Bozeman business license, and inspections from applicable governmental authorities, and pay all fees and charges in connection therewith. 280 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 12 of 17 18. Laws and Regulations: Contractor must comply fully with all applicable state and federal laws, regulations, and municipal ordinances including, but not limited to, all workers’ compensation laws, all environmental laws including, but not limited to, the generation and disposal of hazardous waste, the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA), the safety rules, codes, and provisions of the Montana Safety Act in Title 50, Chapter 71, MCA, all applicable City, County, and State building and electrical codes, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and all non-discrimination, affirmative action, and utilization of minority and small business statutes and regulations. 19. Web Accessibility and the ADA: Title II of the ADA prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in all services, programs, and activities offered or made available by City. This includes ensuring that City’s communications with people with disabilities are as effective as its communications with others. If Contractor’s Scope of Services includes the production of digital content, documents, or web applications intended to be branded for use by City, Contractor must use the City style guide when creating a design. As per recommendations found in Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, all digital content, documents, or web applications must also adhere to level A and AA Success Criteria and Conformance Requirements as defined by the current Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). City will not accept digital content that does not comply with WCAG A and AA guidelines. If City refuses digital content because it is non-compliant with the City style guide, Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, and/or WCAG, Contractor will be required to make the digital content compliant and redelivered at no additional cost to City. 20. Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI): Contractor must inform the City’s representative of its intention to utilize Generative AI to fulfill the deliverables or services detailed in the Scope of Services. City’s representative may, in their discretion, permit or deny Contractor’s use of Generative AI. If Contractor is permitted to use Generative AI, Contractor agrees to review any work created by Generative AI for accuracy, bias, and copyright infringement. Contractor agrees it will never submit any confidential or personal identifiable information acquired through this Agreement into a Generative AI system. For the purposes of this section, Generative AI is defined as a deep learning model that can generate high quality content such as stories or writings, images, voice replication and music. 21. Nondiscrimination and Equal Pay: Contractor agrees that all hiring by Contractor of persons performing this Agreement must be on the basis of merit and qualifications. Contractor 281 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 13 of 17 must have a policy to provide equal employment opportunity in accordance with all applicable state and federal anti-discrimination laws, regulations, and contracts. Contractor cannot refuse employment to a person, bar a person from employment, or discriminate against a person in compensation or in a term, condition, or privilege of employment because of race, color, religion, creed, political ideas, sex, age, marital status, national origin, actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, physical or mental disability, except when the reasonable demands of the position require an age, physical or mental disability, marital status or sex distinction. Contractor is subject to and must comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Section 140, Title 2, United States Code, and all regulations promulgated thereunder. Contractor represents it is, and for the term of this Agreement will be, in compliance with the requirements of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Section 39-3-104, MCA (the Montana Equal Pay Act). Contractor must report to City any violations of the Montana Equal Pay Act that Contractor has been found guilty of within 60 days of such finding for violations occurring during the term of this Agreement. Contractor must require these nondiscrimination terms of its subcontractors providing services under this Agreement. 22. Intoxicants; DOT Drug and Alcohol Regulations/Safety and Training: Contractor must not permit or suffer the introduction or use of any intoxicants, including alcohol or illegal drugs, by any employee or agent engaged in services to City under this Agreement while on City property or in the performance of any activities under this Agreement. Contractor acknowledges it is aware of and must comply with its responsibilities and obligations under the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations governing anti-drug and alcohol misuse prevention plans and related testing. City must have the right to request proof of such compliance and Contractor must be obligated to furnish such proof. Contractor must be responsible for instructing and training Contractor's employees and agents in proper and specified work methods and procedures. Contractor must provide continuous inspection and supervision of the work performed. Contractor is responsible for instructing its employees and agents in safe work practices. 23. Modification and Assignability: This Agreement may not be enlarged, modified or altered except by written agreement signed by both Parties. Contractor may not subcontract or assign Contractor’s rights, including the right to compensation or duties arising hereunder, without 282 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 14 of 17 the prior written consent of City. Any subcontractor or assignee will be bound by all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 24. Reports/Accountability/Public Information: Contractor agrees to develop and/or provide documentation as requested by City demonstrating Contractor’s compliance with the requirements of this Agreement. Upon a seven (7) calendar day written notice, Contractor must allow City, its auditors, and other persons authorized by City to inspect and copy its books and records for the purpose of verifying that the reimbursement of monies distributed to Contractor pursuant to this Agreement was used in compliance with this Agreement and all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local law. Contractor cannot issue any statements, releases or information for public dissemination without prior approval of City. 25. Non-Waiver: A waiver by either Party of any default or breach by the other Party of any terms or conditions of this Agreement does not limit the other Party’s right to enforce such term or conditions or to pursue any available legal or equitable rights in the event of any subsequent default or breach. 26. Attorney’s Fees and Costs: In the event it becomes necessary for either Party to retain an attorney to enforce any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement or to give any notice required in this Agreement, the prevailing Party is entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs, including fees, salary, and costs of in-house counsel including the City Attorney’s Office staff. 27. Taxes: Contractor is obligated to pay all taxes of any kind or nature and make all appropriate employee withholdings. 28. Dispute Resolution: a. Any claim, controversy, or dispute between the Parties, their agents, employees, or representatives must be resolved first by negotiation between senior-level personnel from each Party duly authorized to negotiate settlement agreements. Upon mutual agreement of the Parties, the Parties may invite an independent, disinterested mediator to assist in the negotiated settlement discussions. The Parties must attempt to resolve by negotiation within 90 days after the claim, controversy, or dispute has arisen. b. If the Parties are unable to resolve the dispute pursuant to subsection (a), then such dispute may only be resolved in a court of competent jurisdiction in compliance with the Applicable Law provisions of this Agreement. In such a case, all court actions must be commenced within 1 year after the settlement procedure in subsection (a) has been exhausted. 283 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 15 of 17 29. Survival: Contractor’s indemnification must survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement for the maximum period allowed under applicable law. 30. Headings: The headings used in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not to be construed as a part of the Agreement or as a limitation on the scope of the particular paragraphs to which they refer. 31. Severability: If any portion of this Agreement is held to be void or unenforceable, all other provisions of this Agreement must remain in effect. 32. Applicable Law: The Parties agree that this Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of Montana. 33. Binding Effect: This Agreement is binding upon and inures to the benefit of the heirs, legal representatives, successors, and assigns of the Parties. 34. No Third-Party Beneficiary: This Agreement is for the exclusive benefit of the Parties, does not constitute a third-Party beneficiary agreement, and may not be relied upon or enforced by a third Party. 35. Counterparts: This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, which together constitute this Agreement. 36. Integration: This Agreement and all Exhibits attached hereto constitute the entire Agreement of the Parties. Covenants or representations not contained herein or made a part thereof by reference, are not binding upon the Parties. There are no understandings between the Parties other than as set forth in this Agreement. All communications, either oral or written, made prior to the date of this Agreement are hereby abrogated and withdrawn unless specifically made a part of this Agreement by reference. 37. Consent to Electronic Signatures: The Parties have consented to execute this Agreement electronically in conformance with the Montana Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, Title 30, Chapter 18, Part 1, MCA. 38. Extensions: This Agreement may, upon mutual agreement, be extended for a period of up to one year at a time by written agreement of the Parties. In no case, however, may this 284 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 16 of 17 Agreement run longer than five (5) years from the effective date of this Agreement. **** END OF AGREEMENT EXCEPT FOR SIGNATURES **** 285 Professional Services Agreement for Stucky Road Reconstruction Project Page 17 of 17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written or as recorded in an electronic signature. CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA HDR Engineering, Inc. CONTRACTOR By________________________________ By__________________________________ Chuck Winn, City Manager Print Name: Tim Erickson, PE Print Title: Vice President APPROVED AS TO FORM: By_______________________________ Greg Sullivan, Bozeman City Attorney 286 1 EXHIBIT A CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA STUCKY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT PHASE I: PRELIMINARY DESIGN – SCOPE OF SERVICES Task 100. Project Management 101 Project Startup and Contracts 102 Project Meetings Objective Manage and control the professional services Contract to provide completion of the project. Subtasks 101 - Project Startup and Contracts. Includes project startup and preparing contract agreements with the City and subconsultant. Also includes preparing monthly invoices and progress reports. Progress reports will summarize the work progress to date, the budget expenditures to date, and identify information requirements or decisions that need to be made by the City. 102 - Project Meetings. Conduct a project kickoff meeting with key City staff to establish project goals and objectives, refine the schedule, and establish points of contact and project communication. Conduct monthly meetings with the City, as required, to review project progress, schedule, and budget. Identify information needs and make decisions regarding changes in the scope of the project. Task 100 Assumptions •The City will participate in telephone calls and meetings, review project status reports, approve invoices and collaborate with overall project approach, schedule and deliverables as appropriate. •The Preliminary Design Phase tasks are anticipated to be complete approximately six months after NTP. •Project kick-off meeting will be held virtually for key discipline leads located outside Bozeman. The meeting will be attended by HDR’s project manager and up to five task leads. •Monthly coordination meetings (virtual) with the City are included and will be attended by HDR’s project manager. Task 100 Deliverables •Project progress reports, budget report, and invoices. •Memoranda and meeting notes, as required. 287 2 Task 200. Data Collection and Field Work 201 Review Existing Information 202 Survey (Stahly) 203 Geotechnical Investigation (SK Geotechnical) 204 Environmental Investigation Objective Collect field data and existing available information necessary to complete the design. Subtasks 201 Review Existing Information. Obtain and provide limited review of existing drawings from City, Montana Department of Transportation (MDT), and private utility companies and compare to what has been located in the field. Provide limited review of existing available information, reports, and studies, including the City of Bozeman Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan (most recent and available version), City of Bozeman Wastewater Collection System Baxter Creek Drainage Analysis (2022), City of Bozeman Water Facility Plan, and the City of Bozeman Sensitive Lands Plan. 202 Survey (Stahly Engineering & Associates): • Notice of Entry, Corridor managing entity outreach, Utility Locates, CAD Base map. Prepare and send Notice of Entry letters by Certified Mail to all adjoining landowners along project extents. Stahly has identified 20 adjacent landowners along this corridor. Contact and notify MDT & Gallatin County of Survey crew schedules and impacts on Traffic while working in County and State roadways. Coordinate 811 utility locates throughout project extents. Based on recent prior experience on similar corridor projects in the area, the scale of project extents is very likely to result in a delayed response from locator companies, and the statutory timelines for filling tickets will not be met. Stahly has accounted for additional trips to collect utility marks as portions of the project are marked. All records research of existing Cadastral and road easement boundary will be entered into an AutoCAD base map to provide search points for the field, and serve as a base drawing (.dwg) for compiling GIS and other pre-field data. • Field Survey (Stahly). Review engineering topographic and cadastral survey provided by Stahly. See attached scope of services provided by Stahly Engineering, Inc. for additional information. 203 Geotechnical Investigation (SK Geotechnical): Review preliminary pavement sections and geotechnical report to be included in the overall pre-design report. See attached scope of services provided by SK Geotechnical for additional information. 204 Environmental Investigation. HDR will provide baseline environmental surveys and documentation of existing conditions through review of publicly available databases as part of the pre-design phase of the project including a Biological Resource Review, Hazardous Materials/Substances – Initial Site Assessment, Wetland Delineation Report and Mitigation 288 3 Alternatives. HDR will also identify existing ditches located within the project limits. Stahly will provide a list of associated water right owners within the project limits. This task will involve field investigation during a time suitable for wetland delineation to delineate wetlands and other aquatic resources, including watercourses and ditches, within the specified project area. Develop a brief memo and map summarizing the results of the wetland delineation suitable for submittal to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Provide digital files (.shp, .dwg, or .dgn) of the aquatic resource delineation to the design team. The methodology will be in accordance with the 1987 USACE Wetland Delineation Manual and applicable Regional Supplement. Task 200 Assumptions • City will provide electronic files of existing information for review. • Wetland functional assessment is not included with this scope of services but could be added by amendment if required by permitting agencies. • Identification of water rights will evaluate groundwater and surface water rights within the project limits as identified in the GWIC and NDRC databases. This will not include all downstream users of the Middle Creek Ditch and will not extend past MSU. • Field work is anticipated to be completed in Spring 2027. A desktop review of aquatic resources will be conducted in 2026 to inform the alternatives analysis. Task 200 Deliverables • Topographic Survey Base Map. • Geotechnical Evaluation Report. • Environmental Investigation Report. Task 300. Public Outreach 301 Preliminary Purpose & Need Statement and Engagement Plan Review 302 Technical Advisory Committees (TAC) 303 Stakeholder Outreach & Open House Public Meetings 304 Presentation Support Objective HDR will develop a strategy for public participation that is in accordance with the City’s current Engage Bozeman Community Engagement Initiative. Subtasks 301 Preliminary Purpose & Need Statement and Engagement Plan Review. • Draft project Purpose & Need Statement for input from City, TAC members, and key stakeholders. • Prepare final Purpose & Need Statement based on comments and input received. 289 4 • Coordinate with City staff to develop a Public Involvement Action Plan outlining the timeline of public outreach events and defining responsibilities of HDR and City staff as it relates to these activities. 302 Technical Advisory Committees (TAC). HDR will work with the City to identify TAC members, schedule TAC meetings, and determine the content of these meetings. • Minimum of 3 TAC Committees will be compiled for technical input during the preliminary design stage of the project. • Up to 3 TAC Committee meetings are included and will be attended by up to 3 HDR staff. • HDR will prepare and coordinate the information, documents, and agendas for the TAC meetings and work with the City to distribute the materials to the TAC no less than 3 business days prior to the meeting. • HDR will also provide meeting minutes for each TAC meeting and submit to the City’s project manager to serve as documentation of the TAC’s guidance and decisions. 303 Stakeholder Outreach & Open House Public Meetings. HDR will serve as the primary point of contact for all incoming project questions via the Engage Bozeman website. Talking Points and a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document will be developed to provide consistency in message and response. HDR will engage the City for guidance and approval on responding to any questions not initially included in the Talking Points and FAQ. All interactions and comments will be logged into a contact database. Key stakeholders and agencies will be identified and issued quarterly project updates via email and at key project milestones. HDR will attend and prepare materials for Stakeholder and Public Outreach meetings. • Up to 3 Stakeholder Meetings will be held to introduce the project and provide an overview of Purpose & Need Statement, project schedule, and outreach activities. Stakeholder meetings will be held virtually and will be attended by up to three HDR staff. Meetings to discuss the Middle Creek Ditch Company and MSU will be attended by up to two Stahly team members. Stakeholders may include Gallatin County, MDT, MSU, private utility companies, Middle Creek Ditch Company, ditch users and adjacent landowners. • One (1) Open House Public Meeting will be held during the Pre-Design Phase of the project to provide an overview of the project and the alternative analysis for the Stucky Rd. reconstruction. A presentation will be given at the beginning of the open house, which will also be posted on the project website for those that are not able to attend the event in-person. The open house will be attended by up to four HDR staff. Open House materials include display boards (up to 10), a handout, comment sheets, map roll, and promotional materials (digital ads, print ads, radio ads, social media post, press release, mailer) to drive attendance to the meeting. A final open house summary will be compiled identifying reoccurring themes and meeting highlights. • Materials developed for Stakeholder and Public Outreach Meetings will be compiled and presented to the public. All materials will also be linked on the Engage Bozeman project website. • Documentation of stakeholder and public engagement including Comment Database and attendees will be provided for each outreach event. 290 5 • Compile contact database during the Pre-Design Phase of the project summarizing contact information, comments received, and other stakeholder and public outreach activities completed during this phase of the project. 304 Presentation Support. HDR will prepare graphics and presentations for City Staff to provide project updates to City Commission and the Transportation Advisory Board. • HDR will prepare presentation materials (Power Point and handout) for one Transportation Advisory Board Meeting. One round of review comments is included. City staff will present material to the Transportation Advisory Board. • HDR will prepare presentation materials for up to two City Commission Meetings. One round of review comments is included for each presentation/meeting. City staff will present materials to the City Commission. Task 300 Assumptions • City will own and maintain the project website as part of the Engage Bozeman program. • HDR will provide electronic files of deliverables for website content. Graphics specific to the project website will not be required. Task 300 Deliverables • Purpose & Need Statement • TAC Meeting Minutes • Stakeholder Meeting Minutes • Stakeholder outreach & public engagement comment summary and attendance report • Contact database • Project presentations (2) • Open House materials and summary • Talking Points and FAQ Task 400. Preliminary Design 401 Design Criteria Documentation 402 Traffic & Safety Analysis 403 Stormwater Analysis & Concept Design 404 Irrigation Evaluation & Concept Design 405 Preliminary Utility Design 406 Concept Design Development 407 Preliminary Design Cost Estimate 408 Alternative Analysis Evaluation 409 Preliminary Design Report 291 6 Objective Complete the preliminary design to meet the requirements of the City and the State of Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Circular DEQ-2 Design Standards for Wastewater Facilities. Subtasks 401 Design Criteria Documentation. Compile design criteria for reference throughout the design development process. Determine design standard references and identify project specific criteria to be considered for Stucky Rd and intersection alternative analysis including design speed, lane widths, design vehicle, pedestrian facility requirements, and other local agency requirements. Prepare Design Criteria Memo. 402 Traffic & Safety Analysis. Compile traffic data and preliminary traffic and safety analysis to inform concept design and the alternative analysis to identify the preferred typical section for Stucky Rd and intersection configurations. • Traffic Data Collection (406 Traffic): Collect traffic data for including average daily traffic (ADT) counts along Stucky Rd and AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts at the following intersections using Miovision data collection systems. Data processing will also provide a breakdown of trucks, buses, bicycles, and pedestrians as well as directional distribution. Raw traffic count data will be adjusted for seasonal variation using the most current available MDT seasonal adjustment factors and available counts from City of Bozeman and Gallatin Valley MPO. Review LRTP and TDM from the Gallatin Valley MPO. Coordinate with the MPO to determine long-range growth rates and calculate projected traffic volumes for the design year analysis. o Stucky Rd/Fowler o Stucky Rd/27th Ave o Stucky/Enterprise Blvd o Stucky/Discovery Drive o Stucky Rd/Private Approach (Church access onto Stucky) o S 19th Ave/Private Approach (Church access onto S 19th Ave) • Safety Analysis: Review and analysis of crash data for the most recent 5-year period if available. Review the existing roadway geometrics for deficiencies. Analyze existing intersection and stopping sight distance along the corridor. Crash data will be requested from MDT and City of Bozeman. The new Citian platform will also be reviewed for relevant information. • Traffic Analysis: o Provide level of service analysis for existing and proposed intersection configurations at the locations listed above based on current traffic counts and design year (20-year projections). City of Bozeman to provide relevant traffic impact studies prepared for developments in the area. o Evaluate up to two intersection configurations at the Fowler Ln and 27th Ave intersections including traffic signals and roundabouts including an analysis of MUTCD traffic signal warrants. Conduct turn lane analysis at the intersection with Enterprise Blvd, Discovery Drive and both church private accesses. 292 7 o Compile corridor traffic model for the AM and PM peak periods using Synchro’s SIMTraffic. • Intersection Control Evaluation (Stage 1): o Evaluate up to three intersection alternatives at both the Fowler Ln and 27th Ave intersections (No Build, Signal, Roundabout) for improving safety and access of the intersection. o Concept intersection development will be included in Task 406. o Incorporate a high-level equity assessment using mapping data of 1/2-mile radius of the intersections being evaluated, land use assessment, existing transportation plans, transit data, and additional relevant date available through the MPO into the ICE analysis. o Screen volume-to-capacity ratio, pedestrian and bicycle safety, environmental constraints, and motor vehicle safety using industry best practices. o Summarizing evaluation for residual capacity and intersection resiliency for selected future traffic volume scenarios. Include intersection recommendations for both locations. • Preliminary Lighting Analysis: Conduct preliminary lighting calculations for Stucky Rd, including intersection lighting. Prepare a preliminary concept street lighting plan and quantities. Coordinate with NorthWestern Energy to discuss current infrastructure and potential locations for future electrical services. • Prepare Preliminary Traffic & Safety Memo: Compile memo summarizing existing conditions, traffic and safety analysis, intersection evaluations, and preliminary lighting layout for inclusion in Preliminary Design Report. 403 Stormwater Analysis & Concept Design. Review existing stormwater drainage infrastructure and develop concept designs as part of the alternatives analysis. This task will include: • Project Site Visit: Two (2) staff members from HDR will visit the project site to photograph and document existing conditions and to become familiar with the drainage patterns within the project area. • Existing Drainage Patterns Analysis: HDR will review the existing topographic mapping, culverts, storm drain system and stormwater management facilities, and off-site drainage facilities within the project area. HDR will review available reports and as-built information from area developments and roadways. The information will be used to delineate existing drainage basins for the project area, including off-site drainage basins. • Existing Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis: HDR will analyze the existing hydrology and calculate the existing peak flows for the drainage basins within the project area. One hydrologic method will be utilized and will be selected in accordance with the City of Bozeman Design and Construction Standards as appropriate based on basin sizes and requirements for the proposed hydraulic design. HDR will complete an existing hydraulic evaluation to inform proposed preliminary design alternatives. The hydraulic evaluation will include the development of a stormwater drainage model and is intended to: o Determine existing pipe capacity and historical adequacy; 293 8 o Evaluate existing storm drain system(s) and stormwater management facilities; o Evaluate existing roadside ditch capacity and function. • Concept Design Alternatives: Coordinate with discipline leads to develop two proposed concept-level stormwater drainage design alternatives, including an open and closed system design, for up to two roadway design alternatives (for a maximum of four concept drainage design alternatives). Plan view graphics will be included in preliminary design exhibits as described in Task 406. Stormwater drainage design to support preliminary alternative development will be conceptual and limited to plan layouts; detailed stormwater drainage system design, analysis, and calculations (including vertical layouts, inlet design, pipe sizing, stormwater water quality and quantity mitigation design, utility conflict design, etc.) will occur following selection of the preferred alternative by the City of Bozeman. • Stormwater Memo: HDR will develop a stormwater memo summarizing the design criteria and assumptions, existing conditions analysis, and proposed concept-level alternatives. The stormwater memo will be included in the Pre-Design Report. 404 Irrigation Analysis & Concept Design (Stahly). Review preliminary irrigation analysis and concept design. Coordinate with Stahly on potential roadway grading limits and impacts to irrigation facilities. See attached scope of services provided by Stahly Engineering, Inc. for additional information. Incorporate preliminary irrigation design callouts into design exhibits. 405 Preliminary Utility Design & Coordination. Prepare preliminary horizontal layout for water and sewer conceptual design evaluation. • Provide coordination with the City of Bozeman on existing public utilities and proposed extensions, as well as private utility companies throughout the development of the concept designs and Pre-Design Report. Prepare for, attend and document up to two utility coordination meetings. • Review available as-builts, water and sewer service line records, and other information and studies as applicable to identify potential conflicts and opportunities for expansion. • Incorporate preliminary utility alignments into design exhibits to account for potential water/sewer extensions and other CIP projects that are within the project limits. Evaluate future annexation of County parcels and the required connections to water and sewer. • Identify existing overhead and underground power lines. • Consult with Northwestern energy on any planned improvements in the project area. • As part of preliminary design, determine location of power connections/meters for street lighting and traffic signals. 406 Preliminary Design Development. Prepare design concepts showing geometrics, lane configurations and typical sections along Stucky Rd and 19th Ave. Two typical section alternatives will be developed, generally consisting of two-lane and four-lane alternatives with striped or raised medians and turn lane widening. Develop intersection alternative layouts as defined in Task 402. Potential right-of-way impacts will be identified for each typical section alternative and for the intersection alternatives. Concept drawings will be prepared in plan view only. Bike and pedestrian facilities will also be included in all concept design alternatives. 294 9 Existing utilities and stormwater facilities will be shown in the exhibits along with preliminary proposed utility and stormwater layouts. Potential utility conflicts will be called out in plan view. Conceptual landscape recommendations will be shown as part of typical section graphics for the proposed Stucky Road improvements and the roundabout intersection alternatives. Coordination with known adjacent site development projects will be provided as needed to address access locations and water and sewer services. The deliverable for this phase will include roll plot exhibits showing the base topographic survey and proposed improvements overlaid on an aerial image and will include typical sections for Stucky Road and 19th Ave. This phase will include coordination with the Clear Route Real Estate Services as necessary for a preliminary review of right-of-way impacts and constraints. Up to three renderings for intersection improvements and typical section alternatives will be developed as part of the Concept Design Development to be used as part of the stakeholder and public outreach for the project. Coordinate with LDI on preliminary landscape recommendations and conceptual renderings. 407 Preliminary Construction Cost Estimates. Prepare Preliminary Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost with 20-30% contingency included. Any opinions of probable project cost or probable construction cost provided by Engineer are made on the basis of information available to Engineer and on the basis of Engineer's experience and qualifications and represents its judgment as an experienced and qualified professional engineer. However, since Engineer has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment, or services furnished by others, or over the contractor(s') methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, Engineer does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual project or construction cost will not vary from opinions of probable cost Engineer prepares. 408 Alternative Analysis Evaluation. Coordinate with key project stakeholders to define evaluation criteria and determine the priority for each. Qualitatively analyze intersection-type alternatives and typical section alternatives along Stucky Rd based on the evaluation criteria, approved design year traffic volume projections, roadway geometrics, right-of-way constraints and other considerations. Prepare Alternative Analysis memo for review by the City. 409 Preliminary Design Report. The evaluations and recommendations from previous tasks will be summarized and documented through the preparation of a preliminary design report. This report will include previously completed deliverables including Design Criteria, Traffic and Safety data, the ICE report, and the Stormwater Memo. The PDR will also include a summary of existing and proposed utilities, concept level design drawings, and opinions of probable cost.. A draft report will be prepared for review by the City of Bozeman, and the report will then be finalized following receipt of review comments and the City Commission’s decision on design alternatives. Task 400 Assumptions • City will provide requested data and review the Preliminary Design Report and supporting information/submittals. • City will provide a draft memo template for reference when developing the design criteria documentation. 295 10 • City staff will coordinate HDR access for Citian CRASH platform to obtain crash data within city limits (roughly halfway between 27th & Fowler). • No delineated FEMA floodplains, bridges, or high hazard dams are present within the project limits. • Concept-level stormwater drainage design alternative exhibits will be plan layouts and will include generic stormwater management facility details. • The modeling software Autodesk Storm and Sanitary Analysis or equivalent will be used for hydrologic and hydraulic modeling and stormwater drainage design for the project. • A portion of the project area is located within an existing MS4 boundary therefore the entire project will be subject to MS4 permit requirements and the City of Bozeman Stormwater Management Plan. • Stormwater water quality mitigation (stormwater treatment) and water quantity mitigation (peak flow attenuation) will be required for the project. • NOAA Atlas 14 Rainfall Data will be used for the project in lieu of Rainfall Data identified in the City of Bozeman Design and Construction Standards; Nested Rainfall Distributions will be developed using NOAA Atlas 14 Rainfall Data and employed for the project. • A Stormwater Drainage Report in accordance with the City of Bozeman Design and Construction Standards will be developed for the selected stormwater drainage design alternative following the Preliminary Design – Scope of Services. Task 400 Deliverables • Design Criteria Memo • Preliminary Traffic & Safety Memo • Stormwater Memo • Irrigation Analysis & Concept Design (Stahly) • Preliminary Roll-Plot Exhibits, Intersection Renderings, and Typical Sections • Preliminary Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost • Alternatives Analysis Memo • Preliminary Design Report (draft & final) 296 Activity Tasks Total Hours Project Manager Sr. Engineer Roadway Engineer Traffic Engineer Hydraulics Engineer Electrical Engineer Design Engineer Environmental EIT/Designer PI Specialist Graphics Specialist QA/QC Accountant Activity Tasks Total Hours Project Manager Sr. Engineer Roadway Engineer Traffic Engineer Hydraulics Engineer Electrical Engineer Design Engineer Environmental EIT/Designer PI Specialist Graphics Specialist QA/QC Accountant 100 Project Management 101 Project Startup & Contracts 16 10 6 102 Project Meetings 34 20 6 2 2 2 2 100 100 SUBTOTAL (HOURS)50 30 6 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 6 200 Data Collection and Field Work 201 Review Existing Information 36 8 4 4 4 16 202 Survey 24 8 8 4 4 203 Geotechnical Investigation 24 8 8 4 4 204 Environmental Investigation 66 4 58 4 102 102 SUBTOTAL (HOURS)150 16 16 16 4 16 0 4 58 16 0 0 4 0 300 Public Outreach 301 Preliminary Purpose & Need Statement & Engagement Plan Review 16 2 14 302 Technical Advisory Committees (TAC)45 6 3 24 12 303 Stakeholder Outreach & Open House Public Meetings 166 24 12 6 4 80 40 304 Presentation Support 56 2 2 2 2 24 24 103 SUBTOTAL (HOURS)283 34 12 11 6 2 0 0 0 0 142 76 0 0 400 Preminary Design 401 Design Criteria Documentation 26 2 4 8 4 4 2 2 402 Traffic & Safety Analysis 230 12 50 110 12 40 6 403 Stormwater Analysis & Concept Design 300 20 16 180 68 16 404 Irrigation Evaluation & Concept Design 10 2 8 405 Preliminary Utility Design & Coordination 50 2 8 40 406 Preliminary Design Development 288 20 40 120 20 80 8 407 Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate 19 1 2 2 4 8 2 408 Alternative Analysis Evaluation 118 8 24 40 40 6 409 Preliminary Design Report 136 8 24 80 16 8 104 SUBTOTAL (HOURS)1177 75 160 170 234 232 22 40 0 196 0 0 48 0 SURVEY PH TOTAL PRE-DESIGN PHASE HOURS 1660 155 194 199 246 252 22 44 58 212 144 76 52 6 Total Project Total Project Hours 1660 155 194 199 246 252 22 44 58 212 144 76 52 6 PROJECT: Stucky Rd Reconstruction Estimate Prepared By: HDRCity of Bozeman DATE: 10/30/2026 PRE-DESIGN PHASE ACTIVITIES Page 1 of 2 297 Hours % of total Rate Extension 155 9.3%91.50 14,182.50 194 11.7%96.00 18,624.00 199 12.0%52.50 10,447.50 246 14.8%57.50 14,145.00 252 15.2%60.50 15,246.00 22 1.3%58.00 1,276.00 44 2.7%83.00 3,652.00 58 3.5%53.50 3,103.00 212 12.8%37.50 7,950.00 144 8.7%53.50 7,704.00 76 4.6%44.50 3,382.00 52 3.1%94.00 4,888.00 6 0.4%46.50 279.00 1660 LABOR SUBTOTAL $104,879.00 1.85 OVERHEAD SUBTOTAL $194,026.15 TOTAL LABOR/OVERHEAD $298,905.15 Hours Per Hour Title commitments Parcels Per Parcel $300 Vehicle Rental Days Per Day $50 Miles 1100 Per Mile $0.760 Current IRS Rate 836.00 Airline Trips Trips Per Trip Days 7 Per Day $170 Current IRS Rate 1,190.00 Days 14 Per Day $80 Current IRS Rate 1,120.00 TOTAL DIRECT NONLABOR $3,146.00 R/W Appraisals & Acquisition (Clear Route)11,087.74 Surveys (Stahly)86,584.12 Landscaping/Graphics (LDI)28,250.00 Geotechnical (SK Geotechnical)59,861.24 Traffic Counts 4,400.00 TOTAL OUTSIDE SERVICES AND SUBCONTRACTS $190,183.10 Total Labor/ Overhead 298,905.15 Total Direct NonLabor 3,146.00 Total Outside Services & Subcontracts 190,183.10 12%Profit (12% of Total Labor Costs)35,868.62 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $528,102.87 OUTSIDE SERVICES AND SUBCONTRACTS RECAPITULATION Design Engineer Environmental EIT/Designer Graphics Specialist Lodging Meals Other Traffic Engineer Hydraulics Engineer Electrical Engineer PROJECT: Stucky Rd Reconstruction Estimate Prepared By: HDR Project Manager Sr. Engineer Roadway Engineer City of Bozeman DATE: 10/30/2026 COST SUMMARY Mileage PI Specialist QA/QC Accountant DIRECT NONLABOR Miscellaneous (Blueline prints, Computer TOTAL HOURS GENERAL OVERHEAD @ Page 2 of 2 298 Stahly Engineering & Associates Scope of Services for Stucky Drive Reconstruction Project—19th Ave to Fowler: Pre- planning Phase 1. Overview This scope of work is limited solely to supporting the acquisition of formal permission from the Middle Creek Ditch Company to pipe, re-align, or otherwise alter the existing ditch crossings (approximately 3–5 locations) that will fall within the future right-of-way of the road improvement project. All other design, engineering, surveying, environmental permitting, right-of-way acquisition, and construction activities are excluded from this scope. 2. Objectives • Obtain written permission from the Middle Creek Ditch Company for the proposed modifications to the affected ditch crossings. • Coordinate input and concurrence from all relevant stakeholders, including the ditch company’s legal counsel. • Document the process and outcomes for project records. 3. Stakeholders Primary stakeholders to be engaged under this scope include: • Middle Creek Ditch Company (board / authorized representatives) • Middle Creek Ditch Company legal counsel • Ditch users / water right holders served by the affected segments • Adjacent landowners • City of Bozeman • Gallatin County • Montana State University • Water right owners within the project limits 4. Scope of Services Stahly will perform the following tasks: 4.1 Stakeholder Identification & Coordination • Confirm and maintain an up-to-date contact list for all stakeholders listed above, including the ditch company’s attorneys. 299 • Investigate water rights holders within the project boundary—both surface and groundwater—using GWIC database and DNRC records • Serve as the primary point of contact for ditch-related coordination. • Track and document all communications related to the ditch crossings. 4.2 Plan Walk • Participate in an on-site plan walk with the design team. • Review the proposed roadway alignment, future right-of-way limits, and each of the affected ditch crossings in the field. • Document field observations, concerns, and preliminary preferences regarding piping, realignment, or other alterations. 4.3 Stakeholder Meetings • Participate in 2-4 stakeholder meetings (in-person or virtual, as mutually agreed). • Help prepare agendas, meeting materials, and meeting summaries/minutes for each meeting. • Use the meetings to resolve technical and operational issues and build consensus toward formal ditch company permission. 4.4 Public Meeting • Plan and attend one public meeting focused on the proposed project. • Coordinate logistics, prepare presentation materials, and document public comments related to the ditch work. • Summarize public input for the Middle Creek Ditch Company and the project team. 4.5 Permission Acquisition Support (including Legal Coordination) • Assist in preparing the formal request package to the Middle Creek Ditch Company (plans, exhibits, descriptions of proposed piping/realignment/alterations, and supporting documentation). • Coordinate directly with the Middle Creek Ditch Company’s legal counsel throughout the review and negotiation process. • Participate in discussions, respond to legal comments or conditions, and facilitate the exchange of information between the project team and the ditch company’s attorneys. 300 • Track the status of the permission request through final written approval (or documented denial/conditions). Note: Based on experience, coordination with the ditch company’s lawyers typically requires extended timeframes. Stahly will manage this process diligently while keeping the Client informed of progress and any delays. 5. Deliverables • Stakeholder contact list and communication log (including legal counsel contacts) • Plan-walk summary memorandum (including photos and field notes) • Agendas, presentation materials, attendance records, and meeting minutes for all ditch-related meetings • Formal permission request package submitted to the Middle Creek Ditch Company • Documentation of all correspondence and negotiations with the ditch company’s legal counsel • Final documentation of written permission (or status report if permission is pending or conditioned at the conclusion of this scope) 6. Assumptions & Limitations • This scope is limited exclusively to the ditch-crossing permission process described above. • HDR will provide current roadway plans, right-of-way exhibits, and any engineering details needed for the ditch company and legal review. • Stahly will not perform hydraulic design, structural design of piping, or construction of the ditch modifications. • Legal review of any formal agreement will be performed by the Client’s counsel; the Consultant will provide technical and coordination support only. • Coordination with the Middle Creek Ditch Company’s attorneys is expected to take a significant amount of time; the overall schedule for obtaining permission will reflect this reality. • The exact number of stakeholder meetings (within the 1–4 range) will be determined based on project needs and mutual agreement with the HDR. 7. Schedule The plan walk, stakeholder meetings, and public meeting will be scheduled in coordination with the overall project timeline and the availability of the Middle Creek Ditch Company. Legal coordination with the ditch company’s attorneys will be initiated early and pursued 301 diligently; however, the Client should anticipate that this portion of the process may extend the overall timeline for obtaining formal permission. 8. Compensation Compensation for the aforementioned scope of services is broken out by phases in a cost plus fixed fee format as detailed below: 8.1 Stakeholder Coordination Project Engineer 30 hr @ $116 / hr $ 3,480.00 Senior Engineer 60 hr @ $208 / hr $12,480.00 Overhead Subtotal $15,960.00 Fixed Fee (12%) $ 1,915.20 Phase Total $17,875.20 8.2 Stakeholder/Public Meetings and Plan Walk Project Engineer 10 hr @ $116 / hr $ 1,160.00 Senior Engineer 32 hr @ $208 / hr $ 6,656.00 Overhead Subtotal $ 7,816.00 Fixed Fee (12%) $ 937.92 Phase Total $ 8,753.92 8.3 Permission Acquisition Project Engineer 32 hr @ $116 / hr $ 3,712.00 Senior Engineer 58 hr @ $208 / hr $ 12,064.00 Overhead Subtotal $15,776.00 Fixed Fee (12%) $ 1,893.12 Phase Total $17,669.12 8.4 Stahly Stakeholder Totals Overhead Subtotal $39,552.00 Fixed Fee (12%) $ 4,746.24 Phase Total $44,298.24 302 219 2nd Ave S, Suite 302 Great Falls, MT 59405 (406) 604-4644 851 Bridger Drive, Suite 1 Bozeman, MT 59715 (406) 522-8594 2223 Montana Avenue, Suite 201 Billings MT 59101 (406) 601-4055 Engineering Excellence for 55 Years | www.seaeng.com Stucky Road Improvements Survey City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, MT A proposal to: HDR Stahly Engineering & Associates Professional Services Proposal 708 Road 7 1/2 Cowley, WY 82420 (307) 548-9913 3530 Centennial Drive Helena, MT 59601 (406) 442-8594 303 Proposal for Services Page 2 Introduction Stahly Engineering & Associates (Stahly) is pleased to submit a professional services proposal for surveying and civil engineering for the subject project. As discussed, the goal is to provide HDR with a topographic corridor survey and boundary of the project and engineering irrigation design and public outreach coordination for the pre-design phases of the project. Outcomes of this work will be used to consult the City of Bozeman for moving forward with traffic flow improvements. For the project extents, please see figure 1 attached to this document. We have attempted to identify all work items that will be required by Stahly personnel. However, there may be certain elements of the project infrastructure that will not be fully defined or may arise during coordination with the owner, or regulatory agency review that will alter the herein described scope of work. Any additional items that arise will be negotiated by contract amendments approved by the City of Bozeman and no additional work will be completed without prior authorization. Scope of Work PROJECT PLANNING 1) Corridor managing entity outreach, Utility Locates, CAD Base map Contact and notify MDT & Gallatin County of Survey crew schedules and impacts on Traffic while working in County and State roadways. Coordinate 811 utility locates throughout project extents. Based on recent prior experience on similar corridor projects in the area, the scale of project extents is very likely to result in a delayed response from locator companies, and the statutory timelines for filling tickets will not be met. Stahly has accounted for additional trips to collect utility marks as portions of the project are marked. All records research of existing Cadastral and road easement boundary will be entered into an AutoCAD base map to provide search points for the field, and serve as a base drawing (.dwg) for compiling GIS and other pre-field data. PROJECT AQUISITION 2) Field Survey Stahly will conduct a boundary monument recovery survey on approximately 18 tracts of record to define the existing easement for Stucky road, which is a county road ‘by use’ bounded by Fowler Lane on the west extents, a petitioned county road, and South 19th Ave on the east extents which is a state highway. Field crews will concurrently be conducting structure and utility pickup survey, setting aerial targets and collecting QC shots in vegetated and non-vegetated areas for control of the UAV Lidar mission that will collect the majority of planimetric and elevation data along approximately 8,500LF of the project extents. 304 Proposal for Services Page 3 Extents specified in the scoping meeting were for 50’ either side of CL, 500’ South and West at the Stucky & Fowler intersection, 300’ South on Goldeneye Drive and 150’ South along minor intersecting streets. Approximately 1600LF of S.19th St. will be included to inform of existing traffic features and sidewalk tie-ins. Approximately 5800LF of Stucky road are in the proposed extents. Point Cloud data from the Lidar Flight will be classified and extracted to provide 3D breaklines with a decimated ground surface point dataset that will be conventionally processed into TINN models in the CAD base .dwgs. Elements of importance identified in the scoping meeting that will be collected with in the county road easement during this task include trees, wet utility structure lids and rims, irrigation and storm structures and adjacent ADA facilities and tie-in grades for project design. To ensure compliance with ADA facility design tolerances, all ADA connection points will be collected conventionally. PROJECT PROCESSING 3) Deliverables Field data will be processed and prepared for design work in ACAD Civil3D 2025 .dwg format. This includes PLS boundary determinations that will show the variable width of the Stucky County road easement in relation to the adjoining cadastral and controlling PLSS lines. Data extraction from the lidar point cloud will provide breaklines and conventional planimetric road and access corridor hardscape features as well as low-pass bare-earth point returns from the dataset. The processed CAD deliverables will allow the client to confidently proceed with design and identify areas where additional road easement may need to be acquired to accommodate alternatives, as well as any design constraints posed by existing utilities and improvements. Stahly can assist with preparation of easement acquisition exhibits as they are identified under a separate additional scope item not covered in this fee. Fees for Professional Services The present defined scope is for providing a complete boundary and topographic base map of the project extents to inform Pre-design phase design options for the stakeholder group. The cost plus fixed fee for the above described scope of survey services are as follows: Overhead (cost plus expenses) Licensed Surveyor: 93 hrs @$155.20=$14,433.60 Remote Sensing Specialist 65 hrs @$153.20=$9,974.25 Survey Technician 64 hrs @$115.77=$7,409.28 Equipment, Vehicle, Lodging, Meals =$6,661.75 Fixed Fee =$3,807.00 Total Cost =$42,285.88 Owner/Client is responsible for all costs relating to: agency reviews, permitting, and filing fees; legal, accounting and other consulting services as may be required. 305 Proposal for Services Page 4 Thank you for this opportunity to work with HDR once again. We look forward to providing quality professional services delivered on schedule. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions or concerns. Survey Task 1 can be initiated within 2-3 weeks of notice to proceed, with field and deliverable tasks to be completed within 3-6 weeks of NTP. Weather conditions for late season work may delay deliverables. We are available to commence work on this project immediately upon authorization and receipt of the enclosed agreement. Sincerely, STAHLY ENGINEERING & ASSOCIATES Enclosure: Professional Services Agreement 306 October 8, 2026 Proposal P-26160R1 Ms. Lisa Fischer, PE HDR Engineering, Inc. Via E-Mail: lisa.fischer@hdrinc.com Dear Ms. Fischer: Re: Revised Proposal for Utility and Pavement Evaluation, Stucky Road – Fowler Lane to South 19th Avenue, Bozeman, Montana As you requested, we are pleased to furnish this revised proposal for the above-referenced project. The proposal is being revised to update the cost estimate methodology from lump sum basis to cost-plus fixed fee basis. Our proposed scope of work and cost estimate are included with this proposal. We propose to provide our services on a cost-plus fixed-fee basis in accordance with the attached spreadsheets, which include our most recent Indirect Cost Rates (IDC) for consulting and drilling. Based on our understanding of the project, we estimate the cost to perform the geotechnical services to 70 percent design will be $59,861.24. We have assumed the proposed IDC rates will remain fixed for the duration of the contract. Our proposed geotechnical services are outlined in the attached Scope of Services. Attached Table 1 summarizes our proposed borings and anticipated laboratory testing program. Attached Tables 2 and 3 are cost estimate summaries. We will begin work on the project following receipt of your written authorization. Current scheduling would permit us to begin the fieldwork within four to five weeks after authorization to proceed, weather permitting. We anticipate the drilling fieldwork will take about one long week. Approximately four to six weeks will then be required for laboratory testing and preparation of the engineering report, unless there are delays due to circumstances beyond our control. We appreciate the opportunity to present this revised proposal. If you have any questions, please contact us at your convenience. Sincerely, Dustin P. Hutzenbiler, PE Principal, Geotechnical Engineer Attachments: Proposed Scope of Services Summary of Borings and Laboratory Tests Preliminary Boring Location Maps 2511 Holman Avenue P. O. Box 80190 Billings, Montana 59108-0190 p: 406.652.3930; f: 406.652.3944 www.skgeotechnical.com 307 HDR Engineering, Inc. October 8, 2026 Proposal P-26160R1 Page 2 Proposed Scope of Services Description of Project The purpose of the geotechnical evaluation will be to characterize and evaluate subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the selected boring locations for the project. The City of Bozeman is planning to reconstruct and increase the capacity of Stucky Road between South 19th Avenue and Fowler Lane in Bozeman, Montana. The project is currently in preliminary design but is anticipated to include widening Stucky Road to three lanes to accommodate future left-turn lanes and constructing intersection improvements at Fowler Lane and South 27th Avenue. The intersections are anticipated to be converted to either signalized intersections or roundabouts. Curvilinear roadway alignments may also be incorporated to reduce impacts to existing structures along Stucky Road. Improvements to South 19th Avenue are also planned near the Stucky Road intersection. South of Stucky Road, the roadway is anticipated to be widened to the west to provide two southbound lanes. Along the north leg of the intersection, more substantial widening is anticipated to accommodate an additional through lane and dedicated southbound turn lane. Utility improvements will include installation of a new water main beneath Stucky Road to serve future development. The water main is anticipated to consist of approximately 16-inch-diameter ductile iron or PVC pipe with a minimum earth cover of 6 1/2 feet, resulting in an anticipated invert depth of approximately 8 feet. Three existing stormwater crossing culverts will also be extended or replaced as part of the project. Additional improvements are anticipated to include new pedestrian facilities and street lighting along the improved roadway. Reconstruction of the existing paved surface is planned, however, the project will also evaluate the feasibility of rehabilitating portions of the existing pavement using minor rehabilitation, such as mill and overlay, or major rehabilitation, such as full-depth reclamation. We have assumed the site will be accessible to our truck-mounted drill rig and that towing or snow removal services will not be required. We have assumed HDR will assist with obtaining access to private property for borings located outside the existing right-of-way. Field exploration will be performed weather permitting. Auger drilling generally requires temperatures of approximately 20 degrees and rising, while pavement core drilling generally requires temperatures of 32 degrees and rising. Roadway surfaces must also be clear and dry to perform borings within the roadway. Access delays or additional mobilization resulting from circumstances beyond our control may result in additional charges. We have also assumed our current insurance limits are acceptable and can provide a certificate of insurance upon request. 308 HDR Engineering, Inc. October 8, 2026 Proposal P-26160R1 Page 3 Scope of Services Reconnaissance and Staking. We propose to have our field engineer travel to the site to complete a reconnaissance of the existing pavement surface, with particular attention to areas of significant pavement distress and drainage concerns. Boring locations will be selected and staked at this time to provide representative coverage of the project corridor and target areas of observed distress, proposed improvements, and other features of geotechnical interest. Following staking, underground utility locates will be requested. Due to the anticipated concentration of underground utilities within the project corridor, particularly near South 19th Avenue, final boring locations may need to be adjusted to maintain adequate clearance from existing utilities. Boring Locations and Traffic Control. We reviewed the City of Bozeman Public Works interactive map for the project area. An existing 21-inch PVC sewer main appears to run beneath the centerline of Stucky Road along the entire corridor. Overhead utilities are present along both sides of the roadway for much of the project. Buried fiber optic lines and natural gas generally run parallel to Stucky Road on the south side. Service lines for fiber optics, sewer, and natural gas likely cross the road to provide services to residences adjacent to Stucky Road. We have assumed that the City and HDR will assist with obtaining the necessary permission from private property owners. For borings completed within the roadway, we will subcontract a qualified traffic control company to provide lane closures and flagging. After the borings have been completed, we have assumed HDR/Stahly will survey the drilled locations and provide us with the surveyed locations and surface elevations. Soil Borings. We propose completing fifteen soil borings for the project. The test borings will extend to depths ranging from 15 to 25 feet to address the various geotechnical considerations associated with the planned improvements. Preliminary boring locations and proposed depths are shown on the attached Preliminary Boring Location Map. At each boring location, we propose to conduct penetration tests to assist in evaluating the engineering characteristics of the subsurface soils and to obtain representative samples for classification. At each boring located within the existing pavement, we propose to core the asphalt pavement for thickness measurements and asphalt stripping analysis for use in evaluating pavement rehabilitation alternatives. Bulk grab samples of the existing underlying base course and subgrade soils will also be collected for laboratory testing. The thickness of the existing base/subbase course will be measured to the nearest 1/2-inch. Penetration tests will generally be conducted at 2 1/2-foot intervals to a depth of 15 feet and at 5-foot intervals thereafter. Tube samples may also be obtained for laboratory strength and consolidation/swell testing. If groundwater is encountered during drilling, its depth will be recorded. 309 HDR Engineering, Inc. October 8, 2026 Proposal P-26160R1 Page 4 Three of the proposed off-road borings will be completed as 2-inch-diameter PVC groundwater piezometers and instrumented with groundwater data loggers to provide extended groundwater monitoring. The piezometers will remain in service for at least one year to evaluate seasonal groundwater variations. Borings completed within the roadway will be backfilled with auger cuttings to the bottom of the existing base course. The base course will then be replaced to the bottom of the existing asphalt pavement, and the pavement surface will be patched with commercially available cold-mix asphalt. Laboratory Tests. The samples will be returned to our laboratory for routine laboratory testing to assist us in evaluating the strength and compressibility of the soils. Depending on the subsurface conditions, typical tests are penetrometer, moisture content, Atterberg limits, gradation, Proctor, California Bearing Ratio, unconfined compressive strength, one-dimensional consolidation, and corrosion. Geotechnical Reports. After the field and laboratory testing has been completed, the results will be analyzed and discussed with you. A Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report will then be prepared to support the 30% design. The preliminary report will include the following. For the proposed water main, the report will address the suitability of the trench subgrade soils to support the new water main. Recommendations for Type 1 and Type 2 bedding (if necessary), reuse of excavated materials as trench backfill, backfill compaction recommendations, and general construction dewatering considerations will also be provided. For the street improvements, flexible pavement sections for reconstruction under stable and unstable subgrade conditions will be provided, along with our opinion regarding the suitability of pavement rehabilitation alternatives. The report will also include foundation recommendations for ancillary structures, including streetlights and traffic signal poles. Recommendations for roadway and embankment widening, fill slope configurations, anticipated embankment settlement, embankment construction materials, and overall constructability will also be provided. Geotechnical considerations for the stormwater crossings will be addressed, as necessary. At the 70% design phase, we will review the developed design and prepare a Final Geotechnical Engineering Report addressing applicable design changes, comments received during the preliminary design phase, and refinements to our geotechnical recommendations, as appropriate. The geotechnical reports will be prepared in letter format. Digitally signed electronic copies will be emailed to you following completion. Hard copies will not be provided unless requested. Geotechnical engineering services beyond the 70% design phase, including additional report revisions or design reviews at the 90% or 100% design phases, are not included in this proposal and can be provided under a supplemental agreement, if requested. 310 HDR Engineering, Inc. October 8, 2026 Proposal P-26160R1 Page 5 Groundwater Data Collection. For purposes of this proposal, we have budgeted for two additional site visits over a period of approximately one year, at roughly six-month intervals, to measure groundwater levels and download data from the installed groundwater data loggers. Following each data collection trip, we will prepare a short summary memorandum presenting the groundwater monitoring data. If the groundwater monitoring data indicates that modifications to our previously issued geotechnical recommendations may be warranted, we will discuss the findings with HDR and determine whether additional engineering evaluation or updated recommendations are necessary. Utility Clearance SK Geotechnical will contact the local utilities one-call number to notify the local telephone, electric, gas, sewer, water, and cable TV companies to determine the location of underground utilities. We request that you or your authorized representative notify the SK Geotechnical project manager immediately of the presence and location of any underground objects on private property which are not the responsibility of public utilities. SK Geotechnical will take reasonable precautions to avoid underground objects. SK Geotechnical will rely on the utility information provided by the utility companies and the client in planning and completing our field exploration. 311 Table 1. Summary of Borings and Laboratory TestsPrepared By: Dustin P. Hutzenbiler, PE Date: 9/15/2026Truck-Mounted Drill RigCommentsAlignment1 ST-1 2081111 1Fowler Int. - Pavement/Signal Pole Boring - TC1 ST-2 208111 1Fowler Int. - Pavement, Signal Pole, and Utility Boring - TC1 ST-3P 15 7 1 1 1 Off-Road Utility and Widening, Inst. Piezometer1 ST-4 15 7 1 Pavement and Utility Boring - TC1 ST-5P 15 7 Off-Road Utility and Widening, Inst. Piezometer1 ST-6 2081111 1 S. 27th Ave. Int. - Pavement/Signal Pole Boring - TC1 ST-7 208111 1 S. 27th Ave. Int. - Pavement, Signal Pole, and Utility Boring - TC1 ST-8 15 7 1 Off-Road Utility and Widening1 ST-9 15 7 1 Pavement and Utility Boring - TC1 ST-10P 15 7 Off-Road Utility and Widening, Inst. Piezometer1 ST-11 15 7 1 1 1 1 S. 19th Ave. Int. - Pavement and Utility Boring - TC1 ST-12 15 7 1 Pavement/Widening Boring - TC1 ST-13 259122 1Pavement, Signal Pole, and Utility Boring - TC1 ST-14 259122 1Off-Road, Signal Pole, Utility, Widening Boring1 ST-15 15 7 Off-Road, Widening BoringSubtotal 15 265 113 6 10 1030390Additional Work3 3 2 Composite Base Course Samples, Culvert CorrosionTOTAL 15 265 113 6 13 1332390ST-xxP - Groundwater Monitoring PiezometerTC - Traffic Control Flaggers needed when drillingAuger Boring Depth(ft)UCSProject: Stucky Road - Fowler Lane to 19thStucky RoadS. 19th Ave IntersectionLaboratory TestsAtterberg LimitsR-Value (CBR)CorrosionConsolidationAsphalt StrippingDirect ShearMilepostNumber of BoringsBoring NumberMoisture ContentSieve Analysis312 Table 2. Cost Estimate SpreadsheetPROJECT: Stucky Road ReconstructionDATE: 10/8/2026Total HoursSenior EngineerProject Engineer, Regular TimeProject Engineer, OvertimeField Engineer, Regular TimeField Engineer, OvertimeProject Assistant128.00 15.00 45.00 0.00 52.00 10.00 6.00128.00 15.00 45.00 0.00 52.00 10.00 6.00Hours Rate ExtensionSenior Engineer 15.00 69.97 1,049.55Project Engineer, Regular Time 45.00 47.70 2,146.50Field Engineer, Regular Time 52.00 37.63 1,956.76Field Engineer, Overtime 10.00 56.45 564.45Project Assistant 6.00 35.78 214.68TOTAL HOURS 128.005,931.94CONSULTING OVERHEAD @ 1.80098 10,683.31TOTAL LABOR/OVERHEAD16,615.25Quantity RateMeals, per person, per day (Travel Days) 2 40.00 80.00Meals, per person, per day 2 50.00 100.00Lodging, per person, per day 4 200.00 800.00TOTAL DIRECT NONLABOR980.00SK Geotechnical Drilling (see attached)32,557.16SK Geotechnical Lab Testing (See Tables 1 and 3)7,715.00TOTAL OUTSIDE SERVICES AND SUBCONTRACTS40,272.16Total Labor/ Overhead16,615.25Total Direct NonLabor980.00Total Outside Services & Subcontracts40,272.16Profit 12%1,993.83TOTAL ESTIMATED COST59,861.24DIRECT NONLABOROUTSIDE SERVICES AND SUBCONTRACTSRECAPITULATIONCOST SUMMARYCONSULTING LABOR SUBTOTALCONSULTING OVERHEAD SUBTOTALSURVEY PHASE ACTIVITIESPREPARED BY: Dustin Hutzenbiler, PETasksGeotechnical Services through 70% DesignSUBTOTAL (HOURS)Page 1 of 3313 SK Geotechnical Drilling Usage Cost Scope: Project: Date: Desc.: Client: Item Hours Rate Extension Drill Crew Chief, regular time 38 hr. @ $35.91 / hr. $ 1,364.58 Drill Crew Chief, overtime 10 hr. @ $53.87 / hr. 538.65 Drill Assistant, regular time 38 hr. @ $27.50 / hr. 1,045.00 Drill Assistant, overtime 10 hr. @ $41.25 / hr. 412.50 Subtotal Drilling Labor $ 3,360.73 Drilling Usage Rate 3.9620 13,315.31 Subtotal Drilling Labor plus Usage $ 16,676.04 Profit 12% 2,001.12 Subtotal Drilling Usage (Labor, Usage, Profit) $18,677.16 Expenses Consumables (Patch, Piezometer Supplies) 1 ea. @ $3,650.00 / ea. 3,650.00 City of Bozeman Bond/Permit 1 ea. @ $50.00 / ea. 50.00 Traffic Control Subcontractor 3day @ $2,700.00 / day 8,100.00 Shelby Tubes, 3"x18" 6 ea. @ $20.00 / ea. 120.00 Meals, per person, per travel day 4 da. @ $40.00 / da. 160.00 Meals, per person, per day 4 da. @ $50.00 / da. 200.00 Lodging, per person, per day 8 da. @ $200.00 / da. 1,600.00 SK Geotechnical Lab Testing (See Tables 1 and 3)Subtotal Expenses $ 13,880.00 Total SK Geotechnical Drilling $32,557.16 See Table 1 for Summary of proposed borings.Stucky Road Reconstruction 10/8/2026 Geotechnical services through 70 Percent Design, Final Report addressed with supplement HDR 314 SK Geotechnical Laboratory Testing Cost Scope: Project: Date: Desc.: Client: Item Hours Rate Extension Moisture content 113 ea. @ $5.00 / ea. 565.00 Atterberg limits 13 ea. @ $115.00 / ea. 1,495.00 Grain size distribution, minus No. 4 mat'l 13 ea. @ $110.00 / ea. 1,430.00 Consolidation - swell test 3 ea. @ $315.00 / ea. 945.00 Unconfined Compressive Strength 6 ea. @ $125.00 / ea. 750.00 Moisture-density curve+1pt CBR 3 ea. @ $565.00 / ea. 1,695.00 Asphalt Stripping 9 ea. @ $45.00 / ea. 405.00 Corrosion tests (pH, resistivity, sulfates) 2 ea. @ $215.00 / ea. 430.00 Total SK Geotechnical Laboratory $7,715.00 See Table 1 for anticipated laboratory testing program. Stucky Road Reconstruction 10/8/2026 HDR Geotechnical services through 70 Percent Design, Final Report addressed with supplement 315 316 S. 27th Ave.S. 27th Ave.317 318 319 Table 1. Current Salary Ranges Job Category 2026 Current Salary Range President, Principal Geotechnical Engineer $ 60.10 Senior Engineer (1 Staff) $ 69.97 Project Geotechnical Engineer (3 Staff) $ 45.89 to $ 52.88 Field Engineer (3 Staff) $ 36.04 to $ 40.47 Drill Crew Chief (2 Staff) $ 35.28 to $ 35.91 Drill Assistant (2 Staff) $ 25.50 to $ 27.50 Project Assistant (1 Staff) $ 35.78 Note: Staff salaries are reviewed/adjusted in April each year. Typical adjustments range from 4 to 6 percent. 320 September 4, 2026 HDR c/o Lisa Fischer, P.E. 2150 Analysis Drive, Suite A Bozeman, MT 59718 Subject: Stucky Road Reconstruction Right-of-Way Acquisition Services Proposal Dear Lisa, The following is a proposal for Clear Route Real Estate, LLC to provide services for the HDR project referenced above and as described in the Project Intent section to follow. This proposal establishes the scope of services and budget between Clear Route Real Estate, LLC (hereinafter “Clear Route”) and HDR to be provided to the project client, The City of Bozeman, attached as Exhibit A. Project Intent We understand the City of Bozeman is planning to reconstruct Stucky Road from South 19th Avenue to Fowler Avenue in the near future. As part of the design process, Clear Route will provide right-of-way (R/W) acquisition services to be completed in two phases. The first phase will be to coordinate with up to 16 parcels with property impacts, additionally coordinating with Montana State University and the Middle Creek Ditch Company. The second phase will be to conduct acquisition services to acquire real property interests to allow the City to construct the roadway improvements. The second phase to be completed under a contract amendment once preliminary designs are completed. Thank you for including our team to assist with this project. Feel free to call me at 406-208-7919 if you have any questions regarding this proposal. If it meets your approval, please mail or email this signed and dated agreement to our office at P.O. Box 6162, Bozeman, MT 59771 or tgaddo@clearroute-re.com. Thank you. Sincerely, Clear Route Real Estate Tony Gaddo, P.E., REALTOR® Senior R/W Consultant, Broker/Owner Enclosures 321 Stucky Road Reconstruction Page | 1 9/4/2026 EXHIBIT A Scope of Services The scope of services is detailed below. 1. Project Research a. Obtain and review available preliminary design plans and project documentation b. Coordination meeting with the project team members c. Obtain current deeds and ownership information for 16 parcels as shown on attached Figure 1, including MSU and Middle Creek Ditch 2. Initial Property Owner Contact a. Compile contact information for 16 parcels and irrigation ditch owners b. Initiate contact with owners for 16 parcels of land to begin pre-acquisition discussions, including MSU Office of Facilities Services. Contact with Middle Creek Ditch Company will be completed and coordination with The Association of Gallatin Agricultural Irrigators. c. Conduct meetings with affected property owners. It is assumed each affected private property owner and irrigation company will require one meeting. d. Maintain conversation history record for all meetings e. Team coordination 3. R/W Impact Analysis and Cost Estimate a. Provide preliminary R/W review to document anticipated property impacts based on preliminary design information b. Provide a preliminary R/W cost estimate to document the anticipated costs for land acquisition and significant private property impacts based on the preliminary design concept as determined by the Client. One preliminary estimate and one final estimate will be prepared. c. The cost estimate will include a review of the real estate market to estimate land values for impacted parcels d. R/W design services are not included in this contract. e. Team coordination Schedule Clear Route and HDR will work together to create a schedule outlining key milestones for starting and completing the project. This schedule will reflect realistic timeframes for services provided by Clear Route and HDR’s other consultants and will incorporate anticipated review and approval periods by HDR and the City of Bozeman. The schedule will remain flexible and may be revised throughout the project to accommodate changes in scope or design, or to address delays or other factors outside Clear Route’s control. Budget and Invoicing Clear Route will bill for its services with a total maximum cost of $11,087.74, as detailed on the attached fee summary. 322 Stucky Road Reconstruction Page | 2 9/4/2026 Clear Route Real Estate will submit monthly invoices to the Client for services performed during the prior billing period, typically aligning with the calendar month and spanning approximately 30 days. Each invoice will itemize, as applicable, charges based on time, as well as any costs for subcontracted consultants, reimbursable expenses, and profit. Invoices will be issued promptly following the end of each billing period and will be due upon receipt by the Client. 323 CRRE Proposal—Figure 1 Page 1 of 1 (1) Current Project Information PROJECT NAME: Stucky Road Reconstruction Notes: Aerial image locations are approximate and may not be exact. 324 PROJECT: Activity Tasks Total Hours R/W Agent/Manager PRELIMINARY RIGHT OF WAY 110 Project Research 20 20 110 Initial Property Onwer Contact 32 32 110 R/W Impact Analysis and Cost Estimate 18 18 110 110 110 110 SUBTOTAL (HOURS)70 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 R/W PHASE TOTAL RIGHT OF WAY PHASE HOURS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Project HoursTotal Project Hours 70 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 PREPARED BY: DATE: Clear Route 9/4/2026 Stucky Road Reconstruction Proposal Revised 9/4/26 Page 1 of 2 325 PROJECT: Hours % of total Rate Extension 70 100% 65.00 4,550.00 70 $4,550.00 1.171 $5,328.05 $9,878.05 0.00 Hours Per Hour $10 0.00 Title commitments Parcels Per Parcel $650 0.00 Vehicle Rental Days Per Month $271 GSA 0.00 Miles 32 Per Mile $0.760 GSA 24.32 Airline Trips Trips Per Trip $800 0.00 Days Per Day $118.80 GSA 0.00 Days Per Day $68.00 GSA 0.00 Days Per Day $51.00 0.00 $24.32 $0.00 9,878.05 24.32 0.00 1,185.37 $11,087.74 Meals (1st and last day) Meals (full day) DIRECT NONLABOR Miscellaneous (Blueline prints, mylars, multilith paper, telephone, TOTAL LABOR/OVERHEAD LABOR SUBTOTAL COST SUMMARY PREPARED BY: DATE: Stucky Road Reconstruction Proposal Clear Route 9/4/2026 OUTSIDE SERVICES AND SUBCONTRACTS TOTAL DIRECT NON-LABOR TOTAL HOURS R/W Agent/Manager OVERHEAD SUBTOTAL Other GENERAL OVERHEAD @ Computer Mileage Lodging Biological Resources Studies/Report Surveys Subsurface Utility Engineering (Phase lI) Hazardous Materials (Initial Site Assessment) R/W Appraisals, Negotiation & Acquisition Soils/Geotechnical Survey/Report/Testing Cultural Resource Studies/Report Noise Study Traffic Study/Report TOTAL OUTSIDE SERVICES AND SUBCONTRACTS TOTAL ESTIMATED COST Profit (12% of Total Labor Costs) Total Labor/Overhead Total Direct Non-Labor Total Outside Services & Subcontracts RECAPITULATION Landscaping Plans Electrical/Lighting Signalization etc Aerial Photography/Mapping Other Drilling Contractor Revised 9/4/26 Page 2 of 2 326 October 14, 2026 Mrs. Lisa Fischer, PE HDR Lisa.Fischer@hdrinc.com Subject: Fee Proposal for Landscape Architectural Services – Stucky Road Reconstruction – Pre-Design Phase, Bozeman, Montana Dear Mrs. Fischer: Thank you for the opportunity to provide this proposal for the Stucky Road Reconstruction – Pre-Design Phase. Based on our discussions, Land Design, Inc. offers the following Scope of Services: PROJECT UNDERSTANDING Land Design, Inc. understands that HDR will develop two typical section alternatives for Stucky Road and two intersection configurations at each of the Stucky/Fowler and Stucky/27th Avenue intersections. LDI will support HDR’s pre-design effort by reviewing the proposed alternatives, providing landscape architectural recommendations, and preparing presentation-level graphic exhibits and supporting visual materials for HDR’s public presentations. The work will consider existing mature trees, pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, safety, applicable City of Bozeman Municipal Code requirements, winter conditions, and long-term operations and maintenance. SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. Existing Conditions and Context Evaluation • Review available project information, mapping, surveys, aerial imagery, and other documentation provided by HDR. • Conduct one site visit to observe existing landscape conditions, mature trees, and pedestrian and bicycle connections within the project limits. • Identify landscape-related opportunities and constraints that may influence the roadway design. 2. Design Review and Recommendations • Review roadway typical sections and intersection configurations developed by HDR. • Provide landscape architectural feedback related to mature tree preservation, pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, and integration with adjacent development. 327 Stucky Road Reconstruction – Pre-Design Phase Bozeman, Montana October 14, 2026 • Review applicable landscape, pedestrian, bicycle, and streetscape design elements for consistency with City of Bozeman Municipal Code requirements. • Consider right-of-way constraints, visibility, winter conditions, snow storage, irrigation, and long-term maintenance. • Provide recommendations to support safe, functional, and context-sensitive roadway improvements. 3. Presentation Graphics and Cost Estimates • Prepare presentation-level graphic exhibits for the two Stucky Road typical section alternatives and two intersection configurations at each of the Stucky/Fowler and Stucky/27th Avenue intersections. • Prepare planning-level cost estimates for landscape-related improvements associated with the design alternatives. • Coordinate with HDR, incorporate comments, and finalize graphics and cost estimates for use in public presentations. 4. Design Team Coordination • Participate in biweekly design team meetings, or as requested by HDR. • Coordinate with HDR and the project team to discuss design progress, outstanding questions, and upcoming deliverables. FEE SUMMARY Land Design, Inc. proposes to provide the services described above on an hourly basis using the following billing rates, inclusive of overhead and 12% profit: Principal: $155/hour Project Manager: $135/hour Designer: $120/hour Total fees for the Pre-Design Phase shall not exceed $28,250.00, based on the attached task estimate. *Our terms are net-30 days, subject to the attached Terms and Conditions, which are incorporated herein. 328 Services Proposal Date:10/14/26 Project:Stucky Road Reconstruction: Pre-Design Proposed Services: Task Personnel Quantity Units Rate Sub-Total Scope of Services: Pre- Design Phase 1 Existing Conditions & Context Evaluation •Site visit (x1)Principal 8 Hrs.$155.00 $1,240.00 •Set up base file Project Manager 12 Hrs.$135.00 $1,620.00 •Identify opportunities & constraints Designer 10 Hrs.$120.00 $1,200.00 Expenses 1 LS $150.00 $150.00 SUBTOTAL 30 $4,210.00 2 Design Review and Recommendations •Review roadway sections & intersection.Principal 8 Hrs.$155.00 $1,240.00 configurations developed by HDR Project Manager 22 Hrs.$135.00 $2,970.00•City Municipal Code requirements.Designer 34 Hrs.$120.00 $4,080.00 •Provide feedback & recommendations Expenses 0 LS $0.00 $0.00 SUBTOTAL 64 $8,290.00 3 Presentation Graphics and Cost Estimates •Presentation Graphics Principal 10 Hrs.$155.00 $1,550.00 •Cost Estimates Project Manager 32 Hrs.$135.00 $4,320.00 •Review & revisions Designer 48 Hrs.$120.00 $5,760.00 Expenses 1 LS $100.00 $100.00 SUBTOTAL 90 $11,730.00 4 Design Team Coordination •Biweekly meetings Principal 12 Hrs.$155.00 $1,860.00 •Coordination with HDR & project team Project Manager 16 Hrs.$135.00 $2,160.00 Designer 0 Hrs.$120.00 $0.00 Expenses 0 LS $0.00 $0.00 SUBTOTAL 28 $4,020.00 TOTAL 212 $28,250.00 *All hourly billing rates listed above include overhead and a 12% profit markup. 329 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Jesse DiTommaso, Economic Development Coordinator Brit Fontenot, Economic Development Director SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Task Order 2 with Economic and Planning Systems (EPS) for a 2025 Market and Economic Conditions Report MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Vendor/Contract RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to sign a task order 2 with Economic and Planning Systems (EPS) for a 2025 market and economic conditions report. STRATEGIC PLAN:2.1 Business Growth: Support retention and growth of both the traded and local business sectors while welcoming and encouraging new and existing businesses, in coordination with the Economic Development Plan. BACKGROUND:Economic and Planning Systems (EPS), a land economics consulting firm, has created a Market Report for the City of Bozeman since 2022. The report is focused on the housing market, but includes other economic data and trends. The goal of the report is to provide accurate and current data to assist the City and broader community in understanding the Bozeman market. Additional data around affordable for-sale housing needs and wage data for traded sector and local sector jobs has been requested by staff this year. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:As recommended by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:The total cost of the task order is $25,510 which is available in the Economic Development Department budget. Attachments: EPS Task Order 2 - Market Update final.pdf Report compiled on: October 15, 2026 330 City of Bozeman Term Contract with Economic and Planning Systems Task Order Number 2: Economic and Planning Systems PROJECT: Annual Market Update and Community Presentation Issued under the authority of the City of Bozeman Professional Services Agreement Term Contract with Economic and Planning Systems to support Economic Development and Community Housing programs. This Task Order is dated November 10, 2026 between the City of Bozeman Economic Development Department and Economic and Planning Systems (Contractor). The following representatives have been designated for the work performed under this Task Order: City: Jesse DiTommaso, Economic Development Coordinator Contractor: Brian Duffany, Principal SCOPE OF WORK: Annual Market Update scope attached as Exhibit A. COMPENSATION: EPS will bill for its services on a time and materials basis with a project total not-to-exceed $25,510. The provisions of the Professional Services Agreement Term Contract shall govern the Work. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties authorized to commit resources of the parties have executed this Task Order: City of Bozeman Economic & Planning Systems Chuck Winn Brian Duffany City Manager Principal 331 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 263078 2026 Market Update Scope.docx 1 Background EPS prepares an annual market and economic conditions update for the City under our on-call services contract with the City. This scope of work describes how we will complete the 2026 update including modifications to the 2026 report compared to previous reports. Scope of Work Task 1 – Real Estate Market Conditions EPS will compile and analyze the real estate market and demographic information outlined below. • Population and demographic trends • Commercial real estate trends for office, industrial, hotel, and retail market segments o Trends in building inventory, vacancy rates, rental rates • Housing trends o Residential construction o Home prices o Multifamily rents and vacancies Task 2 – Economic Conditions The economic conditions section in the 2026 version will be revised from the previous reports to describe the economy around the Traded Sector (export sectors) and Local Sector framework that the City uses to guide its economic development strategies. EPS will compile and analyze the economic data outlined below for Bozeman and Gallatin County and for some indicators, the State of Montana. • Jobs by industry • Discussion of impacts and benefits of traded sector jobs compared to local jobs (e.g. higher wages, greater economic impact) • Wages by industry • Unemployment rate • Labor force participation rate (total population in workforce) • Labor force participation by sex (may only be available at state level) Task 3 – Housing Affordability The City would like additional documentation of the affordability gaps for for-sale and rental housing in Bozeman. EPS will incorporate housing affordability indicators that look at housing costs compared to household income and 332 2026 Market Update Scope 2 compared to wages and job types. We anticipate showing the data and analysis outlined below. • Housing cost burden for renters and owners • Home purchase price and rental gap by income range • Home purchase price and rental gap by job/wage range for major industries in traded and local sectors Task 4 – Draft and Final Report EPS will prepare a draft report for the City to review and Final Report after receiving comments. The Report will also include a summary of findings that highlights notable trends and outlooks. Task 5 – January Real Estate and Economic Presentation EPS will prepare a presentation for January event hosted by the City. EPS will develop presentation content from the Market Report and may add supplemental information deemed to be relevant. EPS will travel to Bozeman for the event and present the material and help facilitate discussions and Q&A. Budget Description Principal Associate Research Analyst II Total Billing Rate $265 $165 $135 Task 1: 2026 Market and Economic Update 20 60 20 $17,900 - CoStar data cost recovery $500 Subtotal $18,400 Task 2: January Real Estate and Economic Update Event - Prepare slide deck and review with City 8 16 4 $5,300 - Presentation and Event 4 0 0 $1,060 - Travel Costs $750 Subtotal $7,110 Total Task Order Budget (not to exceed)$25,510 333 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Jon Henderson, Assistant City Manager David Arnado, Facilities Superintendent Shane Miller, Facilities Project Coordinator SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign Service Order 2 with Jackola Engineering and Architecture for Lindley Center Renovations MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Vendor/Contract RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to Sign Service Order 2 with Jackola Engineering and Architecture for Lindley Center Renovations STRATEGIC PLAN:4.3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices: Prioritize long-term investment and maintenance for existing and new infrastructure. BACKGROUND:On July 21, 2026, the Bozeman City Commission approved a Master Agreement with Jackola Engineering & Architecture for architectural design and construction administration services associated with the Lindley Center Renovations project approved in a 2021 bond measure to include upgrading restrooms to meet current American with Disabilities Act requirements, replacing windows and log siding, upgrading the kitchen, insulating the east roof, installing floor and roof supports, and improvements to the parking lot and related site work. As the project has been further developed, additional improvements, existing-condition needs, consultant services, and design and coordination efforts have been identified beyond the assumptions of the original proposal. This Service Order 2 adds additional professional architectural services and associated fees for work beyond the scope and assumptions of the original Agreement as described in Exhibit A. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:As directed by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:Funds are currently allocated in the approved City of Bozeman Lindley Center Renovation Budget. Service Order 2 = $123,500 334 Attachments: Lindley Center Renovation - Service Order 2.pdf Report compiled on: October 28, 2026 335 Document B221TM – 2018 Service Order for use with Master Agreement Between Owner and Architect AIA Document B221 – 2018. Copyright © 2014 and 2018. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 17:55:54 MDT on 10/29/2026 under Subscription No.20250131413 which expires on 05/26/2027, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (6ae3dcb7cf4c07330123b6f1) 1 ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS: The author of this document may have revised the text of the original AIA standard form. An Additions and Deletions Report that notes revisions to the standard form text is available from the author and should be reviewed. A vertical line in the left margin of this document indicates where the author has added to or deleted from the original AIA text. This document has important legal consequences. Consultation with an attorney is encouraged with respect to its completion or modification. This document provides the Architect’s scope of services for the Service Order only and is intended to be used with AIA Document B121™–2018, Standard Form of Master Agreement Between Owner and Architect ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS: The author of this document may have revised the text of the original AIA standard form. An Additions and Deletions Report that notes revisions to the standard form text is available from the author and should be reviewed. A vertical line in the left margin of this document indicates where the author has added to or deleted from the original AIA text. This document has important legal consequences. Consultation with an attorney is encouraged with respect to its completion or modification. This document provides the Architect’s scope of services for the Service Order only and is intended to be used with AIA Document B121™–2018, Standard Form of Master Agreement Between Owner and Architect SERVICE ORDER number 2 made as of the Tenth day of November in the year 2026 (In words, indicate day, month, and year.) BETWEEN the Owner: (Name, legal status, address, and other information) City of Bozeman 121 N. Rouse Ave., Bozeman, MT 59771 and the Architect: (Name, legal status, address, and other information) Jackola Engineering and Architecture, PC 705 Osterman Drive, Suite B, Bozeman, MT 59715 for the following PROJECT: (Name, location, and detailed description) Lindley Center - Design Build THE SERVICE AGREEMENT This Service Order, together with the Master Agreement between Owner and Architect dated the Third day of March in the year 2026 (In words, indicate day, month, and year.) form a Service Agreement. The Owner and Architect agree as follows. TABLE OF ARTICLES 1 INITIAL INFORMATION 2 SERVICES UNDER THIS SERVICE ORDER 3 DATE OF COMMENCEMENT AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION 4 COMPENSATION 5 INSURANCE 6 PARTY REPRESENTATIVES 7 ATTACHMENTS AND EXHIBITS 336 AIA Document B221 – 2018. Copyright © 2014 and 2018. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 17:55:54 MDT on 10/29/2026 under Subscription No.20250131413 which expires on 05/26/2027, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (6ae3dcb7cf4c07330123b6f1) 2 ARTICLE 1 INITIAL INFORMATION § 1.1 Unless otherwise provided in an exhibit to this Service Order, this Service Order and the Service Agreement are based on the Initial Information set forth below: § 1.2 The Owner and Architect may rely on the Initial Information. Both parties, however, recognize that such information may materially change and, in that event, the Owner and the Architect may agree to appropriately adjust the schedule, the Architect’s services, and the Architect’s compensation in accordance with the Master Agreement. The Owner shall adjust the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work and the Owner’s anticipated design and construction milestones, as necessary, to accommodate material changes in the Initial Information. ARTICLE 2 SERVICES UNDER THIS SERVICE ORDER § 2.1 The Architect’s Services under this Service Order are described below or in an exhibit to this Service Order, such as a Scope of Architect’s Services document. § 2.1.1 Basic Services Professional Design Services. Refer to Exhibit A for details. § 2.1.2 Additional Services (Describe below the Additional Services the Architect shall provide pursuant to this Service Order or state whether the services are described in documentation attached to this Service Order.) ARTICLE 3 DATE OF COMMENCEMENT AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION § 3.1 Unless otherwise provided in an exhibit to this Service Order, the Owner’s anticipated dates for commencement of construction and Substantial Completion of the Work are set forth below: .1 Commencement of construction date: .2 Substantial Completion date: ARTICLE 4 COMPENSATION § 4.1 For Basic Services described under Section 2.1.1, the Owner shall compensate the Architect as follows: .1 Stipulated Sum (Insert amount) $123,500.00 § 4.3 For Reimbursable Expenses described in the Master Agreement, the Architect shall be compensated in accordance with the Master Agreement unless otherwise set forth below: 337 AIA Document B221 – 2018. Copyright © 2014 and 2018. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 17:55:54 MDT on 10/29/2026 under Subscription No.20250131413 which expires on 05/26/2027, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (6ae3dcb7cf4c07330123b6f1) 3 ARTICLE 5 INSURANCE § 5.1 Insurance shall be in accordance with section 3.3 of the Master Agreement: ARTICLE 6 PARTY REPRESENTATIVES § 6.1 The Owner identifies the following representative in accordance with Section 1.4.1 of the Master Agreement: Shane Miller, Project Coordinator 121 N. Rouse Ave., Bozeman, MT 59771 (406) 577-7425 shane.miller@bozemanmt.gov § 6.2 The Architect identifies the following representative in accordance with Section 1.5.1 of the Master Agreement: Chad Malcott, Project Manager 705 Osterman Dr., Ste B, Bozeman, MT 59715 (406) 586-0707 cmalcott@jackola.com ARTICLE 7 ATTACHMENTS AND EXHIBITS § 7.1 The following attachments and exhibits, if any, are incorporated herein by reference: .1 AIA Document, B121TM-2018, Standard Form of Master Agreement Between Owner and Architect for Services provided under multiple Service Orders; .2 Other Exhibits incorporated into this Agreement: Exhibit A .3 Other documents: This Service Order entered into as of the day and year first written above. Click here to enter text.\s1\ OWNER (Signature) BY: Chuck Winn, City Manager (Printed name and title) Click here to enter text.\s2\ ARCHITECT (Signature) BY: Timothy R. Eddy FAIA, Executive Officer (Printed name, title, and license number if required) 338 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B221 – 2018. Copyright © 2014 and 2018. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 17:55:54 MDT on 10/29/2026 under Subscription No.20250131413 which expires on 05/26/2027, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (6ae3dcb7cf4c07330123b6f1) 7 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA® Document B221TM – 2018 This Additions and Deletions Report, as defined on page 1 of the associated document, reproduces below all text the author has added to the standard form AIA document in order to complete it, as well as any text the author may have added to or deleted from the original AIA text. Added text is shown underlined. Deleted text is indicated with a horizontal line through the original AIA text. Note: This Additions and Deletions Report is provided for information purposes only and is not incorporated into or constitute any part of the associated AIA document. This Additions and Deletions Report and its associated document were generated simultaneously by AIA software at 17:55:54 MDT on 10/29/2026. PAGE 1: SERVICE ORDER number 2 made as of the Tenth day of November in the year 2026 City of Bozeman 121 N. Rouse Ave., Bozeman, MT 59771 Jackola Engineering and Architecture, PC 705 Osterman Drive, Suite B, Bozeman, MT 59715 Lindley Center - Design Build This Service Order, together with the Master Agreement between Owner and Architect dated the Third day of March in the year 2026 PAGE 2: § 4.4 When compensation identified in Section 4.1 is on a percentage basis, progress payments for each phase of Basic Services shall be calculated by multiplying the percentages identified in this Article by the Owner’s most recent budget for the Cost of the Work. Compensation paid in previous progress payments shall not be adjusted based on subsequent updates to the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work. (State below details of the Project’s site and program, Owner’s contractors and consultants, Architect’s consultants, Owner’s budget and schedule, anticipated procurement method, Owner’s Sustainable Objective, and other information relevant to the Project.) § 1.2 The Owner and Architect may rely on the Initial Information. Both parties, however, recognize that such information may materially change and, in that event, the Owner and the Architect shallmay agree to appropriately adjust the schedule, the Architect’s services, and the Architect’s compensation in accordance with the Master Agreement. The Owner shall adjust the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work and the Owner’s anticipated design and construction milestones, as necessary, to accommodate material changes in the Initial Information. (Describe below the Basic Professional Design Services the Architect shall provide pursuant to this Service Order or state whether the services are described in documentation attached to this Service Order.). Refer to Exhibit A for details. 339 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B221 – 2018. Copyright © 2014 and 2018. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 17:55:54 MDT on 10/29/2026 under Subscription No.20250131413 which expires on 05/26/2027, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (6ae3dcb7cf4c07330123b6f1) 8 .2 Percentage Basis (Insert percentage value) ( ) % of the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work, as calculated in accordance with Section 4.4. .3 Other (Describe the method of compensation) § 4.2 For Additional Services described under Section 2.1.2 or in the Master Agreement, the Architect shall be compensated in accordance with the Master Agreement unless otherwise set forth below: (Insert amount of, or basis for, compensation if other than as set forth in the Master Agreement. Where the basis of compensation is set forth in an exhibit to this Service Order, such as a Scope of Architect’s Services document, list the exhibit below.) § 4.3 For Reimbursable Expenses described in the Master Agreement, the Architect shall be compensated in accordance with the Master Agreement unless otherwise set forth below: (Insert amount of, or basis for, compensation if other than as set forth in the Master Agreement. Where the basis of compensation is set forth in an exhibit to this Service Order, such as a Scope of Architect’s Services document, list the exhibit below.) PAGE 3: ARTICLE 5 INSURANCE$123,500.00 § 4.3 For Reimbursable Expenses described in the Master Agreement, the Architect shall be compensated in accordance with the Master Agreement unless otherwise set forth below: ARTICLE 5 INSURANCE § 5.1 Insurance shall be in accordance with section 3.3 of the Master Agreement: ARTICLE 6 PARTY REPRESENTATIVES § 6.1 The Owner identifies the following representative in accordance with Section 1.4.1 of the Master Agreement: Shane Miller, Project Coordinator 121 N. Rouse Ave., Bozeman, MT 59771 (406) 577-7425 shane.miller@bozemanmt.gov § 6.2 The Architect identifies the following representative in accordance with Section 1.5.1 of the Master Agreement: Chad Malcott, Project Manager 705 Osterman Dr., Ste B, Bozeman, MT 59715 (406) 586-0707 340 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B221 – 2018. Copyright © 2014 and 2018. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 17:55:54 MDT on 10/29/2026 under Subscription No.20250131413 which expires on 05/26/2027, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (6ae3dcb7cf4c07330123b6f1) 9 cmalcott@jackola.com ARTICLE 7 ATTACHMENTS AND EXHIBITS § 7.1 The following attachments and exhibits, if any, are incorporated herein by reference: .1AIA Document, B121TM-2018, Standard Form of Master Agreement Between Owner and Architect for Services provided under multiple Service Orders; .2 Other Exhibits incorporated into this Agreement: Exhibit A .3 Other documents: This Service Order entered into as of the day and year first written above. PAGE 4: Signature Signature OWNER (Signature) ARCHITECT (Signature) BY: Chuck Winn, City Manager BY: Timothy R. Eddy FAIA, Executive Officer (Printed name and title) (Printed name, title, and license number if required) SERVICE ORDER number made as of the day of in the year THE SERVICE AGREEMENT This Service Order, together with the Master Agreement between Owner and Architect dated the day of in the year (In words, indicate day, month, and year.) form a Service Agreement. The Owner and Architect agree as follows. TABLE OF ARTICLES 1 INITIAL INFORMATION 2 SERVICES UNDER THIS SERVICE ORDER 3 DATE OF COMMENCEMENT AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION 341 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B221 – 2018. Copyright © 2014 and 2018. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 17:55:54 MDT on 10/29/2026 under Subscription No.20250131413 which expires on 05/26/2027, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (6ae3dcb7cf4c07330123b6f1) 10 4 COMPENSATION 5 INSURANCE 6 PARTY REPRESENTATIVES 7 ATTACHMENTS AND EXHIBITS ARTICLE 1 INITIAL INFORMATION § 1.1 Unless otherwise provided in an exhibit to this Service Order, this Service Order and the Service Agreement are based on the Initial Information set forth below: PAGE 5: § 1.2 The Owner and Architect may rely on the Initial Information. Both parties, however, recognize that such information may materially change and, in that event, the Owner and the Architect may agree to appropriately adjust the schedule, the Architect’s services, and the Architect’s compensation in accordance with the Master Agreement. The Owner shall adjust the Owner’s budget for the Cost of the Work and the Owner’s anticipated design and construction milestones, as necessary, to accommodate material changes in the Initial Information. ARTICLE 2 SERVICES UNDER THIS SERVICE ORDER § 2.1 The Architect’s Services under this Service Order are described below or in an exhibit to this Service Order, such as a Scope of Architect’s Services document. § 2.1.1 Basic Services § 2.1.2 Additional Services (Describe below the Additional Services the Architect shall provide pursuant to this Service Order or state whether the services are described in documentation attached to this Service Order.) ARTICLE 3 DATE OF COMMENCEMENT AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION § 3.1 Unless otherwise provided in an exhibit to this Service Order, the Owner’s anticipated dates for commencement of construction and Substantial Completion of the Work are set forth below: .1 Commencement of construction date: .2 Substantial Completion date: ARTICLE 4 COMPENSATION § 54.1 Insurance shall be in accordance with section 3.3 of the Master Agreement, except as indicated belowFor Basic Services described under Section 2.1.1, the Owner shall compensate the Architect as follows: .1 Stipulated Sum (Insert any insurance requirements that differ from those statedamount) § 4.2 For Additional Services described under Section 2.1.2 or in the Master Agreement, such as coverage types, coverage limits, and durations for professional liability or other coverages.)the Architect shall be compensated in accordance with the Master Agreement unless otherwise set forth below: 342 Additions and Deletions Report for AIA Document B221 – 2018. Copyright © 2014 and 2018. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 17:55:54 MDT on 10/29/2026 under Subscription No.20250131413 which expires on 05/26/2027, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (6ae3dcb7cf4c07330123b6f1) 11 § 54.23 In addition to insurance requirementsFor Reimbursable Expenses described in the Master Agreement, the Architect shall carry the following types of insurance.be compensated in accordance with the Master Agreement unless otherwise set forth below: (List below any other insurance coverage to be provided by the Architect, not otherwise set forth in the Master Agreement, and any applicable limits.) Coverage Limits PAGE 6: ARTICLE 5 INSURANCE § 5.1 Insurance shall be in accordance with section 3.3 of the Master Agreement: (List name, address, and other information.) (List name, address, and other information.) skitchin@henneberyeddy.com (Clearly identify any other exhibits incorporated into this Agreement.) (List other documents, if any, including additional scopes of service forming part of this Service Order.) BY: Jon Henderson, Acting City Manager BY: Timothy R. Eddy FAIA, Executive Officer 343 AIA Document D401 – 2003. Copyright © 1992 and 2003. All rights reserved. “The American Institute of Architects,” “American Institute of Architects,” “AIA,” the AIA Logo, and “AIA Contract Documents” are trademarks of The American Institute of Architects. This document was produced at 17:55:54 MDT on 10/29/2026 under Order No.20250131413 which expires on 05/26/2027, is not for resale, is licensed for one-time use only, and may only be used in accordance with the AIA Contract Documents® Terms of Service. To report copyright violations, e-mail docinfo@aiacontracts.com. User Notes: (6ae3dcb7cf4c07330123b6f1) 1 Certification of Document's Authenticity AIA® Document D401™ – 2003 I, Jon Henderson, Assistant City Manager, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, that I created the attached final document simultaneously with its associated Additions and Deletions Report and this certification at 17:55:54 MDT on 10/29/2026 under Order No. 20250131413 from AIA Contract Documents software and that in preparing the attached final document I made no changes to the original text of AIA® Document B221TM - 2018, Service Order for use with Master Agreement Between Owner and Architect, other than those additions and deletions shown in the associated Additions and Deletions Report. _____________________________________________________________ (Signed) _____________________________________________________________ (Title) _____________________________________________________________ (Dated) 344 2250 Highway 93 South Kalispell, MT. 59901 | 406.755.3208 - Corporate Office | 406. 755.3218 - Fax www.jackola.com | Kalispell, MT | Bozeman, MT | Vancouver, WA ADDITIONAL SERVICES PROPOSAL Project : Date: 10/16/2026 Lindley Center Renovation 1102 E. Curtiss Ave Bozeman, MT 59715 Client: Contact Information: City of Bozeman Attn: Shane Miller Facilities Project Coordinator Phone: 406-595-0637 20 E. Olive Street Office 014B Email: smiller@bozeman.net Bozeman, MT 59715 PURPOSE OF PROPOSAL This proposal outlines additional professional services and associated fees for the Lindley Center Renovation beyond the scope and assumptions of the original Agreement. The original services were developed around an anticipated project budget of $1,540,000, less design and GCCM preconstruction fees. The City has subsequently established a $2,500,000 all-in project budget. As the project has been further developed, additional improvements, existing-condition needs, consultant services, and design and coordination efforts have been identified beyond the assumptions of the original proposal. This Additional Services Proposal addresses the additional effort required to incorporate the expanded project scope, identified existing conditions, and services not included in the original Agreement. Upon acceptance, the additional services and fees will be incorporated into the Agreement through a separate amendment. EXPANDED SCOPE OF SERVICES Jackola will provide the following services in addition to, or as an expansion of, the services described in the original Agreement: 1. Project Management, Design Coordination, and Cost Alignment Provide additional project management and multidisciplinary coordination associated with the expanded renovation scope. Coordinate integration of additional and expanded discipline scope, including site/UDC improvements, structural repairs, electrical improvements, and optional technology/low- voltage systems. Coordinate revisions to the design schedule resulting from the expanded scope, pricing and reconciliation process, and revised construction schedule. Coordinate the design with the Owner-provided hazardous-material assessment. Jackola will not identify or quantify hazardous materials on the drawings. The Contractor is responsible for reviewing and addressing the findings of the Owner-provided assessment. Exhibit A 345 2. Geotechnical Services Provide test pits and infiltration testing and prepare a geotechnical engineering report with recommendations for new footing and exterior patio foundations, subgrade preparation, and pavement sections for the parking lot and other proposed paved areas. 3. Architectural and Interior Design Advance the selected architectural concept and provide additional documentation for the expanded interior, envelope, roof, window, entrance, and exterior improvement scope, including accessibility improvements, restrooms, kitchen and service access, staff office, janitorial space, and storage. 4. Building Envelope and Roofing Develop repair and replacement details for deteriorated log walls based on observed conditions, including localized face replacement and full-member replacement where required by final investigation. Develop roof replacement and insulation improvements, including coordination of drainage, ice- damming mitigation, and interface conditions at existing construction. 5. Structural Engineering Provide structural design and coordination for selected ramp, stair, and patio improvements. 6. Mechanical and Plumbing Engineering Expand plumbing design from isolated repair of nonfunctioning piping to replacement of aging domestic water and sanitary piping within the building. 7. Electrical, Lighting, and Fire Alarm Provide additional electrical design and coordination for improvements added through the expanded project scope, including power distribution for exterior convenience receptacles, event use, and other added electrical loads. Expand interior lighting design beyond one-for-one fixture replacement including simple and intuitive dimming/control strategies. Provide additional exterior and site lighting design for building entrances, parking, pedestrian routes, and security/safety lighting. 8. Civil, Site, and Landscape Design Since the original Agreement was prepared, the City of Bozeman has revised the Uniform Development Code (UDC), requiring additional civil and site design beyond the assumptions of the original scope: o Provide additional civil and site design associated with current City of Bozeman UDC requirements beyond the assumptions of the original scope, including paved parking and gutter improvements, required vehicular access dimensions, and accessible pedestrian routes. o Provide additional stormwater-management design resulting from increased impervious area associated with the selected site improvements. 346 9. Technology and Low-Voltage Systems - Optional Additional Service If authorized by the City, add low-voltage design and consultant coordination, which were excluded from the original Agreement. The included scope consists of core data and network infrastructure, including structured cabling, headend equipment, network components, data connections, indoor wireless coverage, and access control at the main entrance door. Audio/video systems, outdoor wireless coverage, expanded access control, security/surveillance systems, and other enhanced technology systems are not included and may be added as additional services if selected by the City. DELIVERABLES Project deliverables will remain as defined in the original agreement. SCHEDULE The original milestone dates are superseded. Jackola will coordinate an updated design, pricing, permitting, and construction schedule with the City and Martel Construction following authorization of these additional services. The schedule will account for City reviews, GCCM pricing and reconciliation, hazardous-material findings, permitting, and any construction considerations. Construction Administration compensation in the original Agreement was based on a four-month construction period, eight bi-weekly OAC meetings, and the stated discipline site-visit allowances. Services beyond those assumptions are not included in the revised design fee and will require an additional written amendment or will be invoiced as Additional Services when authorized. COMPENSATION Original Agreement Amount $195,960.00 Proposed Add Services - Expanded Basic Services $123,500.00 Optional Low-Voltage / Technology Services $11,000.00 Optional services will only proceed with written authorization from the City. Except for the scope, fee, and schedule changes described in this proposal, all other terms of the existing Agreement remain unchanged. CONSULTANT: Date: 10/16/2026 By: Chad J. Malcott Title: Project Manager 347 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Karl Johnson, Project Engineer Shawn Khotz, Director of Utilities SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Task Order Number 5 for the Right of Way Acquisition Project with Clear Route Real Estate, LLC for Properties Necessary to Construct the Sourdough Transmission Mains Rehabilitation Project MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Vendor/Contract RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Task Order Number 5 for the Right of Way Acquisition Project with Clear Route Real Estate, LLC for Properties Necessary to Construct the Sourdough Transmission Mains Rehabilitation Project STRATEGIC PLAN:4.3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices: Prioritize long-term investment and maintenance for existing and new infrastructure. BACKGROUND:Clear Route Real Estate (“Clear Route”) provides the City with real estate and right-of-way acquisition services through the Professional Services Agreement (PSA) for Streets and Utilities Land Agent Service FY2026-FY2028 authorized by City Commission on July 15, 2025. Attached is a copy of Task Order Number 5 with Clear Route Real Estate, LLC for the Right of Way Acquisition Project under the PSA for the Sourdough Transmission Mains Rehabilitation Project (Project). The Project is currently in the design phase which is replacing the existing Sourdough Transmission Mains from the Sourdough Tank to near the Trooper Trail and Sourdough Road intersection. Execution of the project and long term operation flexibility requires construction of a new water main that connects the two existing transmission mains north of the project limits described above. This task order is for the acquisition of the easement for the new water main connection. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:These services will be paid on a time and materials basis with a not to exceed total amount. The not to exceed for this task order is $9,445.00 to be paid from project W04 – Water Pipe Replacement Program. Sufficient capital 348 project budget is available to cover the agreed task order services. Attachments: Task Order 5 Proposal_2026-10-23.pdf Report compiled on: October 26, 2026 349 October 23, 2026 Karl Johnson, PE City of Bozeman 20 East Olive St. Bozeman, MT 59715 Subject: City of Bozeman Buyers Agent for R/W FY 2025 - FY 2026 Project Scope of Services – Task Order #5 Water Main Easement--Sourdough Dear Karl, Clear Route Real Estate is pleased to submit this proposal to provide services for the project referenced above, as outlined in the attached Exhibit A. If the terms of this proposal are acceptable, please indicate your approval by signing and dating the signature page. This document outlines the agreement between the City of Bozeman (the “Client”) and Clear Route Real Estate. The Professional Services Agreement for Realty Professionals, under which Clear Route Real Estate will serve as the City’s Buyer’s Agent for right-of-way acquisition during FY 2025 – FY 2026, is hereby incorporated into and made an integral part of this contract. Project Intent We understand the City of Bozeman is anticipating completing water main improvements adjacent to Sourdough Road in the near future. As part of the process, the City has requested right-of-way (R/W) acquisition services to acquire a water main easement for the proposed improvements. Clear Route will coordinate with one impacted property, further detailed on the attached Exhibit A, to acquire a permanent easement. Thank you for including our team to assist with this project. Feel free to call me at 406-208-7919 if you have any questions regarding this proposal. If it meets your approval, please mail or email this signed and dated agreement to our office at P.O. Box 6162, Bozeman, MT 59771 or tgaddo@clearroute-re.com. Thank you. Sincerely, Clear Route Real Estate Tony Gaddo, P.E., REALTOR® Senior R/W Consultant, Broker/Owner Enclosures 350 Water Main Easement--Sourdough Page | 1 10/23/2026 EXHIBIT A Scope of Services The scope of services is detailed below. 1. Project Research a. Obtain and review available preliminary design plans and project documentation b. Coordination meeting with the project team members c. Obtain current deeds and ownership information for one property for R/W acquisition 2. Initial Property Owner Contact a. Compile contact information for one (1) parcel b. Initiate contact with owners of one (1) parcel of land to begin acquisition discussion 3. Title Commitments a. A title commitment will be secured for one (1) parcel requiring permanent property acquisition b. Team coordination 4. Appraisals and Valuations a. Full appraisal narrative reports are not included in this scope of services b. A waiver valuation will be completed for one (1) parcel to acquire a water main easement by Clear Route c. Team coordination d. QA/QC of valuation documents 5. Prepare Contracts a. Prepare one water main easement using City standard templates for the proposed water main as shown on Exhibit B, attached b. The City’s project engineering consultant, Sanbell, is completing the project’s survey and engineering design. Sanbell will prepare and provide necessary R/W exhibits with legal descriptions for the easement acquisition area for one (1) parcel under separate contract with the City. R/W exhibits will be stamped by a professional land surveyor. c. Clear Route will prepare acquisition documents including graphics, figures, maps, letters, and project information d. Prepare acquisition cost details and summary e. QA/QC of documents 6. Acquisitions a. Conduct acquisition meetings with property owners (family trust) for one (1) parcel (minimum of 5 meetings) b. Prepare final acquisition documents c. Prepare final acquisition costs d. QA/QC of documents 351 Water Main Easement--Sourdough Page | 2 10/23/2026 7. Title Clearing and Closing a. Prepare final title transfer documents, and schedule closing date for the selected property b. Obtain mortgage releases, clear taxes and leans, as required c. Submittal of completed R/W acquisition offer packages to the City for review and execution d. Team coordination e. Attend closing meeting 8. Final Submittal and Closeout a. Prepare R/W acquisition project submittal packet b. Deliver completed title transfer documents c. QA/QC of deliverables Schedule Clear Route Real Estate and the Client will work together to create a schedule outlining key milestones for starting and completing the project. This schedule will reflect realistic timeframes for services provided by Clear Route and the Client’s other consultants and will incorporate anticipated review and approval periods by the Client and any governing agencies. The schedule will remain flexible and may be revised throughout the project to accommodate changes in scope or design, or to address delays or other factors outside Clear Route Real Estate’s control. Budget and Invoicing Clear Route will bill for its services on a time-and-materials basis with a total cost not to exceed $9,445.00. Clear Route will begin work once this agreement has been signed by both parties. Right-of-Way Acquisition Services 1. Project Research $380.00 2. Initial Property Owner Contact $495.00 3. Title Commitments $980.00 4. Appraisals and Valuations $1,980.00 5. Prepare Contracts $990.00 6. Acquisitions $3,300.00 7. Title Clearing and Closing $990.00 8. Final Submittal and Closeout $330.00 Total $9,445.00 352 Water Main Easement--Sourdough Page | 3 10/23/2026 Clear Route Real Estate will submit monthly invoices to the Client for services performed during the prior billing period, typically aligning with the calendar month and spanning approximately 30 days. Each invoice will itemize, as applicable, charges based on time or unit rates, as well as any costs for subcontracted consultants and reimbursable expenses. Invoices will be issued promptly following the end of each billing period and will be due upon receipt by the Client. ____________________________________________________________________________ This Task Order is dated ________________, 20___ between City of Bozeman, Montana (City) and Clear Route Real Estate (Contractor). IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written or as recorded in an electronic signature. CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA CLEAR ROUTE REAL ESTATE, LLC By: _______________________________ By: _______________________________ Print Name: ________________________ Print Name: ________________________ Print Title: __________________________ Print Title: __________________________ Date: ______________________________ Date: ______________________________ 353 Exhibit B Page 1 of 1 (1) Current Project Information PROJECT NO.: TBD PROJECT NAME: Water Main Easement--Sourdough PARCEL NO.: 1 (2) RECORD OWNER: TBD Notes: Aerial image locations are approximate and may not be exact. Refer to easement exhibits for detail. 354 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Brian Heaston, Engineer III Shawn Kohtz, Director of Utilities SUBJECT:Authorize the City Manager to Sign Task Order 7 with HDR Engineering Providing Professional Services for Revision of the Total Maximum Daily Load for Nutrients for the Middle Segment of the East Gallatin River MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Agreement - Vendor/Contract RECOMMENDATION:Authorize the City Manager to Sign Task Order 7 with HDR Engineering Providing Professional Services for Revision of the Total Maximum Daily Load for Nutrients for the Middle Segment of the East Gallatin River STRATEGIC PLAN:6.1 Clean Water Supplies: Ensure adequate supplies of clean water for today and tomorrow. BACKGROUND:On October 27, 2026 the City Commission authorized a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to revise the nutrient total maximum daily load (TMDL) for the middle segment of the East Gallatin River. Refer to the prior hyperlink to view packet information for the MOU which contains additional background information. The attached Task Order 7 with HDR Engineering provides professional services to complete all necessary scientific and technical water quality analyses to revise the nutrient TMDL. The TMDL process will derive numeric nutrient water quality targets for the middle segment of the East Gallatin River that satisfy the state’s narrative nutrient water quality standards. The TMDL culminates with the assignment of a waste load allocation (WLA) to the City’s nutrient discharges to the river. The WLA establishes the maximum legal quantity of nutrients, total nitrogen and total phosphorous, that the water reclamation facility (WRF) can discharge long-term. By law, the WLA must be approved by DEQ and the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) prior to its incorporation into the WRF’s discharge permit as a final effluent limit. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the City Commission. 355 FISCAL EFFECTS:The adopted FY27 budget contains $300,000 in the wastewater fund capital improvements plan for the TMDL revision (Project Code WW164). The negotiated cost for Task Order 7 is $300,000, which is within the authorized FY27 budget. Attachments: Bozeman WRF Task Order 07_TMDL.pdf Bozeman WRF Task Order 07_TMDL.pdf Report compiled on: October 29, 2026 356 WRF Task Order No. 7 1 Exhibit A to Professional Services Agreement TASK ORDER NUMBER 07 Issued under the authority of Professional Services Agreement between the City of Bozeman and HDR Engineering, Inc. for: A range of professional and technical services related to operations and maintenance of the City of Bozeman Water Reclamation Facility and the East Gallatin River. This Task Order is dated , 2026, between City of Bozeman (City) and HDR Engineering, Inc. (Contractor). The following representatives have been designated for the work performed under this Task Order: City: Brian Heaston Contractor: Coralynn Revis SCOPE OF WORK: (attach additional sheet(s) as required) 1. Water quality analysis assistance on the East Gallatin River in support of the discharge permit. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) services for nutrients in middle segment of the East Gallatin River. See Attachment A. COMPENSATION: The anticipated cost for services for the above Task items, to be completed on a Time and Materials Basis not to exceed $300,000.00 without prior authorization. Contractor shall be reimbursed on a Time and Materials basis not to exceed the budget amounts presented, without prior written authorization from the City of Bozeman. Contractor shall notify the City of Bozeman prior to executing additional work, and shall not proceed with additional work without written authorization from the City of Bozeman. Contractor shall invoice no more often than monthly for services provided in the prior month. The provisions of the Professional Services Master Task Order Agreement and any Special Terms and Conditions and/or Exhibits or Attachments to this Task Order shall govern the Work. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties authorized to commit resources of the companies have executed this Task Order: City of Bozeman HDR Engineering, Inc. By: By: Title: Title: Vice President Date: Date: Fed. ID. No. 47-0680568 November 10, 2026 357 1 Attachment A - Scope of Services City of Bozeman Third-Party Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Revision BACKGROUND The City of Bozeman (City) discharges to the East Gallatin River under Montana Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MPDES) Permit MT0022608 and is subject to wasteload allocations in the 2013 Lower Gallatin TMDL. In accordance with a 2026 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and associated project plan, the City will support the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in revising the nutrient Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for the middle segment of the East Gallatin River (assessment unit MT41H003_020). The revision is needed because House Bill 664 (2025) repealed Montana's base numeric nutrient standards, which the 2013 nutrient targets were based on. DEQ now implements the narrative nutrient criteria at Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM) 17.30.637(1)(e), using the available science. SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services will commence upon written Notice to Proceed (NTP), with a project duration anticipated to be approximately 24 months and completion of scoped work expected by December 2028. SCOPE OUTLINE AND MOU CROSSWALK Task Number Title MOU Responsibility 100 Project Management V 200 Impairment Identification and Definition n/a 300 Source Identification and Assessment III.B 400 Data Compilation III.B, III.C 500 Targets for Nutrients III.B 600 Impairment and Targets Linkage III.A, III.B 700 Allocations III.D 800 Assembling the TMDL III.D 900 Recommendations for Implementation (Future Task) III.D, III.E 1000 Support Stakeholder and Public Involvement (Future Task) IV.A–C 1100 Public Comment Response and Final TMDL Revisions (Future Task) IV.D 358 2 OBJECTIVE Under this Scope of Services, HDR will provide engineering services to support the City Cityin carrying out its responsibilities under the 2026 MOU with DEQ for the Middle East Gallatin River Third-Party TMDL Revision (DEQ 2026a). This third-party TMDL revision is intended to update a portion of the 2013 Lower Gallatin Planning Area Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and Framework Water Quality Improvement Plan (Lower Gallatin TMDL) (DEQ 2013). Specifically, the revision is focused on the nutrient components of the TMDL for the middle segment of the East Gallatin River, Highway 411Highway 411 to Smith Creek (AU MT41H003_020). The 2016 Integrated Report moved the upstream boundary of the assessment unit to Montana Highway 411 (Springhill Road), where it borders the CCity of Bozeman’s Water Reclamation Facility (WRF). Task 100 Project Management Objective Manage the technical scope, schedule, budget, quality assurance, coordination, communications, and required project management documentation. Approach 101. Project Management Plan Prepare a Project Management Plan (PMP) defining project objectives, scope, communication protocols, milestones, staffing, deliverables, quality procedures, and assumptions. 102. Project Initiation Workshop Conduct a project initiation workshop with the CCity and DEQ to confirm objectives, technical approaches, data needs, communication procedures, and expectations. It is anticipated that the workshop duration will be two hours and virtual. 103. City Coordination Meetings Conduct monthly coordination meetings with City. Prepare agendas and summaries documenting decisions, action items, and responsibilities. 104. DEQ Status Meetings and Schedule Updates Participate in standing monthly City and DEQ status meetings to discuss progress, technical matters, and coordination of work items. Document deviations from the project plan discussed at these meetings and update the project schedule as the work progresses. 105. Progress Reports and Invoices Prepare monthly progress reports summarizing completed work, budget and schedule status, upcoming activities, risks, and issues requiring resolution. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • Meeting agendas transmitted to the City via email. • Monthly progress report and invoice transmitted to the City via email. 359 3 Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: • Project management activities are limited to management of HDR's contract and technical scope. • Monthly progress reporting and invoicing will use HDR standard formats. • Up to two HDR staff will participate in project coordination meetings using virtual platforms. • HDR will proceed based on City comments and direction provided at project decision points. Substantial revisions resulting from delayed or changed direction, regulatory interpretation, assessment methodology, regulatory requirements, or DEQ guidance after acceptance of an interim work product may require schedule, scope, and budget modifications. • HDR will attend up to 24 monthly City coordination meetings and up to 24 monthly City and DEQ status meetings, each up to 1 hour. Task 200 Impairment Identification and Definition Objective Identify and describe the waterbody and watershed, the impaired designated use and suspected cause, and the pollutant of concern. Characterize the watershed and pollutant sources, including delineating the watershed, quantifying land use and land management practices, and describing hydrologic characteristics. To establish the technical basis for subsequent TMDL revision activities, review the existing TMDL technical basis, current water quality conditions, applicable assessment information, and target-development framework to identify data gaps, changed conditions, and identify revisions. The findings will be used to develop an existing- conditions baseline that informs target development, source assessment, modeling, allocation analyses, and revisions to the TMDL document. Approach 201. Watershed Characterization and Hydrologic Assessment The waterbody has been defined by DEQ as assessment unit MT41H003_020, waterbody East Gallatin River, and location description East Gallatin River, MT HWY 411 to Smith Creek. In some reports the waterbody extends a few miles upstream from the confluence with Highway 411 to the confluence with Smith Creek. In the Lower Gallatin TMDL, the waterbody is referred to as the Middle East Gallatin River. For this revision, the project plan defines the segment as the East Gallatin River from the confluence with Highway 411 to the confluence with Smith Creek (22.12 miles). This extent includes both reaches identified in Section 6.6.3.3 of the Lower Gallatin TMDL (Highway 411 to Hyalite Creek and Hyalite Creek to Smith Creek) and the Bozeman WRF outfall. HDR will delineate reaches within the segment to support reach-scale source assessment, target development, and allocations. Perform a flow analysis using DFLOW or the U.S Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Toolbox on discharge data available from the Middle East Gallatin River flow monitoring 360 4 stations. Present the result in a table, including values for 5th and 10th percentile, 7Q10, 14Q5, 4B3, and harmonic mean on an annual and seasonal basis. Determine the critical flow and season for the protection of beneficial uses. Develop a map of the Middle East Gallatin River using the USGS 2025 National Land Cover Database. Present the land cover types by acre for the Middle East Gallatin River watershed to characterize the land use. 202. Existing Conditions and Water Quality Assessment Review Review the Draft 2022/2024 Assessments available from the DEQ Clean Water Act Information Center. Summarize the assessment record summary for AU MT41H003_020. Review available Integrated Reports, 303(d) listings, and TMDL documentation to evaluate beneficial-use and narrative-target attainment and identify implications for data compilation, reach segmentation, and existing-condition summaries. Evaluate existing nutrient conditions, spatial trends, temporal trends, flow conditions, and potential eutrophication indicators. 203. Existing TMDL and Target Development Framework Review Review nutrient-related sections of the 2013 Lower Gallatin TMDL, including historical loading calculations, source-quantification methods, Appendix F, and Appendix G. Review DEQ guidance, narrative nutrient-standard interpretation methods, reference conditions, and existing TMDL targets. Identify data gaps, regulatory changes, and analyses requiring revision. 204. Existing Conditions Review Technical Memorandum Document watershed characterization and hydrologic analysis findings, existing TMDL review findings, current water quality conditions, assessment considerations, and implications for target development. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • Flow analysis and land cover summary files. • Draft and final existing conditions and TMDL review technical memoranda. Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: • Existing-conditions review will rely on data and documentation compiled under Task 400. Tasks 200 and 400 will be performed concurrently. • HDR's review will use the segment extent defined in the project plan for this project (Highway 411 to Smith Creek, AU MT41H003_020). • Reassessment of impaired-water boundaries, segment definitions, beneficial-use determinations, or assessment unit delineations is not included. • No additional field investigations, sampling, or development of new regulatory assessment methodologies is included under this task. 361 5 • DEQ will review the existing-conditions findings and make the final determination regarding how the findings will be incorporated into nutrient target development and subsequent TMDL analyses. Task 300 Source Identification and Assessment Objective Characterize the type, magnitude, and location of sources of nutrient loading to the waterbody, including point and nonpoint sources. Compile the available data to determine the magnitude. A source assessment evaluates the type, magnitude, timing, and location of loadings to the waterbody. The source assessment determines inputs, measured as loads or concentrations, that will support the formulation of the load allocation and the wasteload allocation of the TMDL. The Lower Gallatin TMDL identified six loading sources: • Forest • Agriculture • Residential/Developed • Subsurface wastewater disposal and treatment • USFWS Fish Tech Center (point source) • City of Bozeman WRF (point source) The source assessment will determine if additional loading sources are significant and should be included in the TMDL. Approach 301. Source Inventory and Characterization Update and characterize nutrient sources, including natural background, wastewater discharges, septic systems, stormwater and urban runoff, agricultural sources, residential and urban sources, tributary and return-flow inputs, and groundwater inputs. Use aerial imagery, GIS, and available watershed data to characterize source distributions. Update information on sources that existed when the 2013 Lower Gallatin TMDL was completed and identify new sources. The inventory will include adjacent land use category, septic density per reach, MPDES permits, irrigation withdrawals and returns, grazing practices, tributary inputs, riparian condition, discrete nutrient sources, and natural background sources. 302. Point Source and Tributary Loading Evaluation Once the sources are identified, compile the available data to characterize the magnitude, timing, and locations of these source loads to the Middle East Gallatin River. For point sources and sources with monitoring, directly compute their loading to the Middle East Gallatin River as both time series and in summary statistics tables. Evaluate nutrient loads from tributaries, the upstream boundary, and other inflows to AU MT41H003_020 between Highway 411 and Smith Creek using available water quality and flow 362 6 data. Compile Bozeman WRF discharge monitoring report data and evaluate historical and current effluent nutrient trends to support wasteload allocation development. Estimate stormwater and urban runoff loads using MS4 permit monitoring and discharge monitoring report data, supplemented by literature values, and the City's SWMM model modified with local empirical data where appropriate. 303. Nonpoint Source Loading Estimates For non-point sources and land uses without monitoring data, indirectly estimate their loading to the Middle East Gallatin River. Calculate a range of nutrient loadings from the loading sources based on monitoring data and simple analysis techniques as described in EPA’s Protocol for Developing Nutrient TMDLs (EPA 1999). The simple analysis techniques to employ include the following. • Land Use Export Empirical Methods • Simple Method • USGS Regression Method Supplement these techniques with the source-specific methods identified in the project plan: • Natural background: establish natural background conditions using methods similar to those in the 2013 Lower Gallatin TMDL. • Septic: update septic loads per reach, including potential loads from failing or malfunctioning systems, using the DEQ Method for Estimating the Attenuation of Nutrients from Septic Systems (MEANSS) model. • Agriculture/livestock and residential/urban: attribute measured loads to major source categories at a reach-scale resolution using field and aerial source identification information. 304. Source Inventory and Loading Analysis Workshop Conduct one City workshop (2 hours) to review the draft source inventory, loading framework, inputs, methods, assumptions, data gaps, and preliminary estimates. Document agreed refinements for the source assessment memorandum and subsequent modeling and allocation analyses. 305. Source Assessment Memorandum Document source inventories, assumptions, loading methods, and estimated loads in a memorandum. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • Associated data analysis file(s). • Draft and final source assessment memoranda. Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: 363 7 • Loading methods will follow the medium-to-high level of detail described in the project plan, using the simple analysis techniques, MEANSS, and SWMM described above. Methods beyond those listed are not included. • Investigations beyond Tasks 200 and 400 and evaluations requiring unavailable data are excluded. • HDR will submit a draft source assessment memorandum for DEQ review and will address DEQ comments in preparation of the final memorandum. • Source identification will rely on aerial imagery, GIS, and field observations from prior monitoring. New field surveys are not included. • SWMM modeling will use the City's existing model, provided by the City. Development or refinement of a new SWMM model is not included. Task 400 Data Compilation Objective Compile the necessary reports and data, such as flow, water quality, and geographic information system (GIS) to support the development of the analyses for the TMDL revision. Approach 401. Water Quality and Source Data Compilation Compile available information relevant to nutrient conditions, eutrophication responses, watershed characteristics, and source assessments that meet the following criteria. • Data from within the middle segment of the East Gallatin River watershed (Highway 411 to Smith Creek (AU MT41H003_020). Data from the following sources, as applicable to the segment, will include but not be limited to the following (See Task 300). o Flow and water quality data from East Gallatin River stream monitoring locations o Flow and water quality data from tributaries to the East Gallatin River o On-site septic systems o Flow and water quality data from irrigation diversions and returns o Belgrade WWTP (MTX000116) o Riverside Water & Sewer District WWTP o City of Bozeman Water Treatment Facility (MT0030155) o City of Bozeman Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) (MT0022608) o City of Bozeman MS4 Storm Water System (MTR040002) o United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) Bozeman Fish Technology Center (MTG130006) • Data from 2012 through 2026, focusing on data collected under DEQ-approved SAPs after the Bozeman WRF's major nutrient process upgrade was completed in 2012. The Lower Gallatin TMDL used data from 2001 through 2011. • Data from readily available and credible sources, e.g., DEQ, USGS, City, and Gallatin Local Water Quality District. • Parameters of interest include nitrogen and phosphorus (nutrient) concentrations, chlorophyll-a, dissolved oxygen, pH, and biological indicators. 402. Watershed Information Compilation 364 8 Compile GIS layers, land use, stream morphology (e.g., Rosgen classification and stream slope), aerial imagery, stream photos, applicable reference site data, point-source, tributary, and other watershed data. 403. Data Analysis for Target Development Analyze nutrient concentrations, chlorophyll-a, dissolved oxygen, pH, biological indicators, and other eutrophication-response metrics relevant to target development. Summarize the compiled data in statistics tables describing the period of record, count, minimum, median, average, and maximum values by location. 404. Data Quality Review Conduct a quality review of compiled data to determine if data does not meet DEQ quality requirements. Review data quality and identify datasets appropriate for target development and TMDL analyses. Data that does not meet quality requirements will be excluded from analysis and documented. It is anticipated that only data after the 2011 WRF upgrades will be used. 405. Data Compilation and Review Technical Memorandum Document compiled datasets, screening methods, data usability findings, and datasets recommended for DEQ review and subsequent tasks. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • Associated data analysis file(s). • Compiled 2012–2026 SAPs, data summary reports, and supporting monitoring documentation. • Draft and final data compilation and review technical memoranda. Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: • Data are electronically readily available. No data entry will be performed. • Data are from credible sources. Quality control review will follow DEQ guidance and project QA requirements. • Data may be excluded from the project data set based on quality of year of sampling. • Available data from the City, DEQ, USGS, and other public sources will be provided electronically by DEQ. • Required GIS, source, stream, and watershed information will be publicly available or provided by the City. • DEQ will review and confirm datasets for use in future target development and TMDL analyses. • The 2026 sampling and analysis plan, monitoring activities, laboratory coordination, data validation, and MT-eWQX upload will be completed under an ongoing, separately scoped project. 365 9 Task 500 Targets for Nutrients Objective Identify water quality indicators and targets that would support beneficial uses. Approach 501. Applicable Water Quality Standards and Targets Describe applicable water quality standards and water quality objectives and targets. TMDLs must link back to the existing water quality standards applicable to that waterbody and the pollutant of concern. 502. Evaluation of Alternative Target Scenarios The MOU includes the “proposal of new nutrient TMDL target values” for the middle segment of the East Gallatin River, Highway 411 to Smith Creek (AU MT41H003_020). Investigate a range of potential nutrient target values for comparison using a variety of references and methods including the following. • Lower Gallatin TMDL Section 6.4.2 Nutrient Target Values (DEQ 2013) • EPA’s 1999 Protocol for Developing Nutrient TMDLs (EPA 1999) • EPA’s 2000 Nutrient Criteria Technical Guidance Manual: Rivers and Streams (EPA 1995 and EPA 2000). • EPA’s 2010 Using Stressor-Response Relationships to Derive Numeric Nutrient Criteria (EPA 2010) • DEQ’s 2026 Eutrophication Assessment Method for Wadeable Streams and Medium Rivers (DEQ 2026b) Evaluate up to three target approaches, which may include site-specific biological response relationships, reference or regional conditions, seasonal considerations, and other scientifically supported methods for demonstrating protection of beneficial uses under Montana's narrative nutrient standard. Target parameters may include total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and nitrate plus nitrite (NO3+NO2). 503. Proposed TMDL Target Development and City Workshop Develop proposed TMDL targets and supporting rationale. Propose targets within DEQ's guidance on interpreting the narrative standard, using site- specific, data-driven methods where available. Evaluate whether targets should apply to the full segment or to the two reaches used in the 2013 Lower Gallatin TMDL (Highway 411 to Hyalite Creek and Hyalite Creek to Smith Creek). Confirm that proposed targets protect beneficial uses in the downstream lower segment of the East Gallatin River, and identify where meeting targets may create assimilative capacity downstream. Review the proposed targets and approach in one City workshop. 504. DEQ Target Development Coordination 366 10 Coordinate with DEQ to review narrative-standard interpretation, target-setting approach, reference-condition methods, and proposed endpoints in a monthly meeting or separate workshop. 505. TMDL Target Development Technical Memorandum Document target-development methods, evaluated alternatives, recommended target values, and workshop outcomes for DEQ consideration. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • Proposed target values presentation to DEQ in Microsoft PowerPoint format. • Draft and final TMDL target development summary memoranda. Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: • Nutrient target development will be based on the data review, existing-conditions assessment, and related findings developed under Tasks 200 and 400, together with available reference-condition information and DEQ guidance at the time of analysis. • Changes to regulatory requirements or target-setting methodology after work has commenced may require additional services. • HDR will prepare materials for one target-setting workshop with the City and one workshop with DEQ, 2 hours and virtual. Task 600 Impairment and Targets Linkage Objective Describe how the sources result in impairment of the Middle East Gallatin River above the targets. Approach Link the pollutant of concern to water quality within the impaired waterbody. Describe the cause- and-effect relationship between the impaired waterbody and the pollutant sources and determine the total loading capacity. Critical flow and water level conditions, as well as seasonality, must be considered when linking pollutant loading with water quality. 601. Modeling Approach Evaluation and Framework Development QUAL2K is a one-dimensional steady-flow model that tracks attached bottom algae biomass separately from suspended phytoplankton. The QUAL2K model has been applied to multiple snapshots in time based on monitoring data of the East Gallatin River that includes the upper (partial), middle, and lower reaches. DEQ reviewed documentation and the models during the development. This task includes reviewing Appendix G and prior East Gallatin modeling. 602. Modeling Quality Assurance Project Plan 367 11 Prepare the modeling Quality Assurance Project Plan and supporting quality documentation required for TMDL modeling, following EPA's QAPP development template and graded approach (EPA 2025). 603. Water and Loading Balances Connecting the sources and routing them through the Middle East Gallatin River can be shown by flow and loading balances. Develop water and loading balances for the Middle East Gallatin River for dates with synoptic water quality monitoring data. Present the results in figures and tables with descriptions of the process for developing the water balances provided. 604. Model Development, Calibration, and Validation Available QUAL2K models to work from include 9/22/2014, 9/29/2015, 8/15/2016, and 8/8/2018. These models will be used to reconstruct new models of the Middle East Gallatin River using the QUAL2KW Version 5. Model performance will be evaluated graphically and statistically using root mean squared error to compare model prediction to monitoring data and then assessing the result to reference error bands. Calibrate the model using the August 2026 synoptic sampling data collected under the separately scoped 2026 Sampling and Analysis Plan (HDR 2026) and validate the model using an earlier synoptic dataset. 605. Loading Capacity and Alternative Loading Scenarios Evaluate multiple nutrient reduction and source control scenarios to support allocation development. Define the loading capacity for the critical summer low-flow period, including the upstream boundary condition at Highway 411, and evaluate the assimilative capacity carried to the downstream segment. 606. Modeling Technical Report Prepare a draft modeling technical report documenting the selected analytical approach, model development and application, input data, assumptions, calibration and validation, evaluated scenarios, loading-capacity findings, limitations, and supporting quality assurance documentation. The report will describe model setup and parameterization and present outputs for existing conditions and modeled scenarios, including comparison of simulated and observed results for hydrology and nutrients. Address consolidated City and DEQ comments and prepare the final modeling technical report. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • QUAL2K input/output files (e.g., shade estimates, meteorological data, land use cover, and headwater conditions), model files, supporting data, and calculation spreadsheets (native electronic formats). • Draft and final QUAL2K modeling reports (MS Word). • Quality Assurance Project Plan for QUAL2K modeling work (MS Word). Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: 368 12 • Previous QUAL2K modeling will support reconstruction of new Middle East Gallatin River models. • DEQ will review, provide comments, and final acceptance of the impairment and target linkages (modeling) to support allocations. • DEQ’s acceptance of the outcomes for defining a linkage between the selected water quality targets and the identified pollutant sources to characterize total assimilative capacity for nutrient loading or total load reduction needed will be necessary to effectively move to the allocation phase. • Modeling and loading capacity evaluations will use applicable data, analyses, and findings compiled or developed under Tasks 200 through 500. • Selected modeling approaches will be reviewed and approved by DEQ based on available data, regulatory requirements, and project objectives. • Loading capacity analyses will be based on available information regarding critical flows, seasonal conditions, and nutrient response relationships. • Significant revisions resulting from future DEQ target-setting guidance may require scope and fee modification. • DEQ review of the modeling approach, model development, calibration and validation, scenarios, and loading-capacity findings will occur through review of the draft modeling technical report. HDR will address consolidated City and DEQ comments in preparing the final modeling technical report. • The draft and final modeling technical report include one consolidated revision cycle. Additional revisions resulting from changed direction, new data, or revised regulatory requirements may require a scope and fee amendment. Task 700 Allocations Objective Use the results from Task 600 to develop recommendations for the allocation of loads among the various point and nonpoint sources, while accounting for uncertainties in the analyses. Approach 701. Allocation Scenario Development Develop a pollutant allocation scenario. Load allocations attributed to the sources must be identified through reasonably accurate estimates via data analysis or water quality simulation modeling. A TMDL consists of the sum of individual wasteload allocations (WLAs) for point sources and load allocations (LAs) for nonpoint sources. Calculate TMDLs from streamflow and the established targets, with allocations expressed in pounds per day that increase with flow. The TMDL will equal the sum of allocations to major source categories, including an allocation to the upstream segment at Highway 411 and an allowance for future growth. Establishing a TMDL means finding an acceptable combination of allocations that adequately protects water quality standards. However, deciding how to divide the assimilative capacity of a given waterbody among sources can be a challenging task. 369 13 702. Allocation Framework Evaluation and TMDL Calculations The following methods will be evaluated and compared for distributing assimilative capacity. • Equal percentage reductions in concentration. • Equal percent reductions in loads. • Equal concentration inversely proportioned to source flows. • Equal loads inversely proportioned to source flows. • Equal incremental cost above minimum treatment (normalized for volumetric flow rate). • Modified optimization (i.e., least cost solution that includes the minimum treatment requirements of the technology-based controls). • One framework will apply the source-category approach described in the project plan. Natural background will be allocated based on reference site low-flow conditions. Each framework will be carried through the allocation calculations so the City can compare results. The City and DEQ will select a preferred framework at the TMDL and allocation workshops (Subtask 704). 703. Margin of Safety and Reasonable Assurance Determine if a margin of safety should be included to account for uncertainty or lack of knowledge about the relationship between pollutant loads and water quality. The margin of safety may be explicitly set aside as a specific fraction of the TMDL loading capacity, or it may be implicit and accounted for by making conservative assumptions when developing the pollutant allocation scenario. Check that seasonal variation in loads is considered and that the allocations are protective of standards. Document existing controls, regulatory mechanisms, permits, and BMP implementation assumptions supporting reasonable assurance. Incorporate the margin of safety through the following. • Use of critical summer low-flow conditions and end-of-pipe water quality targets to calculate wasteload allocations. • Use of conservative assumptions for natural background allocations. • Use of conservative assumptions to estimate septic-system loads and establish septic load allocations. 704. TMDL and Allocation Workshops Present the findings to DEQ. DEQ’s responsibilities include the final establishment of allocations as DEQ sees appropriate for AU MT41H003_020. Conduct one City and one DEQ workshop to review the proposed TMDL calculations, allocation framework, source allocations, margin-of-safety approach, reasonable-assurance considerations, and recommended revisions. 705. TMDL and Allocation Analysis Technical Memorandum Document TMDL calculations, allocation methods, margin-of-safety assumptions, reasonable- assurance considerations, workshop outcomes, and recommended revisions. 370 14 Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • TMDL and allocation workshop presentation materials (MS PowerPoint). • Draft and final TMDL and allocation analysis technical memoranda (MS Word). Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: • DEQ will provide guidance on the allocation methods, stakeholder involvement, and the final analysis and selection of allocations. • If DEQ rejects the modeling results or technical approach and requires additional or revised modeling to support TMDL and allocation development, continued modeling services will require scope and fee amendment. • DEQ retains authority over establishment of final TMDLs, allocations, margins of safety, and regulatory determinations. • Evaluation of up to three allocation frameworks is included. Additional frameworks or material changes to the approved allocation approach may require a scope and fee amendment. • HDR will prepare materials for and conduct one TMDL and allocation workshop with the City and one with DEQ.(2 hours each) • The draft and final TMDL and allocation analysis technical memoranda include one consolidated revision cycle based on City and DEQ comments. • Wasteload allocations for the two new MS4 general permits proposed for 2027 and revisions to the Smith Creek pathogen TMDLs are outside this scope and will be completed by DEQ. • Septic allocation evaluation is limited to reaches with potentially significant septic loading and up to two allocation iterations. Task 800 Assembling the TMDL Objective Compile the pertinent information and revise the Lower Gallatin TMDL using track changes for DEQ. Approach 801. Draft TMDL Revisions Upon completion of the technical analysis and allocation decision process, the elements of the technical analysis and their accompanying supporting documentation are assembled into the TMDL document that will undergo public review and comment consistent with the applicable procedures and forums used for public involvement. Translate the results of Task 200 through 700 into the Lower Gallatin TMDL using track changes to show the proposed revisions. Prepare draft revisions to the following Lower Gallatin TMDL sections identified in the DEQ project plan. 371 15 • Section 6.3 Water Quality Data Sources • Section 6.4.3.7 Middle East Gallatin River • Section 6.5.1.4 Riverside Water & Sewer District WWTP • Section 6.5.2.1 Bozeman WRF • Section 6.5.3 Existing Nutrient Load Summary • Section 6.6.1.1 WRF Allocation Approach • Section 6.6.3.2 East Gallatin WRF TMDL • Section 6.6.3.3 East Gallatin River Middle Segment • Section 6.6.4 Seasonality / MOS / Uncertainty (if applicable) • Applicable Sections 9 and 10 • Appendix F Prepare revisions in accordance with the DEQ document formatting requirements in the project plan, including no third-party logos, standardized fonts, table and figure labeling, and Chicago- style references without footnotes. Digital accessibility including alternative text for figures, descriptive link text, and reading order will be the responsibility of DEQ and not part of the submittals. 802. Appendix and Supporting Documentation Prepare revisions to Appendix F, together with supporting data summaries, figures, tables, references, and calculation documentation. 803. DEQ and EPA Review Coordination Coordinate with DEQ during development and review of the draft TMDL revision package, participate in technical review meetings, maintain comment-response documentation, and address one consolidated set of City and DEQ comments in preparing the revised draft package for public comment. Following DEQ's facilitation of EPA's initial review, address one consolidated set of EPA comments. 804. Final Deliverable Package Compile the revised draft TMDL document, appendices, technical memoranda, comment- response documentation, calculations, GIS and modeling files, and supporting materials into an organized package for DEQ release for public comment. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • Provide DEQ with a track changes version of edits to the original 2013 Lower Gallatin TMDL document. • Revised draft Sections 6.0, 9.0, and 10.0, Appendix F, provided with track changes or strikethrough and underline (MS Word), including supporting figures, tables, and Chicago-style references. • Draft and final technical memoranda and reports developed under Tasks 200 through 700 (MS Word). • Consolidated DEQ and EPA initial review comment-response documentation (MS Word or MS Excel). 372 16 • Revised draft TMDL package for public comment, including supporting data, calculations, GIS files, modeling files, analytical files, databases, and presentation materials (native electronic formats). Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: • DEQ will provide an editable Lower Gallatin TMDL document incorporating the formatting and digital accessibility requirements identified in the project plan. • Draft revisions will be prepared using track changes or redline formatting • DEQ will be responsible for final draft formatting and accessibility certification before public notice, including edits for digital accessibility, and for final document formatting, publication, and EPA submission after public comment. • Task 800 includes one consolidated City and DEQ review cycle between the initial draft and the revised draft package prepared for public comment. • File names will include a date descriptor for version control. HDR will provide completed products to the City for transmittal to DEQ by email or the project SharePoint site and will include completed products in the final package. • DEQ will complete formatting and accessibility certification. • Task 800 includes one consolidated response cycle for EPA initial review comments. Task 900 Recommendations for Implementation (FUTURE TASK) Objective TMDLs should include monitoring and evaluation plans to implement the TMDL and provide a basis for reviewing and revising TMDL elements or control actions in the future. This task is to be scoped at a future date. Task 1000 Support Stakeholder and Public Involvement (FUTURE TASK) Objective Support the joint responsibilities of the MOU for stakeholder and public meetings. These meetings include stakeholder meetings and a public meeting or open house. This task is to be scoped at a future date. Task 1100 Public Comment Response and Final TMDL Revisions (FUTURE TASK) Objective Support DEQ's public comment process and prepare final TMDL revisions based on DEQ- approved responses to consolidated public comments. This task is to be scoped at a future date. 373 17 Proposed Schedule References HDR, Inc. 2026. Water Quality Sampling for Mechanistic Model Refinement, East Gallatin River in Bozeman, Montana: Sampling and Analysis Plan. Missoula, MT: HDR, Inc. Montana DEQ. 2013. Lower Gallatin Planning Area TMDLs and Framework Water Quality Improvement Plan. Helena, MT: Montana Dept. of Environmental Quality. Montana DEQ. 2026a. Memorandum of Understanding for Middle East Gallatin River Third- Party TMDL Revision between the City of Bozeman (“City”) and Montana Department of Environmental Quality (“Department”) including Attachment A Lower Gallatin Third Party TMDL Revision Project Plan. Montana Department of Environmental Quality. Helena, MT. Task Description Start End 100 Project Management 11/2026 11/2028 200 Impairment Identification and Definition 11/2026 12/2026 300 Source Identification and Assessment 11/2026 01/2027 400 Data Compilation 01/2027 05/2027 500 Targets for Nutrients 05/2027 08/2027 600 Impairment and Targets Linkage 08/2027 01/2028 700 Allocations 01/2028 03/2028 800 Assembling the TMDL 03/2028 07/2028 900 Recommendations for Implementation TBD TBD 1000 Support Stakeholder and Public Involvement TBD TBD 1100 Public Comment Response and Final TMDL Revisions TBD TBD 374 MONTANA AREA 2026 HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE BILLING CLASSIFICATION RATE RANGES Principal/ Sr. Technical Advisor $ 250.00 - $ 400.00 Sr. Engineer/ Sr. Project Manager $ 250.00 - $ 400.00 Project Manager $ 180.00 - $ 350.00 Project Engineer $ 150.00 - $ 250.00 Design Engineer/EIT $ 100.00 - $ 200.00 CADD/GIS/Technician $ 100.00 - $ 200.00 Controls/Integration $ 100.00 - $ 300.00 Project Admin and Support $ 85.00 - $ 200.00 Environmental Specialist $ 100.00 - $ 250.00 Strategic Comm/Graphics $ 100.00 - $ 250.00 Construction Management/Inspection $ 100.00 - $ 300.00 Economics/Project Controls $ 100.00 - $ 300.00 Right-of-Way Specialist $ 100.00 - $ 250.00 2026 CHARGEABLE EXPENSE SCHEDULE Direct project expenses will be charged at the rates listed below unless a separate rate is negotiated for a specific project. SUBSISTENCE (PER DIEM) Subsistence such as meals and lodging while out on a project will be charged at actual cost or at the per diem rate negotiated for a specific project. TRAVEL Travel expenses will be charged at the following rates unless a separate rate is negotiated for a specific $Vehicles 0.92 /mile Rental Vehicles & Aircraft $ Actual Cost /mile 375 2026 CHARGEABLE EXPENSE SCHEDULE (continued) TELEPHONE/FAX/POSTAGE Long distance calls, telegrams, fax, cellular phone, and any special class postage will be charged at SPECIAL EQUIPMENT CHARGES GPS - Handheld $ 20 /hr. Survey Equipment $ 50 /hr. UTV Other equipment to be determined as necessary $ 350 /day SURVEYING SUPPLIES (Includes: Flagging, Stakes, Etc.) $ 50 /mile SUBCONSULTANTS Subconsultants and expenses may be subject to markup OVERHEAD Overhead costs, such as rent, insurance, utilities, office furniture, employee benefits, and taxes are included in the hourly billing rates. 376 WRF Task Order No. 7 1 Exhibit A to Professional Services Agreement TASK ORDER NUMBER 07 Issued under the authority of Professional Services Agreement between the City of Bozeman and HDR Engineering, Inc. for: A range of professional and technical services related to operations and maintenance of the City of Bozeman Water Reclamation Facility and the East Gallatin River. This Task Order is dated , 2026, between City of Bozeman (City) and HDR Engineering, Inc. (Contractor). The following representatives have been designated for the work performed under this Task Order: City: Brian Heaston Contractor: Coralynn Revis SCOPE OF WORK: (attach additional sheet(s) as required) 1. Water quality analysis assistance on the East Gallatin River in support of the discharge permit. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) services for nutrients in middle segment of the East Gallatin River. See Attachment A. COMPENSATION: The anticipated cost for services for the above Task items, to be completed on a Time and Materials Basis not to exceed $300,000.00 without prior authorization. Contractor shall be reimbursed on a Time and Materials basis not to exceed the budget amounts presented, without prior written authorization from the City of Bozeman. Contractor shall notify the City of Bozeman prior to executing additional work, and shall not proceed with additional work without written authorization from the City of Bozeman. Contractor shall invoice no more often than monthly for services provided in the prior month. The provisions of the Professional Services Master Task Order Agreement and any Special Terms and Conditions and/or Exhibits or Attachments to this Task Order shall govern the Work. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties authorized to commit resources of the companies have executed this Task Order: City of Bozeman HDR Engineering, Inc. By: By: Title: Title: Vice President Date: Date: Fed. ID. No. 47-0680568 November 10, 2026 377 1 Attachment A - Scope of Services City of Bozeman Third-Party Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Revision BACKGROUND The City of Bozeman (City) discharges to the East Gallatin River under Montana Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (MPDES) Permit MT0022608 and is subject to wasteload allocations in the 2013 Lower Gallatin TMDL. In accordance with a 2026 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and associated project plan, the City will support the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in revising the nutrient Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for the middle segment of the East Gallatin River (assessment unit MT41H003_020). The revision is needed because House Bill 664 (2025) repealed Montana's base numeric nutrient standards, which the 2013 nutrient targets were based on. DEQ now implements the narrative nutrient criteria at Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM) 17.30.637(1)(e), using the available science. SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of services will commence upon written Notice to Proceed (NTP), with a project duration anticipated to be approximately 24 months and completion of scoped work expected by December 2028. SCOPE OUTLINE AND MOU CROSSWALK Task Number Title MOU Responsibility 100 Project Management V 200 Impairment Identification and Definition n/a 300 Source Identification and Assessment III.B 400 Data Compilation III.B, III.C 500 Targets for Nutrients III.B 600 Impairment and Targets Linkage III.A, III.B 700 Allocations III.D 800 Assembling the TMDL III.D 900 Recommendations for Implementation (Future Task) III.D, III.E 1000 Support Stakeholder and Public Involvement (Future Task) IV.A–C 1100 Public Comment Response and Final TMDL Revisions (Future Task) IV.D 378 2 OBJECTIVE Under this Scope of Services, HDR will provide engineering services to support the City Cityin carrying out its responsibilities under the 2026 MOU with DEQ for the Middle East Gallatin River Third-Party TMDL Revision (DEQ 2026a). This third-party TMDL revision is intended to update a portion of the 2013 Lower Gallatin Planning Area Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and Framework Water Quality Improvement Plan (Lower Gallatin TMDL) (DEQ 2013). Specifically, the revision is focused on the nutrient components of the TMDL for the middle segment of the East Gallatin River, Highway 411Highway 411 to Smith Creek (AU MT41H003_020). The 2016 Integrated Report moved the upstream boundary of the assessment unit to Montana Highway 411 (Springhill Road), where it borders the CCity of Bozeman’s Water Reclamation Facility (WRF). Task 100 Project Management Objective Manage the technical scope, schedule, budget, quality assurance, coordination, communications, and required project management documentation. Approach 101. Project Management Plan Prepare a Project Management Plan (PMP) defining project objectives, scope, communication protocols, milestones, staffing, deliverables, quality procedures, and assumptions. 102. Project Initiation Workshop Conduct a project initiation workshop with the CCity and DEQ to confirm objectives, technical approaches, data needs, communication procedures, and expectations. It is anticipated that the workshop duration will be two hours and virtual. 103. City Coordination Meetings Conduct monthly coordination meetings with City. Prepare agendas and summaries documenting decisions, action items, and responsibilities. 104. DEQ Status Meetings and Schedule Updates Participate in standing monthly City and DEQ status meetings to discuss progress, technical matters, and coordination of work items. Document deviations from the project plan discussed at these meetings and update the project schedule as the work progresses. 105. Progress Reports and Invoices Prepare monthly progress reports summarizing completed work, budget and schedule status, upcoming activities, risks, and issues requiring resolution. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • Meeting agendas transmitted to the City via email. • Monthly progress report and invoice transmitted to the City via email. 379 3 Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: • Project management activities are limited to management of HDR's contract and technical scope. • Monthly progress reporting and invoicing will use HDR standard formats. • Up to two HDR staff will participate in project coordination meetings using virtual platforms. • HDR will proceed based on City comments and direction provided at project decision points. Substantial revisions resulting from delayed or changed direction, regulatory interpretation, assessment methodology, regulatory requirements, or DEQ guidance after acceptance of an interim work product may require schedule, scope, and budget modifications. • HDR will attend up to 24 monthly City coordination meetings and up to 24 monthly City and DEQ status meetings, each up to 1 hour. Task 200 Impairment Identification and Definition Objective Identify and describe the waterbody and watershed, the impaired designated use and suspected cause, and the pollutant of concern. Characterize the watershed and pollutant sources, including delineating the watershed, quantifying land use and land management practices, and describing hydrologic characteristics. To establish the technical basis for subsequent TMDL revision activities, review the existing TMDL technical basis, current water quality conditions, applicable assessment information, and target-development framework to identify data gaps, changed conditions, and identify revisions. The findings will be used to develop an existing- conditions baseline that informs target development, source assessment, modeling, allocation analyses, and revisions to the TMDL document. Approach 201. Watershed Characterization and Hydrologic Assessment The waterbody has been defined by DEQ as assessment unit MT41H003_020, waterbody East Gallatin River, and location description East Gallatin River, MT HWY 411 to Smith Creek. In some reports the waterbody extends a few miles upstream from the confluence with Highway 411 to the confluence with Smith Creek. In the Lower Gallatin TMDL, the waterbody is referred to as the Middle East Gallatin River. For this revision, the project plan defines the segment as the East Gallatin River from the confluence with Highway 411 to the confluence with Smith Creek (22.12 miles). This extent includes both reaches identified in Section 6.6.3.3 of the Lower Gallatin TMDL (Highway 411 to Hyalite Creek and Hyalite Creek to Smith Creek) and the Bozeman WRF outfall. HDR will delineate reaches within the segment to support reach-scale source assessment, target development, and allocations. Perform a flow analysis using DFLOW or the U.S Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Toolbox on discharge data available from the Middle East Gallatin River flow monitoring 380 4 stations. Present the result in a table, including values for 5th and 10th percentile, 7Q10, 14Q5, 4B3, and harmonic mean on an annual and seasonal basis. Determine the critical flow and season for the protection of beneficial uses. Develop a map of the Middle East Gallatin River using the USGS 2025 National Land Cover Database. Present the land cover types by acre for the Middle East Gallatin River watershed to characterize the land use. 202. Existing Conditions and Water Quality Assessment Review Review the Draft 2022/2024 Assessments available from the DEQ Clean Water Act Information Center. Summarize the assessment record summary for AU MT41H003_020. Review available Integrated Reports, 303(d) listings, and TMDL documentation to evaluate beneficial-use and narrative-target attainment and identify implications for data compilation, reach segmentation, and existing-condition summaries. Evaluate existing nutrient conditions, spatial trends, temporal trends, flow conditions, and potential eutrophication indicators. 203. Existing TMDL and Target Development Framework Review Review nutrient-related sections of the 2013 Lower Gallatin TMDL, including historical loading calculations, source-quantification methods, Appendix F, and Appendix G. Review DEQ guidance, narrative nutrient-standard interpretation methods, reference conditions, and existing TMDL targets. Identify data gaps, regulatory changes, and analyses requiring revision. 204. Existing Conditions Review Technical Memorandum Document watershed characterization and hydrologic analysis findings, existing TMDL review findings, current water quality conditions, assessment considerations, and implications for target development. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • Flow analysis and land cover summary files. • Draft and final existing conditions and TMDL review technical memoranda. Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: • Existing-conditions review will rely on data and documentation compiled under Task 400. Tasks 200 and 400 will be performed concurrently. • HDR's review will use the segment extent defined in the project plan for this project (Highway 411 to Smith Creek, AU MT41H003_020). • Reassessment of impaired-water boundaries, segment definitions, beneficial-use determinations, or assessment unit delineations is not included. • No additional field investigations, sampling, or development of new regulatory assessment methodologies is included under this task. 381 5 • DEQ will review the existing-conditions findings and make the final determination regarding how the findings will be incorporated into nutrient target development and subsequent TMDL analyses. Task 300 Source Identification and Assessment Objective Characterize the type, magnitude, and location of sources of nutrient loading to the waterbody, including point and nonpoint sources. Compile the available data to determine the magnitude. A source assessment evaluates the type, magnitude, timing, and location of loadings to the waterbody. The source assessment determines inputs, measured as loads or concentrations, that will support the formulation of the load allocation and the wasteload allocation of the TMDL. The Lower Gallatin TMDL identified six loading sources: • Forest • Agriculture • Residential/Developed • Subsurface wastewater disposal and treatment • USFWS Fish Tech Center (point source) • City of Bozeman WRF (point source) The source assessment will determine if additional loading sources are significant and should be included in the TMDL. Approach 301. Source Inventory and Characterization Update and characterize nutrient sources, including natural background, wastewater discharges, septic systems, stormwater and urban runoff, agricultural sources, residential and urban sources, tributary and return-flow inputs, and groundwater inputs. Use aerial imagery, GIS, and available watershed data to characterize source distributions. Update information on sources that existed when the 2013 Lower Gallatin TMDL was completed and identify new sources. The inventory will include adjacent land use category, septic density per reach, MPDES permits, irrigation withdrawals and returns, grazing practices, tributary inputs, riparian condition, discrete nutrient sources, and natural background sources. 302. Point Source and Tributary Loading Evaluation Once the sources are identified, compile the available data to characterize the magnitude, timing, and locations of these source loads to the Middle East Gallatin River. For point sources and sources with monitoring, directly compute their loading to the Middle East Gallatin River as both time series and in summary statistics tables. Evaluate nutrient loads from tributaries, the upstream boundary, and other inflows to AU MT41H003_020 between Highway 411 and Smith Creek using available water quality and flow 382 6 data. Compile Bozeman WRF discharge monitoring report data and evaluate historical and current effluent nutrient trends to support wasteload allocation development. Estimate stormwater and urban runoff loads using MS4 permit monitoring and discharge monitoring report data, supplemented by literature values, and the City's SWMM model modified with local empirical data where appropriate. 303. Nonpoint Source Loading Estimates For non-point sources and land uses without monitoring data, indirectly estimate their loading to the Middle East Gallatin River. Calculate a range of nutrient loadings from the loading sources based on monitoring data and simple analysis techniques as described in EPA’s Protocol for Developing Nutrient TMDLs (EPA 1999). The simple analysis techniques to employ include the following. • Land Use Export Empirical Methods • Simple Method • USGS Regression Method Supplement these techniques with the source-specific methods identified in the project plan: • Natural background: establish natural background conditions using methods similar to those in the 2013 Lower Gallatin TMDL. • Septic: update septic loads per reach, including potential loads from failing or malfunctioning systems, using the DEQ Method for Estimating the Attenuation of Nutrients from Septic Systems (MEANSS) model. • Agriculture/livestock and residential/urban: attribute measured loads to major source categories at a reach-scale resolution using field and aerial source identification information. 304. Source Inventory and Loading Analysis Workshop Conduct one City workshop (2 hours) to review the draft source inventory, loading framework, inputs, methods, assumptions, data gaps, and preliminary estimates. Document agreed refinements for the source assessment memorandum and subsequent modeling and allocation analyses. 305. Source Assessment Memorandum Document source inventories, assumptions, loading methods, and estimated loads in a memorandum. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • Associated data analysis file(s). • Draft and final source assessment memoranda. Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: 383 7 • Loading methods will follow the medium-to-high level of detail described in the project plan, using the simple analysis techniques, MEANSS, and SWMM described above. Methods beyond those listed are not included. • Investigations beyond Tasks 200 and 400 and evaluations requiring unavailable data are excluded. • HDR will submit a draft source assessment memorandum for DEQ review and will address DEQ comments in preparation of the final memorandum. • Source identification will rely on aerial imagery, GIS, and field observations from prior monitoring. New field surveys are not included. • SWMM modeling will use the City's existing model, provided by the City. Development or refinement of a new SWMM model is not included. Task 400 Data Compilation Objective Compile the necessary reports and data, such as flow, water quality, and geographic information system (GIS) to support the development of the analyses for the TMDL revision. Approach 401. Water Quality and Source Data Compilation Compile available information relevant to nutrient conditions, eutrophication responses, watershed characteristics, and source assessments that meet the following criteria. • Data from within the middle segment of the East Gallatin River watershed (Highway 411 to Smith Creek (AU MT41H003_020). Data from the following sources, as applicable to the segment, will include but not be limited to the following (See Task 300). o Flow and water quality data from East Gallatin River stream monitoring locations o Flow and water quality data from tributaries to the East Gallatin River o On-site septic systems o Flow and water quality data from irrigation diversions and returns o Belgrade WWTP (MTX000116) o Riverside Water & Sewer District WWTP o City of Bozeman Water Treatment Facility (MT0030155) o City of Bozeman Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) (MT0022608) o City of Bozeman MS4 Storm Water System (MTR040002) o United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) Bozeman Fish Technology Center (MTG130006) • Data from 2012 through 2026, focusing on data collected under DEQ-approved SAPs after the Bozeman WRF's major nutrient process upgrade was completed in 2012. The Lower Gallatin TMDL used data from 2001 through 2011. • Data from readily available and credible sources, e.g., DEQ, USGS, City, and Gallatin Local Water Quality District. • Parameters of interest include nitrogen and phosphorus (nutrient) concentrations, chlorophyll-a, dissolved oxygen, pH, and biological indicators. 402. Watershed Information Compilation 384 8 Compile GIS layers, land use, stream morphology (e.g., Rosgen classification and stream slope), aerial imagery, stream photos, applicable reference site data, point-source, tributary, and other watershed data. 403. Data Analysis for Target Development Analyze nutrient concentrations, chlorophyll-a, dissolved oxygen, pH, biological indicators, and other eutrophication-response metrics relevant to target development. Summarize the compiled data in statistics tables describing the period of record, count, minimum, median, average, and maximum values by location. 404. Data Quality Review Conduct a quality review of compiled data to determine if data does not meet DEQ quality requirements. Review data quality and identify datasets appropriate for target development and TMDL analyses. Data that does not meet quality requirements will be excluded from analysis and documented. It is anticipated that only data after the 2011 WRF upgrades will be used. 405. Data Compilation and Review Technical Memorandum Document compiled datasets, screening methods, data usability findings, and datasets recommended for DEQ review and subsequent tasks. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • Associated data analysis file(s). • Compiled 2012–2026 SAPs, data summary reports, and supporting monitoring documentation. • Draft and final data compilation and review technical memoranda. Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: • Data are electronically readily available. No data entry will be performed. • Data are from credible sources. Quality control review will follow DEQ guidance and project QA requirements. • Data may be excluded from the project data set based on quality of year of sampling. • Available data from the City, DEQ, USGS, and other public sources will be provided electronically by DEQ. • Required GIS, source, stream, and watershed information will be publicly available or provided by the City. • DEQ will review and confirm datasets for use in future target development and TMDL analyses. • The 2026 sampling and analysis plan, monitoring activities, laboratory coordination, data validation, and MT-eWQX upload will be completed under an ongoing, separately scoped project. 385 9 Task 500 Targets for Nutrients Objective Identify water quality indicators and targets that would support beneficial uses. Approach 501. Applicable Water Quality Standards and Targets Describe applicable water quality standards and water quality objectives and targets. TMDLs must link back to the existing water quality standards applicable to that waterbody and the pollutant of concern. 502. Evaluation of Alternative Target Scenarios The MOU includes the “proposal of new nutrient TMDL target values” for the middle segment of the East Gallatin River, Highway 411 to Smith Creek (AU MT41H003_020). Investigate a range of potential nutrient target values for comparison using a variety of references and methods including the following. • Lower Gallatin TMDL Section 6.4.2 Nutrient Target Values (DEQ 2013) • EPA’s 1999 Protocol for Developing Nutrient TMDLs (EPA 1999) • EPA’s 2000 Nutrient Criteria Technical Guidance Manual: Rivers and Streams (EPA 1995 and EPA 2000). • EPA’s 2010 Using Stressor-Response Relationships to Derive Numeric Nutrient Criteria (EPA 2010) • DEQ’s 2026 Eutrophication Assessment Method for Wadeable Streams and Medium Rivers (DEQ 2026b) Evaluate up to three target approaches, which may include site-specific biological response relationships, reference or regional conditions, seasonal considerations, and other scientifically supported methods for demonstrating protection of beneficial uses under Montana's narrative nutrient standard. Target parameters may include total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and nitrate plus nitrite (NO3+NO2). 503. Proposed TMDL Target Development and City Workshop Develop proposed TMDL targets and supporting rationale. Propose targets within DEQ's guidance on interpreting the narrative standard, using site- specific, data-driven methods where available. Evaluate whether targets should apply to the full segment or to the two reaches used in the 2013 Lower Gallatin TMDL (Highway 411 to Hyalite Creek and Hyalite Creek to Smith Creek). Confirm that proposed targets protect beneficial uses in the downstream lower segment of the East Gallatin River, and identify where meeting targets may create assimilative capacity downstream. Review the proposed targets and approach in one City workshop. 504. DEQ Target Development Coordination 386 10 Coordinate with DEQ to review narrative-standard interpretation, target-setting approach, reference-condition methods, and proposed endpoints in a monthly meeting or separate workshop. 505. TMDL Target Development Technical Memorandum Document target-development methods, evaluated alternatives, recommended target values, and workshop outcomes for DEQ consideration. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • Proposed target values presentation to DEQ in Microsoft PowerPoint format. • Draft and final TMDL target development summary memoranda. Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: • Nutrient target development will be based on the data review, existing-conditions assessment, and related findings developed under Tasks 200 and 400, together with available reference-condition information and DEQ guidance at the time of analysis. • Changes to regulatory requirements or target-setting methodology after work has commenced may require additional services. • HDR will prepare materials for one target-setting workshop with the City and one workshop with DEQ, 2 hours and virtual. Task 600 Impairment and Targets Linkage Objective Describe how the sources result in impairment of the Middle East Gallatin River above the targets. Approach Link the pollutant of concern to water quality within the impaired waterbody. Describe the cause- and-effect relationship between the impaired waterbody and the pollutant sources and determine the total loading capacity. Critical flow and water level conditions, as well as seasonality, must be considered when linking pollutant loading with water quality. 601. Modeling Approach Evaluation and Framework Development QUAL2K is a one-dimensional steady-flow model that tracks attached bottom algae biomass separately from suspended phytoplankton. The QUAL2K model has been applied to multiple snapshots in time based on monitoring data of the East Gallatin River that includes the upper (partial), middle, and lower reaches. DEQ reviewed documentation and the models during the development. This task includes reviewing Appendix G and prior East Gallatin modeling. 602. Modeling Quality Assurance Project Plan 387 11 Prepare the modeling Quality Assurance Project Plan and supporting quality documentation required for TMDL modeling, following EPA's QAPP development template and graded approach (EPA 2025). 603. Water and Loading Balances Connecting the sources and routing them through the Middle East Gallatin River can be shown by flow and loading balances. Develop water and loading balances for the Middle East Gallatin River for dates with synoptic water quality monitoring data. Present the results in figures and tables with descriptions of the process for developing the water balances provided. 604. Model Development, Calibration, and Validation Available QUAL2K models to work from include 9/22/2014, 9/29/2015, 8/15/2016, and 8/8/2018. These models will be used to reconstruct new models of the Middle East Gallatin River using the QUAL2KW Version 5. Model performance will be evaluated graphically and statistically using root mean squared error to compare model prediction to monitoring data and then assessing the result to reference error bands. Calibrate the model using the August 2026 synoptic sampling data collected under the separately scoped 2026 Sampling and Analysis Plan (HDR 2026) and validate the model using an earlier synoptic dataset. 605. Loading Capacity and Alternative Loading Scenarios Evaluate multiple nutrient reduction and source control scenarios to support allocation development. Define the loading capacity for the critical summer low-flow period, including the upstream boundary condition at Highway 411, and evaluate the assimilative capacity carried to the downstream segment. 606. Modeling Technical Report Prepare a draft modeling technical report documenting the selected analytical approach, model development and application, input data, assumptions, calibration and validation, evaluated scenarios, loading-capacity findings, limitations, and supporting quality assurance documentation. The report will describe model setup and parameterization and present outputs for existing conditions and modeled scenarios, including comparison of simulated and observed results for hydrology and nutrients. Address consolidated City and DEQ comments and prepare the final modeling technical report. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • QUAL2K input/output files (e.g., shade estimates, meteorological data, land use cover, and headwater conditions), model files, supporting data, and calculation spreadsheets (native electronic formats). • Draft and final QUAL2K modeling reports (MS Word). • Quality Assurance Project Plan for QUAL2K modeling work (MS Word). Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: 388 12 • Previous QUAL2K modeling will support reconstruction of new Middle East Gallatin River models. • DEQ will review, provide comments, and final acceptance of the impairment and target linkages (modeling) to support allocations. • DEQ’s acceptance of the outcomes for defining a linkage between the selected water quality targets and the identified pollutant sources to characterize total assimilative capacity for nutrient loading or total load reduction needed will be necessary to effectively move to the allocation phase. • Modeling and loading capacity evaluations will use applicable data, analyses, and findings compiled or developed under Tasks 200 through 500. • Selected modeling approaches will be reviewed and approved by DEQ based on available data, regulatory requirements, and project objectives. • Loading capacity analyses will be based on available information regarding critical flows, seasonal conditions, and nutrient response relationships. • Significant revisions resulting from future DEQ target-setting guidance may require scope and fee modification. • DEQ review of the modeling approach, model development, calibration and validation, scenarios, and loading-capacity findings will occur through review of the draft modeling technical report. HDR will address consolidated City and DEQ comments in preparing the final modeling technical report. • The draft and final modeling technical report include one consolidated revision cycle. Additional revisions resulting from changed direction, new data, or revised regulatory requirements may require a scope and fee amendment. Task 700 Allocations Objective Use the results from Task 600 to develop recommendations for the allocation of loads among the various point and nonpoint sources, while accounting for uncertainties in the analyses. Approach 701. Allocation Scenario Development Develop a pollutant allocation scenario. Load allocations attributed to the sources must be identified through reasonably accurate estimates via data analysis or water quality simulation modeling. A TMDL consists of the sum of individual wasteload allocations (WLAs) for point sources and load allocations (LAs) for nonpoint sources. Calculate TMDLs from streamflow and the established targets, with allocations expressed in pounds per day that increase with flow. The TMDL will equal the sum of allocations to major source categories, including an allocation to the upstream segment at Highway 411 and an allowance for future growth. Establishing a TMDL means finding an acceptable combination of allocations that adequately protects water quality standards. However, deciding how to divide the assimilative capacity of a given waterbody among sources can be a challenging task. 389 13 702. Allocation Framework Evaluation and TMDL Calculations The following methods will be evaluated and compared for distributing assimilative capacity. • Equal percentage reductions in concentration. • Equal percent reductions in loads. • Equal concentration inversely proportioned to source flows. • Equal loads inversely proportioned to source flows. • Equal incremental cost above minimum treatment (normalized for volumetric flow rate). • Modified optimization (i.e., least cost solution that includes the minimum treatment requirements of the technology-based controls). • One framework will apply the source-category approach described in the project plan. Natural background will be allocated based on reference site low-flow conditions. Each framework will be carried through the allocation calculations so the City can compare results. The City and DEQ will select a preferred framework at the TMDL and allocation workshops (Subtask 704). 703. Margin of Safety and Reasonable Assurance Determine if a margin of safety should be included to account for uncertainty or lack of knowledge about the relationship between pollutant loads and water quality. The margin of safety may be explicitly set aside as a specific fraction of the TMDL loading capacity, or it may be implicit and accounted for by making conservative assumptions when developing the pollutant allocation scenario. Check that seasonal variation in loads is considered and that the allocations are protective of standards. Document existing controls, regulatory mechanisms, permits, and BMP implementation assumptions supporting reasonable assurance. Incorporate the margin of safety through the following. • Use of critical summer low-flow conditions and end-of-pipe water quality targets to calculate wasteload allocations. • Use of conservative assumptions for natural background allocations. • Use of conservative assumptions to estimate septic-system loads and establish septic load allocations. 704. TMDL and Allocation Workshops Present the findings to DEQ. DEQ’s responsibilities include the final establishment of allocations as DEQ sees appropriate for AU MT41H003_020. Conduct one City and one DEQ workshop to review the proposed TMDL calculations, allocation framework, source allocations, margin-of-safety approach, reasonable-assurance considerations, and recommended revisions. 705. TMDL and Allocation Analysis Technical Memorandum Document TMDL calculations, allocation methods, margin-of-safety assumptions, reasonable- assurance considerations, workshop outcomes, and recommended revisions. 390 14 Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • TMDL and allocation workshop presentation materials (MS PowerPoint). • Draft and final TMDL and allocation analysis technical memoranda (MS Word). Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: • DEQ will provide guidance on the allocation methods, stakeholder involvement, and the final analysis and selection of allocations. • If DEQ rejects the modeling results or technical approach and requires additional or revised modeling to support TMDL and allocation development, continued modeling services will require scope and fee amendment. • DEQ retains authority over establishment of final TMDLs, allocations, margins of safety, and regulatory determinations. • Evaluation of up to three allocation frameworks is included. Additional frameworks or material changes to the approved allocation approach may require a scope and fee amendment. • HDR will prepare materials for and conduct one TMDL and allocation workshop with the City and one with DEQ.(2 hours each) • The draft and final TMDL and allocation analysis technical memoranda include one consolidated revision cycle based on City and DEQ comments. • Wasteload allocations for the two new MS4 general permits proposed for 2027 and revisions to the Smith Creek pathogen TMDLs are outside this scope and will be completed by DEQ. • Septic allocation evaluation is limited to reaches with potentially significant septic loading and up to two allocation iterations. Task 800 Assembling the TMDL Objective Compile the pertinent information and revise the Lower Gallatin TMDL using track changes for DEQ. Approach 801. Draft TMDL Revisions Upon completion of the technical analysis and allocation decision process, the elements of the technical analysis and their accompanying supporting documentation are assembled into the TMDL document that will undergo public review and comment consistent with the applicable procedures and forums used for public involvement. Translate the results of Task 200 through 700 into the Lower Gallatin TMDL using track changes to show the proposed revisions. Prepare draft revisions to the following Lower Gallatin TMDL sections identified in the DEQ project plan. 391 15 • Section 6.3 Water Quality Data Sources • Section 6.4.3.7 Middle East Gallatin River • Section 6.5.1.4 Riverside Water & Sewer District WWTP • Section 6.5.2.1 Bozeman WRF • Section 6.5.3 Existing Nutrient Load Summary • Section 6.6.1.1 WRF Allocation Approach • Section 6.6.3.2 East Gallatin WRF TMDL • Section 6.6.3.3 East Gallatin River Middle Segment • Section 6.6.4 Seasonality / MOS / Uncertainty (if applicable) • Applicable Sections 9 and 10 • Appendix F Prepare revisions in accordance with the DEQ document formatting requirements in the project plan, including no third-party logos, standardized fonts, table and figure labeling, and Chicago- style references without footnotes. Digital accessibility including alternative text for figures, descriptive link text, and reading order will be the responsibility of DEQ and not part of the submittals. 802. Appendix and Supporting Documentation Prepare revisions to Appendix F, together with supporting data summaries, figures, tables, references, and calculation documentation. 803. DEQ and EPA Review Coordination Coordinate with DEQ during development and review of the draft TMDL revision package, participate in technical review meetings, maintain comment-response documentation, and address one consolidated set of City and DEQ comments in preparing the revised draft package for public comment. Following DEQ's facilitation of EPA's initial review, address one consolidated set of EPA comments. 804. Final Deliverable Package Compile the revised draft TMDL document, appendices, technical memoranda, comment- response documentation, calculations, GIS and modeling files, and supporting materials into an organized package for DEQ release for public comment. Deliverables Deliverable work products consist of the following: • Provide DEQ with a track changes version of edits to the original 2013 Lower Gallatin TMDL document. • Revised draft Sections 6.0, 9.0, and 10.0, Appendix F, provided with track changes or strikethrough and underline (MS Word), including supporting figures, tables, and Chicago-style references. • Draft and final technical memoranda and reports developed under Tasks 200 through 700 (MS Word). • Consolidated DEQ and EPA initial review comment-response documentation (MS Word or MS Excel). 392 16 • Revised draft TMDL package for public comment, including supporting data, calculations, GIS files, modeling files, analytical files, databases, and presentation materials (native electronic formats). Assumptions The fee for this task is based upon the following assumptions: • DEQ will provide an editable Lower Gallatin TMDL document incorporating the formatting and digital accessibility requirements identified in the project plan. • Draft revisions will be prepared using track changes or redline formatting • DEQ will be responsible for final draft formatting and accessibility certification before public notice, including edits for digital accessibility, and for final document formatting, publication, and EPA submission after public comment. • Task 800 includes one consolidated City and DEQ review cycle between the initial draft and the revised draft package prepared for public comment. • File names will include a date descriptor for version control. HDR will provide completed products to the City for transmittal to DEQ by email or the project SharePoint site and will include completed products in the final package. • DEQ will complete formatting and accessibility certification. • Task 800 includes one consolidated response cycle for EPA initial review comments. Task 900 Recommendations for Implementation (FUTURE TASK) Objective TMDLs should include monitoring and evaluation plans to implement the TMDL and provide a basis for reviewing and revising TMDL elements or control actions in the future. This task is to be scoped at a future date. Task 1000 Support Stakeholder and Public Involvement (FUTURE TASK) Objective Support the joint responsibilities of the MOU for stakeholder and public meetings. These meetings include stakeholder meetings and a public meeting or open house. This task is to be scoped at a future date. Task 1100 Public Comment Response and Final TMDL Revisions (FUTURE TASK) Objective Support DEQ's public comment process and prepare final TMDL revisions based on DEQ- approved responses to consolidated public comments. This task is to be scoped at a future date. 393 17 Proposed Schedule References HDR, Inc. 2026. Water Quality Sampling for Mechanistic Model Refinement, East Gallatin River in Bozeman, Montana: Sampling and Analysis Plan. Missoula, MT: HDR, Inc. Montana DEQ. 2013. Lower Gallatin Planning Area TMDLs and Framework Water Quality Improvement Plan. Helena, MT: Montana Dept. of Environmental Quality. Montana DEQ. 2026a. Memorandum of Understanding for Middle East Gallatin River Third- Party TMDL Revision between the City of Bozeman (“City”) and Montana Department of Environmental Quality (“Department”) including Attachment A Lower Gallatin Third Party TMDL Revision Project Plan. Montana Department of Environmental Quality. Helena, MT. Task Description Start End 100 Project Management 11/2026 11/2028 200 Impairment Identification and Definition 11/2026 12/2026 300 Source Identification and Assessment 11/2026 01/2027 400 Data Compilation 01/2027 05/2027 500 Targets for Nutrients 05/2027 08/2027 600 Impairment and Targets Linkage 08/2027 01/2028 700 Allocations 01/2028 03/2028 800 Assembling the TMDL 03/2028 07/2028 900 Recommendations for Implementation TBD TBD 1000 Support Stakeholder and Public Involvement TBD TBD 1100 Public Comment Response and Final TMDL Revisions TBD TBD 394 MONTANA AREA 2026 HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE BILLING CLASSIFICATION RATE RANGES Principal/ Sr. Technical Advisor $ 250.00 - $ 400.00 Sr. Engineer/ Sr. Project Manager $ 250.00 - $ 400.00 Project Manager $ 180.00 - $ 350.00 Project Engineer $ 150.00 - $ 250.00 Design Engineer/EIT $ 100.00 - $ 200.00 CADD/GIS/Technician $ 100.00 - $ 200.00 Controls/Integration $ 100.00 - $ 300.00 Project Admin and Support $ 85.00 - $ 200.00 Environmental Specialist $ 100.00 - $ 250.00 Strategic Comm/Graphics $ 100.00 - $ 250.00 Construction Management/Inspection $ 100.00 - $ 300.00 Economics/Project Controls $ 100.00 - $ 300.00 Right-of-Way Specialist $ 100.00 - $ 250.00 2026 CHARGEABLE EXPENSE SCHEDULE Direct project expenses will be charged at the rates listed below unless a separate rate is negotiated for a specific project. SUBSISTENCE (PER DIEM) Subsistence such as meals and lodging while out on a project will be charged at actual cost or at the per diem rate negotiated for a specific project. TRAVEL Travel expenses will be charged at the following rates unless a separate rate is negotiated for a specific $Vehicles 0.92 /mile Rental Vehicles & Aircraft $ Actual Cost /mile 395 2026 CHARGEABLE EXPENSE SCHEDULE (continued) TELEPHONE/FAX/POSTAGE Long distance calls, telegrams, fax, cellular phone, and any special class postage will be charged at SPECIAL EQUIPMENT CHARGES GPS - Handheld $ 20 /hr. Survey Equipment $ 50 /hr. UTV Other equipment to be determined as necessary $ 350 /day SURVEYING SUPPLIES (Includes: Flagging, Stakes, Etc.) $ 50 /mile SUBCONSULTANTS Subconsultants and expenses may be subject to markup OVERHEAD Overhead costs, such as rent, insurance, utilities, office furniture, employee benefits, and taxes are included in the hourly billing rates. 396 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Emily Cope, Downtown Bozeman Partnership SUBJECT:A Resolution Authorizing Change Order 1 to the Willson School Accessible Playground Project Landscape Architectural Designs MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Resolution RECOMMENDATION:Approve a Resolution Authorizing Change Order 1 to the Willson School Accessible Playground Project Landscape Architectural Designs STRATEGIC PLAN:2.2 Infrastructure Investments: Strategically invest in infrastructure as a mechanism to encourage economic development. BACKGROUND: The City of Bozeman entered into a Professional Services Agreement with Design 5 Landscape Architecture, for landscape architectural design services for the Willson School Accessible Playground Project, with an original contract amount of $32,800. During the investigation of existing site conditions, an active fiber optic line owned by Blackfoot Communications was identified running through the proposed playground site. Additional investigation is needed to determine the depth of the line to ensure the playground design and construction can account for the existing utility and avoid conflicts during grading and foundation installation. Change Order No. 1 adds an estimated $2,000 to the contract for Design 5 to coordinate with True North Surveying and Little Bear Locating to expose the fiber optic line at three locations, document its depth, and restore the affected areas. This information will inform the final construction documents and help reduce the risk of unforeseen construction costs or service interruptions. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:Dissapprove. 397 FISCAL EFFECTS:This change order will increase the contract amount by $2,000.00 bringing the contract amount total construction cost from $32,800.00 to $34,800.00, which is still within the Downtown URD's budget for FY2027. Attachments: Resolution_CO_No._1_Willson School Playground.docx Add Service Change Order #1 Willson School Playground D5 26_1019.pdf Report compiled on: October 27, 2026 398 RESOLUTION 2026-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, APPROVING AMENDMENT OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH DESIGN 5 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA WHEREAS, the City Commission did, on September 15, 2026, approve the PSA for the Willson School Accessible Playground Project Landscape Architectural Designs with Design 5 Landscape Architecture of Bozeman, Montana; and WHEREAS, Section 7-5-4308, Montana Code Annotated, provides that any such alterations or modifications of the specifications and/or plans of the contract be made by resolution; and WHEREAS, it has become necessary in the prosecution of the work to make alterations or modifications to the specifications and/or plans of the contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, that the proposed amendment to the contract between the City of Bozeman, a municipal corporation, and Design 5 Landscape Architecture as contained in Change Order No. 1, attached hereto, be and the same are hereby approved; and the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract change order for and on behalf of the City; and the City Clerk is authorized and directed to attest such signature. 399 PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, at a regular session thereof held on the 10th day of November, 2026. Joey Morrison Mayor ATTEST: MIKE MAAS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 400 Page 1 of 2 ADD SERVICE CHANGE ORDER #1 OWNER, CLIENT, & PROJECT NAME Project Name: Willson School Accessible Playground Project Client: Downtown Bozeman Partnership Project Owner: Bozeman School District #7 PROJECT LOCATION Willson School located at 404 West Main Street, Bozeman, Montana REQUESTING PARTY (CLIENT) Recommended by Design 5, LLC, Requested by Downtown Bozeman Partnership GENERAL CONTRACTOR N/A D5 PROJECT MANAGER Grant Olson, PLA LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR N/A CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 ARCHITECT N/A DATE OF REQUEST October 19, 2026 CIVIL ENGINEER N/A ADD SERVICE CHANGE ORDER OVERVIEW DESCRIPTION OF ADD SERVICE CHANGE ORDER Expose fiber optic line to determine bury depth: - Design 5 will engage True North Surveying and Little Bear Locating to cut, pothole and expose an existing fiber optic line running through the project area. After depths are recorded at (3) locations, Little Bear Locating will backfill and compact with gravel to match existing surface grade. This service includes saw cuts, excavation, materials, and labor. - If the fiber optic line is determined to be greater than 30” in depth, True North will not engage a vacuum truck to go deeper because it will have determined that the fiber optic line is adequately deep and it will not affect grading, although any playground foundations in the area of the fiber optic line will need to avoid the line. See attached map for locations. - Design 5 will inspect potholes on site to confirm depths prior to any backfilling. REASON FOR CHANGE ORDER Recommended by Design 5 to determine depth of bury for fiber optic line bisecting the playground site. It is important to understand the bury depth so the construction drawings account for the depth of line in the design, and the General Contractor and/or playground installer can avoid the line during grading and playground foundation excavation and installation. POTENTIAL FUTURE SCOPE AND COST INCREASE After the fiber optic line bury depth is determined, Design 5 may recommend the following scenarios: 1. Adequate depth is identified and reasonable construction methods can be used to install the playground as proposed. 2. The surface grade of the playground would need to be built up to avoid any conflicts with the future playground. 3. A segment of the existing fiber optic line may need to be removed and relocated by the fiber optic provider to avoid any potential conflicts. 401 Page 2 of 2 Typically the costs to remove and relocate are estimated by the utility provider and paid by the owner. SUPPORT AND JUSTIFICATION DOCUMENTS The existing conditions survey showed the horizontal (2D) location of the an existing fiber optic line running through the site for the proposed playground. Further investigation identified the line belonging to Blackfoot Communications and confirmed that the line is active. The utility locate is needed to identify, avoid conflicts or surprises in the field that would lead to unforeseen costs or potential interruption of service. CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIMELINE ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE $32,800 ORIGINAL TIMELINE See original Contract and PSA NET CHANGES OF PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS $0 NET CHANGES OF PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS IN DAYS N/A NET INCREASE OF FEES (ESTIMATE) $2,000 NET INCREASE / DECREASE N/A TOTAL CONTRACT PRICE WITH APPROVED CHANGES $ 34,800 TOTAL CONTRACT TIMELINE WITH APPROVED CHANGES See original Contract and PSA ITEMIZED BREAKDOWN OF WORK APPX. NO. OF HRS HOURLY RATE ESTIMATED PRICE FEES - T&E with Estimate N/A N/A $2,000 ESTIMATED TOTAL COMPENSATION INCREASE $2,000 RECOMMENDED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT APPROVED BY CLIENT DATE 10/19/26 DATE 402 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Kellen Gamradt, Engineer II Shawn Kohtz, Director of Utilities SUBJECT:A Resolution Authorizing Change Order 2 to the MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement Project, Phase 1 MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Resolution RECOMMENDATION:Approve a Resolution Authorizing Change Order 2 to the MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement Project, Phase 1 STRATEGIC PLAN:2.2 Infrastructure Investments: Strategically invest in infrastructure as a mechanism to encourage economic development. BACKGROUND:Attached is a copy of the proposed resolution and change order 2 for the above-referenced project. This change order includes three field orders approved during construction and five change requests due to unmarked utilities. The first field order includes the addition of a water service line replacement not shown in the original contract drawings. The second field order includes a pipe material change which was required as a condition of the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) approval, and the final field order covers the addition of flowable backfill in a section of sewer main on Kagy Boulevard with unknown utility conflicts. The remaining five change requests include additional contract time and costs related to working around unlocated and unknown buried utilities within work areas on Kagy Boulevard. The consultant engineer of record and City staff have reviewed these changes and associated costs and found them to be necessary and commensurate with the work involved. Additionally, the work involved in this change order is related to a claim made by a property owner that was filed with the City on August 10, 2026. The City is still investigating the property owner’s claim. By accepting this work order and issuing payment, the City is not accepting liability or waiving any legal rights, remedies, or defenses available to the City under Montana law. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:The work involved in this change order is related to a claim made by a property owner that was filed with the City on August 10, 2026. The City is still investigating the property owner’s claim. By accepting this work order and issuing payment, the City is not accepting liability or waiving any legal 403 rights, remedies, or defenses available to the City under Montana law. ALTERNATIVES:As Suggested by the Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:This change order will increase the contract amount by $94,730.61 bringing the total construction cost from $3,214,452.60 to $3,309,183.21. Funding has been appropriated in the FY27 budget as project WW138 for a total amount of $4,931,900 and paid for from the Wastewater Fund and Wastewater Impact Fee Fund. Attachments: Resolution - Change Order 2.docx Interceptor ChangeOrder #2_2026-09-24.pdf Report compiled on: October 21, 2026 404 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, APPROVING ALTERATION OR MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT WITH WILLIAMS CIVIL CONSTRUCTION WHEREAS, the City Commission did, on the 14TH day of July 2026, authorize award of the bid for the MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement Project, Phase 1 to Williams Civil Construction; and WHEREAS, Section 7-5-4308, Montana Code Annotated, provides that any such alterations or modifications of the specifications and/or plans of the contract be made by resolution; and WHEREAS, it has become necessary in the prosecution of the work to make alterations or modifications to the specifications and/or plans of the contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, to wit: that the proposed modifications and/or alterations to the contract between the City of Bozeman, a municipal corporation, and Williams Civil Construction, as contained in Change Order No. 2, attached hereto, be and the same are hereby approved; and the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract change order for and on behalf of the City; and the City Clerk is authorized and directed to attest such signature. 405 PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, at a regular session thereof held on the 10TH day of November, 2026. ___________________________________ JOEY MORRISON Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 406 Date of Issuance: 9/24/2026 Effective Date: Project:MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement – Phase 1 Owner:City of Bozeman Date of Contract:7/8/2026 Contractor:Williams Civil Construction Engineer:DOWL Engineer's Project No.:4563.000039.01 10/30/2026 10/30/2026 10/30/2026 +2 11/01/2026 $3,182,356.60 4) Utility: Unmarked/unknown 6" Water Main in Kagy, Sta. 305+75 (SS01) POC-05 WCC request for 11-hours in delay and slow productio rates, additional structural fill and asphalt; $22,481.90 +1 working day. 5) Utility: Unmarked stormwater utilities and crossings in Kagy Blvd. (SS01) PCO-06 WCC request for 8-hour delay and slow production rates; $8,606.78 6)Utilitiy: Unmarked utilities, water service crossing to Rosa Pizza (Sta. 104+13; PP04 ) and parellel conduits near Sta. 105+50. PCO-07 WCC request for 4-hour delay and slow production rates; $5,858.07 7) Utility: Unmarked/unknown power crossing, Sta. 106+40, Sheet PP04, and fiber bank crossing, Sta. 106+50, Sheet PP04. PCO-08 WCC request for 5-hours in delay and slow production rates; $6,358.94 8) Field Order 05: Flowable fill on South 3rd Ave for a water main crossing and fiber optic bank crossing near South 3rd MH1, Sta. 109, Sheet PP05. PCO-09 WCC request for 3.5 hour slow production rate and flowable fill costs; $6,140.19 The Contract Documents are modified as follows upon execution of this Change Order: Description: 1) Field Order 04 – Water service line to Crossing Kitchen/Thai Basil Building. PCO-02 WCC request for $23, 958.00 plus 1 working day. 2) Field Order 01: Replace the 24" PVC sewer pipe in Cooper Park with 24" C900 water pipe per MDEQ project approval due to the location of the existing irrigation well being within 50' of the sewer main. PCO-03 WCC request for $19,742.97. CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: Original Contract Times: Working Days Calendar Days Attachments (list documents supporting change): PCO-02; PCO-03; PCO-04; PCO-05; PCO-06; PCO-07; PCO-08 & PCO-09 Original Contract Price: CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIMES: 3) Utility: Unmarked 1.5" Water Service encountered near Sta. 303+50 (SS01). Water service from Wilson to Crossing Kitchen encountered when installing 8" gravity main. PCO-04 WCC request for 1.5-hour delay and slow production rate; $1,583.76 Date: Date: Date: By: By: Engineer (Authorized Signature) Contractor (Authorized Signature)Owner (Authorized Signature) By: ACCEPTED Contract Price incorporating this Change Order: Substantial Completion Sch 1(date): Substantial Completion Sch 1 (date): Substantial Completion Sch 1 (date): Substantial Completion Sch 1(days): $3,214,452.60 $94,730.61 $3,309,183.21 No change, from previously approved Change Orders No. 01: RECOMMENDED ACCEPTED Contract Price prior to this Change Order: Increase of this Change Order: $32,096.00 Contract Times prior to this Change Order: Increase from previously approved Change Orders No. 01: Increase of this Change Order: Contract Times incorporating approved Change Orders: Substantial Completion Sch 1 (date): 407 PCO-02408 PCO-02409 PCO-02 410 PCO-02411 PCO-02 412 PCO-02 413 PCO-02 414 PCO-02 415 PCO-02 416 PCO-02 417 PCO-02 418 PCO-02 419 PCO-02 420 PCO-02 421 PCO-02 422 PCO-02 423 PCO-02 424 PCO-02 425 PCO-02 426 PCO-02 427 EJCDC C-942 Field Order Prepared by the Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee and endorsed by the Construction Specifications Institute. Page 1 of 1 Field Order No. 01 Date of Issuance: 8/3/2026 Effective Date: 8/3/2026 Project: MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement – Phase 1 Owner: City of Bozeman Owner's Contract No.:n/a Engineer: DOWL Date of Contract: 07/8/2026 Contractor: Williams Civil Construction Engineer's Project No.:4563.000039.01 Attention: You are hereby directed to promptly execute this Field Order You are hereby directed to promptly execute this Field Order issued in accordance with General Conditions Paragraph 11.04, for minor changes in the Work without changes in Contract Price or Contract Times. If you consider that a change in Contract Price or Contract Times is required, please notify the Engineer immediately and before proceeding with this Work. Reference: 02660 & 02730 Sheets PP02 & PP09 (Specification Section(s)) (Drawing(s) / Detail(s)) Description: Per the final MDEQ project approval and Deviation 38.2 approval, please make the below project changes to sheet PP02 and PP09; if necessary, submit a change proposal for adjustments to the contract price or time. - Sheet PP02: Delete the flowable on South Tracy Ave. Sta. 95+26 to 95+96 - Sheet PP09: Replace the 355’ of 24-inch PVC sewer pipe in Cooper Park, from 7th Ave. MH 5 (Sta. 21+53) to Story St MH1 (Sta. 25+13), with 355’ of 24-inch C900 DR18 pipe and leak test section of pipe per section 02730-3.4 of the project specifications. Attachments: -Sheet PP02 -Sheet PP09 Engineer: Receipt Acknowledged by Contractor: Date: Copy to Owner PCO-03 428 MSU SEWER INTERCEPTOR - STA. 90+50 TO 96+00 SOUTH T R A C Y A V E CITY OF BOZEMAN - MSU INTERCEPTOR REPLACEMENTPHASE 1406-586-88342425 Technology Blvd, #2174Bozeman, Montana 59718WWW.DOWL.COM06-24-2026 CONFORMED SET 06/24/2026 SOUTH TRACY AVE. - STA. 90+50 TO 96+00SCH 1 - MSU SEWER INTERCEPTOR PH 1PP02MATCH LINE - STA. 90+50; SEE SHEET PP01MATCH LINE - STA. 96+00; SEE SHEET PP03S. TRACY MH2 (F0715) - STA 94+30 2 2 1 3 PCO-03 429 MSU SEWER INTERCEPTOR - STA. 21+00 TO 26+50 SOUTH 7TH AVEWEST STORY STCITY OF BOZEMAN - MSU INTERCEPTOR REPLACEMENTPHASE 1406-586-88342425 Technology Blvd, #2174Bozeman, Montana 59718WWW.DOWL.COM06-24-2026 CONFORMED SET 06/24/2026 SOUTH 7TH AVE. - STA. 21+00 TO 26+50SCH 2 - MSU SEWER INTERCEPTOR PH 1PP09MATCH LINE - STA. 21+00; SEE SHEET PP08MATCH LINE - STA. 26+50; SEE SHEET PP10 2 2 3 3 PCO-03 430 MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement – Phase One PCO 03 – Replace SDR35 with C900 Pipe Rev 1 Owner: City of Bozeman Engineer: DOWL Date: 9/9/2026 WCC Job Number: 2622 Prepared by: John Butcher, Project Manager SCHEDULE OF VALUES Item No. Description Quantity Unit Cost Unit Price 1014 24” SDR35 Deduction 355 -$99.00 LF -$35,145.00 1015 24” C900 Addition 355 $147.36 LF $52,312.80 Mark Up 15% $2,575.17 TOTAL: $19,742.97 CLARIFICATIONS / EXCLUSIONS - Excludes testing as if this were a water line - Excludes any restraints and or caps - Assumes standard sanitary sewer testing for this project. - Bidding documents did not include the flowable fill near station 95+30 as identified on the conformance plans, therefore no deduction is applied for this item. - Per DEQ Approval this section of the pipeline will need to be leak tested per typical sewer pipe, Section 02730 3.4 Tests Low Pressure Air Test of Sewer Pipe or Water (MPWSS and Bozeman Mods to MPWSS). PCO-03 431 MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement – Phase One PCO 04 – Unknown/Unlocated Water Service Delay Owner: City of Bozeman Engineer: DOWL Date: 9/3/2026 WCC Job Number: 2622 Prepared by: John Butcher, Project Manager On 8/5/2026 during our night shift, Williams Civil Construction’s (“WCC”) crews encountered an unidentified active 1.5” water service at approximate STA 303+50. This delayed our crews from working productively. WCC is requesting a monetary adjustment under General Conditions Clause 4.05(F) Delays. Please see the attached breakdown associated with the differing subsurface condition. SCHEDULE OF VALUES Item No. Description Quantity Unit Cost Unit Price 1016 Water Service Delay 1 $1,594.72 LS $1,583.76 TOTAL: $1,583.76 PCO-04 432 Type Make Model Year Start Date Attachments Standard Rate Idling Rate Stand By Rate Standard Hours Idling Hours Stand By Hours Total Excavator Volvo ECR355E 2025 8/3/2026 2 Buckets $160.46 $127.48 $56.02 1.5 $240.69 Excavator Komatsu PC238USLC-11 2022 8/3/2026 Bucket $117.05 $93.55 $41.83 1.5 $175.58 Excavator Komatsu PC88MR-11 2022 8/3/2026 Bucket $81.86 $64.07 $31.06 1 $31.06 Loader Komatsu WA380-8 2023 8/3/2026 Bucket & Forks $87.67 $65.98 $31.66 1 $87.67 Skidsteer CAT 255 2024 8/3/2026 Bucket $97.27 $72.45 $24.54 1 $97.27 Roller CAT CB24B 2018 8/3/2026 NA $31.51 $21.87 $9.07 1 $21.87 Water Truck CAT 4000 2023 8/3/2026 NA $85.25 $44.00 $42.63 1 $85.25 Light Plant Wacker 2010 8/3/2026 NA $9.58 $5.94 $1.75 1 $9.58 Truck - Cole T GMC Sierra K3500 2021 8/3/2026 NA $31.13 $22.50 $10.38 1 $22.50 Truck - Luke Z Chevrolet Silverado 3500HD 2024 8/3/2026 NA $45.89 $33.26 $13.58 1 $33.26 VMB Ver-Mac PCMS 2020 7/30/2026 NA $18.61 $18.61 $9.31 1 $18.61 VMB Ver-Mac PCMS 2021 7/30/2026 NA $18.61 $18.61 $9.31 1 $18.61 2" Bypass Pump Liberty PumpsPRG101A 2026 8/3/2026 NA $10.35 $4.99 $1.48 1 $10.35 $852.30 Start Date Class Burdened Standard Rate Burdened Overtime Rate Standard Hours Overtime Hours Total Mark Up 15%Grand Total 8/3/2026 Super $93.57 1 $93.57 $14.04 $107.61 8/3/2026 Foreman $70.38 $94.08 1 $94.08 $14.11 $108.19 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 1.5 $141.12 $21.17 $162.29 8/3/2026 Loader $70.38 $94.08 1 $70.38 $10.56 $80.94 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 1.5 $105.57 $15.84 $121.41 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 1 $53.99 $8.10 $62.09 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 1 $53.99 $8.10 $62.09 $704.61 Start Date Quantity Crew Size Sifts & Hours Cost Hourly Rate Total Mark Up 15%Total $23.35 $3.50 $26.86 $26.86 GRAND TOTAL: $1,583.76 Indirects Total: Bond 1.5% of Cost Labor Total: Indirects/Per Diem Description Forrest McCarthy Matt Strong Luke Zehrer Hunter Juneau David Gentry Equipment Equipment Total: Labor Name Kevin Amberson Cole Tommerup PCO-04 433 MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement – Phase One PCO 05 – Unknown/Unlocated Waterline Strike Delay Owner: City of Bozeman Engineer: DOWL Date: 9/9/2026 WCC Job Number: 2622 Prepared by: John Butcher, Project Manager On 8/10/26 around 2 PM, Williams Civil Construction’s (“WCC”) crews encountered an unidentified active 6” Waterline running North/South on Kagy at approximate STA 305+75. This line was struck and caused significant delays and damage. City of Bozeman (“COB”) took roughly 2.5 hours to turn the line off, as they didn’t know it existed; and during this time WCC lost their pipe laser. After the line was shut off, “COB” directed “WCC” to cap both lines and place thrust blocks at the end of each cap. The entirety of the delay lasted 11 hours and pushed us into our night shift. The delay was considered complete after the thrust blocks were installed. However, Additional area was also needed to be rebuilt in the trench due to erosion of the trench walls. This was considered as an increase in existing project quantities (Items 1018 and 1019). WCC is requesting monetary and a schedule adjustment of, one (1) working day, under General Conditions Clause 4.05(F) Delays. Please see the attached breakdown associated with the differing subsurface condition. SCHEDULE OF VALUES Item No. Description Quantity Unit Cost Unit Price 1017 Water Service Delay 1 $20,631.55 LS $20,600.90 1018 Additional Structural 20 $63.00 LF $1,260.00 1019 Additional Asphalt 13.5 $46.00 SY $621.00 TOTAL: $22,481.90 PCO-05 434 Type Make Model Year Start Date Attachments Standard Rate Idling Rate Stand By Rate Standard Hours Idling Hours Stand By Hours Total Excavator Volvo ECR355E 2025 8/3/2026 2 Buckets $160.46 $127.48 $56.02 5 4 2 $1,424.26 Excavator Komatsu PC238USLC-11 2022 8/3/2026 Bucket $117.05 $93.55 $41.83 5 4 2 $1,043.11 Excavator Komatsu PC88MR-11 2022 8/3/2026 Bucket $81.86 $64.07 $31.06 11 $341.66 Loader Komatsu WA380-8 2023 8/3/2026 Bucket & Forks $87.67 $65.98 $31.66 5 4 2 $765.59 Skidsteer CAT 255 2024 8/3/2026 Bucket $97.27 $72.45 $24.54 6 5 $706.32 Roller CAT CB24B 2018 8/3/2026 NA $31.51 $21.87 $9.07 11 $99.77 Water Truck CAT 4000 2023 8/3/2026 NA $85.25 $44.00 $42.63 5 4 2 $687.51 Light Plant Wacker 2010 8/3/2026 NA $9.58 $5.94 $1.75 6 5 $66.23 Truck - Cole T GMC Sierra K3500 2021 8/3/2026 NA $31.13 $22.50 $10.38 4 $90.00 Truck - Tyler P GMC Sierra 3500HD 2024 8/3/2026 NA $45.39 $32.89 $13.36 7 $230.23 Truck - Tommy Chevrolet Silverado 3500HD 2023 8/3/2026 NA $45.71 $33.08 $13.47 7 $231.56 Truck - Luke Z Chevrolet Silverado 3500HD 2024 8/3/2026 NA $45.89 $33.26 $13.58 4 $133.04 VMB Ver-Mac PCMS 2020 7/30/2026 NA $18.61 $18.61 $9.31 11 $204.71 VMB Ver-Mac PCMS 2021 7/30/2026 NA $18.61 $18.61 $9.31 11 $204.71 2" Bypass Pump Liberty Pumps PRG101A 2026 8/3/2026 NA $10.35 $4.99 $1.48 11 $113.85 $6,342.55 Start Date Class Burdened Standard Rate Burdened Overtime Rate Standard Hours Overtime Hours Total Mark Up 15%Grand Total 8/3/2026 Super $93.57 4 $374.28 $56.14 $430.42 8/3/2026 Foreman $70.38 $94.08 4 $281.52 $42.23 $323.75 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 4 $281.52 $42.23 $323.75 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 7 $492.66 $73.90 $566.56 8/3/2026 Loader $70.38 $94.08 4 $281.52 $42.23 $323.75 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $44.31 $54.98 7 $310.17 $46.53 $356.70 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 4 $281.52 $42.23 $323.75 8/3/2026 Loader $70.38 $94.08 7 $492.66 $73.90 $566.56 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 4 $215.96 $32.39 $248.35 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 7 $492.66 $73.90 $566.56 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 7 $377.93 $56.69 $434.62 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 4 $215.96 $32.39 $248.35 8/3/2026 Engineer $65.94 4 $263.76 $39.56 $303.32 $5,016.44 Start Date Quantity Crew Size Sifts & Hours Cost Hourly Rate Total Mark Up 15%Grand Total $303.77 $45.57 $349.34 $349.34 Quantity Unit Cost Total Mark Up 15%Grand Total 1 EA $6,709.99 $6,709.99 $1,006.50 $7,716.49 5 HR $160.00 $800.00 $120.00 $920.00 2 EA $17.34 $34.68 $5.20 $39.88 1 LS $188.00 $188.00 $28.20 $216.20 $8,892.57 GRAND TOTAL: $20,600.90 Cole Tommerup Equipment Equipment Total: Labor Name Kevin Amberson Luke Zehrer Tyler Prothero Hunter Juneau Trey Bonello David Gentry Cody Hamilton Forrest McCarthy Tyler Bache John Lopez Matt Strong Andrew Rosston Labor Total: Indirects/Per Diem Description Bond 1.5% of Cost Indirects Total: Materials Description TOPCON TP-L6GV Pipe Laser Materials Total: Straight Truck (haul Off) 6" Waterline Caps Spreader Bars PCO-05 435 MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement – Phase One PCO 06 – Unknown Storm Sewer Cluster Owner: City of Bozeman Engineer: DOWL Date: 9/22/2026 WCC Job Number: 2622 Prepared by: John Butcher, Project Manager Between approximate STA 305+00 to 306+50 and the dates of 8/10/26 and 8/11/26, Williams Civil Construction (“WCC”) encountered an unknow RCP storm pipe, CMP storm pipe and a buried abandoned storm manhole. This impact occurred over 4 shifts. Near the electrical vault (STA 305+25), “WCC” first encountered an additional RCP Storm Pipe. The proximity to the Fiber Optic and the other RCP storm pipe, inhibited the ability to safely install the Sanitary Sewer line. “WCC” needed to bring in a specialty trench box to safely proceed with the installation of the pipe. Further down the run, as we neared Kagy MH5, “WCC” came across and unknown storm sewer system. Consisting of CMP pipe and a buried storm manhole. “WCC” was delayed for it to be investigated. It was determined that the system was abandoned. Additional time was needed to work around the abandoned system and remove portions of the pipe. The abandoned manhole was left in place. WCC is requesting monetary and a schedule adjustment of, one (1) working day, under General Conditions Clause 4.05(F) Delays. Please see the attached breakdown associated with the differing subsurface condition. SCHEDULE OF VALUES Item No. Description Quantity Unit Cost Unit Price 1020 Unknown Storm Cluster 1 $8,606.78 LS $8,606.78 TOTAL: $8,606.78 PCO-06 436 Type Make Model Year Start Date Attachments Standard Rate Idling Rate Stand By Rate Standard Hours Idling Hours Stand By Hours Total Excavator Volvo ECR355E 2025 8/3/2026 2 Buckets $160.46 $127.48 $56.02 8 $1,283.68 Excavator Komatsu PC238USLC-11 2022 8/3/2026 Bucket $117.05 $93.55 $41.83 8 $936.40 Loader Komatsu WA380-8 2023 8/3/2026 Bucket & Forks $87.67 $65.98 $31.66 8 $701.36 Water Truck CAT 4000 2023 8/3/2026 NA $85.25 $44.00 $42.63 8 $682.00 Light Plant Wacker 2010 8/3/2026 NA $9.58 $5.94 $1.75 4 $38.32 Truck - Cole T GMC Sierra K3500 2021 8/3/2026 NA $31.13 $22.50 $10.38 4 $124.52 Truck - Tyler P GMC Sierra 3500HD 2024 8/3/2026 NA $45.39 $32.89 $13.36 4 $181.56 Truck - Luke Z Chevrolet Silverado 3500HD 2024 8/3/2026 NA $45.89 $33.26 $13.58 4 $183.56 VMB Ver-Mac PCMS 2020 7/30/2026 NA $18.61 $18.61 $9.31 8 $148.88 VMB Ver-Mac PCMS 2021 7/30/2026 NA $18.61 $18.61 $9.31 8 $148.88 2" Bypass Pump Liberty Pumps PRG101A 2026 8/3/2026 NA $10.35 $4.99 $1.48 8 $82.80 $4,511.96 Start Date Class Burdened Standard Rate Burdened Overtime Rate Standard Hours Overtime Hours Total Mark Up 15%Grand Total 8/3/2026 Super $93.57 4 $374.28 $56.14 $430.42 8/3/2026 Foreman $70.38 $94.08 4 $281.52 $42.23 $323.75 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 4 $281.52 $42.23 $323.75 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 4 $281.52 $42.23 $323.75 8/3/2026 Loader $70.38 $94.08 4 $281.52 $42.23 $323.75 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $44.31 $54.98 4 $177.24 $26.59 $203.83 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 4 $281.52 $42.23 $323.75 8/3/2026 Loader $70.38 $94.08 4 $281.52 $42.23 $323.75 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 4 $215.96 $32.39 $248.35 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 4 $281.52 $42.23 $323.75 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 4 $215.96 $32.39 $248.35 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 4 $215.96 $32.39 $248.35 8/3/2026 Engineer $65.94 4 $263.76 $39.56 $303.32 $3,948.87 Start Date Quantity Crew Size Sifts & Hours Cost Hourly Rate Total Mark Up 15%Total $126.91 $19.04 $145.95 $145.95 Quantity Unit Cost Total Mark Up 15%Grand Total $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 GRAND TOTAL: $8,606.78 Cole Tommerup Equipment Equipment Total: Labor Name Kevin Amberson Luke Zehrer Tyler Prothero Hunter Juneau Trey Bonello David Gentry Cody Hamilton Forrest McCarthy Tyler Bache John Lopez Matt Strong Andrew Rosston Labor Total: Indirects/Per Diem Description Bond 1.5% of Cost Indirects Total: Materials Description Materials Total: PCO-06 437 MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement – Phase One PCO 07 – Unknown Water Service and Intersection Conduit Delay Owner: City of Bozeman Engineer: DOWL Date: 9/22/2026 WCC Job Number: 2622 Prepared by: John Butcher, Project Manager Starting 8/18/26 and spanning over 2 Shifts, Williams Civil Construction (“WCC”) encountered two unknown utilities that delayed the installation of the 12” Sanitary Sewer. While installing the service near STA 104+13, “WCC” found an unidentified water service. This slowed the production of the installation by causing hand digging. This delayed the work by 1.5 Hours. Later that night, near STA 105+50 an unknown and unmarked conduit was found near the intersection. The line ran parallel with the trench which slowed installation significantly as there was concern this was associated with the traffic lights. Supports and tie backs were installed to protect this line until its path exited our trench. This delayed the work by 2.5 Hours. WCC is requesting monetary under General Conditions Clause 4.05(F) Delays. Please see the attached breakdown associated with the differing subsurface condition. SCHEDULE OF VALUES Item No. Description Quantity Unit Cost Unit Price 1021 Unknown Water Service and Conduit 1 $5,858.07 LS $5,858.07 TOTAL: $5,858.07 PCO-07 438 Type Make Model Year Start Date Attachments Standard Rate Idling Rate Stand By Rate Standard Hours Idling Hours Stand By Hours Total Excavator Volvo ECR355E 2025 8/3/2026 2 Buckets $160.46 $127.48 $56.02 4 $641.84 Excavator Komatsu PC238USLC-11 2022 8/3/2026 Bucket $117.05 $93.55 $41.83 4 $468.20 Loader Komatsu WA380-8 2023 8/3/2026 Bucket & Forks $87.67 $65.98 $31.66 4 $350.68 Skidsteer CAT 255 2024 8/3/2026 Bucket $97.27 $72.45 $24.54 4 $389.08 Water Truck CAT 4000 2023 8/3/2026 NA $85.25 $44.00 $42.63 4 $341.00 Light Plant Wacker 2010 8/3/2026 NA $9.58 $5.94 $1.75 2 $19.16 Truck - Cole T GMC Sierra K3500 2021 8/3/2026 NA $31.13 $22.50 $10.38 2 $62.26 Truck - Tyler P GMC Sierra 3500HD 2024 8/3/2026 NA $45.39 $32.89 $13.36 2 $90.78 Truck - Tommy Chevrolet Silverado 3500HD 2023 8/3/2026 NA $45.71 $33.08 $13.47 2 $91.42 Truck - Luke Z Chevrolet Silverado 3500HD 2024 8/3/2026 NA $45.89 $33.26 $13.58 2 $91.78 6" Bypass Pump BBA Pump DV150B SD SA 2026 8/3/2026 NA $109.44 $90.22 $17.94 4 $437.76 6" Bypass Pump BBA Pump DV150B SD SA 2026 8/3/2026 NA $109.44 $90.22 $17.94 4 $437.76 Alarm System RACO 2 2025 8/3/2026 NA $7.39 $7.39 $3.70 4 $29.56 VMB Ver-Mac PCMS 2020 7/30/2026 NA $18.61 $18.61 $9.31 4 $74.44 VMB Ver-Mac PCMS 2021 7/30/2026 NA $18.61 $18.61 $9.31 4 $74.44 $3,600.16 Start Date Class Burdened Standard Rate Burdened Overtime Rate Standard Hours Overtime Hours Total Mark Up 15%Grand Total 8/3/2026 Super $93.57 2 $187.14 $28.07 $215.21 8/3/2026 Foreman $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Foreman $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Loader $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Loader $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 2 $107.98 $16.20 $124.18 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 2 $107.98 $16.20 $124.18 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 2 $107.98 $16.20 $124.18 8/3/2026 Engineer $65.94 2 $131.88 $19.78 $151.66 8/10/2026 Pipelayer $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/10/2026 Excavator $53.99 $73.46 2 $107.98 $16.20 $124.18 $2,158.57 Start Date Quantity Crew Size Sifts & Hours Cost Hourly Rate Total Mark Up 15%Total $86.38 $12.96 $99.34 $99.34 Quantity Unit Cost Total Mark Up 15%Grand Total $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 GRAND TOTAL: $5,858.07 Materials Total: Indirects Total: Materials Description Bond 1.5% of Cost Labor Total: Indirects/Per Diem Description Andrew Rosston Daniel Lindsey Logan Fulcher Cody Hamilton Forrest McCarthy Matt Strong Dustin Gairrett Luke Zehrer Tommylee Asay Tyler Prothero Hunter Juneau David Gentry Equipment Equipment Total: Labor Name Kevin Amberson Cole Tommerup PCO-07 439 MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement – Phase One PCO 08 – Power and Fiber Optic Delays Owner: City of Bozeman Engineer: DOWL Date: 9/22/2026 WCC Job Number: 2622 Prepared by: John Butcher, Project Manager Starting on 8/19/26, between STA 106+40 and 106+50, Williams Civil Construction (“WCC”) first encountered an unmarked unknown power line (STA 106+40). This slowed production by 1.5 Hours. “WCC” progressed approximately 10 feet further (STA 160+50) and came across 3 unidentified Fiber Optic lines. These lines significantly slowed production as they also caused conflicts with known utilities in the area. This slowed production by an additional 3.5 Hours. WCC is requesting monetary under General Conditions Clause 4.05(F) Delays. Please see the attached breakdown associated with the differing subsurface condition. SCHEDULE OF VALUES Item No. Description Quantity Unit Cost Unit Price 1022 Unknown Power Line and Fiber Optic Cluster 1 $6,358.94 LS $6,358.94 TOTAL: $6,358.94 PCO-08 440 Type Make Model Year Start Date Attachments Standard Rate Idling Rate Stand By Rate Standard Hours Idling Hours Stand By Hours Total Excavator Volvo ECR355E 2025 8/3/2026 2 Buckets $160.46 $127.48 $56.02 5 $802.30 Excavator Komatsu PC238USLC-11 2022 8/3/2026 Bucket $117.05 $93.55 $41.83 5 $585.25 Loader Komatsu WA380-8 2023 8/3/2026 Bucket & Forks $87.67 $65.98 $31.66 5 $438.35 Water Truck CAT 4000 2023 8/3/2026 NA $85.25 $44.00 $42.63 5 $426.25 Light Plant Wacker 2010 8/3/2026 NA $9.58 $5.94 $1.75 3 $28.74 Truck - Cole T GMC Sierra K3500 2021 8/3/2026 NA $31.13 $22.50 $10.38 3 $93.39 Truck - Tyler P GMC Sierra 3500HD 2024 8/3/2026 NA $45.39 $32.89 $13.36 2 $90.78 Truck - Tommy Chevrolet Silverado 3500HD 2023 8/3/2026 NA $45.71 $33.08 $13.47 2 $91.42 Truck - Luke Z Chevrolet Silverado 3500HD 2024 8/3/2026 NA $45.89 $33.26 $13.58 3 $137.67 6" Bypass Pump BBA Pump DV150B SD SA 2026 8/3/2026 NA $109.44 $90.22 $17.94 5 $547.20 6" Bypass Pump BBA Pump DV150B SD SA 2026 8/3/2026 NA $109.44 $90.22 $17.94 5 $547.20 Alarm System RACO 2 2025 8/3/2026 NA $7.39 $7.39 $3.70 5 $36.95 VMB Ver-Mac PCMS 2020 7/30/2026 NA $18.61 $18.61 $9.31 5 $93.05 VMB Ver-Mac PCMS 2021 7/30/2026 NA $18.61 $18.61 $9.31 5 $93.05 $4,011.60 Start Date Class Burdened Standard Rate Burdened Overtime Rate Standard Hours Overtime Hours Total Mark Up 15%Grand Total 8/3/2026 Super $93.57 2 $187.14 $28.07 $215.21 8/3/2026 Foreman $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 3 $211.14 $31.67 $242.81 8/3/2026 Foreman $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Loader $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Loader $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 2 $107.98 $16.20 $124.18 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 2 $107.98 $16.20 $124.18 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 2 $107.98 $16.20 $124.18 8/3/2026 Engineer $65.94 2 $131.88 $19.78 $151.66 8/10/2026 Pipelayer $70.38 $94.08 2 $140.76 $21.11 $161.87 8/10/2026 Excavator $53.99 $73.46 2 $107.98 $16.20 $124.18 $2,239.51 Start Date Quantity Crew Size Sifts & Hours Cost Hourly Rate Total Mark Up 15%Total $93.77 $14.06 $107.83 $107.83 Quantity Unit Cost Total Mark Up 15%Grand Total $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 GRAND TOTAL: $6,358.94 Materials Total: Indirects Total: Materials Description Bond 1.5% of Cost Labor Total: Indirects/Per Diem Description Andrew Rosston Daniel Lindsey Logan Fulcher Cody Hamilton Forrest McCarthy Matt Strong Dustin Gairrett Luke Zehrer Tommylee Asay Tyler Prothero Hunter Juneau David Gentry Equipment Equipment Total: Labor Name Kevin Amberson Cole Tommerup PCO-08 441 EJCDC C-942 Field Order Prepared by the Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee and endorsed by the Construction Specifications Institute. Page 1 of 1 Field Order No. 05 Date of Issuance: 8/21/2026 Effective Date: 8/21/2026 Project: MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement – Phase 1 Owner: City of Bozeman Owner's Contract No.:n/a Engineer: DOWL Date of Contract: 07/8/2026 Contractor: Williams Civil Construction Engineer's Project No.:4563.000039.01 Attention: You are hereby directed to promptly execute this Field Order issued in accordance with General Conditions Paragraph 9.04.A, for minor changes in the Work without changes in Contract Price or Contract Times. If you consider that a change in Contract Price or Contract Times is required, please notify the Engineer immediately and before proceeding with this Work. You are hereby directed to promptly execute this Field Order issued in accordance with General Conditions Paragraph 9.04.A, for minor changes in the Work without changes in Contract Price or Contract Times. If you consider that a change in Contract Price or Contract Times is required, please notify the Engineer immediately and before proceeding with this Work. You are hereby directed to promptly execute this Field Order issued in accordance with General Conditions Paragraph 11.04, for minor changes in the Work without changes in Contract Price or Contract Times. If you consider that a change in Contract Price or Contract Times is required, please notify the Engineer immediately and before proceeding with this Work. Reference: PP05 (Specification Section(s)) (Drawing(s) / Detail(s)) Description: Sta 108+60 +/- Water/Sewer separation: The water/sewer separation at this crossing is less than required. Please proceed with the following mitigation: - Center the 14-foot stick of sewer under the existing water main. - Install flowable over the sewer for the entire width of the trench, length of the sewer pipe stick (14’) & beyond the bells at each end (16’ total) and up to the springline of the existing water main. Attachments: Engineer: Receipt Acknowledged by Contractor: Date: Copy to Owner PCO-09 442 MSU Sewer Interceptor Replacement – Phase One PCO 09 – Field Order 5 Flow Fill Waterline and Sewer Separation Owner: City of Bozeman Engineer: DOWL Date: 9/22/2026 WCC Job Number: 2622 Prepared by: John Butcher, Project Manager This PCO 09 is in response to Field Order 5. Williams Civil Construction (“WCC”) was directed to place flow fill between the sanitary sewer and water line, as there wasn’t enough distance between them. Also added to this change is the fiber optic duct bank near S. Tracy MH1 at approximate STA 109+35. “WCC” needed to chip out the existing fiber optic duct bank and then replace it with flow fill after the manhole was placed. In total 8 CY of flow fill was placed, 4 CY for the separation between lines and 4 CY for the fiber optic duct bank. Please see the attached cost breakdown. SCHEDULE OF VALUES Item No. Description Quantity Unit Cost Unit Price 1023 Field Order 5 1 $6,140.19 LS $6,140.19 TOTAL: $6,140.19 PCO-09 443 Type Make Model Year Start Date Attachments Standard Rate Idling Rate Stand By Rate Standard Hours Idling Hours Stand By Hours Total Excavator Volvo ECR355E 2025 8/3/2026 2 Buckets $160.46 $127.48 $56.02 3.5 $561.61 Excavator Komatsu PC238USLC-11 2022 8/3/2026 Bucket $117.05 $93.55 $41.83 3.5 $409.68 Excavator Komatsu PC88MR-11 2022 8/3/2026 Bucket $81.86 $64.07 $31.06 3.5 $286.51 Loader Komatsu WA380-8 2023 8/3/2026 Bucket & Forks $87.67 $65.98 $31.66 3.5 $306.85 Water Truck CAT 4000 2023 8/3/2026 NA $85.25 $44.00 $42.63 3.5 $298.38 Light Plant Wacker 2010 8/3/2026 NA $9.58 $5.94 $1.75 3.5 $33.53 Truck - Cole T GMC Sierra K3500 2021 8/3/2026 NA $31.13 $22.50 $10.38 3.5 $108.96 Truck - Luke Z Chevrolet Silverado 3500HD 2024 8/3/2026 NA $45.89 $33.26 $13.58 3.5 $160.62 6" Bypass Pump BBA Pump DV150B SD SA 2026 8/3/2026 NA $109.44 $90.22 $17.94 3.5 $383.04 6" Bypass Pump BBA Pump DV150B SD SA 2026 8/3/2026 NA $109.44 $90.22 $17.94 3.5 $383.04 Alarm System RACO 2 2025 8/3/2026 NA $7.39 $7.39 $3.70 3.5 $25.87 VMB Ver-Mac PCMS 2020 7/30/2026 NA $18.61 $18.61 $9.31 3.5 $65.14 VMB Ver-Mac PCMS 2021 7/30/2026 NA $18.61 $18.61 $9.31 3.5 $65.14 $3,088.33 Start Date Class Burdened Standard Rate Burdened Overtime Rate Standard Hours Overtime Hours Total Mark Up 15%Grand Total 8/3/2026 Foreman $70.38 $94.08 3.5 $246.33 $36.95 $283.28 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 3.5 $246.33 $36.95 $283.28 8/3/2026 Loader $70.38 $94.08 3.5 $246.33 $36.95 $283.28 8/3/2026 Excavator $70.38 $94.08 3.5 $246.33 $36.95 $283.28 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 3.5 $188.97 $28.34 $217.31 8/3/2026 Pipelayer $53.99 $73.43 3.5 $188.97 $28.34 $217.31 $1,567.74 Start Date Quantity Crew Size Sifts & Hours Cost Hourly Rate Total Mark Up 15%Total $90.54 $13.58 $104.12 $104.12 Quantity Unit Cost Total Mark Up 15%Grand Total 8 CY $150.00 $1,200.00 $180.00 $1,380.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,380.00 GRAND TOTAL: $6,140.19 Materials Total: Indirects Total: Materials Description Flow Fill Bond 1.5% of Cost Labor Total: Indirects/Per Diem Description Forrest McCarthy Matt Strong Luke Zehrer Hunter Juneau David Gentry Equipment Equipment Total: Labor Name Cole Tommerup PCO-09 444 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Bob Murray, Project Engineer Shawn Kohtz, Utilities Director SUBJECT:Adopt a Resolution Authorizing Change Order 2 with CK May Excavating, Inc. for the Sourdough Intake Improvements Project MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Resolution RECOMMENDATION:Adopt a resolution authorizing Change Order No. 2 with CK May Excavating, Inc. for the Sourdough Intake Improvements Project. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices: Prioritize long-term investment and maintenance for existing and new infrastructure. BACKGROUND:Attached is a copy of a resolution and change order number 2 for the above referenced project. The change order includes nine items, six additions, two deducts, and one item that was the result of a design problem that the consultant reimbursed the City for (Item 2, $32,060.99). There is a description of each of the items beginning on the second page of the change order titled “Sourdough Creek Intake Improvements, City of Bozeman, Change Order No. 2 Summary”. This is followed by the detailed backup information associated with each item. The result of the nine items is an increase in the current contract amount of $91,298.22. With the credit provided by the consultant, the net cost to the City is $59,237.23. There is an increase of 26 days in contract time associated with this change. The final recommended change in cost and time for these items is reasonable and commensurate with the work involved. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the City Commission FISCAL EFFECTS:Increase of $91,298.22 from $4,518,300.00 to $4,609,598.22. The change will be paid from the Water Fund. The Water Fund in the Capital Improvement Plan budgeted $5,100,000 (W107) for this project. Attachments: CO2-resolution.docx Sourdough Change Order No 2 October 2026 CK May and Eng 445 Signed.pdf Report compiled on: October 29, 2026 446 Version February 2023 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, APPROVING ALTERATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT WITH CK MAY EXCAVATING, INC., BELGRADE, MONTANA. WHEREAS, the City Commission did, on the 17th day of December 2024, authorize award of the bid for the Sourdough Intake Improvements Project to CK May Excavating, Inc., Belgrade, Montana; and WHEREAS, Section 7-5-4308, Montana Code Annotated, provides that any such alterations or modifications of the specifications and/or plans of the contract be made by resolution; and WHEREAS, it has become necessary in the prosecution of the work to make alterations or modifications to the specifications and/or plans of the contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, to wit: that the proposed modifications and/or alterations to the contract between the City of Bozeman, a municipal corporation, and CK May Excavating, Inc., as contained in Change Order No. 2, attached hereto, be and the same are hereby approved; and the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract change order for and on behalf of the City; and the City Clerk is authorized and directed to attest such signature. PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, at a regular session thereof held on the 10th day of November, 2026. ___________________________________ JOEY MORRISON Mayor 447 Version February 2023 ATTEST: ___________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 448 449 Page 1 of 4 Sourdough Creek Intake Improvements City of Bozeman Change Order No. 2 Summary This Change Order includes modification of several work items as outlined below. Attachments are noted for each item. 1 Work Change Directive No. 3 – Provide Fill Around Air Relief Valve Vault Increase in Contract Time – 2 days Final Pricing $14,713.87 and 2 additional contract days Attachments – Final Pricing from CK May – WCD 3 2 Air Valve Change (Previously Work Change Directive No. 4) This change provides for providing Class 150 Ball Valves to match the specified pipe flanges. Costs are associated with procuring the valves, associated fittings, and fabrication of spools. Increase in Contract Time – 5 days Increase in Contract Price - $32,060.99 Attachments – Final Pricing from CK May 3 Work Change Directive No. 5 – Construct Trench Plug A trench plug was required to prevent water from migrating through the various zones of pipe bedding between the creek and the pipe line connection point. Increase in Contract Time – 5 days Final Pricing $32,335.30 and 5 additional contract days Attachments – Final Pricing from CK May – WCD 5 450 Page 2 of 4 4 Work Change Directive No. 6 – Change Measure and Payment Item This change provided for the change in terms of payment for demobilization. No increase in Contract Price or Contract Time Attachments – WCD 6 5 Work Change Directive No. 7 – Exploratory Excavation This change included plugging off an abandoned pipe to reduce leakage from the creek and groundwater system across the site. Increase in Contract Time – 2 days Final Pricing $5,680.46 and 2 additional contract days Attachments – Final Pricing from CK May – WCD 7 6 Request for Proposal No. 4 – Miscellaneous Intake Site Changes This change included several minor modifications to site work at the intake site. Increase in Contract Price - $14,942.96 – Final Increase in Contract Time 2 Days – Final Attachments – Request for Proposal No. 4 – Final Pricing from CK May 7 Credit for not installing 24” Flexible Check Valve Decrease in Contract Price - $7,300 No change in Contract Time No Attachments 451 Page 3 of 4 8 Request for Proposal 2 – Flow Control Building Trolley and Hoist This change included adding a trolley and hoist in the flow control building. Increase in Contract Price - $3,729.96 No change in Contract Time Attachments – Request for Proposal No. 2 - Final Pricing from CK May 9 Sump Pump and Wet Well Deletion This change modified the drainage outlet of the air valve vault to remove a pump and wet well from the project. Decrease in Contract Price - $4,865.32 No change in Contract Time Attachments - Final Pricing from CK May 10 Project Completion Timing Once final completion was achieved on November 26, 2025 the project was put on hold until suitable Spring/Summer conditions existed. A majority of the weather related work was completed in the June and July time frame with some minor punch list items extending into the Fall. A final completion date of December 15, 2026 has been identified as a reasonable amount of time for this change order to be processed and all final project closeout documents to be received and processed. 452 Page 4 of 4 Summary Item Number Price Time (Substantial Completion) 1 $14,713.87 2 days 2 $32,060.99 10 days 3 $32,335.30 10 days 4 $0 0 days 5 $5,680.46 2 days 6 $14,942.96 2 days 7 ($7,300.00) 0 days 8 $3,729.96 0 days 9 (4,865.32) 0 days Total $91,298.22 26 days 453 ITEM 1 454 Bozeman, MT QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 1 13.25 $ 45.00 $ 596.25 12.00 $ 67.50 $ 135.00 1 1.00 $ 227.42 $ 227.42 1 1.00 $ 10.24 $ 10.24 1 15.25 $ 15.29 $ 233.17 1 15.25 $ 1.98 $ 30.20 1 14.00 $ 37.00 $ 518.00 1 2.75 $ 55.50 $ 152.63 1 1.00 $ 161.15 $ 161.15 1 1.00 $ 9.39 $ 9.39 1 16.75 $ 14.10 $ 236.18 1 16.75 $ 1.98 $ 33.17 1 12.50 $ 37.00 $ 462.50 1 1.25 $ 55.50 $ 69.38 1 1.00 $ 114.35 $ 114.35 1 1.00 $ 7.45 $ 7.45 1 13.75 $ 14.10 $ 193.88 1 13.75 $ 1.98 $ 27.23 1 10.75 $ 32.00 $ 344.00 1 1.25 $ 48.00 $ 60.00 1 1.00 $ 50.34 $ 50.34 1 1.00 $ 5.66 $ 5.66 1 12.00 $ 14.10 $ 169.20 1 12.00 $ 1.98 $ 23.76 1 12.00 $ 30.00 $ 360.00 1 0.50 $ 45.00 $ 22.50 1 1.00 $ 75.20 $ 75.20 1 1.00 $ 5.36 $ 5.36 1 12.50 $ 11.82 $ 147.75 1 12.50 $ 1.98 $ 24.75 $ - $ 675.91 QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 1 8.50 $ 168.38 $ 1,431.23 1 13.00 $ 133.68 $ 1,737.84 1 4.50 $ 81.50 $ 366.75 13.00 $ 43.15 $ 129.45 1 8.50 $ 112.08 $ 952.68 1 8.50 $ 94.18 $ 800.53 1 5.50 $ 115.30 $ 634.15 $ - $ 907.89 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments 14 CY $ 14.03 $ 200.85 1 LS $ 577.11 $ 577.11 $ - $ 116.69 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments 1.50 HR $ 160.00 $ 240.00 1.00 LS $ 1,356.87 $ 1,356.87 $ - $ 79.84 Total Cost $ 14,713.87 J.M.J. (OT Wage) S.P.O (OT Wage) D.R.W. (OT Wage) J.J.M. (OT Wage) P.H.T.P. (OT Wage) Work Change Directive - T&M Pricing Detail CONTRACTOR: CK May Excavating PROJECT NAME:Sourdough Creek Intake ImprovementsPROJECT MANAGER Jim Blair ADDRESS: Morrison-Maierle FAX:July 2, 2025 DESCRIPTION:Work Change Directive No. 03: ARV Vault Fill Load, haul, place, compact, and finish embankment fill around the ARV Vault per attached sketch. Utilize select embankment material and native topsoil generated from Intake Site excavations. Embankment slopes to be track-walked to promote slope stability. P.O. Box 1426 Belgrade, MT 59714 PROJECT LOCATION: PHONE: 406-539-6559 REQUESTED FROM: ON DATE: Description EQUIPMENT:Komatsu HM300-5 (Rock Truck) Volvo L120H (Loader) Contractors Fee (15%) Description LABOR:J.M.J. (ST Wage) Komatsu PC390LCi-11 (Excavator) J.M.J. (Taxes - 31.10%) P.H.T.P. (Work Comp - 6319) J.J.M. (Taxes - 12.46%) J.J.M. (Unemployment - 1.40%) J.J.M. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) Description MATERIALS:1-1/2" ROAD MIX (TMC Cameron Spr.) Trail Closure Signage Caterpillar 299DC H2CB (Track Loader) Caterpillar 260 (Skid Steer) Caterpillar 306 CR Date: 04/30/2026 SUBCONTRACT:Straight Truck (Hourly - Rd Mix Import) Contractors Fee (5%) Authorized Signature Description Contractors Fee (15%) J.M.J. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) J.M.J. (Work Comp - 6319) Invoice: Bozeman Daily Chronicle - Trail Closure Notices Deere 210G LC (Excavator) J.M.J. (Unemployment - 1.40%) D.R.W. (ST Wage) D.R.W. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) S.P.O. (Taxes - 21.50%) J.J.M. (Work Comp - 6319) P.H.T.P. (ST Wage) P.H.T.P. (Taxes - 19.66%) P.H.T.P. (Unemployment - 1.40%) P.H.T.P. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) D.R.W. (Taxes - 24.03%) D.R.W. (Unemployment - 1.40%) D.R.W. (Work Comp - 6319) S.P.O (ST Wage) S.P.O. (Unemployment - 1.40%) S.P.O (Hourly Fringe Benefit) S.P.O. (Work Comp - 6319) J.J.M. (ST Wage) Contractors Fee (15%) 455 456 Order tt 5S294623793 ,·our crd.;r 1r,vo :ce 1.1ilt be en:1led to zach~ckmayexc.avating.com ~ Print Receipt ttem Summary Item Description TRA IL CLOSED Temporary Road Traffic Sign (Orange Diamond) wit h Stock or Custom Image Option v Full Product Details Cust om Blank Parking and Traffic Sign v Full Prod uct Details Quantity Price Qty: 2 Each: 51~6.'-5 $456.90 Qty: 1 $67.48 '1-'o:Jr :rdH i:, ;ubi~c: c,;, :i::.fe:ty:i1£r com·s T~Tl~ and condit,on~ 3rd wi:l cpp::ar or: :,:1a bill or s:a:-:nen: 2.s "~:,f1;-:ys:2r cam" 'li"ou \',ill be-c 3r£~j ~"4hHi ;-·our order ~hips. Your order i.s or,:..:e-s~ed in,m:!'.:iat::!:.r :::.r,d :irnor be i:hc:nge-J ,:r :u,ce-ll~d Erroneou:;l~1 ord-:r~,:i it.em:; n-L:st be. f!?turrec! a"t':r d!?!ive-ry Order FAQ v How do I check he status of m~, order? v What should I do if something happens to my package during shipping? v What shou Id I do if I receive the wrong items? v What should I do if I notice a mistake on nw order? v How do I return products? Ordered September 19, 2025 Stat us Processing Est. Delivery Date September 30, 2025 Shipping Met hod Ground -Fedi x Shipped To Zach Liley 1170 Apple's Way Belgrade, MT 59i14 14063880015 Payment Method Amex ···········••3018 Billed To James Blair CK May Excavating, Inc. .0. Box 1426 3elgrade, H 59714 14063880015 Subtotal Shipping Order Total $524.38 $52.73 $577,11 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 ITEM 2 466 Bozeman, MT QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - $ - QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - $ - QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments 11 EA $ 1,734.35 $ 19,077.85 20 EA $ 417.92 $ 8,358.40 20 EA $ 68.33 $ 1,366.60 20 EA $ 12.77 $ 255.40 1 EA $ 361.74 $ 361.74 2EA $ 28.00 $ 56.00 1 LS $ 2,585.00 $ 2,585.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - $ - Total Cost $ 32,060.99 Pricing Detail - Ball Valve Replacement CONTRACTOR: CK May Excavating PROJECT NAME:Sourdough Creek Intake ImprovementsPROJECT MANAGER Jim Blair ADDRESS: Morrison-Maierle FAX: DESCRIPTION:Pricing Detail - Ball Valve Replacement Replace 3" HPA 300# Ball Valves w/ 150# Ball Valves and Required Filler Flanges at valve vault and within compressor building. 300# valve will be used at the stilling tube with a fabricated transition spool. P.O. Box 1426 Belgrade, MT 59714 PROJECT LOCATION: PHONE: 406-539-6559 REQUESTED FROM: ON DATE: Contractors Fee (15%) Description EQUIPMENT: Contractors Fee (15%) Description LABOR: Description MATERIALS: 3" BALL VALVE, V307, 316 SS BODY, 150# RF 3" X 1.43" THICK FILLER FLANGE, 150#, 304L 3" 1/8" RING GASKET, SYNTHETIC FIBERS 3" BOLT KIT, 304 STAINLESS STEEL, 8 EA - 3" VAN STONE CLASS 300 FLANGES SPEARS 6" BOLT KIT,304 STAINLESS STEEL, 8 EA- 3/4" Date: 11/13/2025 SUBCONTRACT: Contractors Fee (5%) Authorized Signature Fabricated Spool at Stilling Tube Description Contractors Fee (REMOVED) 467 To: ~ H.D. FOWLER ~ COMPANY REMIT: PO Box 84368, Seattle, WA 98124 Invoice Number 17134743 BZWH # 031133 T-0 CK MAY EXCAVATING INC PO BOX 1426 BELGRADE MT 597141426 Due: 10/10/25 Corporate Office 3633 136th Pl SE, Ste 100, Bellevue, WA 98006 PO Box 160, Bellevue, WA 98009-0160 Phone 425-654-8800 * Fax 425-641-8885 Bozeman Branch 401 E MAIN ST Belgrade, MT 59714 (406) 388-1169 Fax (406) 388-4963 Ship to: Order# 08684243 HD Fowler Company -Bozeman Belgrade MT 59714 Inv Date: Order Writer: 09/23/25 Bryan Binder PO/JOB: SOURDOUGH 1 /1 Terms: NET 10TH PROX FOB: H. D. FOWLER Ship Via: WILL CALL SOURDOUGH CREEK INTAKE IMPRO Qty Qty Line Ship'd BO'd UoM 1 1 0 EA 3 2 0 EA JORDPN Part# Description 3" VAN STONE CLASS 300 FLANGES SPEARS #854-030CL300 6" BOLT KIT,304 STAINLESS STEEL, 8 EA-3/4" X 3- 1/2" BOLT WITH NUT.IMPORT Serving the Pacific Northwest since 1911 www.hdfowler.com Terms & Conditions: hdfowler.com/tcs Unit Price 361.740 28.000 Sub total Freight Tax Grand Total Extended Price 361.74 56.00 417.74 0.00 0.00 417.74 T X 468 469 25101 Bar C Drilling and Welding Date: Oct 20 2025 PO Box 1325 Manhattan MT, 59741 (406) 880-8794 PO # 25101 BILL TO SITE / LOCATION CK May Excavating Jim Blair jim@ckmayexcavating.com Sourdough Prefab DESCRIPTION Date QTY / HR UNIT PRICE / RATE TOTAL 2 flanges 2- 4” welds 7/23 2 9.4 (3”) 18.8 2 Pups 4 9.4 (3”) 37.60 Total Inches SS Prefab 56.4 in Total 1184.40 All welds pickled / Stainless Prefabrication Rate-$4200 per 200 in 3” 150# Stainless Flanges 5 105.77 528.85 3” 300# Stainless Flanges 2 136.27 272.54 3” Stainless pipe 20’ 29.98 599.60 Total 2,585 All invoices due 30 days upon receipt,unless previously specified in contract. Please note any invoices unpaid after 90 days will be subject to collections and a 40% collections fee. We can provide a credit card link for payment, check, or ACH transfer. Thank you again for choosing Bar C Drilling, we appreciate your business, please reach out if you have any questions or concerns. 470 ITEM 3 471 Bozeman, MT QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 1 24.50 $ 45.00 $ 1,102.50 1 5.50 $ 67.50 $ 371.25 11.00 $ 458.34 $ 458.34 11.00 $ 20.63 $ 20.63 1 30.00 $ 15.29 $ 458.70 1 30.00 $ 1.98 $ 59.40 1 32.50 $ 37.00 $ 1,202.50 11.00 $ 288.96 $ 288.96 11.00 $ 16.84 $ 16.84 1 32.50 $ 14.10 $ 458.25 1 32.50 $ 1.98 $ 64.35 1 16.00 $ 37.00 $ 592.00 1 3.50 $ 55.50 $ 194.25 11.00 $ 169.04 $ 169.04 11.00 $ 11.01 $ 11.01 1 19.50 $ 14.10 $ 274.95 1 19.50 $ 1.98 $ 38.61 1 30.50 $ 32.00 $ 976.00 11.00 $ 121.61 $ 121.61 11.00 $ 13.66 $ 13.66 1 30.50 $ 14.10 $ 430.05 1 30.50 $ 1.98 $ 60.39 11.50 $ 57.00 $ 85.50 11.00 $ 20.55 $ 20.55 11.00 $ 1.20 $ 1.20 11.50 $ 9.37 $ 14.06 11.50 $ 1.98 $ 2.97 14.00 $ 52.50 $ 210.00 11.00 $ 50.40 $ 50.40 11.00 $ 2.94 $ 2.94 14.00 $ 9.37 $ 37.48 14.00 $ 1.98 $ 7.92 $ - $ 1,172.44 QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 1 16.00 $ 132.43 $ 2,118.88 1 14.00 $ 81.50 $ 1,141.00 1 18.00 $ 112.08 $ 2,017.44 1 9.00 $ 43.15 $ 388.35 1 5.00 $ 115.30 $ 576.50 1 1.50 $ 76.16 $ 114.24 1 4.00 $ 76.18 $ 304.72 1 5.50 $ 22.23 $ 122.27 1 1.00 $ 2,350.93 $ 2,350.93 Rental 1 1.00 $ 505.50 $ 505.50 Rental 1 1.00 $ 394.00 $ 394.00 Rental $ - $ 1,505.07 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments 40 CY $ 157.00 $ 6,280.00 100 Gal $ 3.564666 $ 356.47 $ - $ 995.47 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments 7.5 HR $ 505.00 $ 3,787.50 3787.5 EA $ 0.05 $ 189.38 $ - $ 198.84 Total Cost $ 32,335.30 Xylem Dri-Prime CD150M Diesel Pump Trench Shoring (Inv. 177064458) K.H.D. (Unemployment - 1.40%) K.H.D. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) K.H.D. (Work Comp - 6319) K.H.D. (OT Wage) K.H.D. (Taxes - 24.00%) E.J.W. (Work Comp - 6319) J.M.J. (OT Wage) S.P.O (OT Wage) J.M.J. (Taxes - 31.10%) J.M.J. (Unemployment - 1.40%) D.R.W. (Taxes - 24.03%) S.P.O. (Taxes - 21.50%) S.P.O. (Unemployment - 1.40%) J.J.M. (Unemployment - 1.40%) J.J.M. (Taxes - 12.46%) D.R.W. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) J.M.J. (Work Comp - 6319) D.R.W. (Work Comp - 6319) S.P.O. (Work Comp - 6319) E.J.W. (OT Wage) E.J.W. (Taxes - 30.00%) E.J.W. (Unemployment - 1.40%) E.J.W. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) Work Change Directive - T&M Pricing Detail CONTRACTOR: CK May Excavating PROJECT NAME:Sourdough Creek Intake ImprovementsPROJECT MANAGER Jim Blair ADDRESS: Morrison-Maierle FAX:September 25, 2025 DESCRIPTION:Work Change Directive 05: Construct a trench plug to contain water that is flowing through the pipe bedding material generally in the location shown on the attached figure. The trench plug shall be either flowable fill or clay soil. The width of the trench plug perpendicular to the pipe is to be field determined based on conditions but a minimum width of the excavator bucket. The trench plug is to extend past the existing trench walls a minimum of 3 feet and extend 2 feet below the pipe. If clay soil is used for the trench plug, the material is to be a locally available soil with relatively high clay content, much of the overburden between the topsoil lens and the sandy/gravel material in the valley meets this requirement. Coordinate with Engineer on suitability of the source. The intent of the project is to minimize the amount of water draining through the pipe bedding from the impoundment. Work to be completed on a time and material basis. This change will require a time extension to allow for the work to be completed. Time to be determined based on the work as it is completed. P.O. Box 1426 Belgrade, MT 59714 PROJECT LOCATION: PHONE: 406-539-6559 REQUESTED FROM: ON DATE: Contractors Fee (15%) Description EQUIPMENT:Komatsu PC290LCI-11 Volvo L120H (Loader) Contractors Fee (15%) Description LABOR:J.M.J. (ST Wage) Deere 210G LC (Excavator) J.M.J. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) D.R.W. (ST Wage) D.R.W. (Unemployment - 1.40%) S.P.O (ST Wage) S.P.O (Hourly Fringe Benefit) J.J.M. (ST Wage) J.J.M. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) Caterpillar 306 CR Trench Shoring (Inv. 177093261) Load King 553SS (TRL001) J.J.M. (Work Comp - 6319) Description MATERIALS:Excavatable Fill Fuel (Rental Dri-Prime) Date: 04/30/2026 SUBCONTRACTOR:Vac Truck (Scenic City) Contractors Fee (5%) Authorized Signature Description Contractors Fee (15%) 5% Fuel Surcharge (Scenic City) Caterpillar 260 (Skid Steer) Western Star 49X (TRK009) Western Star 4900 SF (TRK005) 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 ITEM 4 488 489 ITEM 5 490 Bozeman, MT QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 14.50 $ 45.00 $ 202.50 13.25 $ 67.50 $ 219.38 11.00 $ 196.26 $ 196.26 11.00 $ 5.91 $ 5.91 17.75 $ 11.82 $ 91.61 17.75 $ 1.40 $ 10.85 1 8.00 $ 37.00 $ 296.00 1 2.50 $ 55.50 $ 138.75 11.00 $ 169.12 $ 169.12 11.00 $ 6.09 $ 6.09 1 10.50 $ 11.82 $ 124.11 1 10.50 $ 1.40 $ 14.70 1 7.00 $ 35.00 $ 245.00 1 3.50 $ 52.50 $ 183.75 11.00 $ 116.11 $ 116.11 11.00 $ 6.00 $ 6.00 1 10.50 $ 11.82 $ 124.11 1 10.50 $ 1.40 $ 14.70 $ 324.74 QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 11.50 $ 131.52 $ 197.28 1 5.50 $ 43.15 $ 237.33 $ 65.19 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments 10 CY $ 145.00 $ 1,450.00 2EA $ 50.00 $ 100.00 10 YD $ 9.00 $ 90.00 1EA $ 700.00 $ 700.00 $ 351.00 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - $ - Total Cost $ 5,680.46 Morrison-Maierle FAX:May 1, 2026 DESCRIPTION:Work Change Directive 07: 1. Perform exploratory excavation, per Engineer's direction, along the abandoned 18" clay intake pipe in search of active groudwater flows through the abandoned clay pipe and pipe bedding material. 2. Based on exploratory excavation findings, plug the abandoned 18" clay pipe and construct trench plugs at locations determined by the Engineer. P.O. Box 1426 Work Change Directive 07 - T&M Pricing Detail CONTRACTOR: CK May Excavating PROJECT NAME:Sourdough Creek Intake ImprovementsPROJECT MANAGER Jim Blair ADDRESS: Belgrade, MT 59714 PROJECT LOCATION: PHONE: 406-539-6559 REQUESTED FROM: ON DATE: Description EQUIPMENT:Komatsu PC360LCi-11 Contractors Fee (15%) Description LABOR:J.M.J. (ST Wage) CAT 305.5 E2CRB J.M.J. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) D.R.W. (ST Wage) D.R.W. (Taxes - 38.90%) D.R.W. (Work Comp - 6319) J.M.A. (Unemployment - 1.40%) J.M.A. (Work Comp - 6319) Contractors Fee (15%) J.M.J. (OT Wage) J.M.A. (ST Wage) J.M.J. (Taxes - 46.52%) J.M.J. (Unemployment - 1.40%) D.R.W. (OT Wage) J.M.A. (OT Wage) Description MATERIALS:Low Strength Backfill Fuel Surcharge Plug it 1218 Pipe Plug NC 534 Admixture 1.5% J.M.A. (Taxes - 27.08%) D.R.W. (Unemployment - 1.40%) J.M.J. (Work Comp - 6319) D.R.W. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) J.M.A. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) Date: September 04, 2026 SUBCONTRACTOR:N/A Contractors Fee (5%) Authorized Signature Description Contractors Fee (15%) 491 September 2, 2025 257.0 hpHorsepower 79807.0 lbsOperating Weight DieselPower Mode www.equipmentwatch.com All prices shown in US dollars ($) Rental Rate Blue Book® Komatsu PC360LCI-11Crawler Mounted Hydraulic Excavators Size Class: 33.5 - 40.4 mt Weight:N/A Configuration for PC360LCI-11 Blue Book Rates ** FHWA Rate is equal to the monthly ownership cost divided by 176 plus the hourly estimated operating cost. Ownership Costs Estimated Operating Costs FHWA Rate** Monthly Weekly Daily Hourly Hourly Hourly Published Rates USD $15,380.00 USD $4,305.00 USD $1,075.00 USD $160.00 USD $47.72 USD $135.11 Adjustments Region (Montana: 96%)(USD $615.20)(USD $172.20)(USD $43.00)(USD $6.40) Model Year (2020: 99.89%)(USD $15.78)(USD $4.42)(USD $1.10)(USD $0.16) Adjusted Hourly Ownership Cost (100%) ---- Hourly Operating Cost (100%)- Total:USD $14,749.02 USD $4,128.38 USD $1,030.90 USD $153.44 USD $47.72 USD $131.52 Non-Active Use Rates Hourly Standby Rate USD $41.90 Idling Rate USD $101.07 Rate Element Allocation Element Percentage Value Depreciation (ownership)31.52%USD $4,848.53/mo Overhaul (ownership)42.45%USD $6,528.97/mo CFC (ownership)16.09%USD $2,475.09/mo Indirect (ownership)9.93%USD $1,527.40/mo Fuel (operating) @ USD 3.54 36.19%USD $17.27/hr Revised Date: 3rd quarter 2025 These are the most accurate rates for the selected Revision Date(s). However, due to more frequent online updates, these rates may not match Rental Rate Blue Book® Print. Visit the Cost Recovery Product Guide on our Help page for more information. The equipment represented in this report has been exclusively prepared for (sdugan@m-m.net) All material herein © 2003-2025 Randall-Reilly All rights reserved.Page 1 of 1www.equipmentwatch.com492 October 15, 2025 0.3 cu ydBucket Capacity 55.9 hpHorsepower 14136 lbsOperating Weight DieselPower Mode www.equipmentwatch.com All prices shown in US dollars ($) Rental Rate Blue Book® Caterpillar 306 CRCrawler Mounted Compact Excavators Size Class: 5.5 - 6.4 mt Weight:N/A Configuration for 306 CR Blue Book Rates ** FHWA Rate is equal to the monthly ownership cost divided by 176 plus the hourly estimated operating cost. Ownership Costs Estimated Operating Costs FHWA Rate** Monthly Weekly Daily Hourly Hourly Hourly Published Rates USD $4,305.00 USD $1,205.00 USD $300.00 USD $45.00 USD $19.69 USD $44.15 Adjustments Region (Montana: 96%)(USD $172.20)(USD $48.20)(USD $12.00)(USD $1.80) Model Year (2021: 99.89%)(USD $4.44)(USD $1.24)(USD $0.31)(USD $0.05) Adjusted Hourly Ownership Cost (100%) ---- Hourly Operating Cost (100%)- Total:USD $4,128.36 USD $1,155.56 USD $287.69 USD $43.15 USD $19.69 USD $43.15 Non-Active Use Rates Hourly Standby Rate USD $11.73 Idling Rate USD $31.25 Rate Element Allocation Element Percentage Value Depreciation (ownership)27.06%USD $1,164.96/mo Overhaul (ownership)38.17%USD $1,643.26/mo CFC (ownership)16.79%USD $722.70/mo Indirect (ownership)17.98%USD $774.08/mo Fuel (operating) @ USD 3.77 39.56%USD $7.79/hr Revised Date: 4th quarter 2025 These are the most accurate rates for the selected Revision Date(s). However, due to more frequent online updates, these rates may not match Rental Rate Blue Book® Print. Visit the Cost Recovery Product Guide on our Help page for more information. The equipment represented in this report has been exclusively prepared for (sdugan@m-m.net) All material herein © 2003-2025 Randall-Reilly All rights reserved.Page 1 of 1www.equipmentwatch.com493 494 495 496 497 498 06/11/2026499 Summary Sheet WCD 7 The following items are included in WCD 7: 1. Perform exploratory excavation, per Engineer’s direction, along the alignment of the abandoned 18” clay Sourdough intake water pipe. The purpose of the exploratory excavation is to locate active groundwater flows through the clay pipe and/or clay pipe bedding material. 2. Construct a trench plug to contain water that is flowing through the pipe bedding material at location(s) determined by the exploratory excavation. The trench plug shall be either flowable fill or clay soil. The width of the trench plug perpendicular to the pipe is to be field determined based on conditions but a minimum width of the excavator bucket. The trench plug is to extend past the existing trench walls a minimum of 3 feet and extend 2 feet below the pipe. If clay soil is used for the trench plug, the material is to be a locally available soil with relatively high clay content, much of the overburden between the topsoil lens and the sandy/gravel material in the valley meets this requirement. Coordinate with Engineer on suitability of the source. 3. At trench plug location(s), also cut the abandoned 18” clay pipe and plug pipe end with concrete or grout for a minimum pipe length of 5 feet. 4. Preserve and protect existing underground facilities located in the areas of the exploratory excavation(s). The intent of the project is to minimize the amount of water draining through the abandoned clay pipe and pipe bedding and discharging onto the ground surface north of the intake site. Work to be completed on a time and material basis. This change will require a time extension to allow for the work to be completed. Time to be determined based on the work as it is completed. Total Change in Contract Time is TBD. Total Change in Contract Value is estimated to be $18,424.46. Attachments - Exploratory excavation location sketch - CK May estimated cost 500 30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI24 DI 24 DI 24 DI 24 DI 24 DI 24 DI 24 DI 24 DI 24 DI 24 DI 18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC73 5329.0 0 9 X ON L I D 74 5329.0 7 8 X-ON B O X 75 5329.8 5 2 BOLT- S C R E W H E A D 765324.557STEEL CASING24.9824.9024.5024.9024.4023.0023.3023.5023.2027.4727.3027.3028.5020.8019.6018.0022.1024.6222.9417.9319.50212425 26272829242529.6029.6029.6028.1728.8429.3719.5018.0022.6024.1018.0022.4027.94252627282826 24 23 22 2324252 6 27 28 2919 23.0022.4022.4023.0024.9024.4019.0019.0017.9322.4621.8621.8622.4621.6021.1820.2219.9519.6219.6420.2220.5820.5821.1821.6021.0021.0018.0019.5029.6029.5029.5028.5828.5028.5028.5026.3028.5024.0022.4022.4123.0823.0022.4222.4122.4129.6029.60262524232221 21222 8 2 9 3 0 3 1 3 233 3436353727 2 921222019 25 24 23242722212019 25.3025.5026.0027.3024.9824.9024.9024.9824.5024.702222.4022.0022.2022.3022.3022.3022.3024.8023.4023.8022.2022.4022.0024.4023.5024.502423 29.6029.5023.2023.8024.9824.7024.8024.5029.0028.0028.0029.0025.00SOURDOUGH INTAKEGRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN117C09 grading & drainageAS INDICATED117C09MATCH EXISTINGSTREAM BED & BANKSMATCH EXISTINGRIP RAP6' WIDE x 30' LONGBERM - CREST(OVERTOP ELEV = 28.50KEY NOTES1CONSTRUCT 6' WIDE BERM TO MINIMUMTOP ELEVATION = 29.601.SPOT ELEVATIONS HAVE BEEN TRUNCATEDTO TWO DIGITS BEFORE THE DECIMAL. ADDBASE ELEVATION OF 5300.00 TO REACHACTUAL ELEVATIONS ON PROJECT DATUM.GENERAL NOTES:DISCHARGE LINE1ABC2345678DISSUEDESCRIPTIONPROJECT MANAGERPROJECT NUMBER01"2"FILENAMESCALESHEETDATECity of BozemanHyalite/Sourdough Water Treatment PlantSOURDOUGH CREEK INTAKE IMPROVEMENTSBozeman, Montana2024CIVILARCHITECTURALFIRE LIFE SAFETYSTRUCTURALMECHANICALELECTRICALINSTRUMENTATION0417.095J. NICKELSONM. HICKMAND. FRENCHD. HOGANS. GRAHAMS. NIENHUESERT. STULCT. STULC0ISSUED FOR BIDOCT 2024TOP ELEV. = 26.00TOP ELEV. = 27.50TOP OF CONCRETE WALLELEV. = 28.00℄ 24" DIA. TEMP.BYPASSWEST END OFDEFLECTOR WALL(TOP ELEV. TOEAST = 27.00)COMPRESSOR BUILDINGF.F. = 25.00GRADE BREAK LINEEXISTING FLUME INPVC RISER11UNDER-STREAM INFILTRATION GALLERYAND CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE - SEESHEETS 117C03 THROUGH 117C06DEFLECTOR WALL,TOP ELEV. = 27.00SEEDEFLECTOR WALLSSEETOP ELEV. = 27.50TRENCH PLUG PER CITY OF BOZEMANSTD. DRAWING NO. 02222-110' x 18' x 1.5' MIN. DEPTH OF 12"-MINUSRIPRAP, TO 1' MIN. ABOVE PIPE INVERTB117C05B117C05GRADING LIMITS(TYP.)CLEARING LIMITSGRADING LIMITS(TYP.)GRADE BREAKLINEGRADE BREAKLINES (TYP.)50' TYP.GRADE BREAKLINECONCRETE SLAB (FORBATTERY ENCLOSURES)POLE-MOUNTEDPV ARRAYINITIAL EXPLORATORYEXCAVATION POINTAPPROXIMATE ALIGNMENT OFABANDONED 18" CLAY PIPEAPPROXIMATE ALIGNMENT OFSCREENING BUILDING 24"OVERFLOW PIPE501 Bozeman, MT QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 115.00 $ 45.00 $ 675.00 15.00 $ 67.50 $ 337.50 1 1.00 $ 314.89 $ 314.89 1 1.00 $ 14.18 $ 14.18 120.00 $ 15.29 $ 305.80 1 20.00 $ 1.98 $ 39.60 1 15.00 $ 37.00 $ 555.00 1 5.00 $ 55.50 $ 277.50 1 1.00 $ 178.99 $ 178.99 1 1.00 $ 11.66 $ 11.66 1 20.00 $ 14.10 $ 282.00 1 20.00 $ 1.98 $ 39.60 1 15.00 $ 37.00 $ 555.00 1 5.00 $ 55.50 $ 277.50 1 1.00 $ 178.99 $ 178.99 1 1.00 $ 11.66 $ 11.66 1 20.00 $ 14.10 $ 282.00 1 20.00 $ 1.98 $ 39.60 1 15.00 $ 37.00 $ 555.00 1 5.00 $ 55.50 $ 277.50 1 1.00 $ 178.99 $ 178.99 1 1.00 $ 11.66 $ 11.66 1 20.00 $ 14.10 $ 282.00 1 20.00 $ 1.98 $ 39.60 $ - $ 858.18 QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 115.00 $ 132.43 $ 1,986.45 1 15.00 $ 112.08 $ 1,681.20 110.00 $ 43.15 $ 431.50 11.00 $ 2,350.93 $ 2,350.93 Rental $ - $ 967.51 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments 20 CY $ 165.00 $ 3,300.00 100 Gal $ 5.50 $ 550.00 $ - $ 577.50 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - $ - Total Cost $ 18,424.46 Date: 06/04/2026 SUBCONTRACTOR:N/A Contractors Fee (5%) Authorized Signature Description Contractors Fee (15%) Description MATERIALS:Excavatable Fill Fuel (Rental Dri-Prime) Description EQUIPMENT:Komatsu PC290LCI-11 Caterpillar 306 CR Contractors Fee (15%) Description LABOR:Employee 01 (ST Wage) Volvo L120H (Loader) Employee 01 (Hourly Fringe Benefit) Employee 02 (ST Wage) Employee 02 (Taxes - 21.50%) Employee 02 (Work Comp - 6319) Employee 03 (Unemployment - 1.40%) Employee 03 (Work Comp - 6319) Employee 04 (Taxes - 21.50%) Xylem Dri-Prime CD150M Diesel Pump Employee 04 (Unemployment - 1.40%) Morrison-Maierle FAX:May 1, 2026 DESCRIPTION:Work Change Directive 07: 1. Perform exploratory excavation, per Engineer’s direction, along the alignment of the abandoned 18” clay Sourdough intake water pipe. The purpose of the exploratory excavation is to locate active groundwater flows through the clay pipe and/or clay pipe bedding material. 2. Construct a trench plug to contain water that is flowing through the pipe bedding material at location(s) determined by the exploratory excavation. The trench plug shall be either flowable fill or clay soil. The width of the trench plug perpendicular to the pipe is to be field determined based on conditions but a minimum width of the excavator bucket. The trench plug is to extend past the existing trench walls a minimum of 3 feet and extend 2 feet below the pipe. If clay soil is used for the trench plug, the material is to be a locally available soil with relatively high clay content, much of the overburden between the topsoil lens and the sandy/gravel material in the valley meets this requirement. Coordinate with Engineer on suitability of the source. 3. At trench plug location(s), also cut the abandoned 18” clay pipe and plug pipe end with concrete or grout for a minimum pipe length of 5 feet. 4. Preserve and protect existing underground facilities located in the areas of the exploratory excavation(s). The intent of the project is to minimize the amount of water draining through the abandoned Work to be completed on a time and material basis. This change will require a time extension to allow for the work to be completed. Time to be determined based on the work as it is completed. P.O. Box 1426 Belgrade, MT 59714 PROJECT LOCATION: PHONE: 406-539-6559 REQUESTED FROM: ON DATE: Work Change Directive 07 - Cost Estimate CONTRACTOR: CK May Excavating PROJECT NAME:Sourdough Creek Intake ImprovementsPROJECT MANAGER Jim Blair ADDRESS: Employee 01 (OT Wage) Employee 03 (ST Wage) Employee 01 (Taxes - 31.10%) Employee 01 (Unemployment - 1.40%) Employee 02 (OT Wage) Employee 03 (OT Wage) Employee 03 (Taxes - 21.50%) Employee 04 (OT Wage) Employee 04 (ST Wage) Employee 02 (Unemployment - 1.40%) Employee 01 (Work Comp - 6319) Employee 02 (Hourly Fringe Benefit) Employee 03 (Hourly Fringe Benefit) Employee 04 (Hourly Fringe Benefit) Employee 04 (Work Comp - 6319) Contractors Fee (15%) 502 ITEM 6 503 REQUEST FOR PRICING Project: Sourdough Creek Intake Improvements RFP No.: _______04_______ RFP Date: 9/25/2025____ Date Sent to Contractor: __9/25/2025____ Date Rec'd from Contractor: ________________ TO:CK May Excavating Please furnish your proposal for executing the following change(s): SCOPE OF PROPOSED CHANGE(S) IN THE WORK: 1. Install a single plastic delineator at both the new 24” gate valve and new 30” butterfly valve (2 each total) as shown on the attached plan sheet. The delineators are to be mounted on a treated 4x4 wooden post such that the top of the delineator extends a minimum of 6’ above the ground surface elevation. Marker posts shall be installed 2’ upstream of the valve along the same alignment as the respective pipe. Wooden posts shall be buried a minimum of 30” below grade. 2. Install a mesh screen on the existing 24” fine screen overflow pipe outfall, in lieu of the 24” flexible check valve noted on plan sheet 117C02. The screen shall be a stainless steel 1”x1” mesh screen. The screen shall be secured to the overflow pipe in such a manner as to allow for easy removal for cleaning and maintenance. A secondary SS cable shall be secured to both the 24” overflow pipe and to the screen. 3. Leave in place approximately 70 feet of the 24” temporary raw water supply line located on the north side of Sourdough Creek. Cut and cap the temporary water line at the approximate location shown on the attached plan sheet. Utilize a mechanically restrained cap. Mark the location of the cap with a steel T-post painted blue. 4. Dispose of excess soils generated from on-site excavations by constructing a berm over both the 24” and 30” raw water transmission pipes as shown on the attached plan sheet. The berm shall be capped with excess topsoil and seeded as per contract specifications. Begin berm near solar panel array at approximate existing grade elevation 5322.00 and construct berm going north along raw water pipe alignment at an approximate finish grade slope of 1.8%. North extents of berm will be determined by the quantity of excess soil available. Berm slopes shall be constructed at 3H:1V slope. Pricing of this item assumes all embankment material is excess on-site excavation spoils. If there is not adequate quantity of excess excavation spoils to construct berm, this item will need to be revised and re-priced. Attachments to this Proposal Request: 1. SHEET 117C02 (RFP NO. 4 MISCELLANEOUS INTAKE SITE CHANGES). 504 REQUEST FOR PRICING MMI/HDR ___James Nickelson_ ________________________________ Date: ____9/25/2025__________ TO:Morrison Maierle / HDR Proposal: __________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Attachments: Cost _____________________________________________________ Credit ____________________________ (A time extension is not required for this modification unless otherwise detailed and justified:) Contractor ________________________________________________ Date __________________________ The decision to accept the proposal will be made through a Work Change Directive or Change Order issued by the Engineer. 505 30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 DI30 D I 24 DI24 DI 24 DI 24 DI 24 DI18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC18 VC735329.0 09X ON L ID 745329.0 78X-ON BOX 755329.852BOLT-SCREW HEAD 765324.557STEEL CASING 1ABC2345678DISSUEDESCRIPTIONPROJECT MANAGERPROJECT NUMBER01"2"FILENAMESCALESHEETDATECity of BozemanHyalite/Sourdough Water Treatment PlantSOURDOUGH CREEK INTAKE IMPROVEMENTSBozeman, Montana2024CIVILARCHITECTURALFIRE LIFE SAFETYSTRUCTURALMECHANICALELECTRICALINSTRUMENTATION0417.095J. NICKELSONM. HICKMAND. FRENCHD. HOGANS. GRAHAMS. NIENHUESERT. STULCT. STULC0ISSUED FOR BIDOCT 2024SOURDOUGH INTAKESITE PLAN117C02 site plan Rev 1.dwgAS INDICATED117C02EXISTING FOREST SERVICE ROADEXISTING ACCESSGABIONDEFLECTOR WALLEXISTINGSTREAM BEDPROPOSED 6' WIDE X 30' LONGEMERGENCY OVERFLOWKEY NOTES1EXTERIOR CONCRETE SLAB, 5'x20'x6" THICK. USEEXTERIOR CONCRETE SLAB, 5'x6'x6" THICK. USEEXISTING FLUME (PVC RISER)EXISTING 4' WIDE BY 3' HIGH SLUICE GATESINSTALL PIPE BOLLARDS PER AT EACH SIDE OFOVERHEAD DOOR. LOCATE CENTER OF BOLLARDS12" FROM EXTERIOR WALL AND 4" OUTSIDE OF DOOROPENING, FOR CLEAR WIDTH EQUAL TO OVERHEAD DOORWIDTH.INSTALL 24" FLEXIBLE CHECK VALVE ON EXISTING24" OVERFLOW PIPE OUTFALL. REPOSITION EXISTINGRIPRAP TO CLEAR VALVE BY 8" MIN. ALL AROUND.INSTALL BIODEGRADABLE EROSION CONTROL BLANKETON TOP AND WEST BANK OF BERM, TO LIMITS OF GROUNDDISTURBANCE. USE LANDLOK CS2 AS MANUFACTURED BYPROPEX GEOSYNTHETICS, OR ENGINEER-APPROVEDEQUAL.SEE SHEET 117E02 FOR SITE ELECTRICAL CONDUITS ANDSTRUCTURESINSTALL PIPE BOLLARDS PER AROUND BATTERYBOXES.SEE SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR INTAKE DAMREHABILITATION REQUIREMENTS. THE WORK INCLUDESCLEARING VEGETATION, CONCRETE SEALING, SURFACESPALLING SEALING AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS WORK.INSTALL A CHAIN LINK FENCE, PER SPECIFICATIONSECTION 32 31 00, AROUND THE SOLAR ARRAY ANDBATTERY LOCATION (GENERALLY AT THE PERIMETER OFTHE AREA DENOTED AS “CRUSHED LIME OR PEA GRAVEL”).FENCE SHALL BE 8' HIGH AND INCLUDE ONE 4' WIDE GATEAND ONE DOUBLE SWING GATE TO ALLOW FOR A 20-FOOTOPENING. PRICING SHALL INCLUDE AN ALLOWANCE FOR6 CORNER/ANGLE POSTS. LOCATION OF FENCE ANDGATES TO BE DETERMINED BY ENGINEER AND OWNERPRIOR TO ORDERING MATERIALS.AS ONE OF THE FIRST ITEMS OF WORK AT THE INTAKESITE, CONTRACTOR SHALL EXPOSE THE EXISTINGPIPELINE AT THE POINT OF CONNECTION TO DETERMINEEXISTING PIPE ELEVATION. CONTRACTOR SHALL INCLUDEALLOWANCE IN BID PRICE TO POTHOLE THE PIPE IN TWOADDITIONAL LOCATIONS TO DETERMINE ELEVATIONS IFNEEDED. ONCE ELEVATIONS ARE DETERMINED THEENGINEER WILL CONFIRM THAT PIPE GRADES SHOWN ONTHE PLAN WILL WORK OR IF ADJUSTMENTS ARE NEEDED.THE TEMPORARY PORTION OF THE BYPASS LINEINCLUDES BOTH INSTALLATION AND REMOVAL ASINCIDENTAL WORK, INCLUDING PIPE TRENCH BACKFILL.HOWEVER, THE CONNECTION TO THE EXISTING 30”SURFACE INTAKE MAY BE CAPPED OR PLUGGED ANDREMAIN PERMANENT IF IT IS WATER-TIGHT, PERFORMSSIMILARLY TO THE EXISTING 30” PIPE AND ISPRE-APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER FOR PERMANENT USE.THE TEMPORARY PIPE SHALL BE WATER-TIGHT EXCEPT ATTHE STREAM CROSSING WHERE ALLOWANCES FORDISCHARGING EXCESS WATER ARE ACCEPTABLE,INCLUDING AN OPENING FOR DISCHARGE OF EXCESSRUNOFF AS NEEDED FOR CONTRACTOR'S MANAGEMENTOF OVERFLOW AND TO LIMIT FLOW THROUGH THESURFACE INTAKE.2302223023430" x 24" TEE5624-RWBO Z E M A N (S O U R D O U G H ) C R E E K 77B O Z E M A N (S O U R D O U G H ) C R E E KCONCRETE HEADWALLRIP-RAP ENERGYDISSIPATOREXISTING SURFACEINTAKE (ACTIVE)INFILTRATION GALLERYDISCHARGE LINECOMPRESSORBUILDINGEXISTINGSCREENING SHEDF.F.= 24.8AIR VALVE VAULTSEE SHEET 117C07EXISTING TRANSMISSION LINE125346GENERAL NOTES:1.ALL SITE CONCRETE SLABS SHALL BE 6" THICK WITH 12"THICKENED EDGE ON EXTERIOR EDGES ADJACENT TOOVERHEAD DOORS.2.FOR ADDITIONAL PIPING INFORMATION, SEE SHEET 117C06.3.THE COMPRESSOR BUILDING INCLUDES A 50-FOOTDEFENSIBLE SPACE PERIMETER TO MEET THEWILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE CODES. TREES ALLOWEDWITHIN THE DEFENSIBLE SPACE MUST MAINTAIN A MINIMUMHORIZONTAL DISTANCE OF 10 FEET BETWEEN CROWNS OFADJACENT TREES, STRUCTURES, OR UNMODIFIED FUEL.GROUND COVER, INCLUDING DEADWOOD, LITTER,COMBUSTIBLE VEGETATION / GROWTH, SHALL BE REMOVEDFROM THE 50-FOOT PERIMETER DEFENSIBLE SPACE. TREESTHAT DO NOT MEET THE HORIZONTAL SEPARATIONREQUIREMENTS WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE REMOVED.CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFIRM WITH THEOWNER/ENGINEER ON ANY TREE PROPOSED FOR REMOVALPRIOR TO THE WORK ASSOCIATED WITH TREE REMOVAL.4.WOODY VEGETATION CLEARED FROM THE SITE AND/ORWITHIN THE DEFENSIBLE SPACE SHALL BE TRANSPORTEDAND LEGALLY DISPOSED OF OFFSITE.5.PROVIDE TREE PROTECTION FOR ALL TREES TO REMAIN ONTHE SITE.EXISTING SURFACE INTAKE(ABANDONED IN PLACE)INFILTRATION GALLERY(GABION-LINEDSTREAM CHANNEL)FLOW FLOWEXISTINGSTREAM BED24" DIA. STREAM BYPASS PIPE24-BPEXISTING 24" PIPE(FINE SCREEN OVERFLOW)2-SUGABION DEFLECTOR WALL24" CANAL GATE24" INV. = 22.10GRADING LIMITS(TYP.)GRADING LIMITS(TYP.)30-RWSURFACE INTAKEDISCHARGE LINE350030-BV30-RW℄ TEMPORARY 24" DIA.RAW WATER SUPPLY LINE8GABION DEFLECTOR WALL5325533053355340GABION CONTAINMENT WALL(BELOW FINISHED GRADE)6' WIDE BERM6' WIDE BERM83500B9REMOVABLE BOLLARD,(TYP.)CRUSHED LIME OR PEAGRAVEL, 10'-0" MIN RADIUSAROUND BATTERYENCLOSURES AND PV ARRAYS9CLEARING LIMITSEXISTING DAMAND SPILLWAY10108111213532053205325 533024" x 1114" BENDTP = 14.10111224-GV13131BID ADDENDA INCORPORATED05/21/20252EXTEND 24" DISCHARGE LINE06/26/2025INSTALL UTILITY MARKER ON 4X4TREATED WOOD POSTMATCH PROPOSED BERM GRADEWITH DESIGN FINISHED GRADEAT APPROX. ELELATION 5322.00PROVIDE MINIMUM OF 6' COVEROVER EX. 30" RAW WATER PIPE ATNEW 30" VALVE. APPROX. BERM ELEL. = 5320.00 AT30" BUTTERFLY VALVE.INSTALL 1"X1" MESH SS SCREEN ON THEEND OF EXISTING 24" PIPE. SECURESCREEN IN MANNER WHICH ALLOWSFOR EASY REMOVAL FOR CLEANINGAND MAINTENANCE. ATTACH SS CABLEBETWEEN PIPE AND SCREEN.CONSTRUCT BERM OVER EXISTING30" AND NEW 24" RAW WATER PIPES. UTILIZE EXCESS SOILS GENERATEDFROM ON SITE EXCAVATIONS. BERMSLOPES NOT TO EXCEED 3H:1V.LEAVE APPROX. 70 FEET OFTHE TEMPORARY 24" RAWWATER SUPPLY LINE INPLACE. INSTALL CAP ON THEEND OF THE PIPE. MARK ENDOF PIPE WITH METAL T-POST.RFP NO. 4 MISCELLANEOUS INTAKE SITE CHANGES9/25/2025506 Bozeman, MT Cost Comments $ 282.07 $ 3,150.29 $ 4,437.21 $ 7,073.39 $- Total Cost $ 14,942.96 Description Item 1 See attached sheets for pricing detail Item 4 Item 3 Item 2 Authorized Signature Date: 04/30/2026 Proposal: Morrison-Maierle FAX:ON DATE:September 25, 2025 DESCRIPTION:RFP 04 - Miscellaneous Intake Site Changes 1. Install a single plastic delineator at both the new 24” gate valve and new 30” butterfly valve (2 each total) as shown on the attached plan sheet. The delineators are to be mounted on a treated 4x4 wooden post such that the top of the delineator extends a minimum of 6’ above the ground surface elevation. Marker posts shall be installed 2’ upstream of the valve along the same alignment as the respective pipe. Wooden posts shall be buried a minimum of 30” below grade. 2. Install a mesh screen on the existing 24” fine screen overflow pipe outfall, in lieu of the 24” flexible check valve noted on plan sheet 117C02. The screen shall be a stainless steel 1”x1” mesh screen. The screen shall be secured to the overflow pipe in such a manner as to allow for easy removal for cleaning and maintenance. A secondary SS cable shall be secured to both the 24” overflow pipe and to the screen. 3. Leave in place approximately 70 feet of the 24” temporary raw water supply line located on the north side of Sourdough Creek. Cut and cap the temporary water line at the approximate location shown on the attached plan sheet. Utilize a mechanically restrained cap. Mark the location of the cap with a steel T-post painted blue. 4. Dispose of excess soils generated from on-site excavations by constructing a berm over both the 24” and 30” raw water transmission pipes as shown on the attached plan sheet. The berm shall be capped with excess topsoil and seeded as per contract specifications. Begin berm near solar panel array at approximate existing grade elevation 5322.00 and construct berm going north along raw water pipe alignment at an approximate finish grade slope of 1.8%. North extents of berm will be determined by the quantity of excess soil available. Berm slopes shall be constructed at 3H:1V slope. Pricing of this item assumes all embankment material is excess on-site excavation spoils. P.O. Box 1426 Belgrade, MT 59714 PROJECT LOCATION: PHONE: 406-539-6559 REQUESTED FROM: RFP04 - Pricing Detail CONTRACTOR: CK May Excavating PROJECT NAME:Sourdough Creek Intake ImprovementsPROJECT MANAGER Jim Blair ADDRESS: 507 Bozeman, MT QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 1 1.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 1 1.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 1 1.00 $ 0.63 $ 0.63 1 1.00 $ 15.29 $ 15.29 1 1.00 $ 1.98 $ 1.98 1 1.00 $ 37.00 $ 37.00 1 1.00 $ 8.89 $ 8.89 1 1.00 $ 0.52 $ 0.52 1 1.00 $ 14.10 $ 14.10 1 1.00 $ 1.98 $ 1.98 $ - $ 20.91 QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 11.00 $ 43.15 $ 43.15 $ - $ 6.47 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments 2 EA $ 31.37 $ 62.74 $ - $ 9.41 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - Total Cost $ 282.07 D.R.W. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) Date: 04/17/2026 MISC:N/A Authorized Signature Description Contractors Fee (15%) Description MATERIALS:5' 2" BLUE WATER FIBERGLASS POST Contractors Fee (15%) Description EQUIPMENT:Caterpillar 306 CR (Mini Excavator) Contractors Fee (15%) Description LABOR:J.M.J. (Wage) J.M.J. (Taxes - 31.10%) J.M.J. (Unemployment - 1.40%) J.M.J. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) J.M.J. (Work Comp - 6319) D.R.W. (Work Comp - 6319) D.R.W. (Wage) D.R.W. (Taxes - 24.03%) D.R.W. (Unemployment - 1.40%) RFP04 - T&M Pricing Detail CONTRACTOR: CK May Excavating PROJECT NAME:Sourdough Creek Intake ImprovementsPROJECT MANAGER Jim Blair ADDRESS: Morrison-Maierle FAX:September 25, 2025 DESCRIPTION:RFP 04 - Item 01: Install a single plastic delineator at both the new 24” gate valve and new 30” butterfly valve (2 each total) as shown on the attached plan sheet. The delineators are to be mounted on a treated 4x4 wooden post such that the top of the delineator extends a minimum of 6’ above the ground surface elevation. Marker posts shall be installed 2’ upstream of the valve along the same alignment as the respective pipe. Wooden posts shall be buried a minimum of 30” below grade. P.O. Box 1426 Belgrade, MT 59714 PROJECT LOCATION: PHONE: 406-539-6559 REQUESTED FROM: ON DATE: 508 Bozeman, MT QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 1 1.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 1 1.00 $ 14.00 $ 14.00 1 1.00 $ 0.63 $ 0.63 1 1.00 $ 15.29 $ 15.29 1 1.00 $ 1.98 $ 1.98 1 1.00 $ 37.00 $ 37.00 1 1.00 $ 8.89 $ 8.89 1 1.00 $ 0.52 $ 0.52 1 1.00 $ 14.10 $ 14.10 1 1.00 $ 1.98 $ 1.98 $ - $ 20.91 QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - $ - QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments 1 EA $ 2,150.00 $ 2,150.00 1EA $ 350.00 $ 350.00 1EA $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ - $ 390.00 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - Total Cost $ 3,150.29 MISC:N/A Authorized Signature Date: 04/17/2026 Contractors Fee (15%) Description Description MATERIALS:29" OD Rolled Screen w/ 1" x 1" Screen 304SS Misc. SS Tether Hardware Freight for SS Screen EQUIPMENT:N/A Contractors Fee (15%) Contractors Fee (15%) Description Description LABOR:J.M.J. (Wage) J.M.J. (Taxes - 31.10%) J.M.J. (Unemployment - 1.40%) J.M.J. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) J.M.J. (Work Comp - 6319) D.R.W. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) D.R.W. (Work Comp - 6319) D.R.W. (Wage) D.R.W. (Taxes - 24.03%) D.R.W. (Unemployment - 1.40%) Morrison-Maierle FAX:ON DATE:September 25, 2025 DESCRIPTION:RFP 04 - Item 02: Install a mesh screen on the existing 24” fine screen overflow pipe outfall, in lieu of the 24” flexible check valve noted on plan sheet 117C02. The screen shall be a stainless steel 1”x1” mesh screen. The screen shall be secured to the overflow pipe in such a manner as to allow for easy removal for cleaning and maintenance. A secondary SS cable shall be secured to both the 24” overflow pipe and to the screen. P.O. Box 1426 Belgrade, MT 59714 PROJECT LOCATION: PHONE: 406-539-6559 REQUESTED FROM: RFP04 - Pricing Estimate CONTRACTOR: CK May Excavating PROJECT NAME:Sourdough Creek Intake ImprovementsPROJECT MANAGER Jim Blair ADDRESS: 509 Bozeman, MT QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - $ - QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - $ - QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments 70 LF $ 71.74 $ 5,021.80 1EA $ 1,247.27 $ 1,247.27 $ - $ 940.36 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments 1 -3.00 $ 45.00 $ (135.00) 1 -3.00 $ 14.00 $ (41.99) 1 -3.00 $ 0.63 $ (1.89) 1 -3.00 $ 15.29 $ (45.87) 1 -3.00 $ 1.98 $ (5.94) 1 -3.00 $ 37.00 $ 37.00 1 -3.00 $ 8.89 $ (26.67) 1 -3.00 $ 0.52 $ (1.55) 1 -3.00 $ 14.10 $ (42.30) 1 -3.00 $ 1.98 $ (5.94) 1 -3.00 $ 37.00 $ (111.00) 1 -3.00 $ 7.96 $ (23.87) 1 -3.00 $ 0.52 $ (1.55) 1 -3.00 $ 14.10 $ (42.30) 1 -3.00 $ 1.98 $ (5.94) 1 -3.00 $ 32.00 $ (96.00) 1 -3.00 $ 3.99 $ (11.96) 1 -3.00 $ 0.45 $ (1.34) 1 -3.00 $ 14.10 $ (42.30) 1 -3.00 $ 1.98 $ (5.94) 1 -3.00 $ 133.68 $ (401.04) 1 -3.00 $ 112.08 $ (336.24) -1 EA $ 1,290.57 $ (1,290.57) $ - $ (132.01) Total Cost $ 4,437.21 J.M.J. (Taxes - 31.10%) J.M.J. (Unemployment - 1.40%) J.M.J. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) J.M.J. (Work Comp - 6319) D.R.W. (Wage) J.J.M. (Work Comp - 6319) CREDIT:J.M.J. (Wage) Contractors Fee (5%) Authorized Signature Date: 04/17/2026 Komatsu PC390LCI-11 Volvo L120H (Loader) 24" MJ PLUG DI, SSB, AWWA C153 Contractors Fee (15%) D.R.W. (Taxes - 24.03%) D.R.W. (Unemployment - 1.40%) D.R.W. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) D.R.W. (Work Comp - 6319) J.J.M. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) S.P.O (Wage) J.J.M. (Wage) J.J.M. (Taxes - 12.46%) J.J.M. (Unemployment - 1.40%) S.P.O. (Taxes - 21.50%) S.P.O. (Unemployment - 1.40%) S.P.O (Hourly Fringe Benefit) S.P.O. (Work Comp - 6319) Description Description MATERIALS:24" SDR17 HDPE, DIPS, 50' LONG 24" MJ CAP DI, SSB, AWWA C153 EQUIPMENT:Credit Listed Below Contractors Fee (15%) Contractors Fee (15%) Description Description LABOR:Credit Listed Below Morrison-Maierle FAX:ON DATE:September 25, 2025 DESCRIPTION:RFP 04 - Item 03: Leave in place approximately 70 feet of the 24” temporary raw water supply line located on the north side of Sourdough Creek. Cut and cap the temporary water line at the approximate location shown on the attached plan sheet. Utilize a mechanically restrained cap. Mark the location of the cap with a steel T-post painted blue. P.O. Box 1426 Belgrade, MT 59714 PROJECT LOCATION: PHONE: 406-539-6559 REQUESTED FROM: RFP04 - T&M Pricing Detail CONTRACTOR: CK May Excavating PROJECT NAME:Sourdough Creek Intake ImprovementsPROJECT MANAGER Jim Blair ADDRESS: 510 Bozeman, MT QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 1 10.00 $ 45.00 $ 450.00 1 10.00 $ 14.00 $ 139.95 1 10.00 $ 0.63 $ 6.30 1 10.00 $ 15.29 $ 152.90 1 10.00 $ 1.98 $ 19.80 1 10.00 $ 37.00 $ 370.00 1 10.00 $ 8.89 $ 88.91 1 10.00 $ 0.52 $ 5.18 1 10.00 $ 14.10 $ 141.00 1 10.00 $ 1.98 $ 19.80 1 10.00 $ 37.00 $ 370.00 1 10.00 $ 7.96 $ 79.55 1 10.00 $ 0.52 $ 5.18 1 10.00 $ 14.10 $ 141.00 1 10.00 $ 1.98 $ 19.80 $ - $ 301.41 QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments 1 10.00 $ 133.68 $ 1,336.80 1 10.00 $ 112.08 $ 1,120.80 1 10.00 $ 168.38 $ 1,683.80 $ - $ 621.21 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - $ - QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - Total Cost $ 7,073.39 MISC:N/A Authorized Signature Date: 04/17/2026 Contractors Fee (15%) Description Description MATERIALS:N/A EQUIPMENT:Komatsu PC390LCI-11 Volvo L120H Komatsu HM300-5 Contractors Fee (15%) Contractors Fee (15%) Description Description LABOR:J.M.J. (Wage) J.M.J. (Taxes - 31.10%) J.M.J. (Unemployment - 1.40%) J.M.J. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) J.M.J. (Work Comp - 6319) D.R.W. (Wage) S.P.O (Wage) D.R.W. (Taxes - 24.03%) D.R.W. (Unemployment - 1.40%) D.R.W. (Hourly Fringe Benefit) D.R.W. (Work Comp - 6319) S.P.O. (Taxes - 21.50%) S.P.O. (Unemployment - 1.40%) S.P.O (Hourly Fringe Benefit) S.P.O. (Work Comp - 6319) Morrison-Maierle FAX:ON DATE:September 25, 2025 DESCRIPTION:RFP 04 - Item 04: Dispose of excess soils generated from on-site excavations by constructing a berm over both the 24” and 30” raw water transmission pipes as shown on the attached plan sheet. The berm shall be capped with excess topsoil and seeded as per contract specifications. Begin berm near solar panel array at approximate existing grade elevation 5322.00 and construct berm going north along raw water pipe alignment at an approximate finish grade slope of 1.8%. North extents of berm will be determined by the quantity of excess soil available. Berm slopes shall be constructed at 3H:1V slope. Pricing of this item assumes all embankment material is excess on-site excavation spoils. P.O. Box 1426 Belgrade, MT 59714 PROJECT LOCATION: PHONE: 406-539-6559 REQUESTED FROM: RFP04 - T&M Pricing Detail CONTRACTOR: CK May Excavating PROJECT NAME:Sourdough Creek Intake ImprovementsPROJECT MANAGER Jim Blair ADDRESS: 511 2-EA for RFP 04512 Bid No: E631328 Page 1 of 1 Estimate:E631328 Bid Date:4/29/2026 Line Qty UoM Description Unit Price Extended Price 11EA29" OD ROLLED SCREEN W/ 1" X 1" SCREEN 304SS BOTTOM RING (SLIP END) LENGTH: 92.98" (PI X 29.25" + 1" OVERLAP) WIDTH: 2", THICKNESS: 1/4" ID: 29.25" 304SS FLAT BAR, ROLLED TO RING. TOP RING (END) LENGTH: 98.89" (SAME AS ABOVE) WIDTH: 2", THICKNESS 1/4" ID: 29.25" SAME AS BOTTOM 2,150.00 2,150.00 21FREIGHT ESTIMATE - ACTUAL AMOUNT TBD AT TIME OF SHIPMENT.350.00 350.00 Subtotal 2,500.00 Approximate Grand Total 2,500.00 Customer:CK MAY EXCAVATING INC Estimator:Bryan Binder Job Name:SOURDOUGH OVERFLOW SCREEN Location:BOZEMAN, MT 513 514 515 516 ITEM 7 517 ITEM 8 518 REQUEST FOR PRICING Project: Sourdough Creek Intake Improvements RFP No.: _______02_______ RFP Date: 6/4/2025____ Date Sent to Contractor: ___6/4/2025____ Date Rec'd from Contractor: ________________ TO: CK May Excavating Please furnish your proposal for executing the following change(s): SCOPE OF PROPOSED CHANGE(S) IN THE WORK: 1. Supply and install added chain hoist and trolley inside the Sourdough Flow Control Building. Hoist and trolley to be installed on the planned S12x50 monorail beam. 2. Hoist and trolley to be Harrington manual chain hoist and push trolley, 4,000 lb. capacity, 10-foot length, Model NTH020-10, or Engineer approved equal. Attachments to this Proposal Request: 1. None. MMI/HDR ___James Nickelson_ ________________________________ Date: ____6/4/2025__________ TO: Morrison Maierle / HDR Proposal: __________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Attachments: Cost _____________________________________________________ Credit ____________________________ (A time extension is not required for this modification unless otherwise detailed and justified:) Contractor ________________________________________________ Date __________________________ The decision to accept the proposal will be made through a Work Change Directive or Change Order issued by the Engineer. 519 520 521 522 523 ITEM 9 524 Bozeman, MT QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - $ - QTY Hours Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - $ - QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments 100 LF $ 2.31 $ 231.00 1EA $ 11.72 $ 11.72 $ - $ 36.41 QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments -1 LS $ 28.06 $ (28.06) -1 LS $ 25.02 $ (25.02) -1 LS $ 18.00 $ (18.00) -1 LS $ 6.03 $ (6.03) -1 LS $ 1.32 $ (1.32) -1 LS $ 1.29 $ (1.29) -1 LS $ 192.00 $ (192.00) -1 LS $ 121.61 $ (121.61) -1 LS $ 726.40 $ (726.40) -1 LS $ 171.26 $ (171.26) -1 LS $ 25.70 $ (25.70) -1 LS $ 297.60 $ (297.60) -1 LS $ 76.60 $ (76.60) -1 LS $ 106.08 $ (106.08) -1 LS $ 1,470.00 $ (1,470.00) 1LS $ 367.50 $ 367.50 -1 LS $ 2,000.00 $ (2,000.00) $ - $ (244.97) QTY Units Unit Price Cost Comments $ - $ - Total Cost $ (4,865.32) Description MATERIALS (ADDITIONS): 4" SCH 40 IPS SOLVENT WELD PVC PIPE 4" PSM ADAPTER HUB X SCH 40 Contractors Fee (15%) Date: 04/30/2026 MISC:N/A Authorized Signature Mechanical Pump Down Switch Description Subcontractor Credit Contractors Fee - Deduction (5%) 24" HP Water Tight End Cap Restock Fee - End Cap (25%) Description MATERIALS/ SUBCONTRACTOR (CREDITS): 2" Gray Union SxS 2" MIPT Compression Adapter IPS HDPE 4" IPS x 15"+ Inserta Tee 4" SCH40 IPS Solvent Weld PVC Pipe 4/10HP 115V Effluent Pump - EP40M1-20 Link-Seal LS-300-S 2" SCH40 IPS Solvent Weld PVC Pipe 2" SCH40 PVC 90 Elbow 2" SCH40 PVC Male Adapter SxT 2" SDR11 IPS HDPE Pipe 100' Coil 24" Durafiber Riser Lid w/ Gasket 24" x 20' ADS HP Storm 2" SCH40 PVC Female Adapter SxT Contractors Fee (15%) Description EQUIPMENT:N/A Contractors Fee (15%) Description LABOR:N/A Morrison-Maierle FAX: DESCRIPTION:Sump Pump/Wet Well Deletion Delete the sump pump and wet well and associated electrical items. Connect to air valve vault with flexible pipe connection (fernco or gasketed pipe) and gravity drain to approximately same plan location as 2" sump pump discharge. P.O. Box 1426 Belgrade, MT 59714 PROJECT LOCATION: PHONE: 406-539-6559 REQUESTED FROM: ON DATE: Proposal - Pricing Detail CONTRACTOR: CK May Excavating PROJECT NAME:Sourdough Creek Intake ImprovementsPROJECT MANAGER Jim Blair ADDRESS: 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Tom Rogers, Senior Planner Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager Erin George, Director of Community Development SUBJECT:Ordinance, Final Adoption, Establishing a Zoning Designation of B-2, Community Business District, in Association withe Annexation of 2.002 Acres, the BRC North Loop Annexation (Formally PDI Investments), Application 20346 MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Resolution RECOMMENDATION:Finally adopt Ordinance STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods. BACKGROUND:The property owner and Applicant for the BRC North Loop (formally called the PDI Investments) annexation application requests to complete the annexation process based on a March 9, 2021, approval. Several of the terms and contingencies applied to the application in 2021 are no longer relevant or impossible to meet. In addition, the work necessary to connect to city services was required to be completed by September 2022. Therefore, the Commission must determine if the prior approval is still consistent with City priorities and modify the terms of annexation from the previous approval. On March 9, 2021, the City Commission voted (4:1), Commissioner Wallner dissenting, to annex an existing wholly surrounded parcel of property subject to terms of annexation and voted (5:0) to establish an initial zoning designation of B-2 to the property, subject to contingencies necessary to complete the application processing. Staff Report [External Link] March 9, 2021, Agenda [External Link] City Commission Minutes [External Link] from the March 9, 2021, meeting Video recording [External Link] from the public hearing At the time of annexation city utility services were some distance from the 532 subject property and would have required considerable investment to construct necessary sewer and water mains to serve the property in the yet to be constructed Flora Lane and Cultivar Street right-of-way. At that time, initial discussions and plans were being developed for the North Park Industrial Park. Based on this context, working collaboratively with the applicant, staff suggested unique terms of annexation to allow the application to proceed while ensuring all policies and requirements associated with annexation were met, including a timing component that the final process would not drag on indefinitely. The North Park development has constructed required infrastructure to serve development on site. Those improvements include construction of Flora Lane, Cultivar Street, and sewer and water service adjacent to the PDI Investments property. Subsequently, the property was acquired by BRC North Loop, LLC in July 2026. The new property owner reviewed the revised annexation agreement and is in support of the proposed edits and stated their intent to complete the annexation process. On Tuesday, November 20, 2026 the City Commission unanimously affirmed the prior approval, modified the terms of annexation, and approved the Resolution of annexation and provisionally adopted the Ordinance to establish B-2 zoning on the property. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None. ALTERNATIVES:As determined by the Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment. Future development will incur costs and generate review according to standard City practices. Attachments: 20346 BRC North Loop Ordinance.pdf BRC North Loop Initial ZMA Exhibit.pdf Report compiled on: October 28, 2026 533 ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA AMENDING THE CITY OF BOZEMAN ZONING MAP TO INITIALLY DESIGNATE 1.002 ACRES AS B-2, COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT, KNOWN AS THE BRC NORTH LOOP (FORMALLY PDI INVESTMENTS) ZONE MAP AMENDMENT, APPLICATION 20346. WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has adopted zoning regulations and a zoning map pursuant to Sections 76-2-301 and 76-2-302, M.C.A.; and WHEREAS, Section 76-2-305, M.C.A. allows local governments to amend zoning maps if a public hearing is held and official notice is provided; and WHEREAS, Section 76-2-307, M.C.A. states that the Zoning Commission must conduct a public hearing and submit a report to the City Commission for all zoning map amendment requests; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Zoning Commission has been created by Section 2.05.2700, BMC as provided for in Section 76-2-307, M.C.A.; and WHEREAS, Chapter 38, Article 2 of the Bozeman Unified Development Code sets forth the procedures and review criteria for zoning map amendments; and WHEREAS, the proposed zone map amendment application to amend the City of Bozeman Zoning Map to establish a zoning classification of B-2 (Community Business District) for approximately 1.002 acres has been properly submitted, reviewed, and advertised; and WHEREAS, after proper notice, the Bozeman Community Development Board acting in their capacity as the Zoning Commission held a public hearing on February 22, 2021, to receive and review all written and oral testimony on the request for a zone map amendment; and WHEREAS, the Bozeman Zoning Commission recommended the Bozeman City Commission that application No. 20346 the brc North Loop Zone Map Amendment be approved as requested by the applicant; and 534 WHEREAS, after proper notice, the City Commission held its public hearing on February 22, 2021, to receive and review all written and oral testimony on the request for the zone map amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Commission has reviewed and considered the zone map amendment criteria established in Section 76-2-304, M.C.A., and found that the proposed zone map amendment would be in compliance with the criteria. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA: Section 1 Legislative Findings The City Commission hereby makes the following findings in support of adoption of this Ordinance: 1. The City adopted a growth policy, the Bozeman Community Plan 2020, by Resolution 5133 to establish policies for development of the community including zoning; 2. The Bozeman Community Plan 2020, Chapter 5, sets forth the policies by which the City reviews and applies the criteria for amendment of zoning established in 76-3-304, MCA; 3. Zoning, including amendments to the zoning map, must be in accordance with an adopted growth policy; 4. A staff report analyzing the required criteria for a zone map amendment, including accordance to the Bozeman Community Plan 2020, has found that the required criteria are satisfied; 5. The two required public hearings were advertised as required in state law and municipal code and all persons have had opportunity to review the materials applicable to the application and provide comment prior to a decision; 6. The Bozeman Zoning Commission has been established as required in state law and conducted their required public hearing; and after consideration of application materials, staff analysis and report, and all submitted public comment recommended approval of the application. 7. The City Commission conducted a public hearing to provide all interested parties with the 535 opportunity to provide evidence and testimony regarding the proposed amendment prior to the City Commission acting on the application. 8. The City Commission considered the application materials, staff analysis and report, Zoning Commission recommendation, all submitted public comment, and all other relevant information. 9. The City Commission determines that, as set forth in the staff report and incorporating the staff findings as part of their decision, the required criteria for approval of the PDI Investments (now called BRC North Loop) Zone Map Amendment have been satisfied. Section 2 That the zoning district designation of the following-described property is hereby designated as B-2, Community Business District: An area of land comprised described as follows: Lot 7A of the Amended Plat (E-38-G) of the Gordon Mandeville State School Section Subdivision, Situated in the Southeast One-Quarter (SE ¼) of Section 36, Township One South (T1S0, Range Five East (R5E), Principal Meridian, Montana, Gallatin County, Montana. The described tract has an area of 1.002 acres. The described tract is as shown on the accompanying Exhibit A and is along with and subject to any existing easements. SUBJECT to all easements of record or apparent from visual inspection of the property. Section 3 Repealer. All provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. 536 Section 4 Savings Provision. This Ordinance does not affect the rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred or proceedings that were begun before the effective date of this Ordinance. All other provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code not amended by this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. Section 5 Severability. That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this Ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Bozeman Municipal Code as a whole. Section 6 This Ordinance shall not be codified but shall be kept by the City Clerk and entered into a disposition list in numerical order with all other ordinances of the City. Section 7 Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect _________ days after final adoption. 537 PROVISIONALLY ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, on first reading at a regular session held on the 20th day of October 2026. ____________________________________ JOEY MORRISON Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the _____ of _______________ 2026. The effective date of this ordinance is ______________, 20____. _________________________________ JOEY MORRISON Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 538 539 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Mitch Overton SUBJECT:Veterans Alliance of Southwest Montana Recognition and Donation Presentation to the Bozeman Sunset Hills Southwest Montana Veterans Cemetery MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Administration RECOMMENDATION:Receive Donation and Allocate to Southwest Montana Veterans Cemetery at Bozeman Sunset Hills Cemetery STRATEGIC PLAN:4.3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices: Prioritize long-term investment and maintenance for existing and new infrastructure. BACKGROUND:The Veterans Alliance of Southwest Montana group helped to spearhead the Southwest Montana Veteran's Cemetery project with City Parks & Recreation Department staff in 2015. This group of dedicated veterans has supported the project ever since with volunteer time, labor, materials, and funding. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:none FISCAL EFFECTS:The receipt of the donation for the Southwest Montana Veterans Cemetery at Sunset Hills will offset future improvement costs for the project. The current capital improvement plan calls for a $400,000 investment in the facility over the next five year planning cycle, this investment can reduce the amount needed from the City's general fund. Attachments: 15041_Rendering Package_050616.pdf Report compiled on: October 20, 2026 540 1. COMMITTAL SHELTER 2. 240-UNIT DOUBLE-SIZED COLUMBARIUM 3. BENCHES 4. IN-GROUND CREMAIN AREA 5. RETAINING WALL/TERRACE EXISTING PAVED ROAD EXISTING BURIAL AREASKEY EXISTING GRAVEL ROAD 12 3 4 5 5% MAX., TYPVETERANS COLUMBARIUM PLAZA AT SUNSET HILLS CEMETERY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE / PLANNING / CIVIL ENGINEERING Peaks to Plains DesignPC 541 VETERANS COLUMBARIUM PLAZAAT SUNSET HILLS CEMETERY 542 VETERANS COLUMBARIUM PLAZAAT SUNSET HILLS CEMETERY View facing south On-ground view facing south See a video fly-through! https://youtu.be/k_Jh8yEyS8sLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE / PLANNING / CIVIL ENGINEERING Peaks to Plains DesignPC 543 VETERANS COLUMBARIUM PLAZAAT SUNSET HILLS CEMETERY Committal shelter interior view (north facing) Committal shelter & Columbarium See a video fly-through! https://youtu.be/k_Jh8yEyS8sLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE / PLANNING / CIVIL ENGINEERING Peaks to Plains DesignPC 544 VETERANS COLUMBARIUM PLAZAAT SUNSET HILLS CEMETERY View facing northeast Contextual overlay See a video fly-through! https://youtu.be/k_Jh8yEyS8sLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE / PLANNING / CIVIL ENGINEERING Peaks to Plains DesignPC 545 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:Shawn Kohtz, Director of Utilities Brian Heaston, Engineer III SUBJECT:Resolution Establishing the Unit Cost for Payment of Cash In Lieu of Water Rights MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Resolution RECOMMENDATION:I move to approve the Resolution establishing the unit cost for payment of cash in lieu of water rights. STRATEGIC PLAN:6.1 Clean Water Supplies: Ensure adequate supplies of clean water for today and tomorrow. BACKGROUND:Resolution 4095, passed March 17, 2008, establishes the City’s current cash in lieu of water rights (CILWR) unit cost at $6,000/acre-foot. New developments must satisfy the City’s water adequacy code, set forth at Sec. 40.02.1500 Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) as of November 22, 2026, prior to final development approval. (Note, the water adequacy code is also found at Sec. 38.410.110 BMC, which City Staff intends to amend to reference Sec. 40.02.1500 BMC during the next round of Ch. 38 cleanup amendments.) Code compliance may occur through the transfer of municipal water rights to the City, by payment of CILWR, or a combination thereof. Compliance through payment of CILWR to offset a development’s municipal water use has been the primary compliance method chosen by the vast majority of development applicants because the alternative method of obtaining municipal water rights under state law is highly complex, takes multiple years to complete, and has no guaranteed outcome. The code requires CILWR payments to be made at the CILWR rate effective on the date of payment is provided to the City. The City established its first water adequacy policy in 1984 following the loss of the Mystic Lake water supply when the Mystic Lake dam was breached due to public safety concerns. The original water adequacy policy was set forth in Section 2.2 of Resolution 2502, which established the City’s annexation policy at the time. The policy required the transfer of water rights to the City to offset ethe anticipated water demands at full development of the annexed property. The allowance for payment in lieu of a water rights transfer was part of the original water adequacy policy. This policy framework is in place today but has seen modification of its 546 implementation details and codification structure to keep pace with changing water use patterns, water market forces, and state law. Technical and economic analyses supporting an updated CILWR unit cost have been performed and summarized in the attached CILWR update study. The report recommends increasing the unit cost to the $13,050/acre-foot midpoint of the $11,600 - $14,500 range derived by the 3-pronged valuation methodology explained in the attached report. This work was completed by WestWater Research as a specialty subconsultant to the City’s on-call water rights consultant, HydroSolutions. WestWater Research is an industry leading water economics firm specializing in water rights valuations, water markets, and transactional support throughout the western U.S. The attached Resolution describes the limited purposes for which CILWR revenues may be expended. Notably, CILWR revenues are generally limited to funding costs associated with water rights acquisitions and administrative water rights changes. CILWR revenues cannot be utilized to fund infrastructure investments needed to beneficially use the water rights that are acquired with CILWR. The City’s water impact fees are purposed for the necessary infrastructure complement. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:The Community Development Board (CDB) at its October 19, 2026 meeting received a special presentation of the CILWR update report findings and recommendations. No formal action was requested or taken by CDB on the matter of updating the CILWR unit cost. The CDB expressed concern about the magnitude of the increase and suggested the City Commission consider stepping into the recommended $13,050/acre-foot unit cost target incrementally, as well as delaying the effective date for the increase to provide time to conduct stakeholder outreach. There are three primary decision points for the City Commission in establishing an updated CILWR unit cost: 1) establishing the updated unit cost target; 2) whether the target is stepped into incrementally or in one jump; and 3) the date the target becomes effective. The attached Resolution has been prepared by City Staff to establish the CILWR unit cost at the recommended amount of $13,050/acre-foot, in one jump, with the effective date occurring on November 23, 2026. If the City Commission decides any of the three decision points differently than expressed in the Resolution, City Staff requests the Commission clearly articulate each decision point through separate motion, discussion and vote in order for Staff to prepare the Resolution accordingly prior to the Resolution’s execution by the Mayor. ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:The recommended CILWR fee midpoint of $13,050/acre-foot is over double the current fee rate of $6,000/acre-foot. 1 acre-foot of water can serve 547 approximately 4 single family homes or approximately 8 multi-family units. Attachments: Resolution Establishing the Unit Cost for CILWR.pdf Bozeman CIL Update_FINAL-2026.10.01.pdf Report compiled on: October 29, 2026 548 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, ESTABLISHING THE EFFECTIVE UNIT COST FOR PAYMENT OF CASH IN LIEU OF WATER RIGHTS WHEREAS, the City first began requiring new development to offset its demand for municipal water in 1984 through adoption of Resolution 2502; and WHEREAS, the current Commission Resolution controlling the amount of Cash-in-Lieu of Water Rights (CILWR) was adopted by the Commission in March of 2008 establishing the value at $6,000 per acre-foot; and WHEREAS, on October 20, 2026 the Commission approved final adoption of Ordinance 2026-12 codifying the City’s water adequacy requirements in Chapter 40 of the Bozeman Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, WestWater Research and HydroSolutions prepared a report titled City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update which analyzed the City’s CILWR fee using industry accepted methodologies; and WHEREAS, the analysis indicates a valuation of the unit cost of CILWR to be between $11,600 and $14,500; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the City’s water adequacy regulations, new development must offset the municipal water use attributable to the development by the transfer of adequate water rights into City ownership, implementation of water conservation measures, and/or payment of cash in lieu of water rights (CILWR); and WHEREAS, if the development chooses to pay CILWR, the amount of the CILWR payment must be calculated using the unit cost effective for CILWR payments on the date the payment is made to the City; and WHEREAS, the unit cost for CILWR must be established by City Commission Resolution. 549 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, to wit: 1) Resolution 4095 is hereby superseded. 2) The Commission hereby establishes the unit cost for CILWR at $13,050/acre-foot, which is the mid-point of the recommended range for a new CILWR fee contained in the report titled City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update prepared by WestWater Research and HydroSolutions dated October 1, 2026. 3) The full amount of the unit cost set forth by this Resolution will be implemented as the effective unit cost for CILWR payments on November 23, 2026. 4) Revenues collected from CILWR payments shall be placed in a reserve account within the Water Enterprise Fund, which account shall be restricted to the following purposes: a) Acquisition of municipal water rights or contract interests in water rights that are legally available for municipal use. b) Acquisition of irrigation water rights or contract interests in irrigation water rights for non-potable irrigation of City parkland, City rights-of-ways, or other City-owned facilities. c) Acquisition of non-municipal water rights that may be held by the City for mitigation of adverse effects associated with water rights permit applications or water rights change applications. d) Funding administrative, technical, and legal costs associated with water rights change applications to change the legal elements of a water right to a form that advances or supports the City’s water-related policies, goals, objectives, or priorities. e) Funding administrative, technical, and legal costs associated with water rights permit applications and mitigation plans. 5) The unit cost for CILWR payments shall be reviewed not less frequently than biennially and updated by the Commission when necessary. 550 PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, at a regular session thereof held on the _10th___ day of November__, 2026. ___________________________________ JOEY MORRISON Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 551 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Methods, Assumptions, Results, & Recommendations for Updating the City of Bozeman’s Water Rights Cash-In-Lieu Fee to 2025 Prepared for: HydroSolutions 303 Clarke Street Helena, MT 59601 Prepared by: WestWater Research, LLC 205 S. Meldrum St. Fort Collins, CO 80521 October 1, 2026 552 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page i Executive Summary Purpose & Framework This report documents the work of WestWater Research, LLC (WestWater) in developing an updated water rights cash-in-lieu fee (CIL) recommendation for the City of Bozeman. The City's current CIL of $6,000 per acre-foot (AF) was established in 2008. The update follows American Water Works Association M1 system development charge guidance and the rational-nexus principle: the fee should recover the City's investment in existing water rights, provide a revenue stream adequate to acquire new water rights at fair market value, and account for the cost of changing existing water rights to municipal or mitigation purpose. The analysis is intended to be defensible to ratepayers, proportional to actual cost, consistent with regional practice, and easily updated at regular intervals. Valuation Perspectives Independent valuation perspectives are developed and reconciled in this report. Full cost recovery, calculated from seven volume-weighted historical Hyalite Share transactions adjusted to 2025 dollars, yields a Consumer Price Index–adjusted value of approximately $11,560/AF and a cost-of- capital-adjusted value of approximately $14,240/AF of reliable yield. WestWater’s opinion of fair market value of reliable yield held in the City’s portfolio is $9,000–$15,000/AF, based on western Montana water right transactions, Bozeman-area land value differentials, and change case costs. The cost of acquiring new water rights under the City’s water rights alternatives, on a water rights only basis, ranges from approximately $4,900 to $10,000/AF. The perspectives are reconciled rather than averaged, because they measure different things. The first two describe water rights already in, or equivalent to, the City’s municipal portfolio. The third describes the cost of new supply acquired from agriculture, which Appendix A posits has been suppressed by the City’s own purchase history. Bozeman’s Supply Position Bozeman's existing supply portfolio—comprising the Hyalite, Sourdough, and Lyman Creek watersheds—is sufficient to meet projected demand under most growth and conservation scenarios in the near term, with a reliable surplus on the order of 4,800 AF over 2024 demand. However, the baseline scenario in the City’s 2023 Water Conservation and Efficiency Plan, which assumes no conservation program, projects a deficit of roughly 1,330 AF by the end of the planning horizon (2040), and the water rights alternatives in this report are sized to that conservative scenario in order to establish an upper bound on the cost the CIL fee should accommodate. Lower-demand scenarios would proportionally reduce the volume of new water rights required. Recommendation This report recommends a CIL fee in the range of $11,600–$14,500/AF of reliable yield, with a midpoint of $13,050/AF (see Figure ES-1). This is equivalent to about $3,050/home,1 or roughly 0.4% of Bozeman’s 2025 median home price. The lower bound reflects full cost recovery of the City's historical water rights investments, while the upper bound falls between the cost-of-capital- adjusted recovery value and the high end of fair market value. The cost of new water rights under the City’s alternatives falls below this range, suggesting that the recommended fee is sufficient to fund future acquisitions. The methodology is structured so that the fee can be re-evaluated on a three- to five-year cycle as costs, water rights values, and demand projections evolve. 1 City of Bozeman single-household residential demand of 0.234 AF per year per unit, Administrative Order 2013-07, Section III.A. See Section 5.1. 553 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page ii Figure ES-1: CIL Recommendation & Contributory Cost Aspects ($1,000/AF, 2025$) Mountain West Peer Comparison Comparison with eleven other Mountain West municipalities confirms that the recommended range is consistent with regional practice. As a share of single-family home median sale price, the proposed Bozeman CIL falls well below the cross-jurisdictional average of approximately 1.6% (see Figure ES-2), reflecting both Bozeman's relatively high home prices and the disparate nature of Western water markets in their maturity, demand pressures, and institutional constraints. Figure ES-2: CIL Fee Estimate & Median Home Sale Price; Selection of Western Cities Figure Notes: Home sale prices through May 2025 (Realtor.com). CIL fee per home based on 0.234 AF/home for all municipalities, the City of Bozeman single-household residential demand standard under Administrative Order 2013-07. 554 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page iii Acronyms & Abbreviations Acronym or Abbreviation Description & Definition (if needed) AF Acre-foot ARM Administrative Rules of Montana ASR Aquifer storage and recovery BEF Bozeman Experiment Farm weather station CAGR Compound annual growth rate CFS Cubic feet per second CIL Cash-in-lieu of water rights fee CoC Cost of capital CPI Consumer Price Index CU Consumptive use DNRC Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation EDU Equivalent dwelling unit ET Evapotranspiration FCWSD Four Corners Water and Sewer District FMV Fair market value GVFDC Grass Valley French Ditch Company GVH Grass Valley Holding, LLC HCU Historical consumptive use M&I Municipal and industrial M1 Manual American Water Works Association, Principles of Water Rates, Fees, and Charges, Manual of Water Supply Practices M1 MCWUA Middle Creek Water Users Association NASS National Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA SDC System development charge USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture WCEP Water Conservation and Efficiency Plan, City of Bozeman (2023) WestWater WestWater Research, LLC 555 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page iv Table of Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background & Purpose ....................................................................................................... 1 1.2 CIL Industry Standards, Best Practices, & City Objectives .................................................... 2 2 Description of Updated CIL Methodology 5 2.1 Ensuring Full Cost Recovery of Water Rights Expenditures ................................................... 5 2.2 Accommodating Future Supply Expansion Costs ................................................................. 5 2.3 General Approach .............................................................................................................. 6 3 Water Supply & Demand Analysis 7 3.1 Assessment of Existing Water Supply Portfolio .................................................................... 7 3.2 Growth Expectations & Future Demand Projections ............................................................. 9 3.3 Water Rights Alternatives .................................................................................................. 10 4 Valuing Current & Future Water Rights 15 4.1 Cost Recovery for Current Water Rights Portfolio ............................................................... 15 4.2 Fair Market Value of Current Water Rights ......................................................................... 16 4.3 Cost of Water Rights Alternatives ...................................................................................... 16 5 Recommended CIL Determination & Conclusions 21 5.1 Volume Basis for the Per-Home Comparison ..................................................................... 22 5.2 Comparison to CIL of Other Mountain West Municipalities................................................. 23 6 Appendices 24 Appendix A. Gallatin Valley Water Rights Market Assessment & Value Perspective ................. A-1 Appendix B. Storage Rights – Preliminary Decree ................................................................... B-1 556 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page v Tables Table 1: Current Water Supply ...................................................................................................... 7 Table 2: Bozeman Population Projections based on Historical Census Data ................................... 9 Table 3: Bozeman Water Demand Projections ............................................................................... 9 Table 4: Estimated Consumptive Volume Available to Change on Sourdough & Hyalite Creeks ..... 12 Table 5: Storage Rights 10-Year Diversion Scenario ..................................................................... 13 Table 6: Calculation of 2025 Full Cost Recovery for Known Water Rights Acquisitions .................. 16 Table 7: Hyalite Share Purchase Cost Estimate for Supply Expansion ........................................... 17 Table 8: Water Rights Alternative Cost Results ............................................................................ 20 Table 9: CIL Cost Aspect Summary of Results ............................................................................. 21 Table 10: CIL Fees as a Proportion of Home Sale Price for a Selection of Western Cities ............... 23 Figures Figure 1: Diversion Availability Under the Water Reservation Storage Right ................................... 13 Figure 2: CIL Recommendation & Contributory Cost Aspects ($1,000/AF, 2025$) ......................... 22 Figure 3: CIL Fees & Median Home Sale Price; Selection of Western Cities ................................... 24 557 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 1 1 Introduction This study documents the theory, procedures, and proposed determination of an updated water rights cash-in-lieu fee (CIL) for the City of Bozeman, Montana (Bozeman or the City). Additionally, and in support of the CIL analysis, this study provides a quantitative overview of the City’s current water supply portfolio, current and projected water demands, and potential development/acquisition options to bolster supply in anticipation of future growth. Finally, Appendix A provides a preliminary-level market assessment and valuation of Gallatin Valley water rights to support the CIL analysis. 1.1 Background & Purpose The City requires that developers either dedicate adequate water rights to supply any new development or pay a CIL fee, which allows developers to buy into the City’s existing water rights portfolio and provides funds for new water supply acquisitions. An appropriately determined CIL can serve to finance the cost of acquiring new water rights and ensure cost recovery for the existing water rights portfolio. The current CIL fee of $6,000 per acre-foot (AF) was established in 2008 and has not been updated in the intervening years.2 The City maintains an on-call water rights consulting contract with HydroSolutions, to whom it expressed an interest in updating the CIL. In turn, HydroSolutions has contracted with WestWater Research, LLC (WestWater) to lead the CIL revision effort. WestWater is uniquely qualified and well positioned to conduct this CIL revision. The firm has extensive experience and familiarity with Montana’s water markets, and routinely analyzes supply, demand, competition, and price trends for clients in the Gallatin Valley and surrounding areas. In recent years WestWater has completed CIL revisions for two of Colorado’s largest and fastest-growing municipalities and conducted multiple valuations of water rights in Montana’s Gallatin Valley. The overall objective of this study is to recommend a defensible and well-supported CIL fee update to the City. In support of this objective, this report: • Summarizes industry standards and best practices for CIL determinations. • Describes and supports the methodology employed by WestWater. • Provides a quantitative overview of the City’s current water rights portfolio. • Conducts a water supply and demand analysis for the Gallatin Valley. • Investigates and develops preliminary cost estimates for water supply expansion options. • Provides a preliminary-level market assessment and valuation of Gallatin Valley water rights. These contributing elements are reconciled to determine an updated CIL that aligns with Bozeman’s cost recovery and growth goals. The final recommendation is stated as a unit-cost range in dollars per AF. 2 Bozeman City Commission Resolution No. 4095 (2008). 558 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 2 1.2 CIL Industry Standards, Best Practices, & City Objectives This section reviews the legal foundations and industry standards for system development charges (SDCs),3 and best practices and recommended objectives for CIL fees specifically. 1.2.1 Industry Standards for System Development Charge Derivation There are many accepted practices and methodologies for development of a cost-based SDC like the CIL fee. The American Water Works Association’s Manual of Water Supply Practices, M1 (M1 Manual) describes three basic, common approaches for calculation of fees like the CIL: the buy-in approach, the incremental cost approach, and a combined approach.4 The M1 Manual describes these approaches primarily in the context of water system infrastructure, but the approaches are equally applicable to raw water supply expenditures, such as water rights acquisitions. The language in the definitions below has therefore been adapted to more cleanly fit the City’s request that raw water supply be prioritized in CIL determination. • The buy-in approach is based on the value of the existing water supply portfolio. This approach is often used where the portfolio’s existing firm yield is sufficient to serve existing customers and reasonably anticipated growth. The resulting fee is equivalent to acquiring a unit of capacity within the system. This approach ensures cost recovery of the past expenditures incurred to develop the existing portfolio (assuming some adjustment for inflation), generally resulting in a lower CIL reflective of past prices paid. • The incremental cost approach is centered around the cost of expanding the existing water supply portfolio to serve future customers. This approach is often used when the portfolio’s existing firm yield has limited or no capacity for new development and new or incremental capacity is required to serve new development. The resulting fee is representative of the per- unit cost of future capacity. This approach captures the expense of expanding the portfolio based on anticipated acquisitions in the near- and medium-term—generally resulting in a higher CIL reflective of current and forecasted fair market value. • The combined approach is exactly as it sounds, acknowledging that new development will use a combination of existing and future water supply portfolio holdings. This approach is best used where some capacity is available, but new or incremental capacity is required in the foreseeable future. This approach blends the two former approaches and generally returns a CIL falling within the edge conditions created by the buy-in and incremental cost approaches. 3 System development charge, or SDC, is the broad category of one-time charges paid by a new water system customer for system capacity. Other commonly used names include impact fees, system capacity charges/fees, development fees, among others. SDC terms specifically associated with raw water supply acquisition (sometimes inclusive of certain infrastructure elements) include water resources acquisition fees, tap fees, and CIL. 4 Principles of Water Rates, Fees, and Charges. Manual of Water Supply Practices, M1. Seventh Edition. American Water Works Association (2017). (link) 559 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 3 The City set its current fee in 2008 to reflect what it would cost to acquire new water rights at the prevailing market price, rather than the cost of using rights it already held.5 Because the fee has not been updated since, it no longer reflects either current acquisition costs or the City’s past expenditures in 2025 dollars. WestWater has generally recommended the combined approach for its implicit balance between cost recovery and future price expectations. 1.2.2 CIL Fee Best Practices & Common Objectives Based on reviewing and determining CILs for western municipalities, WestWater has compiled a set of best practices and a list of commonly expressed objectives. Generally accepted best practices for the determination of a CIL fee are that it be: • Defensible: The generally accepted approaches for CIL fee development are bounded by those methods based on cost recovery (generally the low bookend) and those based on current and near-term replacement value (generally the high bookend), both of which are acceptable and economically sound. • Proportional: The concept of rough proportionality means that the fees assessed to an individual property are roughly consistent with that property’s expected impact on the water system. With regard to raw water supply, this is implicitly satisfied if the CIL is charged on a unit basis (such as per-AF) and the unit requirement is tied to anticipated demand (e.g., three AF per acre of developable land). • Consistent & Predictable: Annual changes to a CIL fee should be incremental— approximating a continuous function rather than a severe step function. This can be accomplished through the amortization of significant one-time capital expenditures and ensuring the fee calculation is structured to accommodate and moderate severe swings in water market pricing. The methodology should be stress-tested with extreme, but possible, scenarios to determine its suitability if such a scenario comes to pass. The logic behind the calculation should be clear and defensible. • Financially Sustainable: At a minimum, a CIL fee should recover past water asset expenditures in real (i.e., adjusted for inflation) dollars. Additionally, some portion of debt service related to a water asset acquisition should be recovered through the CIL. From an economic standpoint, the City’s opportunity cost might be considered. There is an opportunity cost to the City in tying up significant capital in water acquisitions and this cost can be recovered by an approximation of the City’s cost of capital for the duration of an asset’s holding. Opportunity cost can be approximated by the interest-earning potential of the capital tied up in the water asset. 5 City of Bozeman, memorandum from the City Engineer to the City Commission, “FYI – Updating the Amount Charged for Cash In Lieu of Water Rights,” October 15, 2007, attached to the staff report for Resolution No. 4095, adopted March 17, 2008 (link). The fee was previously based on the City’s annual payments to MCWUA for Hyalite Reservoir water. The memorandum cites a consultant range of $4,000–$6,000 per acre-foot for Montana water at that time. 560 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 4 WestWater has compiled a set of common (though not universal) objectives expressed by municipalities in support of their review/determination of a CIL, which include: • The fee should be competitive with regional municipal peers. • The methodology should ensure that the City is ahead of the need for new growth/demand. • The methodology should be consistent, easily updated, and accessible. • The methodology can be potentially implemented within or linked to a currently maintained water supply or financial model.6The insights provided above are for informational purposes only, and the CIL determined for Bozeman will not necessarily satisfy all of the objectives expressed by other municipalities, which are subject to unique sets of hydrological and market constraints. 1.2.3 Bozeman’s Objectives, Constraints, & Guidance for CIL Update The City has provided specific objectives, constraints, and guidance to WestWater in the CIL determination methodology. • Constrained to a focus on water rights. • Specific to additional legal supplies and water rights for municipal and industrial use (M&I). • Provide a CIL recommendation that maintains a bright line with the Water Impact Fee program—this is a different fee/revenue stream that is currently allocated to capacity- expansion improvements for water supply, treatment, and distribution facilities. • Recover past water rights expenditures and provide a forward-looking informational evaluation of cost recovery for conceptual raw water supply alternatives. • The methodology should be easily updated every three to five years. The City has requested that the updated CIL be based primarily (if not exclusively) on water rights and should omit, where possible, any cost recovery associated with existing raw water storage and treatment or conveyance infrastructure. Certain new raw groundwater supply scenarios evaluated require new infrastructure elements such as wells and aquifer recharge to develop or utilize the additional raw water supply. In such cases, the infrastructure complement is evaluated for information purposes in this CIL determination. 6 Bozeman’s Water Supply Optimization and Management Tool might be considered such an example. 561 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 5 2 Description of Updated CIL Methodology Consistent with the City’s objectives, the methodology applied to determine an updated CIL recommendation ensures full cost recovery of the City’s water rights expenditures, accommodates future pricing expectations, and omits infrastructure costs currently accounted for in the City’s water impact fee program. The methodology described can best be categorized as a combined approach, as it accounts for buying into the current water rights portfolio while collecting sufficient revenues to accommodate future water rights acquisitions. 2.1 Ensuring Full Cost Recovery of Water Rights Expenditures The minimum CIL to be charged to ensure full cost recovery is the nominal amount spent on the water rights adjusted to real dollars—thereby countering inflation’s diminishment of the purchasing power of a dollar over time. This is accomplished by escalating any known water rights purchases from the year of acquisition to a 2025 price level using the Consumer Price Index (CPI).7 Full cost recovery is alternatively calculated by including an estimate of the opportunity cost to the City attributable to the water right acquisitions. The City incurs an opportunity cost to tie up the capital expended on a water asset acquisition that might not be allocated for many years in the future. It is advantageous for the City to have this capability, as it accommodates bolstering the water supply portfolio when an asset can be purchased at a low price, regardless of near-term demand expectations. However, this opportunity cost is a real cost incurred by the City, best approximated as the cost of capital (generally prevailing bonding rates in the case of a municipality) and should be recovered. The yield-to-maturity for a 30-year investment-grade municipal bond in the year of acquisition is used as an estimate of the City’s cost of capital.8 Note that bond yields are market driven and implicitly account for inflation expectations (i.e., a potential bond purchaser will make a selection based on a yield they consider high enough to meet or exceed inflation through maturity). The cost-of-capital (CoC) value adjustment therefore implicitly accounts for inflation, and no independent inflation adjustment is made to avoid double counting. Both the CPI- and CoC-adjusted volume-weighted price paid are calculated and contribute to a reconciled unit price range for full cost recovery. 2.2 Accommodating Future Supply Expansion Costs Making additional water rights purchases to the portfolio will often be more expensive, in real dollars, than equivalent past purchases. The cost recovery calculation will necessarily lag water asset expenditures, perhaps by a decade or more, and leaves the City ill-prepared to finance future water asset acquisitions. The current fair market value (FMV) of the existing water rights portfolio and the cost of potential replacement of raw water assets (or expanding raw supply through project development) are therefore a better indicator of future price expectations. The FMV of the existing portfolio and the estimated cost to acquire or develop additional equivalent raw water supply are therefore considered in the CIL methodology. 7 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items in West. (link) 8 S&P Municipal Bond Index: Investment Grade (link). 562 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 6 In a high-growth environment, the existing water rights portfolio is exhausted more quickly, and higher-price water is purchased sooner. This can be reflected by a higher weight assignment to the supply expansion cost aspect. Under a low-growth scenario, the existing portfolio lasts further into the future and higher-price water purchases can be deferred longer. This is reflected by a lower weight assignment to the supply expansion cost aspect. 2.3 General Approach A water supply and demand analysis is conducted in Section 3 to quantify the City’s water balance and determine if/when any supply shortage might be expected. As explained above, future demand projections can play a role in the weighting of the CIL-contributing components. The section concludes with an overview of raw water supply expansion alternatives. Section 4 presents the calculation of the cost recovery, FMV, and supply expansion cost financial metrics that contribute to the CIL evaluation. Finally, Section 5 reconciles these financial metrics into an updated CIL recommendation and provides comparisons with other known CIL fees in the Mountain West region. 563 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 7 3 Water Supply & Demand Analysis This section summarizes the City’s current municipal water supply portfolio, recent water acquisition history, and future demand projections. Quantifying these metrics is important for the accurate calculation of price paid for existing supply, the timing for future water acquisitions/development, and for estimating the absorption rate by new development. 3.1 Assessment of Existing Water Supply Portfolio The City derives its municipal water supply from a portfolio of owned surface water rights and Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) contracts. The City reports three quantity metrics for its supply: reliable yield, average yield, and maximum yield. These are defined below and summarized by watershed in Table 1.9 • Reliable Yield – The annual volume of water that the City’s water rights produce, on a given source, in a 1-in-50-year drought condition (i.e., a 2% non-exceedance probability). • Average Yield – The annual volume of water that the City’s water rights produce, on a given source, in a 25-in-50-year drought condition (i.e., a 50% non-exceedance probability). This is considered the normal hydrologic condition. • Maximum Yield – The total legal volume of the respective water right. In total, Bozeman estimates its municipal water supply portfolio to have an annual reliable yield of 11,920 AF, an average yield of 13,330 AF, and a maximum yield of 16,517 AF. As shown in Table 1, the Hyalite Creek Watershed (both direct flows and DNRC contracts) accounts for the highest proportion of the City’s supply by any quantity metric among the three watersheds (44%–48%). The Sourdough Creek Watershed provides the second highest proportion (29%– 34%), while the Lyman Creek Watershed provides 18%–26%. The critical quantity metric for supporting new development, and therefore in CIL determination, is reliable yield. The rationale is that a home should not be developed with the expectation that it receives water in an average year, but rather that it will receive sufficient supply in the driest years. The CIL is charged on each AF of a development’s average annual demand under Administrative Order 2013-07. Stating every unit cost in this report per AF of reliable yield matches each AF of demand charged with an AF of supply available in a 1-in-50-year drought. In 2024, municipal consumption was 7,100 AF, or about 60% of the City’s reliable supply, leaving a reliable yield surplus of 4,820 AF. The three watersheds and the City’s associated water rights are described in the sections below. 9 Volumes reported in Table 1 and quantity metric definitions for reliable, average, and maximum yield were provided by the City in a July 9–16, 2025, email correspondence with WestWater. Table 1: Current Water Supply †Reliable = 2% non-exceedance probability Average = 50% non-exceedance probability Maximum = total legal volume of right Source: Input from City (see footnote 9). Watershed &Acre-Feet % of Quantity Metric†(AF)Total Hyalite Creek/Res. Direct Flow Reliable 1,145 10% Average 1,238 9% Maximum 1,631 10% DNR Contracts Reliable 4,580 38% Average 4,655 35% Maximum 5,819 35% Hyalite Totals (Direct Flow + Contracts) Reliable 5,725 48% Average 5,893 44% Maximum 7,450 45% Lyman Creek Spring Reliable 2,127 18% Average 2,980 22% Maximum 4,307 26% Sourdough Creek Direct Flow Reliable 4,068 34% Average 4,457 33% Maximum 4,760 29% TOTALS Reliable 11,920 100% Average 13,330 100% Maximum 16,517 100% 564 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 8 3.1.1 Hyalite Creek Watershed Hyalite Creek (also known as Middle Creek) originates in the Gallatin Mountains south of Bozeman, flows into the Gallatin Valley, and takes a northward course to Bozeman’s east, eventually joining the East Gallatin River northeast of Belgrade. The creek is impounded by Middle Creek Dam, a DNRC state project which was completed in 1951, creating Hyalite Reservoir. Hyalite Dam was raised in 1992 and expanded reservoir storage from 7,850 AF to the current volume of 10,184 AF. DNRC conveyed 109 contracts for use of Hyalite Reservoir water to irrigators and the City, while DNRC retains ownership of the underlying water rights.10 The water units transacted by the DNRC contracts are commonly referred to as Hyalite Shares. Each share is a contract for 1 AF of reservoir water, which is its maximum yield. Its reliable yield is about 0.79 AF and its average yield about 0.80 AF, based on the City-supplied yields in Table 1. The City currently holds 5,819 Hyalite Shares, and 4,365 Hyalite Shares remain in irrigation and recreation. From 2007 to 2021, Bozeman purchased DNRC contracts from irrigators to expand its municipal water supply with additional Hyalite Shares. In 2021, DNRC interjected, asserting that any Hyalite Share sale revenue between shareholders should be allocated to DNRC to reserve for operation, maintenance, and replacement purposes for the Middle Creek state project. This effectively created an indefinite moratorium on the City’s ability to engage directly with irrigation shareholders through arm’s-length transactions as irrigators now lacked any incentive to sell their contracts. If DNRC allows shareholders to transact Hyalite Shares in the future, Bozeman plans to resume its purchasing to expand municipal supply. Bozeman also owns surface water rights in Hyalite Creek (i.e., direct flows) amounting to 1,145 AF of reliable yield.11 These rights are unrelated to Hyalite Shares. Hyalite Creek is considered fully allocated, so it offers no opportunity for new appropriation; additional reliable yield from the creek would come through purchase and change of existing decreed rights.12 3.1.2 Sourdough Creek Watershed Sourdough Creek (also known as Bozeman Creek) originates in the Gallatin Mountains south of Bozeman and one drainage east of Hyalite Creek before flowing through Bozeman and entering the East Gallatin River near the intersection of East Griffin Drive and Bridger Drive. Bozeman owns several surface water rights in Sourdough Creek with priority dates ranging from 1865 to 1985 which contribute 4,068 AF of reliable yield.13 3.1.3 Lyman Creek Watershed Lyman Creek originates from springs in the Bridger Mountains northeast of Bozeman before flowing southwest into Bridger Creek (a tributary of the East Gallatin River) near Bridger Canyon Road. Bozeman owns two surface water rights on Lyman Creek with priority dates of 1864 and 1861 respectively with a combined maximum diversion of 4,307 AF annually.14 Lyman Creek currently supplies Bozeman with 2,127 AF of reliable yield. 10 https://dnrc.mt.gov/_docs/water/middlecreek_factsheet.pdf 11 Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) Water Rights Query System. (link) 12 DNRC Basin Closures. (link) 13 DNRC, op. cit. (n. 11). 14 Maximum legal volume as provided by City (see footnote 9). DNRC reports annual volume at 4,346.2 AF (op. cit. (n. 11)). 565 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 9 3.2 Growth Expectations & Future Demand Projections Bozeman is one of the fastest-growing cities of its size and has grown by more than 2.6% per year since 2010.15 Bozeman expects population growth to continue, though updated growth projections are lower than they have been in the past. Since 2020, growth in Bozeman has slowed to 2.09% annually, which is the rate used in this model to project moderate growth through 2040. A low bookend of 1.5% is used to model a low-growth scenario, and the 2004–2024 growth rate of 3.13% is used to model a high-growth scenario. Growth in Bozeman and Gallatin County will depend on a variety of factors, but a moderate growth scenario would put Bozeman’s population at about 80,500 in 2040. Relevant growth projections based on historical Census data are provided in Table 2. Table 2: Bozeman Population Projections based on Historical Census Data Projection Rationale Growth Rate 2040 Population Low Growth Scenario Low Bookend 1.5% 73,500 Moderate Growth Scenario 2020–2024 Growth Rate 2.09% 80,500 High Growth Scenario 2004–2024 Growth Rate 3.13% 94,800 Bozeman’s 2023 Water Conservation and Efficiency Plan (WCEP) projected water demand at 13,250 AF in 2040 under a baseline scenario, but the City plans to institute a water conservation program to limit the use of potable water for irrigation and landscaping.16 With the conservation program in place, the City projects water demand at 8,820 AF in 2040. If water use grows in line with population at 2.09% annually, projected 2040 demand is 9,890 AF. With conservation savings in place, Bozeman is projected to retain a significant water supply surplus in 2040 even without acquiring additional water. Relevant demand projections are provided in Table 3. Table 3: Bozeman Water Demand Projections Projection 2040 Demand Reliable Supply Surplus Conservation Program Implemented 8,820 3,100 Mid Scenario (2.09% CAGR) 9,890 2,030 Baseline (2023 WCEP) 13,250 (1,330) It is expected that Bozeman will continue to grow. Though Bozeman may not need to expand water supply to meet demand in the near term, strategies and scenarios for expanding water supply are discussed in Section 3.3 of this report for long-term planning. 15 https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/bozemancitymontana# 16 Water Conservation and Efficiency Plan. City of Bozeman (2/15/2023). (link) 566 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 10 3.3 Water Rights Alternatives Bozeman shared several water rights alternatives currently under consideration to provide additional legal water supply for long-range needs. The alternatives are listed in order of likely cost- effectiveness and ease of integration into the existing raw water supply system. 1. Hyalite Shares – Resume purchases of Hyalite Reservoir contract water. 2. Decreed Water Rights Purchase & Change – Acquire Sourdough Creek and Hyalite Creek decreed water rights from willing sellers and obtain DNRC change approval for municipal use. 3. Aquifer Storage & Recovery – Obtain DNRC change approval for the existing unperfected municipal surface storage water rights owned by Bozeman (Sourdough Reservation and Mystic Lake water rights) to change the place of storage to aquifer storage and recovery (ASR). 4. Groundwater Water Right Permit & Aquifer Recharge Mitigation Plan – Obtain DNRC approval of a groundwater water right permit and an aquifer recharge mitigation plan. These alternatives are not mutually exclusive, though the success of one might preclude the need for the others, depending on the reliable yield generated by the alternative and growth in municipal demand. The following sections describe each water rights alternative. Costs are estimated for each in Section 4.3. 3.3.1 Hyalite Shares As detailed in Section 3.1.1, Hyalite Reservoir is a DNRC water storage project that allocates 10,184 AF of water represented in 109 contracts for municipal or irrigation uses. The City currently owns 5,819 Hyalite Shares, and 4,365 Hyalite Shares remain in irrigation. Hyalite Shares represent the easiest and most cost-effective means of expanding Bozeman’s municipal water supply for the key reasons outlined below: • Bozeman already owns and operates necessary treatment and delivery infrastructure due to its existing portfolio of Hyalite Shares.17 • The cost of acquiring Hyalite Shares is known to be affordable for Bozeman based on previous purchasing history. • Hyalite Shares have a reliable yield, are decreed for municipal year-round use, and may be used within the City’s municipal supply system without DNRC change approval.18 • Hyalite Shares provide stored supply, which is the most flexible supply available because reservoir releases can be made as needed to meet demand. • Buying Hyalite Shares financially benefits irrigators who no longer wish to use their water. According to conversations with the City, DNRC changed its policy on Hyalite Share sales in 2021, effectively declaring that any revenue from Hyalite Share sales belonged to DNRC. This policy negated the incentive to sell on the part of irrigators and effectively shut down the market for Hyalite Shares. If not for the new policy, the City would prefer to continue purchasing Hyalite Shares as the primary method of expanding municipal supply. 17 Bozeman 2024 Water Quality Report. (link) 18 Middle Creek Project Original Right. (link) 567 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 11 There are ongoing conversations between the Middle Creek Water Users Association (MCWUA), DNRC, and the City. According to the City, the market for Hyalite Shares will be reinvigorated upon resolution of the share transfer issue between DNRC and MCWUA.19 Some of the details that need to be worked out by the parties include who gets compensated for the transaction and at what rate. The City expects resolution within the next 12 to 18 months, with share transactions between willing sellers resuming thereafter. The total theoretical reliable yield of Hyalite Shares not currently held by the City is 3,436 AF.20 3.3.2 Decreed Water Rights Purchase & Change Bozeman can expand its water rights portfolio by acquiring decreed water rights on Sourdough Creek and Hyalite Creek from willing sellers and changing their purpose of use to municipal. Unlike Hyalite Shares, a decreed right acquired from an irrigator cannot be used within the municipal system until DNRC approves a change application. Both sources carry substantial acquisition opportunity. DNRC records 116 water rights on Sourdough Creek, 77 of them decreed to irrigation purpose, and 137 rights decreed to irrigation purpose on Hyalite Creek.21 All but three of the Sourdough Creek rights and all but one of the Hyalite Creek rights are held by parties other than the City. Only the consumptive portion of a decreed irrigation right may be changed to a new purpose. Historically diverted water in excess of consumptive use remains with the source. The volume available to the City is therefore materially smaller than the decreed diversion volume, and the consumptive volume across the irrigable place of use is the relevant measure. WestWater estimated the consumptive volume that could be changed to municipal purpose on each source from these records. The estimate applies the historical consumptive use (HCU) of alfalfa hay in the Gallatin Valley, approximately 1.36 AF per acre, to the irrigated acreage recorded against each right decreed to irrigation purpose. This is the same HCU conversion applied in the land price differential analysis presented in Appendix A. Rights held by the City are excluded. So is the Middle Creek Ditch Company right, whose recorded 6,178 acres correspond to the Hyalite Share pool addressed above and would otherwise be counted twice. On this basis, decreed irrigation rights carry consumptive volume on the order of 4,000 AF on Sourdough Creek and 10,000 AF on Hyalite Creek.22 Table 4 sets out the derivation on each source. These figures are an upper bound on the physical resource and do not describe an acquirable supply. Three limitations apply. Acreage is recorded against each water right, so ground served by more than one decreed right appears more than once; the estimate removes that overlap where DNRC parcel identifiers permit, which covers 81% of the Sourdough Creek acreage and 58% of the Hyalite Creek acreage, and applies the observed overlap rate to the remainder. The acreage recorded is the decreed maximum rather than the acreage historically irrigated, and DNRC determines historical 19 July 15, 2025, call between Bozeman, WestWater, and HydroSolutions to discuss CIL study updates. 20 Of the 10,184 total shares available, the City holds 5,819. The remaining 4,365 shares are estimated to have a reliable yield of 3,436 AF based on the reliable yield factor of 78.71% used by the City in assessing its current holdings. 21 WestWater analysis of DNRC Water Rights Query System records for Sourdough Creek and Hyalite Creek (op. cit. (n. 11)), retrieved September 2026. 22 WestWater analysis. Consumptive volume is estimated as the irrigated acreage recorded against each right decreed to irrigation purpose, reduced to remove acreage recorded against more than one right, multiplied by 1.36 AF per acre. The rate is the alfalfa historical consumptive use (HCU) derived in Appendix A. Results are rounded to the nearest 1,000 AF. 568 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 12 use in a change proceeding at a volume that is ordinarily lower. The estimate also assumes willing sellers, on which the record is silent. Table 4: Estimated Consumptive Volume Available to Change on Sourdough & Hyalite Creeks Derivation of Consumptive Volume Sourdough Creek Hyalite Creek Water rights decreed to irrigation purpose 77 137 Irrigated acres recorded 7,251 17,826 Less: acres on rights held by the City (2,664) (800) Less: acres on the Middle Creek Ditch Company right† — (6,178) Less: acres served by more than one right‡ (1,763) (3,825) Net irrigated acres 2,824 7,023 Consumptive volume at 1.36 AF/acre§ 3,840 AF 9,551 AF Estimated volume available to change, rounded¶ 4,000 AF 10,000 AF † The Middle Creek Ditch Company right, 41H 119964 00, records 6,178 acres across 86 places of use on five ditches. Its consumptive volume corresponds to the Hyalite Share pool addressed in Section 3.3.1 and is excluded here so that the same water is not counted twice. ‡ Acreage is recorded against each water right, so ground served by supplemental rights is recorded more than once. The deduction removes that overlap where DNRC parcel identifiers permit, covering 81% of the Sourdough Creek acreage and 58% of the Hyalite Creek acreage, and applies the observed overlap rate to the remainder. § Historical consumptive use of alfalfa hay in the Gallatin Valley, as derived in Appendix A. ¶ Rounded to the nearest 1,000 AF. These are upper bounds on the physical resource and do not describe an acquirable supply. 3.3.3 Aquifer Storage & Recovery Another option that Bozeman is currently investigating for additional water rights is ASR. Bozeman holds two unperfected surface storage water rights on Sourdough Creek for municipal purposes: a 609-AF water reservation with a 1985 priority date and a 6,000-AF volume claim to Mystic Lake reservoir with a 1901 priority (the Storage Rights). Bozeman would need to obtain DNRC approval to change the place of storage from a surface reservoir to the valley aquifer and build an infiltration gallery or injection wells to deliver surface water into the aquifer for later withdrawals. The City would then be able to store water underground during spring runoff and use wells to pump out of the aquifer when needed. Bozeman’s Storage Rights are junior priority rights on the creek and can only divert during spring runoff—a concept commonly referred to as free river. Bozeman’s ability to change the Storage Rights for ASR is contingent on DNRC approval. ASR is a legally recognized beneficial use of water in Montana. DNRC has not processed an ASR change or permit, however, and has adopted no regulations governing this use. It is therefore unknown how the agency will approach review and approval of such an application. Since Bozeman can only divert during free river, its ability to divert and store water under the Storage Rights is dependent on sufficient flows being available in priority. Using DNRC water rights data, WestWater determined that there are 74.42 cubic feet per second (CFS) of water rights on Sourdough Creek that are senior to the 1985 priority water reservation Storage Right.23 Figure 1 shows that, 23 February 10, 2022, Memorandum from Jacobs to City of Bozeman. Subject: Direct Flow—Reliable Yield Evaluation. Emailed to WestWater from HydroSolutions June 2, 2025. 569 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 13 based on the available data, sufficient flow is available to create free river conditions in seven of 10 years.24 This is depicted in the figure as the instances where streamflows are greater than cumulative water rights senior to the water reservation. Figure 1: Diversion Availability Under the Water Reservation Storage Right Taking all 10 years into account, the average annual volume that Bozeman could divert under the Storage Rights is about 2,500 AF. In some years, however, no water will be in priority for diversion, and therefore not available. Dropping the three low water years from the average provides an estimate of the available water during free river. An example 10-year diversion scenario is depicted in Table 5. Note that under the City’s 2% non-exceedance probability criterion for reliable yield, this supply expansion alternative provides zero reliable yield in any given year. However, when paired with effective year-to-year rollover storage through use of an infiltration gallery, the limited dataset indicates that a reliable yield of around 2,000 AF could be achievable. A longer hydrological record and additional operational details are needed to draw any definitive conclusions regarding reliability. Table 5: Storage Rights 10-Year Diversion Scenario Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Avg. Avail. Diversion (AF)† 3,581 3,581 0 3,581 3,581 0 3,581 3,581 0 3,581 2,507 † Annual volume is calculated based on the flow instances and duration of such instances where flows exceed 74.42 CFS over the 10-year period 2016–2025. The table average of 2,507 AF accounts for the 3-in-10 years of flows insufficient for City diversion. 3.3.4 Groundwater Water Right Permit & Aquifer Recharge Mitigation Plan The Gallatin Valley overlies significant groundwater resources within various hydrogeologic structures. If Bozeman develops wells in the valley alluvium, any adverse effects from surface water 24 DNRC Sourdough Creek Gage. (link) 0 50 100 150 200 250 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Sourdough Creek Flow (CFS)Average Flow (CFS)Available for Diversion Rights Senior to the Storage Right 570 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 14 depletions caused by groundwater pumping must be offset through a mitigation plan in accordance with Montana water law.25 The Upper Missouri River Basin (of which the Gallatin watershed is a part) is closed to new surface water rights.26 While the surface water closure does not preclude new groundwater appropriations, it does require a higher standard to be met in order to avoid injury or adverse effects to surface water users. All new groundwater appropriation applications in the Gallatin River Basin must include a hydrogeologic report that examines whether the new appropriation will cause depletions to surface water supplies and, if depletions will occur, whether they will cause adverse effects to current surface water users. If the new appropriation causes adverse effects, the applicant must then submit a mitigation plan that prevents injury to existing users by replacing depletions.27 A mitigation plan typically involves decreasing diversions at appropriate points, often by fallowing fields owned by the applicant,28 or purchasing water rights and changing the use to mitigation so that they will be left instream. If cessation of diversion will not provide adequate mitigation in amount, timing, and location, aquifer recharge can be used. Because municipal use occurs continuously throughout the year, other continuous use rights such as those for fisheries and stockwater purposes must also be mitigated continuously. Water rights available for mitigation change are typically seasonal irrigation rights, and seasonal rights can provide continuous year-round mitigation through aquifer recharge. Aquifer recharge is the controlled addition of surface water to the aquifer to offset stream depletions at the correct time, location, and amount. An existing water right must be acquired and DNRC change approval obtained to change that right’s purpose to aquifer recharge. DNRC will not approve a new groundwater water right permit in the closed Upper Missouri River Basin without also approving a complementary mitigation plan. Where the mitigation plan relies on aquifer recharge, the change to aquifer recharge purpose must be completed before the permit will issue. The most straightforward procedure for mitigating surface water depletions caused by wells would be purchasing water rights from irrigators. Most large surface water diversions in the Gallatin Valley are owned by corporations known as ditch companies. A ditch company is made up of shareholders, with each share representing an equal portion of the ditch company’s water rights portfolio. Bozeman could pursue a strategy of purchasing shares from irrigators and changing the nature of use of the underlying water right to mitigation or aquifer recharge to replace depletions caused by municipal wells. The reliable yield under this alternative might be limited by any of four variables: • The willingness of ditch companies or individual water right owners to change their water rights to mitigation or aquifer recharge purpose. • The amount of mitigation water ditch companies or individual water right owners would sell to the City. • The amount of seasonal storage developed. • The unique characteristics of the aquifer and its physical capacity to receive surface water for aquifer recharge purposes. 25 https://archive.legmt.gov/content/Committees/Interim/2007_2008/water_policy/staffmemos/waterlawsummary.pdf 26 https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0850/chapter_0020/part_0030/section_0430/0850-0020-0030-0430.html 27 As the Gallatin is a closed basin, depletion will necessarily result from pumping a well, and mitigation is always required. 28 Mitigation by fallowing requires permanently retiring acres to provide sufficient flow rate and volume to offset usage under a new permit. Due to the change in purpose of use (and likely place of use) a change application is required. 571 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 15 4 Valuing Current & Future Water Rights This section presents the calculation of full cost recovery for the City’s water rights portfolio and of forecasted future water rights costs. Appendix A of this report provides a preliminary-level market assessment and valuation of Gallatin Valley water rights to provide a general perspective of FMV of water rights equivalent to those held, and those that might be procured, by the City. 4.1 Cost Recovery for Current Water Rights Portfolio The City’s water rights portfolio holds 11,920 AF of reliable yield. Price paid is known for 275.6 AF of that total, contributed by the purchase of 350 Hyalite Shares the City made between 2007 and 2021. Those purchases are the basis for the full cost recovery unit cost developed in this section. At the City’s direction, the analysis covers contemporary purchases only, meaning those completed after the Middle Creek state project rehabilitation and dam raise in 1992. The City considers earlier acquisitions historical, and their costs fully recovered. All known purchases postdate 1992, so this scope does not alter the calculated values. Given the City’s direct flow rights in Lyman, Sourdough, and Hyalite creeks along with 5,819 Hyalite Shares, Bozeman possesses adequate water supply to meet its current needs. However, the City’s reasonably foreseeable future water needs, as documented in the 2013 Integrated Water Resources Plan, require additional water rights to keep pace with projected population growth through 2062. Amid rapid growth in 2007, Bozeman renewed its strategy of purchasing additional Hyalite Shares to expand municipal water rights and ensure sufficient capacity for continued growth. From 2007 to 2021, Bozeman purchased 350 Hyalite Shares. In total, the purchases added 275.6 AF of reliable yield to Bozeman’s municipal supply. The City paid $6,000 per share in five of the seven purchases, the same figure as the $6,000/AF CIL it set in 2008.29 Because a share’s 1 AF contract volume yields about 0.79 AF in a 1-in-50-year drought, $6,000 per share is equivalent to about $7,620/AF of reliable yield. The share price and the 2008 CIL therefore coincide per share but not on the reliable yield basis used throughout this report. That difference in volume basis, about 27%, accounts for part of the increase from the current fee, separate from inflation. Transaction details can be found in Section A.1.1 of Appendix A. Table 6 summarizes the calculation of full cost recovery for known contemporary water rights acquisitions held in the current water rights portfolio. The minimum value to ensure full cost recovery is represented by the CPI-adjusted (CPI-Adj.) values, which state the City’s past expenditures in real dollars. The cost-of-capital-adjusted (CoC-Adj.) values in the table report the City’s known water rights expenditures inclusive of an estimate of opportunity cost based on municipal bonding rates in the year of acquisition (see Section 2.1 for additional details). As shown in Table 6, the CIL fee required to ensure full cost recovery ranges from $11,560–$14,240/AF of reliable yield. In this case, the volume-weighted average is the most meaningful statistic, as it is the precise value that must be charged for each AF of reliable supply to ensure full cost recovery. Were the CIL set to the median value, the City would come up short in total reimbursement. Note that the three earliest 29 The City has described its purchases in the same terms. Its April 6, 2020 staff memorandum on the R Lazy J Ranch assignment treats 90 shares as 90 AF of MCWUA contract water, prices them at $6,000/AF, notes that the price is identical to the CIL fee, and sizes the purchase to serve 384 single-family homes, or about 0.234 AF/home (link). 572 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 16 transactions are three of the four largest in volume and the highest unit cost in adjusted dollars. They therefore have a significant impact on the volume-weighted average unit prices reported. Table 6: Calculation of 2025 Full Cost Recovery for Known Water Rights Acquisitions Purchase Year Shares Total Price Paid Reliable Yield (AF) $/Reliable AF Acquired Nominal CPI-Adj.† CoC-Adj.‡ CPI-Adj.† CoC-Adj.‡ 2021 90 $540,000 $638,500 $589,800 70.8 $9,000 $8,310 2021 17 $102,000 $120,600 $111,400 13.4 $9,000 $8,310 2015 10 $55,000 $76,900 $75,900 7.9 $9,740 $9,610 2010 25 $150,000 $230,500 $233,700 19.7 $11,700 $11,860 2010 58 $348,000 $534,800 $542,200 45.7 $11,700 $11,860 2008 50 $300,000 $464,300 $687,600 39.4 $11,780 $17,450 2007 100 $700,000 $1,121,200 $1,684,600 78.7 $14,250 $21,410 Totals 350 $2,195,000 $3,186,800 $3,925,200 275.6 — — Volume-Weighted Average $11,560 $14,240 Median $11,700 $11,860 †Adjusted to 2025 price level by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for West, All Items. ‡Adjusted for the City’s cost of capital through 2025—estimated as 30-year municipal bond yield-to-maturity. 4.2 Fair Market Value of Current Water Rights Confidently assigning a current FMV to the existing water rights portfolio would require a comprehensive valuation of the underlying water rights, which is beyond the scope of this study. However, WestWater conducted a preliminary market assessment and perspective of value for Gallatin Valley water rights based on updates to past regional analyses and some limited additional analysis, which can be found as Appendix A to this report. As explained in Appendix A, Bozeman is the dominant price-maker in the Gallatin Valley water rights market, and therefore the pricing for regional supply has closely tracked the City’s own purchase activity. Complementing the City’s purchase history with a selection of other comparable sales and adjustments to regional agricultural water values for change case costs and seasonality finds an estimated FMV range of $9,000–$15,000/AF. 4.3 Cost of Water Rights Alternatives The water rights alternatives provided by the City involve a mix of water rights acquisition, administrative change of existing water rights, and new water rights permitting. Bozeman is actively investigating all of the alternatives described, and each is at a different stage of maturity. Certain hydrological, legal, and cost details are yet unknown. This analysis uses the best data provided by the City, HydroSolutions, and past project experience to arrive at the cost estimates presented. 573 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 17 4.3.1 Hyalite Share Purchases Resumption This study assumes that Hyalite Share purchases resume and that shares transact at market rates. On that basis, the water asset is estimated at a cost of $7,800/Share or $9,900/AF of reliable yield.30 These calculations are summarized in Table 7. Table 7: Hyalite Share Purchase Cost Estimate for Supply Expansion Unit Cost & Adjustments Per Share ($/Share) Reliable Yield ($/AF) 2021 Purchase Price (Nominal $) $6,000 $7,620 CPI-Adjusted to 2025 price level (2025$) $7,090 $9,000 Additional Transaction Costs (+10%) (2025$) $7,800 $9,900 4.3.2 Decreed Water Rights Purchase & Change Costs under this alternative comprise the purchase price of irrigation water rights on Sourdough Creek and Hyalite Creek, plus a DNRC change case for each acquisition. Appendix A provides the agricultural water rights valuation that underpins the acquisition component. Because only the consumptive portion of a right may be changed, the acquisition cost must be expressed per AF of changed consumptive volume rather than per AF of decreed diversion. The acquisition component is bounded on both sides by evidence in Appendix A. The value of irrigation water in its current agricultural use, estimated through the Gallatin County land price differential at approximately $3,600/AF of consumptive use, sets the price below which an irrigator has little reason to sell. Unchanged agricultural water right sales elsewhere in western Montana, at approximately $1,900–$2,400/AF of consumptive use, fall below that figure and support it as a conservative floor for the Gallatin Valley. The Hyalite Share price sets the ceiling. A Hyalite Share is stored, decreed for municipal use, and requires no change application. The City would not rationally pay more per AF of reliable yield for a decreed direct flow right than for a Hyalite Share, estimated at $9,900/AF of reliable yield in Table 7. The change component is estimated at $50,000–$60,000 per change case, the typical cost reported by HydroSolutions (see Section A.1.2). The City’s $250,000 estimate in Section 4.3.3 reflects the novelty of the ASR change and does not apply to a conventional change from irrigation to municipal purpose. Change case cost is largely indifferent to the volume changed, so it is expressed here against a representative acquisition of approximately 100 irrigated acres (136 AF of consumptive use), whether a single right or several supplemental rights serving the same ground and changed in one proceeding. The City would be expected to target acquisitions of this size or larger. The median decreed irrigation right on either source records 40 acres or fewer and would carry a change cost per AF more than twice as high. Consumptive volume is converted to reliable yield at 90%, consistent with the ratio of reliable to average yield for the City’s own direct flow rights on Sourdough and Hyalite Creeks shown in Table 1. Acquired rights will generally be junior to the City’s, so this ratio likely overstates their reliable yield and biases the unit cost toward the low end. At the floor, the acquisition price plus 10% transaction 30 WestWater states the CIL per AF of reliable yield. The per-share column is shown because Hyalite Shares transact by the share, each a 1 AF contract. 574 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 18 costs, as applied in Table 7, and a change case at $60,000 return approximately $4,900/AF of reliable yield.31 This alternative is therefore estimated at $4,900–$9,900/AF of reliable yield. 4.3.3 Aquifer Storage & Recovery The ASR alternative entails the cost of completing change authorizations with DNRC for the existing surface storage rights the City holds on Sourdough Creek, being the Reservation and Mystic Lake rights. The alternative acquires no new water and, under the fee basis adopted by the City, carries no infrastructure component. Since the ASR water right change authorization that Bozeman would seek is unique and uncommon, costs are projected to be significantly higher than those of a standard change application. The City estimates that a change application would cost $250,000 to complete. A change application is required for each water right, so a total change cost of $500,000 could be expected. That figure is the City’s estimate rather than an observed market or historical cost. For the ASR change only, it supersedes the $50,000–$60,000 typical change case cost previously provided by HydroSolutions, and it is deliberately conservative: the ASR change is novel in Montana, the Water Use Act authority has never been tested by an application, DNRC has no implementing regulations, the City expects objections given the volume involved, and the figure carries outside water rights counsel through objections, potential administrative contested case, and possible appeal.32 On a water rights only basis, the cost of this alternative is the two change applications alone. Against the reliable yield of 1,500–2,000 AF shown in Table 8, the $500,000 total returns approximately $250– $330/AF of reliable yield. That figure is an order of magnitude below every other alternative, for two reasons. 1. The City already holds the Storage Rights, so the alternative acquires no new water and carries no acquisition price. 2. Its reliable yield depends on year-to-year rollover storage through an infiltration gallery, which is infrastructure funded through the impact fee program rather than the CIL. Without that storage, the alternative provides no reliable yield under the City’s 2% non-exceedance criterion. The unit cost is therefore reported for completeness but is not treated as a cost of acquiring new water rights. It is excluded from the summary statistics in Table 8 and from the reconciled cost aspect. 4.3.4 Groundwater Water Right Permit & Aquifer Recharge Mitigation Plan This alternative entails purchasing ditch shares or other individual water rights and changing the purpose of the underlying rights to aquifer recharge, in order to mitigate year-round stream depletions caused by continuous municipal well pumping. Aquifer recharge and municipal well 31 The consumptive volume applies the 1.36 AF per acre HCU of alfalfa hay derived in Appendix A, which reflects the DNRC management factor for the post-1973 period. The decreed irrigation rights on both sources are recorded as statements of claim, which are pre-1973 rights. Under the same DNRC methodology in Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM) 36.12.1902, the pre-1973 management factor of 73.5% returns an HCU of approximately 1.08 AF per acre. At that rate the consumptive volume per acre falls by about 20% while the price paid per acre does not, so the lower bound of this alternative would rise to approximately $6,200/AF of reliable yield, and the volumes in Table 4 would fall proportionally. 32 Bozeman-ASR-concept-cost-est-20250729. Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet prepared by HydroSolutions. Emailed to WestWater July 29, 2025. 575 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 19 infrastructure are typically sited in proximity to one another. On a water rights only basis, costs accrue to the three elements below. 1. Groundwater Water Right Permit Application: Preparing a groundwater permit application in a closed basin is a substantial technical effort. It requires hydrogeologic modeling, test well drilling, and aquifer testing to obtain the data needed for a correct and complete application to DNRC. The expense of professional consultants and attorneys engaged in preparing the application is therefore significant. An attorney specializing in Montana water law is essential to an affirmative permitting outcome, because the application deals with property rights, entails complex decision and appeal processes, and is subject to public notice and objection. Data collection costs are funded through the impact fee program at the City’s direction. For the legal and consulting cost of preparing and prosecuting the application, WestWater applies the $50,000–$60,000 typical change case cost reported by HydroSolutions as a proxy, since an application of this type follows an established DNRC process. 2. Aquifer Recharge Mitigation Plan: The water right permit application must include a complementary aquifer recharge mitigation plan. The plan must demonstrate that stream depletions from continuous municipal well pumping are offset through aquifer recharge at the proper time, location, and amount, so that no adverse effects occur to existing surface water uses. Preparing an aquifer recharge mitigation plan is technically challenging and expensive and requires the engagement of professional consultants and attorneys. The same $50,000–$60,000 proxy is applied to the preparation of the mitigation plan. 3. Aquifer Recharge Water Source Acquisition & Change Application: Implementing the mitigation plan requires that an existing surface water right with the proper legal and physical characteristics be identified and acquired, then taken through a DNRC change application to change its purpose to aquifer recharge. The right must have physical and legal conveyance from the source to the location of the recharge infrastructure. Costs pertain to acquiring the recharge water right and completing the change application and may also accrue to acquisition of conveyance easements where none exist. Acquisition and change costs for the recharge water follow the Decreed Water Rights Purchase & Change alternative in Section 4.3.2, at $4,900–$9,900/AF of reliable yield. The cost of any conveyance easement is site-specific and is not estimated here. The alternative is sized at 1,400 AF of reliable yield, sufficient to cover the deficit projected under the 2023 WCEP baseline scenario, which assumes no conservation program (see Section 3.2). Mitigation is assumed to offset pumping one for one. That assumption is conservative, because return flows to the aquifer would reduce the depletions to be mitigated. On that basis, the recharge water costs $6.9–$13.9 million and the permit application and mitigation plan add $100,000– $120,000. Dividing by 1,400 AF returns a unit cost of approximately $5,000–$10,000/AF of reliable yield. The recharge water accounts for more than 98% of the total, so the result is insensitive to the estimates for the two filings. 4.3.5 Summary of Water Rights Alternative Costs Table 8 summarizes the water rights alternatives on a water rights only basis. Three of the four fall within a band of $4,900–$10,000/AF of reliable yield. Hyalite Share purchases, at $9,900/AF, remain the City’s preferred source and sit near the upper end of that band. Decreed rights purchased and changed on Sourdough and Hyalite Creeks cost $4,900–$9,900/AF, bounded by the agricultural 576 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 20 value of irrigation water and by the price of the Hyalite Shares they would substitute for. The groundwater permit alternative is priced almost entirely by the recharge water it must acquire, and so tracks the decreed rights alternative at $5,000–$10,000/AF. The ASR alternative, at $250– $330/AF, is reported but excluded from the summary statistics for the reasons given in Section 4.3.3. The water rights alternatives cost aspect is therefore set at $4,900–$10,000/AF of reliable yield, with a midpoint of approximately $8,300/AF, being the average of the three alternatives’ midpoints. That range is carried to Table 9. Table 8: Water Rights Alternative Cost Results Reliable Supply Water Rights Alternative Yield (AF) Unit Cost ($/AF) Hyalite Share Purchases Resumption 2,000–3,000+ $9,900 Decreed Water Rights Purchase & Change Up to 12,000† $4,900– $9,900 Aquifer Storage & Recovery 1,500–2,000 $250–$330‡ Groundwater Water Right Permit & Aquifer Recharge Mitigation Plan 1,400 $5,000–$10,000 Summary Statistics Minimum 1,400 $4,900 Maximum Up to 12,000 $10,000 Average — $8,300 † Upper bound on the physical resource, being approximately 13,400 AF of consumptive volume before rounding from Table 4 at a reliable yield ratio of 90%. It does not describe an acquirable supply. ‡ Excluded from the summary statistics. The City already holds the Storage Rights, and the reliable yield depends on rollover storage funded through the impact fee program. 577 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 21 5 Recommended CIL Determination & Conclusions Table 9 summarizes the contributory cost aspects derived for the CIL determination. The minimum CIL fee required to ensure full cost recovery of the known purchased water rights assets in the current portfolio ranges from $11,560 to $14,240/AF of reliable yield, while the FMV analysis for Gallatin Valley rights equivalent to the current supply—that is, changed for municipal or mitigation purpose, have year-round usability, and are quantified on a reliable-yield basis—indicates a CIL fee of $9,000–$15,000/AF (see Appendix A). The cost of the water rights alternatives, excluding ASR, ranges from $4,900 to $10,000/AF. Table 9: CIL Cost Aspect Summary of Results Reliable Supply ($/AF) CIL Contributory Cost Aspect Low Mid High Full Cost Recovery of Current Water Rights $11,560 $12,900 $14,240 FMV of Mitigation Rights Equivalent to Current Supply $9,000 $12,000 $15,000 Cost of Water Rights Alternatives $4,900 $8,300 $10,000 Average $8,490 $11,070 $13,080 Median $9,000 $12,000 $14,240 The three aspects do not converge on a single band, and the reason is structural. Full cost recovery and FMV describe water rights already in, or equivalent to, the City’s municipal portfolio. The water rights alternatives aspect describes the cost of acquiring new rights from agricultural sellers, on a water rights only basis. Its lower end rests on the agricultural value of irrigation water. Its upper end rests on the Hyalite Share price, which the City has held at or near $6,000/share since 2008 and which Appendix A shows has held down regional water values. The alternatives aspect is therefore a floor on the cost of new supply rather than a forecast of it. The recommendation does not follow a simple average of the three aspects, which would return approximately $8,500–$13,100/AF. The City holds a reliable surplus on the order of 4,800 AF over 2024 demand in the near term, so new connections will be served largely from water rights the City has already purchased. A CIL below full cost recovery would charge those connections less than the City paid for the water that serves them, and leave the difference to existing ratepayers. Full cost recovery therefore sets the lower bound. The upper bound falls between the cost-of-capital- adjusted recovery value of $14,240/AF and the FMV high of $15,000/AF. The water rights alternatives aspect confirms that a CIL within this range would fund the acquisition of new supply under every alternative considered, with margin for the price recovery that Appendix A anticipates once the Hyalite Share market reopens. Based on this analysis, WestWater recommends an update of the City’s CIL to $11,600–$14,500/AF of reliable yield, with a midpoint of approximately $13,050/AF. The range and midpoint by aspect, and the reconciled CIL recommendation, are depicted graphically in Figure 2. 578 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 22 Figure 2: CIL Recommendation & Contributory Cost Aspects ($1,000/AF, 2025$) 5.1 Volume Basis for the Per-Home Comparison This report determines the CIL on a per acre-foot basis. Expressing that result per home requires a volume basis, and the City sets that basis by administrative order. The City requires an applicant to offset the entire estimated increase in annual municipal water demand attributable to a development before final approval. The offset may be satisfied by transferring water rights to the City, by water efficiency and conservation measures, or by paying cash-in-lieu for the remainder. The City determines the estimated increase, and the code authorizes the city manager to adopt administrative procedures that include the standards used to calculate it.33 Those standards are set out in the City’s Water Adequacy Requirements Administrative Procedures Manual, adopted by Administrative Order 2013-07.34 The Manual requires water rights or cash-in- lieu in an amount equal to the anticipated average annual water demand of the fully developed property. For a single-household residential unit, meaning any living unit on its own parcel, whether a detached home or an attached townhouse, it sets that demand at 0.234 AF per year.35 The per-home figures in this report therefore use 0.234 AF per home per year. Because the Manual assesses water rights or cash-in-lieu against average annual demand, this is the volume on which a new single-household unit pays the CIL. The per-home figures show the fee as a developer would pay it for that unit. Multi-household units are assessed at 0.124 AF per year per unit under the same Manual and are not shown. 33 City of Bozeman Municipal Code § 38.410.130, Water Adequacy. Adopted by Ordinance No. 2043 (September 17, 2020) and amended by Ordinance No. 2155 (May 14, 2024). 34 City of Bozeman, Administrative Order 2013-07, Adoption of Water Adequacy Administrative Procedures Manual (November 2013), Section III.A. Adopted pursuant to BMC § 38.23.180.D as then codified. Confirmed by the City as the effective standard for CIL purposes, September 24, 2026. 35 Derived by the City from its water billing records for 2000 to 2010, together with its GIS database and Montana Department of Revenue building records (op. cit. (n. 34)). 579 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 23 5.2 Comparison to CIL of Other Mountain West Municipalities Western water providers have widely varying rate and fee structures for raw water and water infrastructure. While many municipalities have explicitly stated CIL rates,36 many others either bundle their CIL into other fees or do not charge CIL at all. CIL is a critical factor for homebuilders to consider as an input to building cost. Higher CIL fees will impact developers’ margins and thus their incentive to build. A selection of Western cities’ CIL fees as a proportion of home sale price (normalized to the City’s 0.234 AF/home single-household demand standard described above), among other metrics, is reported in Table 10, while Figure 3 provides a graphical comparison of select metrics by municipality. This is strictly provided for informational purposes and is not a representative sample of Mountain West CIL fees overall. As shown, Bozeman’s current CIL is the second lowest of the 12 listed municipalities, the very lowest being Phoenix, AZ, at $5,662/AF. Conversely, Bozeman’s median home sale price is the third highest of the list, behind only Steamboat Springs, CO, and Scottsdale, AZ. The average CIL/home as a proportion of home price from this sample (Bozeman excluded) is 1.6%. A CIL based on 1.6% of Bozeman’s median home sale price returns approximately $11,450 per home at 0.234 AF/home, or $48,950/AF. The $/AF result is unchanged by the volume basis, because the same basis is applied to every municipality in the comparison. Table 10: CIL Fees as a Proportion of Home Sale Price for a Selection of Western Cities Municipality Population† Median Household Income‡ Median Home Sale Price§ CIL Fee [primarily 2024] $/Home as % Median Sale Price¶ $/AF $/Home¶ Fort Collins, CO 169,810 $81,883 $597,000 $68,200 $15,959 2.7% Greeley, CO 108,795 $63,526 $435,000 $51,500 $12,051 2.8% Steamboat Springs, CO 13,224 $100,156 $1,052,203 $17,922 $4,194 0.4% Firestone, CO 16,381 $83,215 $479,000 $80,850 $18,919 3.9% Longmont, CO 98,885 $82,984 $585,000 $48,500 $11,349 1.9% Four Corners, MT 5,901 $111,474 $705,000 $21,203 $4,962 0.7% Billings, MT†† 117,116 $67,028 $376,500 N/A N/A N/A Boise, ID 235,684 $79,977 $480,000 Not Stated N/A N/A Phoenix, AZ 1,608,215 $79,664 $460,000 $5,662 $1,325 0.3% Scottsdale, AZ 241,361 $106,058 $966,100 $11,696 $2,737 0.3% Goodyear, AZ 95,294 $105,160 $465,495 $19,634 $4,594 1.0% Bozeman, MT 53,213 $79,903 $736,600 Existing $6,000 $1,404 0.2% Proposed (range midpoint) $13,050 $3,050 0.4% †2020 Census Data. ‡American Community Survey, 5-year estimates: 2023. §Realtor.com: Home sale prices through May 2025. ¶ Applied as 0.234 AF/home for all municipalities; the Bozeman single-household residential demand standard (op. cit. (n. 34)). ††Bundled with infrastructure costs. 36 CIL fees are commonly referred to as Raw Water Fees, Water Resource Fees, System Development Fees, and Tap Fees among other names. 580 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page 24 Figure 3: CIL Fees & Median Home Sale Price; Selection of Western Cities Figure Notes: Home sale prices through May 2025 (Realtor.com). CIL fee per home assuming 0.234 AF/home for all municipalities, the City of Bozeman single-household residential demand standard under Administrative Order 2013-07. 6 Appendices • Appendix A. Gallatin Valley Water Rights Market Assessment & Value Perspective • Appendix B. Storage Rights – Preliminary Decree 581 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page A-1 Appendix A. Gallatin Valley Water Rights Market Assessment & Value Perspective This appendix summarizes the preliminary-level market assessment and perspective of value conducted in support of the City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update. A comprehensive market consultation and valuation of Gallatin Valley water rights is beyond the scope of the CIL update. Rather, this appendix provides a range of the fair market value of water rights in the Gallatin Valley. There are a variety of approaches available to estimate water right value. The selection of the appropriate valuation technique(s) is determined by the characteristics and nature of a specific water right as well as the availability and quality of information. Two valuation approaches are employed for this appraisal and are meant to capture the range of FMV for Gallatin Valley water rights representative of those currently held in the City’s portfolio and those that might be acquired in the future. The two approaches are briefly described below. • Comparable Sales Approach: This approach compares the subject water rights with similar water rights that have been sold to determine market value. A reasonable number of sales are often required to make accurate comparisons. Where necessary, adjustments should be applied to account for differences in physical and legal characteristics and market conditions between the comparable sales and the subject water rights. This is the preferred valuation methodology when comparable information is available. • Land Price Differential Approach: This approach compares prices of agricultural land with water rights to agricultural lands without water rights. The price differential between irrigated and non-irrigated land represents the value that can be attributed to the presence of water rights. For the purposes of this appendix and for consistency and applicability to the greater study, an AF of consumptive use (CU) is considered as the basis for unit values presented herein. A.1 Comparable Sales Approach This approach is used to determine the total value of the subject water right through an analysis of the Montana water rights trading market, focusing on permanent water transactions separate from land. Comparable sales should ideally be within the same market and involve similar water rights. There are no recorded purchases of groundwater rights in the Gallatin Valley. However, several water asset purchases have been recorded in the greater western Montana area. Additionally, in both Bozeman and Four Corners, developers are required to pay a CIL fee. As municipal use is considered to be the highest value use of water in the Gallatin Valley, these CIL fees reveal a reasonable approximation of developers’ willingness to pay for water rights. Note that “revealed preference” (i.e., a record of what was actually paid) generally does not approach the upper bound of willingness to pay. A.1.1 City of Bozeman Water Right Transactions The City of Bozeman has been an active participant in the Gallatin Valley water market. In particular, the City purchased shares between 2007 and 2021 in the MCWUA, which supplies water out of Hyalite Reservoir. Through a comprehensive research process that included a review of Gallatin County recorded documents, Bozeman City Commission documentation, and conversations with 582 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page A-2 local water users, seven purchases by the City of Bozeman were identified. These seven transactions are shown in Table A-1. Recall that one Hyalite Share carries a contract volume of 1 AF and a reliable yield of approximately 0.79 AF. Both unit metrics are portrayed in the table; however, the section will primarily focus on value from a reliable yield basis for consistency with other valuation techniques and the greater report. Additionally, for the purposes of this section, the term “AF” implies “AF of reliable yield.” Table A-1: City of Bozeman Hyalite Reservoir Water Rights Acquisitions Acquired Units Unit Price Metrics Seller Transx. Year Beneficial Use Shares Reliable Yield (AF) $/Share $/AF Reliable Yield Previous New Nominal$ 2025$† Nominal$ 2025$† R Lazy J 2021 Agricultural Municipal 90 70.8 $6,000 $7,090 $7,620 $9,000 Kraft 2021 Agricultural Municipal 17 13.4 $6,000 $7,090 $7,620 $9,000 Barkow 2015 Agricultural Municipal 10 7.9 $5,500 $7,690 $6,960 $9,740 Patterson 2010 Agricultural Municipal 25 19.7 $6,000 $9,220 $7,620 $11,700 Labert 2010 Agricultural Municipal 58 45.7 $6,000 $9,220 $7,620 $11,700 Lindvig 2008 Agricultural Municipal 50 39.4 $6,000 $9,290 $7,620 $11,780 Lane 2007 Agricultural Municipal 100 78.7 $7,000 $11,210 $8,890 $14,250 Totals 350 275.6 — — — — Volume-Weighted Average — — $9,105 $11,560 Median 50 39.4 $9,220 $11,700 †Adjusted to 2025 price level using the West US CPI. The earliest purchase in 2007 was also the largest purchase at 78.7 AF at a price of $8,890/AF ($14,250/AF in 2025 dollars). Subsequent purchases were priced at $7,620/AF with the exception of a 2015 purchase at $6,960/AF ($9,740 in 2025 dollars). All purchases are for water from the MCWUA, which is the water right most valued by the City of Bozeman due to the City’s already large holdings in the MCWUA and its ability to utilize the water right without needing change authorization approval from DNRC. As the City does not need change approval to utilize MCWUA shares, it is able to utilize the full volume of these transactions within its system. In effect these seven purchases are equivalent to the purchase of fully consumptive water. The City of Bozeman is one of the largest non-agricultural water users in the Gallatin Valley and purchased water rights regularly until Hyalite Share transactions stopped in 2021. It is clear that the City’s CIL (described in more detail in Section A.1.4) is the dominant price-setting influence on the regional water market. As the City’s contract purchase price, and related CIL, did not change in nominal dollars since its inception in 2008, adjusting for inflation necessarily indicates a downward trend in price. The most recent purchase price of $7,620/AF in 2021 ($9,000/AF in 2025 dollars) might be considered a reasonable indicator of current FMV, but there is no evidence that the willingness to pay in real dollars has decreased since 2008, and there is reason to believe that the price has only stayed as low due to the City’s position as the regional market price setter. The CPI-adjusted price the City paid in 2008 per AF of reliable yield, $11,780/AF, supports the position that a 2025 market- clearing price could be at least this high. A.1.2 Western Montana Water Right Transactions The City of Bozeman has paid a higher unit price than other buyers in western Montana. Removing Bozeman’s transactions provides a better picture of pricing in regard to the greater market. Table A- 583 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page A-3 2 summarizes the western Montana permanent sales market from 2005 to 2022 with the seven purchases by the City of Bozeman omitted. The average price is $1,195/AF with a median of $964/AF, with all transactions representing agricultural-to-agricultural transfers of water rights on a diversion basis. In order to compare these transactions to those that can be utilized for M&I purposes, the average and median prices must be converted to a CU basis and incorporate the costs of a change case. A rough estimate of the value on a CU basis can be estimated by the assumption that 50% of diverted volume is consumed, yielding a value of $2,389/AF CU for unchanged irrigation water rights. Correspondence with HydroSolutions indicates that a typical change case has associated costs of $50,000–$60,000, which is indifferent to volume being changed. A change case applied to the median transaction—a volume of 48.1 AF—increases the finished value by greater than $1,000/AF. The listed transactions and stated treatments indicate a value range for M&I-ready water supply at approximately $3,500–$4,500/AF. Table A-2: Western MT Permanent Sales, 2005–22 (Excluding City of Bozeman) Metric Price ($/AF)† Adj. Price ($/AF CU)†‡ Volume (AF) Average $1,195 $2,389 406.8 Median $964 $1,927 48.1 Minimum $127 $254 0.7 Maximum $4,746 $9,492 4,615.1 Standard Deviation $1,140 $2,281 950.9 Count 26 26 26 † Adjusted to 2025 price level using the West US CPI. ‡Unit price adjusted 2x to reflect 50% CU assumption. A.1.3 Grass Valley French Ditch Water Bank In 2015, DNRC approved a water rights change on behalf of the Grass Valley French Ditch Company (GVFDC) near Missoula to allow company shareholders to sell shares historically used for irrigation as mitigation for municipal, industrial, or other purposes.37 This effectively created a water bank in which potential housing developers can buy mitigation water to offset depletions caused by municipal wells. A similar water bank could be created in Bozeman if a ditch company in the Gallatin Valley desires to change its water rights to add “Marketing for Mitigation” as a legal use. It is worth noting that changing a water right to allow for mitigation sales does not affect a shareholder’s ability to use their shares for irrigation. Shareholders who are not interested in selling simply continue to operate as they have previously. The added use does, however, provide an opportunity for irrigators to receive compensation for some or all of their water if they decide to scale back or retire their farm. In 2024, Grass Valley Holding, LLC (GVH) bought 58 shares (roughly 65 AF) in GVFDC to mitigate depletions caused by municipal wells to be drilled in the Clark Fork River alluvium. The development is planned to be built outside of Missoula city limits and therefore cannot rely on Missoula’s municipal water supply. GVH paid $4,588/AF of mitigation water, which is roughly equal to the 37 www.grassvalleywaterbank.com/news 584 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page A-4 estimated value of changed agricultural water estimated by the Land Price Differential approach (see Section A.2 of this appendix). The price paid for GVFDC mitigation water represents the value to municipal users of water that has already been changed for mitigation use and does not need to be taken through a lengthy and expensive DNRC process. Notably, conversations with City of Missoula staff indicate that Missoula has a significant water supply surplus and is not currently in the market for new water supplies. This indicates a significantly less competitive water market relative to the Gallatin Valley, where Bozeman would compete with private developers and proximate municipalities for mitigation supplies. Therefore, the $4,588/AF paid by GVH is likely well below the market value for equivalent mitigation water in the Gallatin Valley. A.1.4 Cash-In-Lieu Fees Multiple water providers in the Gallatin Valley charge developers and new users CIL fees to cover the cost of water rights. A comparison of CIL fees is shown below in Table A-3. The City of Bozeman has a CIL of $6,000/AF—unchanged since 2008. The City of Belgrade does not accept cash-in-lieu of water rights and requires dedication of water rights appurtenant to a property being developed. Developers and new users in the Four Corners Water and Sewer District (FCWSD) must pay a fee equivalent to a CIL of $3,800 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU), which converts to $21,203/AF, to Utility Solutions, LLC. Bozeman and Utility Solutions CIL fees are discussed further below. Table A-3: Comparison of Gallatin Valley Cash-In-Lieu Fees or Equivalent ($/AF) City of Bozeman Utility Solutions City of Belgrade $6,000 $21,203 None A.1.4.1 City of Bozeman The City of Bozeman requires that developers either provide adequate water rights to supply any new development or pay cash-in-lieu of adequate water rights. The cash-in-lieu rate was set by the City of Bozeman in 2008 at $6,000/AF by Resolution No. 4095 and has not been updated since. It is the same figure as the per-share price the City was then paying for Hyalite Shares. To make a determination as to how much water is required for a development, the City will first calculate the estimated overall water use of the development. The resulting use that is not offset by adequate water rights transfer or reduced by the implementation of water conservation measures and non- potable irrigation sources is then charged to the developer at $6,000 per acre-foot of annual demand. As described above in Section A.1.1, Bozeman is the regional price maker, and therefore its CIL has paced the market for water rights in support of development. Although developers in the Four Corners area cannot presently dedicate water rights to FCWSD, many of the irrigation company ditches that convey irrigation water rights into the City divert in the Gallatin Gateway and Four Corners area. As such, Bozeman’s CIL of $6,000/AF has created an artificial ceiling of value for water rights in the Utility Solutions municipal water right service area, and the Gallatin Valley in general. The stagnant CIL also provides an indicator of developers’ willingness to pay for water supply in real dollars and as a proportion of home sale value. Consider that Bozeman’s median home sale price in 2008 was $308,850. Applying the City’s current 0.234 AF/home single-household demand standard, 585 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page A-5 described in the body of this report, to both years, the CIL calculates to $1,404/home to the developer, or approximately 0.5% of the sale price.38 This same calculation in 2021, when median home sale price was $700,000, indicates that the CIL was about 0.2% of the sale price. For the CIL to comprise the same share of median home sale price in 2021 (still at 0.234 AF/home) it would have needed to be set at approximately $13,600/AF ($16,000/AF in 2025 dollars). This figure does not depend on the volume basis, because the same basis applies to both years. Likewise, the CPI- adjusted CIL paid by developers in 2008 of $9,290/AF supports the position that developers’ willingness to pay is not exceeded by this amount in real dollars, as this represents equivalent purchasing power in 2025. A.1.4.2 FCWSD/Utility Solutions In 2015, the FCWSD purchased the water system in Four Corners from Utility Solutions for $22.6 million. This purchase included sufficient municipal water rights for existing users but did not include any water rights for new users. Utility Solutions retained water right permit 41H-30046241 which it had received in 2011 to service new growth. New water users in the FCWSD system are required to pay a fee to Utility Solutions of approximately $3,800 per EDU, which converts to $21,203/AF.39 Albeit having some similarities to a CIL, the fee charged by Utility Solutions is not a true cash-in-lieu fee. While the City of Bozeman collects a CIL to pay for the future purchase of water rights, Utility Solutions collects its fee in return for the sale of a portion of municipal water rights it already owns. Also, developers and new users in the City of Bozeman have the option to purchase and dedicate water rights to the City—an option not available within the FCWSD. Finally, this fee is not collected by the water provider, but by a third party. Utility Solutions is functionally a municipal water bank, selling the water right piecemeal at retail rates. The relationship between new municipal water users, FCWSD, and Utility Solutions can be characterized as a largely captured market. New municipal water users essentially have no choice but to buy from Utility Solutions unless that new user develops a municipal water system all its own. The lack of other municipal water systems in the Four Corners area allows Utility Solutions to charge prices beyond what an open water rights market would support for wholesale purchases. Therefore, the Utility Solutions fee is not an indication of the wholesale FMV of regional water rights, but rather a retail rate charged by a municipal water bank and therefore negating its direct use as comparable sales data. The fee can be used as the basis for the income approach to valuation through a discounted cash flow analysis—essentially unwinding the retail water-banking aspect of the operation. However, this is beyond the scope of this analysis. A.2 Land Price Differential Approach An alternative valuation method for irrigation water rights utilizes the price differential between irrigated and non-irrigated agricultural land. If the only difference between the irrigated and non- irrigated land can be assumed to be the presence of irrigation water rights, the price differential can be attributed solely to the value of the irrigation water rights. 38 City of Bozeman single-household residential demand, Administrative Order 2013-07, Section III.A. The Manual postdates 2008, so the 2008 figure applies the current standard retrospectively. 39 Utility Solutions does not publicly disclose its fees. $3,800 per equivalent dwelling unit is based on a call with the Four Corners Water and Sewer District. 586 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page A-6 A.2.1 Transition of Water Demand in the Gallatin Valley The U.S. Geological Survey publishes water use data by county every five years. Figure A-1 shows the water usage for Gallatin County, Montana, in 2015, the last year for which data are presently available. Irrigation is by far the largest use of water in Gallatin County with nearly 97% of all water diverted from surface water or pumped from groundwater for irrigation purposes. Municipal usage accounts for only 2.5% with domestic, industrial, and stockwater usages together less than 1%. Although the proportion remains small, the percentage of water diverted for municipal usage has increased from 1.6% of overall diversions in 2000 to 2.5% in 2015. In contrast, irrigation water diversions have fallen 3.2% over the same period. This growth in municipal water use and decline in irrigation water use mirrors the high growth seen in all local municipalities and Gallatin County in general. Figure A-1: Gallatin County Water Use, 2015 A.2.2 Calculating a Land Price Differential The National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) releases annual per-acre values for sales of irrigated and non-irrigated land on a per state basis. In 2023 the average price of irrigated land in Montana was $3,910/acre whereas the average price of non-irrigated land was $1,010/acre. NASS also releases annual lease values for irrigated and non-irrigated agricultural lands on a state and county basis. In 2023, the last year for which information is available, the State of Montana had an average lease rate per acre of irrigated land of $98 with a non-irrigated lease rate of $30. Gallatin County had an average lease rate per acre of irrigated land totaling $150 and a non-irrigated lease rate of $39. In order to determine a price differential for irrigated and non-irrigated land in Gallatin County, average sale prices for irrigated and non-irrigated lands in the County must be calculated. These values can be calculated by applying a capitalization rate as determined by land sales and leases across the State of Montana in 2023. The capitalization rate is used to determine the rate of return 587 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page A-7 that can be expected to be generated by a property and is calculated as the property’s net operating income divided by its current market value. The capitalization rate for irrigated land in Montana in 2023 is 2.506% and for non-irrigated land is 2.970%.40 These capitalization rates can then be applied to the lease rates observed by NASS in Gallatin County to determine permanent sale values. This results in a value of $5,986 per irrigated acre and $1,313 per non-irrigated acre. These values are not necessarily representative of all irrigated and non- irrigated land values in Gallatin County but are thought to be representative of the agricultural value of land in the County outside of any development potential or amenity value as they are driven by agricultural lease rates, a market driven solely by agriculture. The differential between the calculated irrigated and non-irrigated land values is $4,673/acre ($4,901/acre in 2025 dollars). This is the value of irrigation water rights on a per-acre basis in Gallatin County. The single most widely grown crop in the Gallatin Valley is alfalfa hay,41 which has an HCU of approximately 1.36 AF/acre.42 Applying this value to the differential of $4,901/acre returns a value of $3,600/AF CU for Gallatin Valley irrigation water. As with the unchanged irrigation water right transactions evaluated in western Montana (see Section A.1.2), the value derived in this section should be adjusted for the costs associated with a change case. Applying an equivalent adjustment, the land price differential approach indicates a value range for M&I-ready water supply at approximately $4,500–$5,500/AF of reliable yield. A.3 Summary of Value Perspective Bozeman has been the dominant market participant, and consequently the market price maker, since 2008. The City’s most recent purchase of Hyalite Shares in 2021 at $7,620/AF of reliable yield ($9,000/AF in 2025 dollars) is therefore a grounded indicator of current market value. However, there is strong evidence that the City maintaining its purchases at $6,000/share (and CIL at $6,000/AF) has stunted potential price growth, as the surrounding economy and home values have climbed markedly in the same period. Holding the CIL at its 2008 share of median home sale price indicates approximately $14,300/AF at Bozeman’s 2025 median home sale price of $736,600, or about $16,000/AF when the 2021 result above is carried forward to 2025 dollars. Likewise, adjusting for the purchasing power of the dollar, a 2025 CIL equivalent to that charged in 2008 would be about $9,300/AF. Both values are well shy of the $21,203/AF charged by Utility Solutions, though as described above these fees are not wholly comparable. The analysis of non-Bozeman permanent water rights transactions between agricultural users in western Montana, after accounting for CU adjustments and change case costs, indicates a unit- value range of $3,500–$4,500/AF. The land price differential analysis, also rooted in agricultural 40 98/3,910 = .02506; 30/1,010 = .02970 41 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2022 Census of Agriculture, Gallatin County Profile. (link) 42 Based on seasonal evapotranspiration (ET) data derived from the Bozeman Experiment Farm weather station (BEF), as identified in the DNRC standardized methodology for estimating HCU under ARM 36.12.1902. Using the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Irrigation Water Requirements program (Dalton, 2003), the BEF yields a seasonal alfalfa ET of 16.84 inches for flood, wheel line, and hand line irrigation systems—the irrigation method column applicable to the Gallatin Valley's historical practices. Applying the DNRC management factor of 73.5% for the pre-1973 period per ARM 36.12.1902 yields an HCU of approximately 1.03 AF/acre/season. For water rights established or evaluated under the post-1973 permit framework, the applicable management factor is 92.1%, yielding an HCU of approximately 1.29 AF/acre/season (DNRC, 2012). Finally, Section 17 of the rule accounts for irrecoverable losses at the field by an additive 5% for flood irrigation, returning a final HCU of 1.36 AF/acre/season. 588 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page A-8 water value, returned a unit-value range of $4,500–$5,500/AF for changed water. Note that to utilize these rights for year-round municipal mitigation some storage aspect would be required to account for seasonality. Both results are consistent with the GVH mitigation water purchases at $4,588/AF in 2024. These estimates, and the GVH purchases, are based in areas outside of the Bozeman market region and with considerably less development pressure on water supply. While the combined range of $3,500–$5,500/AF provides an ultimate value floor for the Gallatin Valley and surrounding area, it is afforded less weight in an assessment of Gallatin Valley water values than the Hyalite Share and CIL fee analyses. WestWater’s preliminary value assessment indicates a value of water rights fit for the City’s acquisition and reasonable year-round use to support M&I activity at $9,000–$15,000/AF. The lower bound is the City’s 2021 Hyalite Share purchase price in 2025 dollars. The upper bound is set between the two home price indicators above, approximately $14,300/AF and $16,000/AF. 589 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page B-1 Appendix B. Storage Rights – Preliminary Decree 590 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page B-2 591 City of Bozeman Cash-In-Lieu Update Page B-3 592 Memorandum REPORT TO:City Commission FROM:David Fine, Economic Development Manager Takami Clark, Communications and Engagement Director Brian Guyer, Community Housing Manager SUBJECT:A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, Directing the City Manager Regarding Next Steps for the Fowler Neighborhood Project MEETING DATE:November 10, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Resolution RECOMMENDATION:I move to approve the Resolution. STRATEGIC PLAN:4.5 Housing and Transportation Choices: Vigorously encourage, through a wide variety of actions, the development of sustainable and lasting housing options for underserved individuals and families and improve mobility options that accommodate all travel modes. BACKGROUND:Please see the attached memorandum detailing the consensus process. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:Please see the attached memorandum detailing the consensus process. ALTERNATIVES:As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS:The city will retain a consultant to complete an annexation and zoning application if the City Commission provides direction to move forward with these tasks. The city was already under contract with Sanbell to complete this work, but the contract will need to be modified, because the Unified Development Code changed after the original contract was paused and the contract has been paused for an extended period of time, which is likely to cause costs to change and escalate. Attachments: Resolution on Fowler Consensus 20261030 final.pdf Fowler Neighborhood Commission Memo 20261110.pdf Cushing Terrell Fowler Neighborhood Phase III Engagement Summary.pdf Engagement Strategy and Facilitation Framework - City of Bozeman Affordable Housing Opportunity Collaboration 593 (1).pdf Final - FOWLER NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT PHASE II May 2026.pdf Final - FOWLER NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT PHASE II May 2026.pdf Report compiled on: October 20, 2026 594 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER REGARDING NEXT STEPS FOR THE FOWLER NEIGHBORHOOD PROJECT WHEREAS, on January 11, 2017, the City acquired the fee interest in real property known as the “Fowler Property” south of the intersection of Oak Street and Davis Lane or the purpose of expanding Oak St. using transportation impact fee funds; and WHEREAS, at the time of purchase the City paid the fair market value of the property and knew at the time it was purchasing more property than was necessary for the construction of Fowler Avenue between Oak Street and Durston Road; and WHEREAS, the City has designed and is beginning construction of the Fowler Lane extension between Durston Road and Oak Street and has determined approximately 4.79 acres of the Fowler Property is not necessary for the Fowler Avenue extension and can be used for other purposes; and WHEREAS, the City has for years contemplated the development of affordable housing on the non-right-of-way portion of the Fowler Property since shortly after its purchase, including discussions with the now dissolved Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board; and WHEREAS, on December 10, 2025, to consider the development of affordable housing on the non-right-of-way portion of the Fowler Property to address the City’s affordable housing needs and in compliance with Montana law, the City reimbursed the transportation impact fee fund for the non-right-of way portion of the Fowler Property fusing funds in the Community Housing Fund; and WHEREAS, in furtherance of developing housing on the non-right-of=way portion of the Fowler Property, on August 12, 2025, the Bozeman City Commission directed staff to pursue a consensus-based community engagement process regarding future housing on the non-right- of-way portion of the Fowler Property; and WHEREAS, the City engaged Whole System Performance to lead the first two phases of 595 the consensus process and Cushing Terrell to lead the third phase of the process; and WHEREAS, the first phase of the process consisted of 49 interviews with neighborhood and community stakeholders, housing professionals, and Bozeman city commissioners; and WHEREAS, the second phase of the process included listening sessions for neighbors, housing professionals, and Bozeman city commissioners to listen to each other to build mutual understanding; and WHEREAS, the third phase of engagement was led by architects and planners from Cushing Terrell to engage neighbors, housing professionals and community stakeholders in co- generative problem solving; and WHEREAS, these sessions produced areas of consensus of those present that can guide future planning of the neighborhood ; and WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to memorialize its direction regarding future actions to be taken in regards to the non-right-of-way portion of the Fowler Property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, to wit: A. Site Design. Three consensus aligned Site Design Elements will impact future zoning. 1. No building should include more than four homes, but buildings up to four homes are acceptable. 2. Homes bordering existing homes in Harvest Creek should be limited to two stories in height. 3. Homes along Fowler may be a maximum of three stories. B. Zoning. The Commission directs the City Manager to submit an application for annexation and zoning of the Fowler Property that is consistent with, and accommodating of a housing project that integrates these consensus driven design principles, which is determined to be [R-B, Residential] and to zone the right-of-way portion of the Fowler Property Public Lands and Institutions (PLI). C. Subdivision Exemption. The Commission directs the City Manager to prepare an application for subdivision exemption to separate the right-of-way needed for the Fowler Ave. construction project from the portion of the Fowler Property suitable for community housing. 596 PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, at a regular session thereof held on the 10 day of November, 2026. ___________________________________ JOEY MORRISON Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 597 COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor, Deputy Mayor and City Commission FROM: David Fine, Economic Development Manager Takami Clark, Communications and Engagement Director Brian Guyer, Community Housing Manger MEETING DATE: November 10, 2026 SUBJECT: A Resolution of the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana Directing the City Manager regarding Next Steps for the Fowler Neighborhood Project. Overview In August 2025, the City Commission directed staff to pursue a consensus-driven engagement process for the Fowler Neighborhood Project. The process sought to build a shared understanding among neighbors, people who work in the housing sector, City Commissioners, and other participants through active listening and collaborative problem- solving. It culminated in a design charrette with architects from Cushing Terrell, where participants worked toward agreement on acceptable project elements. Through this process, a consensus emerged on many elements of the project’s design. Participants did not reach a consensus when considering how the agreed-upon design elements aligned with the City’s zoning districts. R-A residential zoning would not allow all of those elements. R-B residential zoning would accommodate them, but it would also allow buildings with greater mass and scale than many of the charrette participants considered acceptable. During the closing session, three participants in the consensus process expressed distrust of the City and whether the City Commission and staff would follow through on the design elements that had gained consensus or instead pursue the maximum density allowed under R-B zoning. In an effort to build trust with residents, staff have proposed a resolution 598 that allows the Commission to determine and commit in writing to design elements to help ensure that the project stays focused on design principles from consensus. The proposed resolution formalizes the City Commission’s direction to staff to incorporate specific site design elements into a future Fowler Neighborhood Project and directs staff to pursue annexation and a zoning designation for the Fowler property. There are three design elements that gained consensus: 1. Buildings may contain up to four homes, but no more than four. 2. Homes bordering existing homes in Harvest Creek should be limited to two stories. 3. Homes along Fowler may be up to three stories. Commission Direction Requested Staff requests that the Commission consider the packet materials, public comments, and other information presented and provide direction on a zoning application for the property. If the Commission prefers a different zoning designation, staff requests that it amend the resolution accordingly. If that designation would prohibit any of the consensus-aligned design elements, staff also request specific direction on how those elements should change. Clear direction will help staff use public resources efficiently as the project moves forward. Unresolved Policy Issues • Direction on whether to proceed with design elements from the consensus process. • Direction on a zoning district application for the Fowler Property suitable for community housing. The Consensus Process The City engaged Diane Groves with Whole Systems Performance to facilitate a consensus driven engagement process. Ms. Groves proposed a three-phase process: Phase I — Listen and Understand, 49 interviews with individuals Phase II — Learn Together, 3 balanced groups of 10-12 Phase III — Co-Create Solutions, 2-day design charrette Each phase builds on the work that came before it. City staff followed the process proposed by Ms. Groves. Documentation related to the process as outlined by Whole Systems Performance is attached. A Report on the outcomes of the process is also attached. 599 A Comparison of R-B Residential Zoning and R-A Residential Zoning The Unified Development Code (UDC) provides purpose statements for the R-A and R-B zoning districts (38.210.010, BMC): A. R-A Residential-A. 1. The R-A district is intended primarily to accommodate a variety of residential housing options including single-unit dwellings, accessory dwelling units (ADUs), duplexes, townhouses, and rowhouses with up to 2 units. B. R-B Residential Mixed Use-B. 1. The R-B district is intended primarily to accommodate a variety of residential housing options including single-unit dwellings, accessory dwelling units (ADUs), duplexes, townhouses, rowhouses, triplexes, fourplexes, and multi- unit dwellings with up to 8 units. Lot/ Building Standard Code links: R-A (38.210.020) R-B (38.210.030) Dwelling units per building (max) 2 8 Building height (max) 40 45 Wall plate height (max) 22 (2 story) 33 (3 story) Minimum density per net acre 6 du/acre 8 du/acre Building width (max) 80 ft 120 ft Lot Coverage (max) 40% 40% Zoning Differences between R-A and R-B • R-A zoning allows a maximum of duplex units. o R-B zoning allows fourplexes and buildings with up to 8 units; • R-A zoning limits a full third story through its use of a wall plate height maximum; o R-B zoning allows a full third story. • R-B allows 5 additional feet of maximum building height beyond R-A. • R-B requires 2 additional dwelling units (du) per acre of minimum density than R-A. Limitations of Existing Residential Zoning Districts Lot Coverage Limits Impedes Alley Loaded Townhome Development For this site, both R-A and R-B zoning significantly limit the feasibility of alley-loaded townhome lots: individual lots with garage access from an alley. For attached housing, the maximum lot coverage requirement can result in lots with front or rear yards substantially deeper than the minimum setbacks require. This configuration would likely create long driveways and increase impervious surface area. These requirements tend to discourage 600 townhomes on individual lots and favor condominium development on this site configuration, where shared open space in a larger project can count toward the area not covered by buildings. Townhomes are, broadly, easier to finance than condominiums for prospective buyers. Obtaining a mortgage for a condominium can be more challenging for buyers than obtaining one for a home on its own lot. This obstacle is not insurmountable but can require more effort on behalf of the home seller and the home buyer. During the design charrette, participants discussed the gap between R-A and R-B zoning. They considered whether a zoning designation allowing up to four attached dwellings, limited to two stories and with lot coverage greater than 40%, could support gentle increases in neighborhood density. This approach would rely more on setbacks and less on overall lot coverage to guide building size and placement. R-A and R-B have the same maximum lot coverage and are equally restrictive in this respect. Subdivision Exemption Staff recommend an application for subdivision exemption to separate the right-of-way needed for the Fowler Ave. construction project from the portion of the Fowler Property suitable for community housing. This would occur after annexation when the City becomes the reviewing authority for the subdivision exemption and municipal zoning allows lot dimensions. Attachments • Whole Systems Performance Consensus Process • Whole Systems Performance Consensus Report • Cushing Terrell Charrette Summary Memo 601 cushingterrell.com October 21, 2026 David Fine City of Bozeman Fowler Neighborhood Community Engagement Phase III Summary Between August 10 and 11, Cushing Terrell engaged with the Bozeman community using the following agenda: August 10 9AM – 9:30AM Welcome and Phase I & II recap 9:30AM -10:30AM Guiding Principles Workshop 10:30AM – 11:30AM Discussion of Local Townhouse Examples 11:30AM – 11:45AM Key elements that align with guiding principles that should be carried into Fowler 11:45AM – 1:00PM Lunch 1:00PM – 3:00PM Charrette August 11 5PM – 7PM Presentation to community for validation of alignment with Guiding Principles Fowler Neighborhood Engagement – Phase III The August 10, 2026, Fowler Neighborhood Guiding Principles Workshop marked the transition from community input and learning into a collaborative design process focused on creating guidelines that would lead to community-valued solutions. The presentation outlined the work already completed during Phases I and II by Diane Groves of Whole System Performance, which included extensive listening, stakeholder engagement, and education around general development components. The Guiding Principles Workshop was the first time participants moved into discussions about future development of the site. A clear consensus emerged around creating a middle-income permanently affordable homeownership opportunity that maintains neighborhood compatibility, quality design, green space, safety, parking, traffic management, and meaningful community involvement. The workshop positioned Phase III as an opportunity to translate community values and concerns into design criteria and neighborhood concepts rather than revisit prior decisions. 602 2 cushingterrell.com Neighborhood Vision A core outcome of the workshop was the creation of a shared vision for the Fowler Neighborhood project: “We envision a thoughtfully designed, high-quality neighborhood that is respectfully integrated into the Harvest Creek community, provides permanently affordable homeownership opportunities for middle income residents, enhances safety and quality of life, fosters belonging among new and existing neighbors, and demonstrates how collaboration, trust, and innovation can create lasting benefits for the entire Bozeman community and future generations.” Guiding Principles Participants in the workshop also identified ten community values that became the basis for the Fowler Neighborhood Guiding Principles for future neighborhood design. The Community Values (from Phases I and II) were, in no particular order of importance: 1. Attainable homeownership for middle-income renters 2. Collaborative and transparent design process 3. Neighborhood character and quality of life 4. Thoughtful design and livability 5. Zoning flexibility with clear design standards 6. Long-term affordability and stewardship 7. Green space, parks, and landscaping 8. Parking, traffic, and infrastructure concerns 9. Inclusion and representation 10. Economic and workforce impact The Fowler Neighborhood Guiding Principles are (in no order of importance): 1. Prioritize attainable homeownership for middle-income residents 2. Foster collaborative and transparent planning 3. Integrate with and complement existing neighborhood character 4. Emphasize livability and thoughtful design 5. Balance zoning flexibility with predictable design 6. Ensure financial and operational sustainability 7. Preserve and enhance green space and connectivity 8. Address parking, traffic, and infrastructure proactively 9. Support inclusion, representation, and community cohesion 10. Plan for existing workforce housing needs along with adaptability and long-term success. 603 3 cushingterrell.com Collectively, these principles, derived directly from participant engagement and the Community Values, are intended to guide all future design decisions and ultimately create a model neighborhood that demonstrates that affordability and quality can coexist, and integrate well with the surrounding neighborhood. Local Housing Case Studies In the workshop, participants also reviewed real examples of housing types and neighborhood patterns already found in Bozeman. The local precedent examples included duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, townhome-style units, as well as mixed residential neighborhoods featuring a range of housing sizes, building heights, garage configurations, in several zoning districts that could apply to the Fowler neighborhood. The purpose of these case studies was not to identify a final building or site design but to help participants evaluate how affordability, livability, neighborhood compatibility, architecture, density, parking, green space, and connectivity work together to create a nice place to live. The workshop concluded by challenging participants to consider how the Community Values and Guiding Principles could be translated into an approach to neighborhood design that serves middle-income homeowners, responds to local concerns, and becomes a model for future community-driven development. Community Meeting – Day 2 As a continuation of the August 10 Guiding Principles Workshop, the August 11 community meeting focused on validating the vision, guiding principles, and design direction that emerged through the previous phases of the community engagement process. Rather than reopening previous discussions, the meeting reaffirmed the consensus that the Fowler Neighborhood should provide affordable homeownership opportunities for middle-income households while remaining compatible with the surrounding Harvest Creek neighborhood. Participants once again confirmed the Fowler Neighborhood Vision Statement and Guiding Principles, reinforcing priorities that were consistent throughout the entire engagement process. Thoughtful design, long-term affordability, neighborhood integration, green space preservation, traffic management, and collaborative decision-making continued to be at the forefront of each conversation. The discussion emphasized that consensus was intended to identify areas of agreement, understand tradeoffs, and develop recommendations to guide future planning decisions. While consensus would emphasize where agreement can be reached, participants were asked to recognize that ultimately unanimous agreement may not necessarily be reached on each topic. The August 11 presentation also summarized community feedback across several key design themes. Each theme represents a topic explored during the August 10 charrette and represents a topic or characteristic important to participants. Neighborhood Connectivity and Safety. Participants expressed strong support for creating a neighborhood that is well connected to Harvest Creek through trails, pathways, open space, and pedestrian amenities. Feedback highlighted concerns regarding pedestrian safety, particularly at the Oak Street roundabout, and emphasized the importance of buffering adjacent neighborhoods through landscaping, internal pathways, tree preservation, and privacy-conscious site design. Neighborhood Character and Open Space. Residents generally favored human-scale development, community gathering spaces, varied architectural styles, durable building materials, and designs that 604 4 cushingterrell.com complement rather than replicate surrounding neighborhoods. Additional discussion reinforced the importance of preserving surrounding neighborhood character, thoughtfully integrating with Harvest Creek, minimizing impacts to nearby residents and wildlife, and ensuring that open space serves as both a recreational and community-building asset. Neighborhood Scale and Zoning. The meeting also refined community preferences regarding density, building form, and zoning as the City moves towards annexing the property. Participants supported limiting taller buildings near existing homes, with a preference for two-story development along eastern property boundaries and greater flexibility for three-story buildings along the future Fowler Avenue frontage. Traffic and Parking. Feedback reflected continued concern about traffic, parking, privacy, and neighborhood compatibility, while also acknowledging the need to balance those concerns against affordability objectives. Design Element Prioritization Through a prioritization and tradeoffs exercise, participants identified building scale and transitions, open space, tree preservation, walkability, parking management, affordability, architectural character, privacy, and traffic mitigation as the most important considerations for the next phase of planning. Collectively, the August 11 meeting confirmed broad alignment around the project vision and provided additional direction on how the Guiding Principles should be translated into an achievable neighborhood design. Zoning Recommendation Participants were given information on the City’s three residential zoning districts, RA, RB and RC. Community feedback indicated clear opposition to RC zoning, with participants expressing concerns that higher-density development emphasized in the RC zone would not align with the desired neighborhood character or appropriate scale of development. Moderators also evaluated RA and RB zones against the Fowler Neighborhood Guiding Principles and shared the analysis with participants. Moderators found that while both zones may align with most of the Guiding Principles, the density and building form limitation prescribed in RA creates challenges while ensuring the financial and operational sustainability of future development. This finding prompted further discussion among participants. While recognizing the need to support affordable middle-income homeownership, participants agreed with the initial analysis and generally favored RB zoning, with conditions, as the preferred balance between housing affordability and neighborhood compatibility. Buildings with up to 4 homes were also deemed acceptable. Concerns over the allowed building heights and wall plate allowances were discussed at length. The specific fear expressed was that with RB the entire site could end up with three story buildings or more. Ultimately participants supported RB zoning with conditions including limiting buildings to smaller-scale multifamily housing, a building height maximum of two stories adjacent to existing homes and building heights up to three stories maximum along Fowler Avenue. 605 Engagement Strategy and Facilitation Framework - City of Bozeman Affordable Housing Opportunity Collaboration Prepared for: The City of Bozeman Montana Prepared by: Diane Groves, Senior Organization Facilitator This document outlines a structured, transparent approach to engage affected neighbors, community members, and decision-makers regarding the proposed affordable housing development on City-owned land. The process is designed to build trust, surface concerns early, and create a pathway toward collaborative solutions. The following proposal is consistent with the Engage Bozeman initiative adopted by the City Commission in April 2021. https://www.bozeman.net/home/showpublisheddocument/11461/637622797246270000 Engagement Phases Phase I: Individual Conversations Virtual and in-person one-on-one conversations with City staff, Commission members, key partners and community members, and neighborhood representatives. These occur prior to group meetings to ensure transparency, fairness, and productive dialogue. Purpose of 1-1 Conversations The engagement process is designed to build trust by ensuring individuals feel respected and heard before entering larger group discussions. It also aims to ensure fairness by identifying information gaps and addressing imbalances in perception or influence so that all voices can be considered in future decision-making. Through these conversations, potential conflicts can be identified early, allowing for thoughtful planning, the sharing of accurate information, and more effective problem-solving. Above all, the 606 process seeks to humanize engagement by creating opportunities for genuine listening and dialogue that values each person’s perspective. Participants to Engage (in all Phases) City Staff and Elected Officials • Engagement and Communication staff – to ensure transparency and coordination. • Planning staff and project leads – responsible for design and alternatives. • Transportation staff – to address mobility and access issues. • City Manager. • Commission members and Mayor. • Consider County officials if relevant. Resource People • Developers, architects, and design experts (outside City staff). • Potential funders or partners. Public and Community Groups • Adjacent neighborhoods, HOAs, property owners, renters, and landlords. • Neighborhood associations and indirectly affected residents, if concerns expand. • Employers and institutions (schools, fire, hospital, parks). • Affordable housing advocates and residents concerned with growth and land use. • Conversations help surface sensitive issues and clarify expectations. • Follow-up in-person sessions can be scheduled for those not available virtually. • Insights gathered will guide the design of listening sessions. 607 Phase II: Group Listening Sessions Listening sessions (2.5–3 hours) will bring together affected groups and City decision-makers. Timeline - will follow 1-1s Purpose of this Process The purpose of this process is to create meaningful dialogue that strengthens understanding, relationships, and decision-making. Specifically, it seeks to: ● Ensure active listening so members of each interest group are heard directly by decision-makers and key partners. ● Acknowledge concerns by surfacing and validating the deepest concerns of both the community and decision-makers. ● Cultivate a shared vision to develop a hopeful, achievable outcome that all parties can support. ● Encourage practical advice by giving participants the chance to offer realistic recommendations for achieving the shared vision. ● Create momentum by expressing ideas that inspire positive energy and progress. ● Build strong relationships that foster trust and collaboration to support informed, collective recommendations. ● Promote empathy and understanding by strengthening active listening skills among all participants. ● Unite the community around shared goals and mutual respect. Example sessions may include: • Adjacent neighborhoods (HOAs, associations, informal groups). • Employers and community members affected by the lack of affordable housing. • Advocates and organizations focused on affordability and land use. Example: Listening sessions focused on affected/adjacent neighbors (may need two, am/pm) Participants: 8-12 neighborhood participants 608 4-6 Listeners (City staff) ● Either 1 commissioner/mayor/deputy and/or City manager (could have 2 depending on group size) ● At least 1 planner ● At least 1 public engagement staff ● Other staff or resource as needed Example: Listening sessions focused on those affected by a lack of affordable housing (may need two, am/pm) 8-12 Employers, others affected by lack of affordable housing, economic development 4-6 Listeners (City staff) ● Either 1 commissioner and the City manager or 2 commissioners (commissioner, mayor, deputy mayor, other?) ● At least 1 planner ● At least 1 public engagement staff ● Other staff/resource person or neighborhood member as decided Phase III: Collaborative Problem-Solving Phase III will be informed by the listening session recommendations for a successful path forward: Generally it will include a mixed-interest group that will be convened to problem solve and work toward recommendations for alternatives. If conflict is high, this may require two consecutive days with follow-up meetings of 3–6 hours. The goal is to develop collaborative recommendations for design alternatives and related issues. Note: depending on progress the group may not feel it necessary to have a facilitator present for all follow-up. This phased approach ensures respectful engagement, balances community concerns with City priorities, and creates opportunities for shared problem-solving that supports Bozeman’s affordable housing goals and upholds the City’s commitment to meaningful and impactful engagement with the community. Assumptions ● Coordination with City staff contacts and leaders ● Review essential materials ● 25-30 individual conversations 609 ● Process design and facilitation ● 5 group listening sessions with reports (individual, integrated) ● 2 days large mixed problem-solving group workshop with report to include next steps and recommendations. Facilitator support by City staff: ● Securing and preparing venues including supplies ● Scheduling, coordinating and issuing invitations for meetings ● Managing clear, timely and transparent communications ● Providing technical and administrative support ● Supplying background materials and technical expertise ● Documenting input and maintaining official records (exception for meeting reports provided by facilitator) ● Report collaboration and disbursement ● Ensuring participation of decision-makers ● Upholding transparency and accountability throughout the process 610 1 CITY OF BOZEMAN FOWLER NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT PHASE II Middle Income Homeownership May, 2026 Bozeman, MT Prepared By: Facilitator Diane Groves 611 2 During May 2026, three in-person community listening sessions were held about the Fowler Neighborhood Project. For each of the three sessions, 1-2 elected officials and 2-3 City staff were asked to participate as listeners. Others were invited from the community who have differing relationships and mixed perspectives about middle-income homeownership and the Fowler Neighborhood project: 4-5 Harvest Creek (HC) neighbors (2 adjacent neighbors and or an HOA board member, and 2-3 nearby HC neighbors), 1 local builder, 1 housing professional, 1-2 local target homebuyers or a current resident of middle-income housing, and 1 hiring professional. Facilitator Introduction and Agenda (Session introduction was presented on flipcharts - as follows) (Presented on flip chart) Phase II Purposes: ● The purpose of tonight’s listening circle is not to make a final decision about the Fowler Neighborhood Project. The purpose is to help people with different relationships to this issue hear one another more fully and help the City understand the values, concerns, questions, and conditions that could shape the next phase of work. ● The first report summarized what was heard in individual conversations. This session gives us a chance to bring some of those perspectives into conversation with one another. ● Tonight, we are trying to do three things: let participants hear the complexity across roles and perspectives; move from “my concern” to “the whole system we are trying to serve”; and identify design and process conditions that could make the project more workable, credible, and trusted. ● We are not here to debate whether someone’s concern is valid. We are here to understand what matters, what people are worried about, where there may be alignment, where there are differing perspectives, and what would need to be addressed for the path forward to be credible, workable, and responsible. (Presented on flip chart) City Sideboards What has been established: ● The City is pursuing a below-market housing project intended to serve middle- income residents, generally households earning 110% to 150% of AMI, who have been priced out of the current housing market. ● The City will not pursue a 4- or 5-story development. 612 3 ● City Commissioners retain final decision-making authority. ● Commissioners and City staff are participating in this phase primarily as listeners. What has not been decided: · Housing types. · Number of units. · Exact site design. · Parking. · Green space. · Materials. · Other design and implementation details. Tonight is not a blank-slate conversation, and it is also not a final-decision conversation. It is a listening and sense-making conversation within those sideboards. The Meaning of Consensus in this Process - What Consensus Means Here Consensus in this process does not mean every person in this room has final decision- making authority. It also does not mean every person must agree before the City can act. It is consensus as a disciplined community learning and problem-solving process. In this process, consensus means we are working to identify: · areas of shared understanding, · areas of agreement, · areas of differing perspectives, · questions that still exist, · concerns that need to be addressed, · tradeoffs that need to be made visible, · and conditions that could make a path forward more credible, responsible, and workable. 613 4 Meeting Process and Collected Data - Integrated Report This document contains collective statements from information developed during the listening sessions. These collective statements are developed from individual statements expressed during the sessions and represent the exact individual perceptions of all the participants. As such, they represent the collective views of the participants. In reading this report, remember that these are the real and exact words expressed and recorded by the participants at the session. Each statement in this report is intentional. This is not a professional report that replaces the personal statement with technical jargon. The process and rationale used for the listening session are also in the APPENDIX. After an introduction from each person in the circle, each person who attended to share their perspective had a chance to speak and be listened to by City staff and elected officials (see listening process in appendix). Following this share out each person was handed a 3x5 card to record 2 things they heard shared by someone else and at least 1 thing they shared. Listeners only recorded what they heard. . WHAT WE HEARD AND WHAT WE SHARED What We Heard and Shared: Housing Affordability and Homeownership Housing Costs Have Outpaced Local Incomes ● Homes skyrocketed in value with no improvements made to justify the increases during COVID. Inflated home values without value added during COVID. ● Bozeman is deeply unaffordable. There are no quality homes that people like me can buy in this community. ● I could not save enough money, even if I did not buy anything extra, and still afford a home at current prices. ● Young people cannot stay and put roots down—none of my four kids have been able to afford to stay here. ● This entire situation is an income issue first. Bozeman needs to create ownership, economic opportunities, and upward mobility for our middle class, or risk losing it. ● Economic issues (market versus affordability) create opportunities for different economic solutions. The City’s Economic Development Office is not facilitating high-income jobs in the area, as evidenced by the significant growth in hotel and restaurant jobs. 614 5 Homeownership Creates Stability ● A desire for homeownership for the working middle class in our community. People want opportunities for stability and predictability through affordable home ownership. ● My home may not be what I would describe as the dream home with four bedrooms and a quarter acre, but it is a nice home, not a bad home, and it allows me to manage my money for the future because my mortgage is stable. ● Renting creates a lot of instability, frequent moves, and unstable monthly housing costs. ● A cap on appreciation is better than losing thousands and thousands of dollars to rent—I do not recover anything in equity. Simply having the ability to own a home is most important. ● Someone shared a personal story about the impact of how the CLT homeownership model made staying in Bozeman possible. Middle-Income Housing Matters ● This is not low-income housing. It is middle-income housing. ● Middle-income homeownership is important for the overall health of the local economy. ● There is a stigma about people like me who have a good-paying job but still need help affording a home. It is important to remember that the housing situation is the problem. People should not be treated as though they are less. ● Many renters in the tenant union would not be able to qualify for these homes because they are still too expensive. They still support the project and would appreciate the opportunity to live in any home like this. ● Hiring people for positions at the university and the school district has become difficult. ● Teachers try to find other single teachers to rent with. ● Bozeman schools want to maintain being the best school district, so they want to attract the best teachers. They also have a program to grow their own teachers so that people already employed and living here can become teachers. Clarifying Affordability ● It is important to be clear rather than just saying "affordable." There are a lot of housing needs that are called affordable, such as shelter, affordable rent for low-income residents, and middle-income homeownership. ● It is not clear to most people what is meant by 110%–150% of AMI; people want to understand what that means in salaries. Community Land Trusts (CLT), Equity, and Wealth Building Questions and Concerns About CLTs 615 6 ● CLTs are confusing to people. CLT community land trusts create uncertainty for some people about whether they are a good investment because they cap appreciation. ● Adjacent neighbors may worry about how they affect existing property values. ● There was concern around CLT appreciation being too low for those who participate. ● Limited appreciation of affordable housing can create a financial trap. ● Housing trust model could be a housing trap (3% appreciation with a 6% mortgage). Benefits and Stability of CLTs and Lived Experiences ● Housing trust model still lets people build equity and protects against risk in downturns. ● CLTs can have a stabilizing effect compared to the regular market, especially during times like 2008. ● Some people are specifically looking to live in CLTs because of their stability. ● Trust in the community land trust model and how it is working in other projects. This model exists and works in Bozeman. ● Community land trust homeownership unlocks possibilities for stability and wealth building, not just for initial buyers but across generations. ● It is a smart, durable community investment. ● Permanently affordable, middle-income homeownership in the Fowler project could yield positive benefits for adjacent neighbors, including community stability, strong neighborhood networks, and intentional design. ● People who previously purchased in Bridger are realizing gains. ● I heard a person who is currently living in a CLT affordable housing who is happy with a tiny yard where she grows vegetables. ● A cap on appreciation is better than losing thousands and thousands of dollars to rent—I do not recover anything in equity. ● Personal impact of how the CLT homeownership model made staying in Bozeman possible. Neighborhood Design, Character, and Quality of Life Community Character and Neighborhood Fit ● Quality of the homes themselves needs to be high quality, a place owners and the community feel proud of. Creating a quality neighborhood that is connected to Harvest Creek is important. ● Community integration is very important. The development will be part of the Harvest Creek neighborhood. It needs to integrate well. ● Neighborhoods matter. I have always purchased homes for the neighborhood, not just the home itself. ● The original drawing designs did not fit Bozeman or blend with the neighborhood. 616 7 ● Not everything that has been built in Bozeman is quality. Green Space, Trails, and Outdoor Amenities ● Has green space or a trail, a place where people can walk their dogs and kids, not on the busiest roads. ● Likes the location because of access to trails and parks. ● Harvest Creek neighbors are very interested in greenspace for each unit and trails. ● Those looking for housing spoke less about that amenity and appreciated proximity to larger parks and green space nearby. Housing Types and Variety ● We should look at local housing models and neighborhoods that are working (example: Valley West). ● Developments with varying price points are more desirable. ● A neighborhood gains value from a variety of price points. ● Variety of housing. ● Variety of financing options. ● I heard different tolerances for yards and no yards. For some, access to the park and trails is enough others desire at least a small yard. ● Including examples from Bridger View of mixed home types. ● It is possible to have a very expensive home next to a home that rents for or costs less to buy. ● Someone said first-time homebuyers want single-family homes. ● Most people would prefer a yard, garage, etc. when considering purchasing a residence. Density, Traffic, Parking, and Safety Density ● Some additional density may be acceptable. ● Density does not belong here; perhaps the town should be divided and density placed somewhere else. ● What is built here should be thoughtful. ● Keep density toward Fowler Road. ● One person said that if there is more density, it should be located toward the street. ● Neighbors are open to middle-income homeownership—if it is feasible—while considering parking and density. ● The devil is in the details, specifically around density and parking. Traffic and Safety 617 8 ● Traffic into the neighborhood is a major issue that needs to be addressed. ● Harvest Creek currently has lots of kids and dogs, so traffic needs to be considered. ● Pedestrian safety needs to be thought about. ● Density increases risk to pedestrians and cyclists. ● Density brings more dogs and people, so managing parking and safe foot traffic is important. Mixed-Use Development ● Maybe include some commercial uses like a coffee shop. ● Mixed-use development with commercial space on the ground floor. ● We can do three stories and mixed-use development along Fowler. ● Explore a mix of housing types and commercial uses to meet the needs of Bozeman residents. Trust, Transparency, and Public Process Desire for Transparency ● It is important to be transparent when information is known. If people do not know, they assume the worst. ● Fear of the unknown. When people do not know, they fill in information with what they fear. ● A willingness to compromise and a desire for transparency. Concerns About the City's Process ● The beginning of the process last year was scary and did not build trust. ● A feeling of distrust with the City due to original concepts and drawings. ● Distrust of the City and the process. ● Some Harvest Creek neighbors believe the City does not care about their opinions as homeowners. ● Preference for working out a plan through informal channels. ● Mistrust in the process and institutions. ● Concerned about a mismatch of engagement. ● We are talking to current homeowner neighbors but unable to get feedback from the people who would most benefit—future homeowners. ● Impact of the consensus process that could delay or slow down the project due to accommodating various perspectives. ● Concerns around this process and the dilution of expertise. Desire for Meaningful Engagement 618 9 ● Let folks be part of planning and design—no surprises at the end. ● Professionals, homeowners, and those who will actually buy homes all have a voice in common. ● Harvest Creek homeowners care about community engagement and are willing to compromise for a feasible project. ● The value of trust and collaboration with the City is imperative to success. ● I believe the whole community benefits from stable affordable housing. Concerns, Risks, and Potential Impacts Property Values and Financial Security ● Fear of loss of assets, value, and security for the future. ● Concerns around equity and investments. ● Fear of the resulting project on adjacent home values and quality of life. ● Concern the overall housing market will dip and values needed will be lost. Change and Uncertainty ● Change can be scary. ● I heard fear of change. ● Fear of the unknown. ● Acceptance of future development and hope for compromise. ● What is best for the neighborhood and the project is a good opportunity. Housing Market, Realtors, and Economic Systems Housing Market Concerns ● It is not common for the market to experience such high jumps like it did during COVID. ● People also want to know why the market has jumped so much. Realtor and Market Criticism ● Where are the ethics within our local real estate professionals? ● What responsibility do they have in these market spikes? ● Price gouging by realtors—not selling value, but "how much can we get for the house?" ● One person pointed to realtors being the issue, pricing things high so they can make a profit. 619 10 ● Another person expressed frustration around housing being for profit and not for living in. Solutions, Opportunities, and Path Forward Learning from Successes ● We can solve this problem. ● Let us look at what we can do. ● Let us focus on what we can do by looking at past successes. ● Use past success to create a path forward. ● We should look at housing models that are successful and working in the community and see what we can learn from them. Support for the Project if Done Well ● Not against affordable housing development, just want those projects to be thoughtful and mindfully executed. ● Glad the City has agreed not to build four-story buildings. ● An understanding that there should be compromise and recognition of the importance of this type of housing. ● Acceptance of future development and hope for compromise. ● The housing challenges in our community are large, and people generally have a lot of empathy for those affected. ● Many said the City has a tough job. ● Some acknowledged that this project alone will not solve the housing problem. ● Others are optimistic about the project and want to see it happen so more housing options become available. ● What is best for the neighborhood and the project is a good opportunity. Eligibility and Access ● Make sure that all assets are considered so people who do not have other options for homeownership actually get qualified. ● Be thoughtful about the criteria that you use to qualify. ● Some single people explore ways to purchase a home together so they can afford to own and stay in Bozeman. ● And to buy a house with the support of parents. THE WORST POSSIBLE OUTCOMES OF NOT WORKING TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY ON THE FOWLER NEIGHBORHOOD 620 11 If We Do Not Work Collaboratively Loss of Trust in the City and the Process ● The project is shadowed in controversy. ● Harvest Creek neighbors feel they were not listened to. No effect on outcome. ● They hate the development and hate the City. ● They say the consensus process was a sham. ● We risk reinforcing broken trust between the City and the community; we participated, but nothing changed. Eroded or broken trust among all groups—it takes time to rebuild. Loss of trust. There is a breakdown of trust in our government systems and belief in the ability to support all local residents. Further erosion between City leaders and the community. Trust is destroyed with residents (neighbors and people looking for housing). ● Angry citizens, resentment toward the City, and possible new residents. Anger and mistrust persist. Community Division and Resentment ● It becomes all about units and numbers and not about building community. ● A divided community. ● Neighbors resent future homeowners of the project. ● An undesirable, unmanaged development that breeds resentment and anger between new neighbors, existing neighbors, and City leadership. ● Further divides are created. ● There are unintended consequences involving division among residents. ● Anger and mistrust persist. Housing Does Not Remain Affordable ● The housing built is so constrained that it is not affordable. ● Housing is unaffordable in the project. ● Nothing moves forward and no additional below-market units are built. ● A product is built that the target homebuyers cannot afford. ● Housing continues to be unaffordable—options remain limited. ● All homes are market-rate and do not serve identified needs. ● The project is not geared toward the target audience. ● A development that does not serve its purpose or mission for middle-income affordable homeownership. Fewer Homes for People Who Need Them 621 12 ● Neighbors want so few homes in the new neighborhood that it fails to be affordable. ● Thirty to fifty households may not have access to homes they can afford. ● We make it harder for people to own homes in Bozeman. ● There is a missed opportunity for homeownership for some of Bozeman’s population. ● The City does not house as many families at an affordable rate as it could have. ● The project could die, and more community members are displaced. ● Key community members walk away to find housing elsewhere. Missing an Opportunity to Address a Community Need ● We squander our chance to do something truly innovative with land we actually have control over as a City. ● If we are too responsive to hyper-local concerns, we lose an opportunity to make a meaningful difference on a critical community-wide need. ● Failing to center the problem we are trying to solve—housing affordability and community vitality—signals that Bozeman is not for the middle class, similar to Jackson Hole. ● We fail to capitalize on a unique opportunity to meet an urgent community need. ● We fail to set an example for peer communities across the West that we can all be proud of. ● Missing an opportunity to demonstrate the City’s commitment to creating opportunities for middle-income families to purchase a home. ● The worst outcome would be the loss of support to pursue projects like this in the future. Wrong Housing Product Gets Built ● Without collaboration, the wrong housing product gets built. ● We will build housing that potential buyers do not want. ● Unacceptable living conditions for buyers because it becomes their only choice. The homes built are not desirable and do not sell. ● A bad project that no one wants to live in. ● A subpar project. ● A project with significant negative impacts on the community and adjoining neighborhood. ● An undesirable, unmanaged development. ● A development that does not serve its purpose or mission. No Housing Gets Built ● No housing gets built at all. ● Nothing moves forward, and no additional below-market units are built. ● There is no compromise found with the neighbors. ● The project could die. 622 13 Property Values and Home Equity Loss ● The Fowler project detracts from Harvest Creek home values and quality of life. ● Reducing property values. ● The working class of Harvest Creek experiences a significant decrease in home values while paying increased taxes. ● It is an economic robbery of the working middle class of Harvest Creek. ● The loss of home value for adjacent property owners. ● Loss of retirement funds due to loss of home equity. Taxpayer and Financial Costs ● A lawsuit costs City taxpayers millions. ● A financial burden on owners of the four-cell homes due to improper disclosure. ● Waste of tax dollars by building something that does not fit the intended scope or purpose. ● Too much expenditure of City funds for less gain. ● A money sink for everyone. Traffic and Parking ● Increasing traffic safety problems and congestion. ● Too many parking spaces. ● Too few parking spaces. Safety and Security ● There are unintended consequences involving safety issues and security of City residents. ● Lack of safety for children and families in the area. Density and Neighborhood Compatibility ● High-density homes on top of an existing neighborhood. ● The Fowler project detracts from Harvest Creek quality of life. ● A project with significant negative impacts on the community and adjoining neighborhood. ● Loss of green space. Development Falls into the Wrong Hands ● A developer comes in and develops something that does not work for anyone. ● It becomes another avenue for the top 1% to buy a second home in Bozeman. 623 14 ● It becomes similar to what is being built in Big Sky. ● It goes to the free market and gets bought up by private equity. What We Hope to Create Through Collaboration with City and Community Trust, Relationships, and Working Together ● Build trust between the City and citizens. ● We develop relationships with one another where we can continue working together. ● Trust is built that the City listens. ● We can find compromise and innovation through dialogue. ● Community members regain trust and feel gratitude and pride. ● Trust grows, and people can take a breath. ● Harmony between all stakeholders. ● Understand one another’s different perspectives better. ● I am hopeful and excited to work with the City again. Trust in Future City Projects and Processes ● Future support for these types of projects. ● Framework for a successful process for similar projects and opportunities in the future. ● This becomes an example for future housing in Bozeman and Montana—a leader and role model. A Model for Other Communities ● A model project and neighborhood that serves as an example of success. ● A good project that meets the needs and expectations of a representative and diverse slice of the community. ● There is broad buy-in. ● A model to replicate. ● We do something for Bozeman to become a model for others to follow. ● A model development to replicate in other parts of the City. ● This becomes an example for future housing in Bozeman and Montana—a leader and role model. 624 15 Affordable Homeownership Opportunities ● Creation of truly affordable housing for the middle class. ● The creation of a Fowler neighborhood project that meets the needs of middle-income homeownership. ● There will be homeownership opportunities. ● Permanently affordable, desirable homeownership opportunities that sell. ● The target homebuyer gets stable housing through homeownership. ● Neighborhood stability through occupancy and affordable homes. ● Many people are provided with the opportunity for homeownership. Housing for Essential Workers and Local Residents ● A number of essential workers who otherwise could not—such as nurses, teachers, firefighters, and police officers—get to own housing and stay in Bozeman. ● Homes help Bozeman residents and workers. ● Middle-income households put down roots, start new businesses, and serve the community. Housing That Meets Community Needs ● We build a housing development that truly meets our housing needs. ● A thoughtfully designed project that provides housing for those who need it at a reasonable price point. ● A good project that meets the needs and expectations of a representative and diverse slice of the community. ● We created buy-in and support for CLT and middle-income ownership and built a neighborhood that made a meaningful impact on the problem. ● The whole community is proud of it. Integration with Harvest Creek ● We create an affordable mixed-use neighborhood fully integrated into Harvest Creek. ● Creation of truly affordable housing for the middle class that complements and enhances the quality of life of the entire area and integrates well with the adjacent neighborhood. ● An integrated mixed-housing-type development that reaches affordability targets. ● An integrated neighborhood that not only creates value but helps revitalize and increase the value of existing neighborhoods. ● A thoughtfully designed project that successfully integrates into the existing neighborhood. ● We add new neighbors to a great neighborhood and build a community that becomes seamless. ● Newer neighbors become an integral part of the Harvest Creek HOA and community. 625 16 ● The housing development does not infringe on the rights of adjacent homeowners. Neighbor Support and Acceptance ● We are asked to build at least 60 homes that can be embraced by adjacent Harvest Creek neighbors. ● The neighbors are on board and supportive of density that allows the project to be affordable. ● Those neighbors who reside in it love their homes and are embraced by existing neighbors. ● Existing neighbors and new neighbors take pride in the project. ● New homes and homeowners bring richness and benefit to existing homeowners. ● The City can build in a way with little to no consequences for neighbors. Community Building and Belonging ● We can create community and housing that advance the well-being of neighbors. ● We meet the varied needs of residents while intentionally fostering inclusion and belonging for new and established residents. ● The community grows and strengthens. ● We add new neighbors to a great neighborhood and build a community that becomes seamless. ● Newer neighbors become an integral part of the Harvest Creek HOA and community. Neighborhood Quality and Livability ● An intentional, mindful development. ● A neighborhood is built that is quality—not granite counters, but quality in the sense of being built to last. ● A neighborhood that has dignity and could be someone’s forever home. ● Creation of a desirable neighborhood where people want to live. ● A vibrant, desirable neighborhood seen as an addition to the current housing stock. ● It satisfies families who are invested in the community through PTA involvement, neighborhood assets, and civic engagement. Design Quality and Compatibility ● Through high-quality design, we are able to integrate more housing units into the existing neighborhood in a thoughtful and collaborative way. ● An integrated mixed-housing-type development is loved by existing neighbors by adding value to their lives and homes. ● A neighborhood that honors Harvest Creek priorities, such as two-story homes, while allowing for sunlight and airflow. 626 17 ● A thoughtfully designed project that successfully integrates into the existing neighborhood. ● The housing development does not infringe on the rights of adjacent homeowners. Property Values and Neighborhood Enhancement ● The project enhances the neighborhood. ● An integrated neighborhood helps revitalize and increase the value of existing neighborhoods. ● Existing neighbors gain richness and benefit from new homes and homeowners. ● The project adds value to the lives and homes of existing neighbors. Community Pride ● A project that the whole community can be proud of. ● Current and new community members can take pride in and embrace the project. ● The whole community is proud of it. ● Community members regain trust and feel gratitude and pride. Safety and Transportation Improvements ● Increasing traffic safety. Keeping transportation and safety in mind. ● Increased safety through newer enhancements such as roundabouts and signs. Folks feel safe in their neighborhood. ● The City can build in a way with little to no consequences for neighbors. Changing Perceptions of Affordable Housing ● The dispelling of myths around affordable housing. Understand one another’s different perspectives better. Long-Term Impact and Future Generations ● A project that creates opportunities for generations of Bozemanites to build the kind of lives we aspire to. ● Middle-income households put down roots, start new businesses, and serve the community. ● Neighborhood stability through occupancy and affordable homes. ● A meaningful impact on the housing problem. ● A framework for future successful projects and opportunities. The best possible outcomes are the collective hopes of people in the community. A vision can be created that captures the major themes of the collective statements above - We envision a thoughtfully designed, high-quality neighborhood that is fully integrated into the Harvest Creek 627 18 community, provides permanently affordable homeownership opportunities for middle-income residents, enhances safety and quality of life, fosters belonging among new and existing neighbors, and demonstrates how collaboration, trust, and innovation can create lasting benefits for the entire Bozeman community and future generations. The Advice We Have for Fostering Collaboration and Next Steps Maintain a Clear Vision and Follow Through ● However you move forward, you will not avoid adversity; you just have to see it through. Come up with a vision and refine it; stick with it. ● We just need to dig into it with open minds. ● Strategic consideration of integrated design and community benefit that looks across the next seven generations, but also incorporates action, not just thoughts. ● Once it’s on the ground, I’m confident that the neighbors will love their new neighbors. Improve Transparency and Communication ● A more transparent and ongoing inclusive communication of all aspects of the project. ● Intense, clear, direct communication of any plan going forward, including all pertinent information regarding design, budget, and timing. ● Clarity to the community regarding what steps remain. ● City check-ins—keep communication open to reduce loss of understanding about what is happening. ● Update the Engage Bozeman timeline frequently. Strengthen Relationships and Listening ● Must continue to really listen to one another. The city needs to listen and be willing to compromise and act in the best interests of the majority of its citizens, including people who live and work in Bozeman, not temporary residents. ● Assume positive intent. Keep open-mindedness and softness. ● Remember, we had similar ideas about what a successful project would look like for people. Improve Public Accessibility and Understanding ● Ensure City Hall is accessible. Ex: from City: If you’re wanting to know, ask directly. 628 19 ● Highlight other similar local projects and take the time to understand the nuances of why they are successful. ● Translation of models, including financial models, for everyone. ● Clarify to the community what steps remain. ● Address broader issues. ● We need to have an updated needs analysis for our market. ● Understand where we are now and what we still need to develop. Use Visuals and Concept Designs to Support Understanding ● Create concept designs with different tradeoffs. ● Provide examples that illustrate tradeoffs involving parking, greenspace, commercial uses, and housing. Bring pictures or drawings of homes and units built that reflect the scale of the houses, the surrounding area, and the percentage of green space that are amenable to achieving the goals of the development. ● Rendering options similar to the Fowler Street project. ● Create a land plan that focuses on the ideas created here. Start iterating on potential neighborhood plans. Explore Design Tradeoffs and Neighborhood Preferences ● Explore whether the Harvest Creek neighborhood wants a coffee shop or small commercial development. ● Determine whether commercial development is allowed on R-B zoning. ● Do research on affordability targets and ask neighborhoods. ● Harvest Creek HOA has hard lines; will it be a failure of the process to have some three- story buildings? ● I want everyone to keep an open mind about how density could integrate with the neighborhood if it is thoughtfully designed. ● Commitments from the City on parking, safety, density, green space, and neighborhood access points. Finance, Affordability, and Product Quality ● Must center affordability. Center affordability in all conversations. Maximize affordability and access. ● Be really creative with financing and making the project pencil out while attaining a quality, durable product with a variety of options for different people. ● Housing cost is the biggest problem—not the cost of building quality homes. ● Maximize affordability and access. ● Ensure permanent affordability through Community Land Trust partnerships, organizations, and the City. 629 20 Move the Project Toward Implementation ● Create a process for advancing the City’s draft proposal for this project and make it a model for others to emulate. ● Involve a developer who will be tasked with the development as soon as possible. ● Take what we have learned and put it into a design. Get it built. Process Design and Decision-Making ● Per Mike’s suggestion, find a way to design a project with input from neighbors and community members, such as a design charrette. Distill it further and have smaller involved groups with representatives from various perspectives. ○ Get priorities locked down from both sides and identify where there is consensus or where compromise is possible. ● City after-action report on this process. Create Ongoing Opportunities for Input through the process. ● Ongoing opportunities for input from all stakeholders and constituents. ● There needs to be significant meetings between City decision-makers and homeowners. ● Involve homeowners at each phase to ensure clear communication. ● Get opinions and guidance from adjacent homeowners. 630 21 PARTICIPANTS: Andrea Kavert, Betsy Asserson, Bill Backes, Bill Valencourt, Courtney Naumann, Erin Allison, Grant Syth, Greg Stratton, Heather Higgs, Jesse Hoffman, Meredith Center, Mike Roser, Molly McGuire, Nathan Stein, Olive Sohn, Pat Straus, Rick Simkins, Tony Modugno Listeners: David Fine, Brian Guyer, Takami Clark, Emilly Kiely, Brit Fontenot Emma Bode, Alisson Sweeney,Joey Morrison, Jennifer Madgic End of report 631 22 APPENDIX LISTENING SESSIONS GENERAL PROCESS AND RATIONALE: This is the general process used during the Phase II listening sessions in the City of Bozeman. It includes a brief rationale for each activity. The process is often changed or adapted to fit the time available. 1. Introduction by facilitator. This allows the facilitator to get his/her voice in the room with an introduction, an overview of the project, and to talk about the purpose of the session. 2. Grounding: This allows each person to get their voice in the room equally. It establishes a Listening with Respect environment, where all speak in turn without interruption by others. It creates a sense of safety for the participants and provides some sense of community concerns. Each person answers three questions: Introduce yourself and your relationship to middle-income homeownership and/or the Fowler Neighborhood project. What are your expectations for this listening session? How do you feel about being here? When the participants pause, do not interrupt or try to help. Let them speak in their own time. Silence is OK for a while. They are thinking, overcoming self-consciousness. If you sense they need some time, ask if you can continue and come back to them. Then make sure you come back to them. 3. Greeting Circle. Meeting everyone. (OPTIONAL) The facilitator moves inside the circle and greets the person to their left; then continues inside the circle, greeting each person in turn. Those who have been greeted follow the person who greeted them last inside the circle. When the facilitator returns to his or her original location, those inside the circle will continue to greet them, a second time. This time, the person inside the circle is the greeter, not the greeted. This balances the circle. This allows the participants to meet each other as adults on a personal basis, to overcome the feeling of intimidation, and to feel equal. It increases a sense of security, a sense of community. 4. Learning from the experience. (Optional) This activity allows all participants to learn from the experience. It helps them to get their voice in the room, knowing 632 23 they will be listened to. It provides initial information on their concerns and how they feel. How do you feel about the greeting circle? What did you learn that will help us to listen and learn from each other? 5. Listening to the Community: Community members (adjacent and affected neighbors, organizations, target homeowners, local builders, housing specialists, etc.) speak to a planning staff member or elected official that they select from the group. This person is a listener who only responds with what they heard. It is imperative that the listeners understand they are to respond only to what they heard and not how they feel about it. This puts the importance on the community member who speaks, and on their message. Listening to community members will make them feel acknowledged and understood. It creates non-verbal cues in the listening adult that are comforting to the speakers. Continuing to listen to the community members/students will make them feel accepted. (Research supports this.) “Community member... select a staff person/neighborhood member to be your listener.” Wait until they do. Then...answer these questions: What is your perspective on middle-income homeownership and the Fowler Neighborhood project, and how do you feel about it? The selected listener responds: “This is what I heard.” NOTE: A backup listener is also selected to help the listener. This person is usually the previous listener. Often, the participants will be shy and self-conscious about answering this question. They may pass, speak very softly, state they “don’t know,” or be silent. All are acceptable behaviors. They are still not certain they can trust the group. Be comfortable with how they act, allow them to be themselves, in the moment. This is an experience where they need to see if they can trust you, if you will accept them as they are. If a participant passes, be sure to give them another chance when all have spoken. 633 24 6. Recording information: This not only provides a record of the conversation, it also assures that people feel they are heard. The facilitator passes out 3 x 5 cards. Then the facilitator provides them with this task: What descriptions of managing growth in Bozeman did you hear others express? (On one side of the card.) What descriptions of managing growth in Bozeman did you express? (On the other side of the card.) State question one and wait until they finish recording before stating the second question. This allows the person to focus on each separately. This not only gathers information but also assures the participants that what they said has been heard. And... it is written in their own words. OPTIONAL: If there is time, have each person read off the information from the cards. If not, gather the cards before moving on. 7. Worst Possible outcomes(expectations):3 x 5 cards are passed out. The facilitator asks the participants to answer this question What are the worst possible outcomes if we do not collaborate successfully with the Fowler Neighborhood project? This information is read off by each person before moving ahead. This raises people’s concerns and fears to the level of consciousness. If not expressed, these worst possible outcomes tend to become self-fulfilling prophecies. Once all have read off their cards, an insight into the Worst/Best outcomes is presented. The cards are collected before moving ahead. 8. Best Possible Outcomes(expectations): 3 x 5 cards are passed out. The facilitator asks the participants to answer this question: Working together, what will be the best possible outcomes? This information is read off by each person before moving ahead. This expresses the purposes that the collective community wants to create through working collaboratively with the City and the community. By expressing these, the possibility exists that they can become self-fulfilling prophecies. 9. Closure: This activity brings a closure to the listening session, allowing neighborhood and community members The community members, students and educators answer to this question is normally that the experience was a good 634 25 one for them, it created the kind of learning environment they want, one that is caring, respectful, understanding, acknowledging. The same occurs for adults. Each person answers in turn: How do you feel about this session? What is your advice to foster collaboration and next steps. (recorded on 3x5 and read off) 10. Honoring: (Optional, if there is time.) The purpose of honoring is to allow each of the groups to acknowledge and appreciate each other. The facilitator has everyone stand first. Then... • The Planning staff/listeners honor the community members. (The community members first go to the center of the circle, and one chosen staff person honors them.) • The community members the listeners. (Listeners go to the center of the circle and one or two chosen community members honor them.) COLLECTIVE STATEMENTS: Collective statements are prepared from all the information collected. Leaving the information in bullet form results in a confusing mass of individual statements. Collective statements provide a cohesive picture of what the participants said and provides a focus for the Planning Staff. The process for collective statements is in the APPENDIX. 635 26 * COLLECTIVE STATEMENTS Collective statements are based on the belief that each of us sees the world from a different viewpoint. Our individual views are like pieces of a puzzle -- when we fit them all together, we get the full picture. In most meetings our views tend to be seen as competitive. When someone speaks, another person responds with a counterstatement, and the meeting progresses with each trying to convince the other of his or her rightness. This behavior is based on a belief in the "one right answer" to all questions. Only one of us can be right, so our intelligence is used to establish that rightness firmly. It becomes a competition in which each person's ego and intelligence are at stake. This is either/or thinking -- either you are right, or I am! Often, two or three people will capture all the time in a meeting with this either/or conflict, while others listen, get bored, and drop out. It is a time-consuming, ineffective process. The meeting ends with some vaguely worded compromise that relieves the participants. They leave with little commitment to it. Collective thinking assumes we can all learn something from each other. We have different views of a situation, and all views are right. This is done with many of the workshop tasks. The collective statements are the result of adding individual statements together, keeping each person's words to the best extent possible, creating a statement of the total group. * DEVELOPING A COLLECTIVE STATEMENT A collective statement process is based on the notion that we all have different views of a situation, and all views are right. Each of us perceives the world through our experiences, our values and beliefs and our desires. In some tasks, statements made by each individual participant are recorded as accurately as possible. These statements are first segregated into common groups. The individual statements are then added together, keeping each person's words to the best extent possible, creating a statement of the total group. At times it is necessary to add words to the brief recorded statements to clarify the intent. Or a word might be added to bridge two or more statements together. This is kept to a minimum to retain the original recorded thought. 636 27 While some grammatical improvements may be made, the original statement and the original words are kept as close as possible. As an example, these were the original recorded statements from a previous workshop, of the "Senior Citizens Worst Outcomes of the Situation": 637 28 SENIOR CITIZENS WORST OUTCOMES OF THE SITUATION: 1. Unsafe community to live in 2. Will regress, if no progress 3. Things fine, no higher taxes 4. Our senior programs will be cut--lack of funds 5. My needs as a senior will not be considered and taxes rise--skyrocket 6. More leave town, higher crime, higher taxes, less facilities 7. Leads to collapse of government 8. If not forward, then backwards. 9. Become retirement community, kids leave, no industry. 10. Uncertain, unhappy future. The statements are segregated to become like groups of statements: SENIOR CITIZENS WORST OUTCOMES OF THE SITUATION: 2. Will regress, if no progress 8. If not forward, then backwards. 3. Things fine, no higher taxes 9. Become retirement community, kids leave, no industry 5. my needs as a senior will not be considered and taxes rise--skyrocket 4. Our senior programs will be cut--lack of funds 1. Unsafe community to live in 6. More leave town, higher crime, higher taxes, less facilities 7. Leads to collapse of government 10. Uncertain, unhappy future These statements are now linked together to form the final collective statement. Words that are added in the process are shown in parentheses: THE SENIOR CITIZENS WORST OUTCOMES: (The community) will regress, if (there is) no progress. If (we do) not (move) forward, then (we slide) backwards. (We all think that) things (are) fine, (as long as there are) no higher taxes. (We) become (a) retirement community, (the) kids leave, (there is) no industry. My needs as (a) senior will not be considered and taxes will rise, skyrocketing. Our senior programs will be cut (because) of (a) lack of funds. 638 29 (This will be an) unsafe community to live in. (More business and people) leave town, (because of) higher crime, higher taxes, less facilities. (This) leads to a collapse of government. (We face) an uncertain, unhappy future. 639 30 I MATTER “I didn’t think I mattered... until today.” Those words were spoken by a junior in high school, a young blond-haired teenager. She spoke to them at the end of the day, as the group of students were doing the closure. All eyes, and all attention were immediately upon her. She spoke these words carefully and deliberately. Her head was up, and her eyes focused on the group. She was looking at 55 other students from her high school, a multi-colored, multi-ethnic group. These would have been considered the at-risk children in the school, children with learning problems that were physical, emotional, intellectual. They would be considered problem children by most of us. To their teachers who were present, and their Principal, who sponsored this day, they were an opportunity. The group of almost 60 adults and high school students was brought together to explore the learning environment they had created in their school, educators and students. Their purpose was to explore and establish a movement to create the kind of learning environment that would motivate them to learn, to grow into capable, growing human beings. They had engaged themselves in this exploration, with great focus and intensity, surprising all the adults with their interest in creating a learning environment that was healthy and functional. They knew what the situation was, why it was, and they knew what they wanted, and how to get there. At the end of the day, the whole group sat in a circle, and each adult and student answered the closure questions: How do you feel about this session today? What did you learn that will help us create that learning environment that you want? When it was her turn to speak, the young woman thought for a moment before speaking, her head down slightly. A pause. Then, speaking softly, but purposefully: “Before today, I didn’t really think that I mattered. I didn’t think I mattered to my family, to my classmates or teachers, or to anyone else. I often thought that it would make no difference to anyone or anything if I was even here.” She paused. “I knew I didn’t matter. I often thought of not being here (sic alive), and if that happened, that nobody would even notice that I was gone.” 640 31 The shocking nature of her statement was felt by the entire group. At this moment the entire attention of the group was focused on this young woman, expressing herself truthfully, authentically. At this moment, she mattered to them, and it was obvious. “Today has changed all that,” she said as she continued. Her eyes were misted with tears now, as were the eyes of many of the group. “I realized today that I did make a difference, that what I had to say was important, because it was different than what others had to say. And..... I was listened to when I said it. Then I heard the statements (collective statements) that we read at the end of the day, and I could see what I said was in there. And, it made a difference... I made a difference.” “That is what I learned,” she said softly, but clearly, her voice catching somewhat, “ that I make a difference, that I matter. After today I will never forget that. That is what I learned. There was a pause, silence for a moment, then a few sounds of applause, then more, until all were applauding and standing. As they did this, I sensed they were not only applauding this young person and what she said, what she learned. They were applauding the impact of the statement on them, adults and student ... They realized they mattered, they made a difference, and she had expressed this for all of them. 641 1 CITY OF BOZEMAN FOWLER NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT PHASE II Middle Income Homeownership May, 2026 Bozeman, MT Prepared By: Facilitator Diane Groves 642 2 During May 2026, three in-person community listening sessions were held about the Fowler Neighborhood Project. For each of the three sessions, 1-2 elected officials and 2-3 City staff were asked to participate as listeners. Others were invited from the community who have differing relationships and mixed perspectives about middle-income homeownership and the Fowler Neighborhood project: 4-5 Harvest Creek (HC) neighbors (2 adjacent neighbors and or an HOA board member, and 2-3 nearby HC neighbors), 1 local builder, 1 housing professional, 1-2 local target homebuyers or a current resident of middle-income housing, and 1 hiring professional. Facilitator Introduction and Agenda (Session introduction was presented on flipcharts - as follows) (Presented on flip chart) Phase II Purposes: ● The purpose of tonight’s listening circle is not to make a final decision about the Fowler Neighborhood Project. The purpose is to help people with different relationships to this issue hear one another more fully and help the City understand the values, concerns, questions, and conditions that could shape the next phase of work. ● The first report summarized what was heard in individual conversations. This session gives us a chance to bring some of those perspectives into conversation with one another. ● Tonight, we are trying to do three things: let participants hear the complexity across roles and perspectives; move from “my concern” to “the whole system we are trying to serve”; and identify design and process conditions that could make the project more workable, credible, and trusted. ● We are not here to debate whether someone’s concern is valid. We are here to understand what matters, what people are worried about, where there may be alignment, where there are differing perspectives, and what would need to be addressed for the path forward to be credible, workable, and responsible. (Presented on flip chart) City Sideboards What has been established: ● The City is pursuing a below-market housing project intended to serve middle- income residents, generally households earning 110% to 150% of AMI, who have been priced out of the current housing market. ● The City will not pursue a 4- or 5-story development. 643 3 ● City Commissioners retain final decision-making authority. ● Commissioners and City staff are participating in this phase primarily as listeners. What has not been decided: · Housing types. · Number of units. · Exact site design. · Parking. · Green space. · Materials. · Other design and implementation details. Tonight is not a blank-slate conversation, and it is also not a final-decision conversation. It is a listening and sense-making conversation within those sideboards. The Meaning of Consensus in this Process - What Consensus Means Here Consensus in this process does not mean every person in this room has final decision- making authority. It also does not mean every person must agree before the City can act. It is consensus as a disciplined community learning and problem-solving process. In this process, consensus means we are working to identify: · areas of shared understanding, · areas of agreement, · areas of differing perspectives, · questions that still exist, · concerns that need to be addressed, · tradeoffs that need to be made visible, · and conditions that could make a path forward more credible, responsible, and workable. 644 4 Meeting Process and Collected Data - Integrated Report This document contains collective statements from information developed during the listening sessions. These collective statements are developed from individual statements expressed during the sessions and represent the exact individual perceptions of all the participants. As such, they represent the collective views of the participants. In reading this report, remember that these are the real and exact words expressed and recorded by the participants at the session. Each statement in this report is intentional. This is not a professional report that replaces the personal statement with technical jargon. The process and rationale used for the listening session are also in the APPENDIX. After an introduction from each person in the circle, each person who attended to share their perspective had a chance to speak and be listened to by City staff and elected officials (see listening process in appendix). Following this share out each person was handed a 3x5 card to record 2 things they heard shared by someone else and at least 1 thing they shared. Listeners only recorded what they heard. . WHAT WE HEARD AND WHAT WE SHARED What We Heard and Shared: Housing Affordability and Homeownership Housing Costs Have Outpaced Local Incomes ● Homes skyrocketed in value with no improvements made to justify the increases during COVID. Inflated home values without value added during COVID. ● Bozeman is deeply unaffordable. There are no quality homes that people like me can buy in this community. ● I could not save enough money, even if I did not buy anything extra, and still afford a home at current prices. ● Young people cannot stay and put roots down—none of my four kids have been able to afford to stay here. ● This entire situation is an income issue first. Bozeman needs to create ownership, economic opportunities, and upward mobility for our middle class, or risk losing it. ● Economic issues (market versus affordability) create opportunities for different economic solutions. The City’s Economic Development Office is not facilitating high-income jobs in the area, as evidenced by the significant growth in hotel and restaurant jobs. 645 5 Homeownership Creates Stability ● A desire for homeownership for the working middle class in our community. People want opportunities for stability and predictability through affordable home ownership. ● My home may not be what I would describe as the dream home with four bedrooms and a quarter acre, but it is a nice home, not a bad home, and it allows me to manage my money for the future because my mortgage is stable. ● Renting creates a lot of instability, frequent moves, and unstable monthly housing costs. ● A cap on appreciation is better than losing thousands and thousands of dollars to rent—I do not recover anything in equity. Simply having the ability to own a home is most important. ● Someone shared a personal story about the impact of how the CLT homeownership model made staying in Bozeman possible. Middle-Income Housing Matters ● This is not low-income housing. It is middle-income housing. ● Middle-income homeownership is important for the overall health of the local economy. ● There is a stigma about people like me who have a good-paying job but still need help affording a home. It is important to remember that the housing situation is the problem. People should not be treated as though they are less. ● Many renters in the tenant union would not be able to qualify for these homes because they are still too expensive. They still support the project and would appreciate the opportunity to live in any home like this. ● Hiring people for positions at the university and the school district has become difficult. ● Teachers try to find other single teachers to rent with. ● Bozeman schools want to maintain being the best school district, so they want to attract the best teachers. They also have a program to grow their own teachers so that people already employed and living here can become teachers. Clarifying Affordability ● It is important to be clear rather than just saying "affordable." There are a lot of housing needs that are called affordable, such as shelter, affordable rent for low-income residents, and middle-income homeownership. ● It is not clear to most people what is meant by 110%–150% of AMI; people want to understand what that means in salaries. Community Land Trusts (CLT), Equity, and Wealth Building Questions and Concerns About CLTs 646 6 ● CLTs are confusing to people. CLT community land trusts create uncertainty for some people about whether they are a good investment because they cap appreciation. ● Adjacent neighbors may worry about how they affect existing property values. ● There was concern around CLT appreciation being too low for those who participate. ● Limited appreciation of affordable housing can create a financial trap. ● Housing trust model could be a housing trap (3% appreciation with a 6% mortgage). Benefits and Stability of CLTs and Lived Experiences ● Housing trust model still lets people build equity and protects against risk in downturns. ● CLTs can have a stabilizing effect compared to the regular market, especially during times like 2008. ● Some people are specifically looking to live in CLTs because of their stability. ● Trust in the community land trust model and how it is working in other projects. This model exists and works in Bozeman. ● Community land trust homeownership unlocks possibilities for stability and wealth building, not just for initial buyers but across generations. ● It is a smart, durable community investment. ● Permanently affordable, middle-income homeownership in the Fowler project could yield positive benefits for adjacent neighbors, including community stability, strong neighborhood networks, and intentional design. ● People who previously purchased in Bridger are realizing gains. ● I heard a person who is currently living in a CLT affordable housing who is happy with a tiny yard where she grows vegetables. ● A cap on appreciation is better than losing thousands and thousands of dollars to rent—I do not recover anything in equity. ● Personal impact of how the CLT homeownership model made staying in Bozeman possible. Neighborhood Design, Character, and Quality of Life Community Character and Neighborhood Fit ● Quality of the homes themselves needs to be high quality, a place owners and the community feel proud of. Creating a quality neighborhood that is connected to Harvest Creek is important. ● Community integration is very important. The development will be part of the Harvest Creek neighborhood. It needs to integrate well. ● Neighborhoods matter. I have always purchased homes for the neighborhood, not just the home itself. ● The original drawing designs did not fit Bozeman or blend with the neighborhood. 647 7 ● Not everything that has been built in Bozeman is quality. Green Space, Trails, and Outdoor Amenities ● Has green space or a trail, a place where people can walk their dogs and kids, not on the busiest roads. ● Likes the location because of access to trails and parks. ● Harvest Creek neighbors are very interested in greenspace for each unit and trails. ● Those looking for housing spoke less about that amenity and appreciated proximity to larger parks and green space nearby. Housing Types and Variety ● We should look at local housing models and neighborhoods that are working (example: Valley West). ● Developments with varying price points are more desirable. ● A neighborhood gains value from a variety of price points. ● Variety of housing. ● Variety of financing options. ● I heard different tolerances for yards and no yards. For some, access to the park and trails is enough others desire at least a small yard. ● Including examples from Bridger View of mixed home types. ● It is possible to have a very expensive home next to a home that rents for or costs less to buy. ● Someone said first-time homebuyers want single-family homes. ● Most people would prefer a yard, garage, etc. when considering purchasing a residence. Density, Traffic, Parking, and Safety Density ● Some additional density may be acceptable. ● Density does not belong here; perhaps the town should be divided and density placed somewhere else. ● What is built here should be thoughtful. ● Keep density toward Fowler Road. ● One person said that if there is more density, it should be located toward the street. ● Neighbors are open to middle-income homeownership—if it is feasible—while considering parking and density. ● The devil is in the details, specifically around density and parking. Traffic and Safety 648 8 ● Traffic into the neighborhood is a major issue that needs to be addressed. ● Harvest Creek currently has lots of kids and dogs, so traffic needs to be considered. ● Pedestrian safety needs to be thought about. ● Density increases risk to pedestrians and cyclists. ● Density brings more dogs and people, so managing parking and safe foot traffic is important. Mixed-Use Development ● Maybe include some commercial uses like a coffee shop. ● Mixed-use development with commercial space on the ground floor. ● We can do three stories and mixed-use development along Fowler. ● Explore a mix of housing types and commercial uses to meet the needs of Bozeman residents. Trust, Transparency, and Public Process Desire for Transparency ● It is important to be transparent when information is known. If people do not know, they assume the worst. ● Fear of the unknown. When people do not know, they fill in information with what they fear. ● A willingness to compromise and a desire for transparency. Concerns About the City's Process ● The beginning of the process last year was scary and did not build trust. ● A feeling of distrust with the City due to original concepts and drawings. ● Distrust of the City and the process. ● Some Harvest Creek neighbors believe the City does not care about their opinions as homeowners. ● Preference for working out a plan through informal channels. ● Mistrust in the process and institutions. ● Concerned about a mismatch of engagement. ● We are talking to current homeowner neighbors but unable to get feedback from the people who would most benefit—future homeowners. ● Impact of the consensus process that could delay or slow down the project due to accommodating various perspectives. ● Concerns around this process and the dilution of expertise. Desire for Meaningful Engagement 649 9 ● Let folks be part of planning and design—no surprises at the end. ● Professionals, homeowners, and those who will actually buy homes all have a voice in common. ● Harvest Creek homeowners care about community engagement and are willing to compromise for a feasible project. ● The value of trust and collaboration with the City is imperative to success. ● I believe the whole community benefits from stable affordable housing. Concerns, Risks, and Potential Impacts Property Values and Financial Security ● Fear of loss of assets, value, and security for the future. ● Concerns around equity and investments. ● Fear of the resulting project on adjacent home values and quality of life. ● Concern the overall housing market will dip and values needed will be lost. Change and Uncertainty ● Change can be scary. ● I heard fear of change. ● Fear of the unknown. ● Acceptance of future development and hope for compromise. ● What is best for the neighborhood and the project is a good opportunity. Housing Market, Realtors, and Economic Systems Housing Market Concerns ● It is not common for the market to experience such high jumps like it did during COVID. ● People also want to know why the market has jumped so much. Realtor and Market Criticism ● Where are the ethics within our local real estate professionals? ● What responsibility do they have in these market spikes? ● Price gouging by realtors—not selling value, but "how much can we get for the house?" ● One person pointed to realtors being the issue, pricing things high so they can make a profit. 650 10 ● Another person expressed frustration around housing being for profit and not for living in. Solutions, Opportunities, and Path Forward Learning from Successes ● We can solve this problem. ● Let us look at what we can do. ● Let us focus on what we can do by looking at past successes. ● Use past success to create a path forward. ● We should look at housing models that are successful and working in the community and see what we can learn from them. Support for the Project if Done Well ● Not against affordable housing development, just want those projects to be thoughtful and mindfully executed. ● Glad the City has agreed not to build four-story buildings. ● An understanding that there should be compromise and recognition of the importance of this type of housing. ● Acceptance of future development and hope for compromise. ● The housing challenges in our community are large, and people generally have a lot of empathy for those affected. ● Many said the City has a tough job. ● Some acknowledged that this project alone will not solve the housing problem. ● Others are optimistic about the project and want to see it happen so more housing options become available. ● What is best for the neighborhood and the project is a good opportunity. Eligibility and Access ● Make sure that all assets are considered so people who do not have other options for homeownership actually get qualified. ● Be thoughtful about the criteria that you use to qualify. ● Some single people explore ways to purchase a home together so they can afford to own and stay in Bozeman. ● And to buy a house with the support of parents. THE WORST POSSIBLE OUTCOMES OF NOT WORKING TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY ON THE FOWLER NEIGHBORHOOD 651 11 If We Do Not Work Collaboratively Loss of Trust in the City and the Process ● The project is shadowed in controversy. ● Harvest Creek neighbors feel they were not listened to. No effect on outcome. ● They hate the development and hate the City. ● They say the consensus process was a sham. ● We risk reinforcing broken trust between the City and the community; we participated, but nothing changed. Eroded or broken trust among all groups—it takes time to rebuild. Loss of trust. There is a breakdown of trust in our government systems and belief in the ability to support all local residents. Further erosion between City leaders and the community. Trust is destroyed with residents (neighbors and people looking for housing). ● Angry citizens, resentment toward the City, and possible new residents. Anger and mistrust persist. Community Division and Resentment ● It becomes all about units and numbers and not about building community. ● A divided community. ● Neighbors resent future homeowners of the project. ● An undesirable, unmanaged development that breeds resentment and anger between new neighbors, existing neighbors, and City leadership. ● Further divides are created. ● There are unintended consequences involving division among residents. ● Anger and mistrust persist. Housing Does Not Remain Affordable ● The housing built is so constrained that it is not affordable. ● Housing is unaffordable in the project. ● Nothing moves forward and no additional below-market units are built. ● A product is built that the target homebuyers cannot afford. ● Housing continues to be unaffordable—options remain limited. ● All homes are market-rate and do not serve identified needs. ● The project is not geared toward the target audience. ● A development that does not serve its purpose or mission for middle-income affordable homeownership. Fewer Homes for People Who Need Them 652 12 ● Neighbors want so few homes in the new neighborhood that it fails to be affordable. ● Thirty to fifty households may not have access to homes they can afford. ● We make it harder for people to own homes in Bozeman. ● There is a missed opportunity for homeownership for some of Bozeman’s population. ● The City does not house as many families at an affordable rate as it could have. ● The project could die, and more community members are displaced. ● Key community members walk away to find housing elsewhere. Missing an Opportunity to Address a Community Need ● We squander our chance to do something truly innovative with land we actually have control over as a City. ● If we are too responsive to hyper-local concerns, we lose an opportunity to make a meaningful difference on a critical community-wide need. ● Failing to center the problem we are trying to solve—housing affordability and community vitality—signals that Bozeman is not for the middle class, similar to Jackson Hole. ● We fail to capitalize on a unique opportunity to meet an urgent community need. ● We fail to set an example for peer communities across the West that we can all be proud of. ● Missing an opportunity to demonstrate the City’s commitment to creating opportunities for middle-income families to purchase a home. ● The worst outcome would be the loss of support to pursue projects like this in the future. Wrong Housing Product Gets Built ● Without collaboration, the wrong housing product gets built. ● We will build housing that potential buyers do not want. ● Unacceptable living conditions for buyers because it becomes their only choice. The homes built are not desirable and do not sell. ● A bad project that no one wants to live in. ● A subpar project. ● A project with significant negative impacts on the community and adjoining neighborhood. ● An undesirable, unmanaged development. ● A development that does not serve its purpose or mission. No Housing Gets Built ● No housing gets built at all. ● Nothing moves forward, and no additional below-market units are built. ● There is no compromise found with the neighbors. ● The project could die. 653 13 Property Values and Home Equity Loss ● The Fowler project detracts from Harvest Creek home values and quality of life. ● Reducing property values. ● The working class of Harvest Creek experiences a significant decrease in home values while paying increased taxes. ● It is an economic robbery of the working middle class of Harvest Creek. ● The loss of home value for adjacent property owners. ● Loss of retirement funds due to loss of home equity. Taxpayer and Financial Costs ● A lawsuit costs City taxpayers millions. ● A financial burden on owners of the four-cell homes due to improper disclosure. ● Waste of tax dollars by building something that does not fit the intended scope or purpose. ● Too much expenditure of City funds for less gain. ● A money sink for everyone. Traffic and Parking ● Increasing traffic safety problems and congestion. ● Too many parking spaces. ● Too few parking spaces. Safety and Security ● There are unintended consequences involving safety issues and security of City residents. ● Lack of safety for children and families in the area. Density and Neighborhood Compatibility ● High-density homes on top of an existing neighborhood. ● The Fowler project detracts from Harvest Creek quality of life. ● A project with significant negative impacts on the community and adjoining neighborhood. ● Loss of green space. Development Falls into the Wrong Hands ● A developer comes in and develops something that does not work for anyone. ● It becomes another avenue for the top 1% to buy a second home in Bozeman. 654 14 ● It becomes similar to what is being built in Big Sky. ● It goes to the free market and gets bought up by private equity. What We Hope to Create Through Collaboration with City and Community Trust, Relationships, and Working Together ● Build trust between the City and citizens. ● We develop relationships with one another where we can continue working together. ● Trust is built that the City listens. ● We can find compromise and innovation through dialogue. ● Community members regain trust and feel gratitude and pride. ● Trust grows, and people can take a breath. ● Harmony between all stakeholders. ● Understand one another’s different perspectives better. ● I am hopeful and excited to work with the City again. Trust in Future City Projects and Processes ● Future support for these types of projects. ● Framework for a successful process for similar projects and opportunities in the future. ● This becomes an example for future housing in Bozeman and Montana—a leader and role model. A Model for Other Communities ● A model project and neighborhood that serves as an example of success. ● A good project that meets the needs and expectations of a representative and diverse slice of the community. ● There is broad buy-in. ● A model to replicate. ● We do something for Bozeman to become a model for others to follow. ● A model development to replicate in other parts of the City. ● This becomes an example for future housing in Bozeman and Montana—a leader and role model. 655 15 Affordable Homeownership Opportunities ● Creation of truly affordable housing for the middle class. ● The creation of a Fowler neighborhood project that meets the needs of middle-income homeownership. ● There will be homeownership opportunities. ● Permanently affordable, desirable homeownership opportunities that sell. ● The target homebuyer gets stable housing through homeownership. ● Neighborhood stability through occupancy and affordable homes. ● Many people are provided with the opportunity for homeownership. Housing for Essential Workers and Local Residents ● A number of essential workers who otherwise could not—such as nurses, teachers, firefighters, and police officers—get to own housing and stay in Bozeman. ● Homes help Bozeman residents and workers. ● Middle-income households put down roots, start new businesses, and serve the community. Housing That Meets Community Needs ● We build a housing development that truly meets our housing needs. ● A thoughtfully designed project that provides housing for those who need it at a reasonable price point. ● A good project that meets the needs and expectations of a representative and diverse slice of the community. ● We created buy-in and support for CLT and middle-income ownership and built a neighborhood that made a meaningful impact on the problem. ● The whole community is proud of it. Integration with Harvest Creek ● We create an affordable mixed-use neighborhood fully integrated into Harvest Creek. ● Creation of truly affordable housing for the middle class that complements and enhances the quality of life of the entire area and integrates well with the adjacent neighborhood. ● An integrated mixed-housing-type development that reaches affordability targets. ● An integrated neighborhood that not only creates value but helps revitalize and increase the value of existing neighborhoods. ● A thoughtfully designed project that successfully integrates into the existing neighborhood. ● We add new neighbors to a great neighborhood and build a community that becomes seamless. ● Newer neighbors become an integral part of the Harvest Creek HOA and community. 656 16 ● The housing development does not infringe on the rights of adjacent homeowners. Neighbor Support and Acceptance ● We are asked to build at least 60 homes that can be embraced by adjacent Harvest Creek neighbors. ● The neighbors are on board and supportive of density that allows the project to be affordable. ● Those neighbors who reside in it love their homes and are embraced by existing neighbors. ● Existing neighbors and new neighbors take pride in the project. ● New homes and homeowners bring richness and benefit to existing homeowners. ● The City can build in a way with little to no consequences for neighbors. Community Building and Belonging ● We can create community and housing that advance the well-being of neighbors. ● We meet the varied needs of residents while intentionally fostering inclusion and belonging for new and established residents. ● The community grows and strengthens. ● We add new neighbors to a great neighborhood and build a community that becomes seamless. ● Newer neighbors become an integral part of the Harvest Creek HOA and community. Neighborhood Quality and Livability ● An intentional, mindful development. ● A neighborhood is built that is quality—not granite counters, but quality in the sense of being built to last. ● A neighborhood that has dignity and could be someone’s forever home. ● Creation of a desirable neighborhood where people want to live. ● A vibrant, desirable neighborhood seen as an addition to the current housing stock. ● It satisfies families who are invested in the community through PTA involvement, neighborhood assets, and civic engagement. Design Quality and Compatibility ● Through high-quality design, we are able to integrate more housing units into the existing neighborhood in a thoughtful and collaborative way. ● An integrated mixed-housing-type development is loved by existing neighbors by adding value to their lives and homes. ● A neighborhood that honors Harvest Creek priorities, such as two-story homes, while allowing for sunlight and airflow. 657 17 ● A thoughtfully designed project that successfully integrates into the existing neighborhood. ● The housing development does not infringe on the rights of adjacent homeowners. Property Values and Neighborhood Enhancement ● The project enhances the neighborhood. ● An integrated neighborhood helps revitalize and increase the value of existing neighborhoods. ● Existing neighbors gain richness and benefit from new homes and homeowners. ● The project adds value to the lives and homes of existing neighbors. Community Pride ● A project that the whole community can be proud of. ● Current and new community members can take pride in and embrace the project. ● The whole community is proud of it. ● Community members regain trust and feel gratitude and pride. Safety and Transportation Improvements ● Increasing traffic safety. Keeping transportation and safety in mind. ● Increased safety through newer enhancements such as roundabouts and signs. Folks feel safe in their neighborhood. ● The City can build in a way with little to no consequences for neighbors. Changing Perceptions of Affordable Housing ● The dispelling of myths around affordable housing. Understand one another’s different perspectives better. Long-Term Impact and Future Generations ● A project that creates opportunities for generations of Bozemanites to build the kind of lives we aspire to. ● Middle-income households put down roots, start new businesses, and serve the community. ● Neighborhood stability through occupancy and affordable homes. ● A meaningful impact on the housing problem. ● A framework for future successful projects and opportunities. The best possible outcomes are the collective hopes of people in the community. A vision can be created that captures the major themes of the collective statements above - We envision a thoughtfully designed, high-quality neighborhood that is fully integrated into the Harvest Creek 658 18 community, provides permanently affordable homeownership opportunities for middle-income residents, enhances safety and quality of life, fosters belonging among new and existing neighbors, and demonstrates how collaboration, trust, and innovation can create lasting benefits for the entire Bozeman community and future generations. The Advice We Have for Fostering Collaboration and Next Steps Maintain a Clear Vision and Follow Through ● However you move forward, you will not avoid adversity; you just have to see it through. Come up with a vision and refine it; stick with it. ● We just need to dig into it with open minds. ● Strategic consideration of integrated design and community benefit that looks across the next seven generations, but also incorporates action, not just thoughts. ● Once it’s on the ground, I’m confident that the neighbors will love their new neighbors. Improve Transparency and Communication ● A more transparent and ongoing inclusive communication of all aspects of the project. ● Intense, clear, direct communication of any plan going forward, including all pertinent information regarding design, budget, and timing. ● Clarity to the community regarding what steps remain. ● City check-ins—keep communication open to reduce loss of understanding about what is happening. ● Update the Engage Bozeman timeline frequently. Strengthen Relationships and Listening ● Must continue to really listen to one another. The city needs to listen and be willing to compromise and act in the best interests of the majority of its citizens, including people who live and work in Bozeman, not temporary residents. ● Assume positive intent. Keep open-mindedness and softness. ● Remember, we had similar ideas about what a successful project would look like for people. Improve Public Accessibility and Understanding ● Ensure City Hall is accessible. Ex: from City: If you’re wanting to know, ask directly. 659 19 ● Highlight other similar local projects and take the time to understand the nuances of why they are successful. ● Translation of models, including financial models, for everyone. ● Clarify to the community what steps remain. ● Address broader issues. ● We need to have an updated needs analysis for our market. ● Understand where we are now and what we still need to develop. Use Visuals and Concept Designs to Support Understanding ● Create concept designs with different tradeoffs. ● Provide examples that illustrate tradeoffs involving parking, greenspace, commercial uses, and housing. Bring pictures or drawings of homes and units built that reflect the scale of the houses, the surrounding area, and the percentage of green space that are amenable to achieving the goals of the development. ● Rendering options similar to the Fowler Street project. ● Create a land plan that focuses on the ideas created here. Start iterating on potential neighborhood plans. Explore Design Tradeoffs and Neighborhood Preferences ● Explore whether the Harvest Creek neighborhood wants a coffee shop or small commercial development. ● Determine whether commercial development is allowed on R-B zoning. ● Do research on affordability targets and ask neighborhoods. ● Harvest Creek HOA has hard lines; will it be a failure of the process to have some three- story buildings? ● I want everyone to keep an open mind about how density could integrate with the neighborhood if it is thoughtfully designed. ● Commitments from the City on parking, safety, density, green space, and neighborhood access points. Finance, Affordability, and Product Quality ● Must center affordability. Center affordability in all conversations. Maximize affordability and access. ● Be really creative with financing and making the project pencil out while attaining a quality, durable product with a variety of options for different people. ● Housing cost is the biggest problem—not the cost of building quality homes. ● Maximize affordability and access. ● Ensure permanent affordability through Community Land Trust partnerships, organizations, and the City. 660 20 Move the Project Toward Implementation ● Create a process for advancing the City’s draft proposal for this project and make it a model for others to emulate. ● Involve a developer who will be tasked with the development as soon as possible. ● Take what we have learned and put it into a design. Get it built. Process Design and Decision-Making ● Per Mike’s suggestion, find a way to design a project with input from neighbors and community members, such as a design charrette. Distill it further and have smaller involved groups with representatives from various perspectives. ○ Get priorities locked down from both sides and identify where there is consensus or where compromise is possible. ● City after-action report on this process. Create Ongoing Opportunities for Input through the process. ● Ongoing opportunities for input from all stakeholders and constituents. ● There needs to be significant meetings between City decision-makers and homeowners. ● Involve homeowners at each phase to ensure clear communication. ● Get opinions and guidance from adjacent homeowners. 661 21 PARTICIPANTS: Andrea Kavert, Betsy Asserson, Bill Backes, Bill Valencourt, Courtney Naumann, Erin Allison, Grant Syth, Greg Stratton, Heather Higgs, Jesse Hoffman, Meredith Center, Mike Roser, Molly McGuire, Nathan Stein, Olive Sohn, Pat Straus, Rick Simkins, Tony Modugno Listeners: David Fine, Brian Guyer, Takami Clark, Emilly Kiely, Brit Fontenot Emma Bode, Alisson Sweeney,Joey Morrison, Jennifer Madgic End of report 662 22 APPENDIX LISTENING SESSIONS GENERAL PROCESS AND RATIONALE: This is the general process used during the Phase II listening sessions in the City of Bozeman. It includes a brief rationale for each activity. The process is often changed or adapted to fit the time available. 1. Introduction by facilitator. This allows the facilitator to get his/her voice in the room with an introduction, an overview of the project, and to talk about the purpose of the session. 2. Grounding: This allows each person to get their voice in the room equally. It establishes a Listening with Respect environment, where all speak in turn without interruption by others. It creates a sense of safety for the participants and provides some sense of community concerns. Each person answers three questions: Introduce yourself and your relationship to middle-income homeownership and/or the Fowler Neighborhood project. What are your expectations for this listening session? How do you feel about being here? When the participants pause, do not interrupt or try to help. Let them speak in their own time. Silence is OK for a while. They are thinking, overcoming self-consciousness. If you sense they need some time, ask if you can continue and come back to them. Then make sure you come back to them. 3. Greeting Circle. Meeting everyone. (OPTIONAL) The facilitator moves inside the circle and greets the person to their left; then continues inside the circle, greeting each person in turn. Those who have been greeted follow the person who greeted them last inside the circle. When the facilitator returns to his or her original location, those inside the circle will continue to greet them, a second time. This time, the person inside the circle is the greeter, not the greeted. This balances the circle. This allows the participants to meet each other as adults on a personal basis, to overcome the feeling of intimidation, and to feel equal. It increases a sense of security, a sense of community. 4. Learning from the experience. (Optional) This activity allows all participants to learn from the experience. It helps them to get their voice in the room, knowing 663 23 they will be listened to. It provides initial information on their concerns and how they feel. How do you feel about the greeting circle? What did you learn that will help us to listen and learn from each other? 5. Listening to the Community: Community members (adjacent and affected neighbors, organizations, target homeowners, local builders, housing specialists, etc.) speak to a planning staff member or elected official that they select from the group. This person is a listener who only responds with what they heard. It is imperative that the listeners understand they are to respond only to what they heard and not how they feel about it. This puts the importance on the community member who speaks, and on their message. Listening to community members will make them feel acknowledged and understood. It creates non-verbal cues in the listening adult that are comforting to the speakers. Continuing to listen to the community members/students will make them feel accepted. (Research supports this.) “Community member... select a staff person/neighborhood member to be your listener.” Wait until they do. Then...answer these questions: What is your perspective on middle-income homeownership and the Fowler Neighborhood project, and how do you feel about it? The selected listener responds: “This is what I heard.” NOTE: A backup listener is also selected to help the listener. This person is usually the previous listener. Often, the participants will be shy and self-conscious about answering this question. They may pass, speak very softly, state they “don’t know,” or be silent. All are acceptable behaviors. They are still not certain they can trust the group. Be comfortable with how they act, allow them to be themselves, in the moment. This is an experience where they need to see if they can trust you, if you will accept them as they are. If a participant passes, be sure to give them another chance when all have spoken. 664 24 6. Recording information: This not only provides a record of the conversation, it also assures that people feel they are heard. The facilitator passes out 3 x 5 cards. Then the facilitator provides them with this task: What descriptions of managing growth in Bozeman did you hear others express? (On one side of the card.) What descriptions of managing growth in Bozeman did you express? (On the other side of the card.) State question one and wait until they finish recording before stating the second question. This allows the person to focus on each separately. This not only gathers information but also assures the participants that what they said has been heard. And... it is written in their own words. OPTIONAL: If there is time, have each person read off the information from the cards. If not, gather the cards before moving on. 7. Worst Possible outcomes(expectations):3 x 5 cards are passed out. The facilitator asks the participants to answer this question What are the worst possible outcomes if we do not collaborate successfully with the Fowler Neighborhood project? This information is read off by each person before moving ahead. This raises people’s concerns and fears to the level of consciousness. If not expressed, these worst possible outcomes tend to become self-fulfilling prophecies. Once all have read off their cards, an insight into the Worst/Best outcomes is presented. The cards are collected before moving ahead. 8. Best Possible Outcomes(expectations): 3 x 5 cards are passed out. The facilitator asks the participants to answer this question: Working together, what will be the best possible outcomes? This information is read off by each person before moving ahead. This expresses the purposes that the collective community wants to create through working collaboratively with the City and the community. By expressing these, the possibility exists that they can become self-fulfilling prophecies. 9. Closure: This activity brings a closure to the listening session, allowing neighborhood and community members The community members, students and educators answer to this question is normally that the experience was a good 665 25 one for them, it created the kind of learning environment they want, one that is caring, respectful, understanding, acknowledging. The same occurs for adults. Each person answers in turn: How do you feel about this session? What is your advice to foster collaboration and next steps. (recorded on 3x5 and read off) 10. Honoring: (Optional, if there is time.) The purpose of honoring is to allow each of the groups to acknowledge and appreciate each other. The facilitator has everyone stand first. Then... • The Planning staff/listeners honor the community members. (The community members first go to the center of the circle, and one chosen staff person honors them.) • The community members the listeners. (Listeners go to the center of the circle and one or two chosen community members honor them.) COLLECTIVE STATEMENTS: Collective statements are prepared from all the information collected. Leaving the information in bullet form results in a confusing mass of individual statements. Collective statements provide a cohesive picture of what the participants said and provides a focus for the Planning Staff. The process for collective statements is in the APPENDIX. 666 26 * COLLECTIVE STATEMENTS Collective statements are based on the belief that each of us sees the world from a different viewpoint. Our individual views are like pieces of a puzzle -- when we fit them all together, we get the full picture. In most meetings our views tend to be seen as competitive. When someone speaks, another person responds with a counterstatement, and the meeting progresses with each trying to convince the other of his or her rightness. This behavior is based on a belief in the "one right answer" to all questions. Only one of us can be right, so our intelligence is used to establish that rightness firmly. It becomes a competition in which each person's ego and intelligence are at stake. This is either/or thinking -- either you are right, or I am! Often, two or three people will capture all the time in a meeting with this either/or conflict, while others listen, get bored, and drop out. It is a time-consuming, ineffective process. The meeting ends with some vaguely worded compromise that relieves the participants. They leave with little commitment to it. Collective thinking assumes we can all learn something from each other. We have different views of a situation, and all views are right. This is done with many of the workshop tasks. The collective statements are the result of adding individual statements together, keeping each person's words to the best extent possible, creating a statement of the total group. * DEVELOPING A COLLECTIVE STATEMENT A collective statement process is based on the notion that we all have different views of a situation, and all views are right. Each of us perceives the world through our experiences, our values and beliefs and our desires. In some tasks, statements made by each individual participant are recorded as accurately as possible. These statements are first segregated into common groups. The individual statements are then added together, keeping each person's words to the best extent possible, creating a statement of the total group. At times it is necessary to add words to the brief recorded statements to clarify the intent. Or a word might be added to bridge two or more statements together. This is kept to a minimum to retain the original recorded thought. 667 27 While some grammatical improvements may be made, the original statement and the original words are kept as close as possible. As an example, these were the original recorded statements from a previous workshop, of the "Senior Citizens Worst Outcomes of the Situation": 668 28 SENIOR CITIZENS WORST OUTCOMES OF THE SITUATION: 1. Unsafe community to live in 2. Will regress, if no progress 3. Things fine, no higher taxes 4. Our senior programs will be cut--lack of funds 5. My needs as a senior will not be considered and taxes rise--skyrocket 6. More leave town, higher crime, higher taxes, less facilities 7. Leads to collapse of government 8. If not forward, then backwards. 9. Become retirement community, kids leave, no industry. 10. Uncertain, unhappy future. The statements are segregated to become like groups of statements: SENIOR CITIZENS WORST OUTCOMES OF THE SITUATION: 2. Will regress, if no progress 8. If not forward, then backwards. 3. Things fine, no higher taxes 9. Become retirement community, kids leave, no industry 5. my needs as a senior will not be considered and taxes rise--skyrocket 4. Our senior programs will be cut--lack of funds 1. Unsafe community to live in 6. More leave town, higher crime, higher taxes, less facilities 7. Leads to collapse of government 10. Uncertain, unhappy future These statements are now linked together to form the final collective statement. Words that are added in the process are shown in parentheses: THE SENIOR CITIZENS WORST OUTCOMES: (The community) will regress, if (there is) no progress. If (we do) not (move) forward, then (we slide) backwards. (We all think that) things (are) fine, (as long as there are) no higher taxes. (We) become (a) retirement community, (the) kids leave, (there is) no industry. My needs as (a) senior will not be considered and taxes will rise, skyrocketing. Our senior programs will be cut (because) of (a) lack of funds. 669 29 (This will be an) unsafe community to live in. (More business and people) leave town, (because of) higher crime, higher taxes, less facilities. (This) leads to a collapse of government. (We face) an uncertain, unhappy future. 670 30 I MATTER “I didn’t think I mattered... until today.” Those words were spoken by a junior in high school, a young blond-haired teenager. She spoke to them at the end of the day, as the group of students were doing the closure. All eyes, and all attention were immediately upon her. She spoke these words carefully and deliberately. Her head was up, and her eyes focused on the group. She was looking at 55 other students from her high school, a multi-colored, multi-ethnic group. These would have been considered the at-risk children in the school, children with learning problems that were physical, emotional, intellectual. They would be considered problem children by most of us. To their teachers who were present, and their Principal, who sponsored this day, they were an opportunity. The group of almost 60 adults and high school students was brought together to explore the learning environment they had created in their school, educators and students. Their purpose was to explore and establish a movement to create the kind of learning environment that would motivate them to learn, to grow into capable, growing human beings. They had engaged themselves in this exploration, with great focus and intensity, surprising all the adults with their interest in creating a learning environment that was healthy and functional. They knew what the situation was, why it was, and they knew what they wanted, and how to get there. At the end of the day, the whole group sat in a circle, and each adult and student answered the closure questions: How do you feel about this session today? What did you learn that will help us create that learning environment that you want? When it was her turn to speak, the young woman thought for a moment before speaking, her head down slightly. A pause. Then, speaking softly, but purposefully: “Before today, I didn’t really think that I mattered. I didn’t think I mattered to my family, to my classmates or teachers, or to anyone else. I often thought that it would make no difference to anyone or anything if I was even here.” She paused. “I knew I didn’t matter. I often thought of not being here (sic alive), and if that happened, that nobody would even notice that I was gone.” 671 31 The shocking nature of her statement was felt by the entire group. At this moment the entire attention of the group was focused on this young woman, expressing herself truthfully, authentically. At this moment, she mattered to them, and it was obvious. “Today has changed all that,” she said as she continued. Her eyes were misted with tears now, as were the eyes of many of the group. “I realized today that I did make a difference, that what I had to say was important, because it was different than what others had to say. And..... I was listened to when I said it. Then I heard the statements (collective statements) that we read at the end of the day, and I could see what I said was in there. And, it made a difference... I made a difference.” “That is what I learned,” she said softly, but clearly, her voice catching somewhat, “ that I make a difference, that I matter. After today I will never forget that. That is what I learned. There was a pause, silence for a moment, then a few sounds of applause, then more, until all were applauding and standing. As they did this, I sensed they were not only applauding this young person and what she said, what she learned. They were applauding the impact of the statement on them, adults and student ... They realized they mattered, they made a difference, and she had expressed this for all of them. 672