Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutUpdate on Carnegie Parcels Hotel Development RFQ Process1 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Carnegie Parcels RFQ Preliminary Review Panel (the Panel) Brit Fontenot, Director of Economic Development Chris Kukulski, City Manager SUBJECT: Update on the Carnegie Parcels Hotel Development Request for Qualifications (RFQ) Process, Direction to Carnegie Parcels RFQ Preliminary Review Panel Regarding the Scheduling of Respondent Interviews and Preparation of a Final Recommendation. MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action Item RECOMMENDATION: Receive presentation, ask questions of Staff and the Panel, receive public comment and provide direction to the Panel on the continuation of the RFQ process including whether to conduct respondent interviews and forward of a final recommendation to the Commission that one firm be considered for an exclusive negotiation agreement for the Carnegie parcels. POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVE MOTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION [Please select one of the following]: If the Commission desires to continue with the RFQ process for development of the Carnegie parcels: I move that the Carnegie parcels RFQ Preliminary Review Panel continue with the process of conducting interviews of the two qualified respondents and extend the deadline for the Panel’s recommendation for an additional 30 days (or another date certain). [An additional 30 days forwards the hearing date to August 13, 2012.] OR If the Commission desires to suspend or terminate the RFQ process for development of the Carnegie parcels: I move that the Carnegie parcels RFQ process be suspended for a period of 90 days (or another date certain). [An additional 90 days forwards the hearing date to October 8, 2012.] 185 2 OR I move that the Carnegie parcels RFQ process be terminated. In the ALTERNATIVES section of this memorandum (p. 4) several additional alternatives not mentioned in the above potential motions are provided. BACKGROUND: A detailed process timeline from April, 2011 – February, 2012 is included as ATTACHMENT 1. On March 13, 2012 the RFQ, seeking firms interested in developing a full service hotel with meeting facilities on the Carnegie parcels owned by the City, was released to the public. The deadline for responses was established for 5 pm on April 13, 2012. By 5:00 pm on April 13, 2012 the City received three (3) Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) in response to the Carnegie RFQ. By April 13, 2012 the Carnegie Parcels Preliminary Review Panel was selected and seated. The Panel, consisting of one City Commissioner (Cyndy Andrus) along with City staff, representing the Parking Division (Paul Burns) and the Finance (Anna Rosenberry) and Planning (Tim McHarg) departments, joined representatives of the following downtown organizations; the downtown Business Improvement District (Mike Basile), the downtown Tax Increment Finance District (Bobby Bear) and the Parking Commission (Ben Bennett). The expectations of the Panel are described in the Evaluation Process, Section 7 of the RFQ, see ATTACHMENT 2. The section is reproduced in its entirety below: EVALUATION PROCESS THE CITY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REJECT ANY OR ALL SUBMITTALS AT ITS SOLE AND ABSOLUTE DISCRETION. The City will designate a preliminary review panel (the Panel) to evaluate all submittals received in response to this RFQ. Within 30 days of the submittal deadline, the panel will assess respondent qualifications based on the evaluation criteria described in Section 6, above. Panel members will score each proposal in their own preferred order. The scores assigned by each Panel member will be based on the individual member’s reasonable judgment as to the degree to which the proposal complies with the criteria and intent of the RFQ process. Members of the Panel and other City staff may contact references and industry sources, investigate previous projects and current commitments, and interview some or all of the development team. Within 60 days of the submittal deadline interviews may be scheduled for firms or teams which have been found to be the most responsive to the RFQ. Following review, one or more firms may be selected to submit a more detailed proposal including concept design drawings, financial projections, and the 186 3 financial terms for the purchase or lease of the Carnegie parcels. Within 90 days of the submittal deadline the panel may then recommend to the City Commission that one firm be considered for an exclusive negotiation agreement for the Carnegie parcels. The Panel met on: April 16 2012 to acknowledge SOQ responses and be briefed on the process and expectations; April 20, 2012 to discuss the responses and the initial scoring of the SOQs; April 30, 2012 to finalize scoring and discuss the interview process and content; and May 23, 2012 to discuss the RFQ process and request clarity and direction from City Commission and directed Staff to perform the following tasks: 1) Inform one of the three respondents that their SOQ did not meet the minimum scoring requirements and therefore would not proceed to the interview stage. The respondent which did not meet the minimum requirements was notified. 2) Verify the interest of the remaining two respondents in continuing with the RFQ process. The remaining qualified respondents were contacted and expressed interest in continuing the process to completion. 3) Request Commission clarity and direction via public hearing regarding the continuation of the RFQ process including: a. Schedule qualified respondent interviews; and b. After interviews, prepare a recommendation to the City Commission that one firm, if qualified, be considered for an exclusive negotiation agreement for the Carnegie parcels. Through the RFQ language, the Panel was directed by the Commission to return a recommendation within 90 days of the RFQ deadline of April 13, 2012. The recommendation deadline is July 13, 2012 and a public hearing scheduled for July 9, 2012. Carnegie parcels RFQ timeline: 1) SOQ deadline April 13, 2012; 2) SOQ deadline + 30 Days (May 13, 2012) – Assess respondent qualifications; 3) SOQ deadline + 60 Days (June 13, 2012) – Schedule and conduct qualified respondent interviews and request additional or more detailed information, if necessary; 4) SOQ deadline + 90 Days (July 13, 2012) – Commission recommendation (scheduled for Monday, July 9, 2012). If the Commission extends the Panel’s deadline for recommendation for an additional 30 days, the new deadline will be August 13, 2012. Additionally, the RFQ contains a Reservation of Rights section that provides the City the authority to suspend or terminate the RFQ process or to extend timelines when deemed necessary, see Section 10 of the RFQ, ATTACHMENT 2 The Panel requests direction from the Commission on the following: 187 4 1) Should the Committee continue with the RFQ process as originally directed? If so, the next steps of the process include: a. Schedule and conduct qualified respondent interviews as soon as possible; b. Request additional, or more detailed respondent information, if necessary; and c. Prepare a recommendation to the City Commission. The Panel requests an additional 30 days beyond the July 13, 2012 deadline to conduct interviews and forward a recommendation to the Commission. This action would forward the public hearing date to August 13, 2012. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: Other than the request for direction identified herein, there are no other identified unresolved issues related to the Carnegie parcels RFQ process. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Continue with the defined RFQ process; 2) Extend the 90 day deadline for final recommendation; 3) Cancel the Carnegie parcels RFQ; 4) Suspend the work of the Panel for a fixed amount of time; 5) Suspend the work of the Panel for an indefinite amount of time; or 6) Other alternatives as directed by the Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: Commission direction to proceed with the defined RFQ process or a finite or indefinite suspension of the RFQ process has no identifiable fiscal ramifications at this time. Attachments: 1. Carnegie parcels timeline; and 2. The Carnegie parcels RFQ. Report compiled on: June 7, 2012 188 ATTACHMENT 1 1 CARNEGIE PARCELS TIMELINE On April 15, 2011 the City of Bozeman received a Letter of Intent (LOI) from CATELLUS GROUP LLC (CATELLUS) for the purchase of the Carnegie parcels located at 106 East Mendenhall Street in downtown Bozeman for the purpose of exploring the feasibility of constructing a hotel with ancillary services. On May 2, 2011 the Commission voted 5 – 0 to acknowledge the receipt of the CATELLUS LOI and authorized the City Manager to sign the LOI and order an appraisal “only if a future determination is made by the City that the Carnegie parking lot is no longer necessary for the conduct of city business”. On May 9, 2011, City staff conducted a public forum and information and listening session in the Commission meeting room with downtown businesses and property owners surrounding the Carnegie parcels. Approximately 25 – 30 business and property owners, staff and elected officials participated in the discussion. On May 11, 2011, the Bozeman Parking Commission met in its regularly scheduled monthly meeting wherein the Parking Commission found, by a vote of 5 – 1 (with one recusal), that there is a higher and better economic use and a greater benefit to the downtown area for the Carnegie parcel than surface parking due to the amount of available parking in the vicinity of this lot, particularly at the Bridger Park Downtown, which currently has the capacity to replace removal of the Carnegie lot spaces. Accordingly, the Parking Commission found the Carnegie parcel is not needed to provide public parking. On June 13, 2011, the Commission conducted a public hearing to determine whether real property owned by the City located at 106 East Mendenhall Street, known as the Carnegie parcels, is necessary for the conduct of City business or the preservation of its property and provided direction to staff. By a 5 – 0 vote the Commission determined that: 1) the real property known as the Carnegie parking lot (lots 17A, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22 of Block E of the Original Town-site of Bozeman, Montana) located at 106 East Mendenhall is no longer necessar y for the conduct of City business or the preservation of City property and that sale and development of the real property by a private entity, in compliance with adopted City plans, is in the public interest; 2) any motion made by the Commission on May 2, 2011 regarding this property or the proposed sale of is superseded in its entirety by this motion; and 3) Staff is directed to proceed with a request for proposals process that could authorize the sale of the Carnegie parking lot to the entity whose proposal satisfies all legal requirements for the sale of City real property and whose development proposal the Commission determines best fulfills the objectives of the City’s 2020 Community Plan, its Economic Development Plan and the Downtown Improvement Plan. 189 ATTACHMENT 1 2 With Commission direction, utilizing internal and external resources, parking, legal, planning and economic development staff prepared the draft RFP for Commission review. Other internal reviews include those by finance and administration. Additionally, external, private sector, review of the RFP was solicited and comments received and incorporated into the draft. On August 25, 2011 a Commitment for Title Insurance was issued by Security Title Company, Bozeman, Montana. On September 14, 2011, a real estate appraisal was issued by Appraisal Services of Bozeman Inc. Bozeman, Montana which appraised the property at $1.5 million dollars. The appraisal is valid for one year from the date of issuance. The current appraisal expires on September 15, 2012. On September 26, 2011, the Commission provided comment and direction on the content of the draft Carnegie parcels RFP for the construction of a full-service hotel with meeting facilities in downtown Bozeman, Montana, on the Carnegie parcels. The Commission directed staff to leave the date of publication open for Commission discussion and decision at the October 24, 2011 public hearing. Staff incorporated the Commission changes into the Draft 2 of the RFP as directed with a public release date to be determined by the Commission. On October 24, 2011, in a unanimous 5 – 0 decision, the Commission directed staff to postpone the release of the Carnegie RFP until January, 2012. The Commission set a hearing date of January 23, 2012 for staff to return to the Commission to discuss the final release of the approved Carnegie parcels RFP. On December 7, 2011 CATELLUS requested that they be removed from consideration for the purchase of the Carnegie parcels and future development of a downtown hotel project. During the week of January 2, 2012, City staff conducted discussions with hotel industry development professionals who independently expressed concerns with the release of the RFP as drafted citing primarily the expense of the initial investment necessary to create an acceptable and appropriate response to the RFP. The up-front cost appeared disproportionately high when viewed against the odds of being chosen as the preferred project proposal. These professionals suggested the net result of pursuing the current strategy of the RFP release as drafted, and associated up-front investment to the Respondent, may be a total lack of responses at the conclusion of the 90-day response period. A lack of responses to the Carnegie parcels RFP may cause credibility issues with the process that may reflect poorly on City. Based on this information, we proposed re-working the process to reduce up-front costs for Respondents without undermining the spirit of the original RFP. One option included adding an RFQ stage and a process to provide more personalized attention to those who may respond in order to communicate community desires, assess Respondent capabilities and research past projects while simultaneously setting expectations from the City and attempting to understand the Respondents expectations. 190 ATTACHMENT 1 3 If an alternative approach is approved, work put into the existing RFP is neither lost or nor undermined by altering the process. The RFP as drafted and approved will constitute the majority of the information requested from respondents, albeit in a later phase of the process. Identified in both the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan and the Commission’s 2011 – 2012 adopted work plan, the development of a downtown hotel is one of the highest community priorities. Ensuring that the process facilitates an outcome with the highest probability of success is the rationale for suggesting alternatives to the originally proposed RFP process. Given the complexities public property sale transactions and the planning process for the con struction of a downtown hotel, staff does not believe that the requested delay will have an overall negative impact on a downtown hotel project. On January 11, 2012 at the regularly scheduled monthly Parking Commission meeting, staff discussed the available information and excerpts from discussions with private sector industry professionals. City staff received a consensus from Parking Commissioners present that the recommended delay and process reconsideration is a reasonable accommodation under the circumstances if the modifications increase the odds of success in the desire to construct a downtown hotel. On January 12, 2012 results of a Phase I Environmental Assessment was issued by Phoenix Engineering, Bozeman, Montana. On January 23, 2012 the City Commission voted 4 – 1, with Deputy Mayor Krauss opposed, to delay publishing the Request for Proposal (RFP) and direct staff to develop an Request for Qualifications (RFQ) within approximately thirty days and release it to the public upon completion. On February 21, 2012 the City Commission received a letter from several downtown business and property owners expressing their “opposition to the sale of the [Carnegie] parking lot because it is of the utmost importance to the long-term financial survival of their businesses and properties downtown”. On March 13, 2012 the Carnegie RFQ was released to the public. The deadline for responses was established for 5 pm on April 13, 2012. 191 1 | Page City of Bozeman Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the Construction of a Full-Service Hotel with Meeting Facilities In Downtown Bozeman, Montana “In some ways it is surprising that a community of Bozeman’s stature does not already have a small 50-80 room, ‘four star’ hotel. The university, the hospital, and other corporate entities report that such a hotel is needed for many types of visitors.”1 Section 1 DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY Thank you for your interest in the development of a full-service hotel with meeting facilities in the heart of downtown Bozeman, Montana, gateway to Yellowstone National Park. The property development opportunity is to design, build and operate a full-service hotel with meeting facilities to attract more downtown patrons and high quality events and help the City of Bozeman (the City) maintain strong tourism, entertainment, cultural and professional events industries. The project must be consistent with all City plans that relate to its historic downtown core and dynamic Central Business District including but not limited to the stated goals of the Bozeman City Commission, the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan, Bozeman Community Plan and the Economic Development Plan. Section 2 WHY BOZEMAN? Located in the heart of the Rocky Mountains, Bozeman is truly a remarkable community. The City of 38,000 people serves a region of 90,000+ residents with backgrounds and cultures as diverse as the Montana landscape. From cattle ranchers to high tech entrepreneurs, the area is home to a breed of people who have come to appreciate an unmatched quality of life. While retaining its small town feel, Bozeman prides itself on offering a wide array of cultural amenities with an abundance of outdoor recreational opportunities. It’s easy to understand why Bozeman consistently ranks as one of America’s most livable cities. The Gallatin Valley is one of the fastest-growing areas in the northern Rocky Mountains. Bozeman is the regional trade, education and medical center of southwest Montana and consistently attracts top-tier business, medical, retail, cultural, and educational opportunities 1 Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan, page 37. 192 2 | Page through innovation, collaboration, and focused effort. Bozeman is well positioned as a competitive, attractive and inspiring location to conduct business, live, visit, recreate or earn a degree. Bozeman is home to Montana State University, a thriving research university. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching recognizes MSU as one of 96 research universities with “very high research activity.” MSU enrollment numbers for the fall of 2011total 12,188 undergraduate students and 1,965 graduate students. Through competitively awarded grants and contracts, MSU accounted for $109,481,694 in research expenditures between 2009 and 2010. MSU provides a well educated workforce and strong technology transfer program that attract, retain and support higher paying jobs in southwest Montana. Additionally, Gallatin College Programs (GCP) offers 2 year associate degrees and 1 year certificate programs further improving and diversifying our workforce. In 2011, Gallatin College Programs recorded an enrollment of approximately 200 students. Each year, both MSU and GCP enrollments continue to expand. Considered the “Gateway to Yellowstone National Park” Bozeman hosts over one million visitors each year. Three world class ski resorts, Bridger Bowl, Big Sky, and Moonlight Basin are only minutes away. Many visitors travelling east to west arrive in Bozeman via Interstate 90 which is less than 2 minutes from Downtown. Many others arrive via the recently expanded Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport. Our airport recorded its busiest year ever in 2011 with 397,822 passengers boarding flights. This represents an 8.9 percent increase over 2010 and approximately 32,600 more passengers than the previous record set in 2010. Bozeman Yellowstone Airport and local private business interests are pursuing the establishment of an on- site U.S. Customs agent for international passenger arrivals and departures. In 2011, a newly constructed concourse addition allows expanded service to six airlines including Alaska, Allegiant, Delta, Frontier, Horizon and United Airlines. The Bozeman Yellowstone Airport averages 20 flights per day including many non-stop connections to major hubs including 193 3 | Page Atlanta (seasonal), Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles (seasonal), Las Vegas, Minneapolis, New York (seasonal), Phoenix, Portland (seasonal), Salt Lake City, San Francisco (seasonal), and Seattle. Additionally, two private jet centers provide an array of services to private jet owners, pilots and passengers. Over the years, Bozeman is fortunate to be included on a variety of “Best Of” lists. Policom, an economic research firm, ranked Bozeman as the seventh strongest micropolitan economy in 2011 out of 576 small cities studied throughout the United States. Additional recognitions include:2 1. “Where to Live and Play Now:” National Geographic Adventure recommended Bozeman as a good place to raise children for the reasons of sa fety, exposure to culture, and outdoor amenities. October, 2009. 2. “The Union of Town and Gown:” Entrepreneur Magazine highlighted colleges that are working with their cities to foster a local entrepreneurial spirit that will develop the economy and encourage business-savvy students to stick around post-graduation. Bozeman ranked #6 on this list. October, 2009. 3. “Happiest States of 2009: The List:” LiveScience ranked Montana #3 behind Hawaii and Utah where the index included questions about six areas of well-being, including overall evaluation of resident’s lives, emotional health, physical health, healthy behaviors and job satisfaction. February, 2010. 4. “Best Towns 2010 – Best for Skiing (West):” Outside magazine featured the top 25 towns in America for cycling, paddling, running, surfing, skiing, and – because you might want everything – all of the above. Bozeman received these accolades for having two ski areas and 350 inches of annual snowfall. August, 2010. 5. “10 Best Affordable Mountain Towns for Retirement:” According to U.S. News & World Report, Bozeman fits the bill of offering access to plenty of skiing, trails, and wildlife, while still providing affordable housing and a reasonable cost of living in addition to other retiree-friendly characteristics, such as access to healthcare and a low crime rate. July, 2010. 6. “Bozeman named #1 town to live (if you’re a skier):” According to Powder magazine, “Bozeman is the perfect mix of ski town and ski-tropolis; it’s more affordable than Jackson Hole, less crowded than Salt Lake City, and more of a real town than Whistler.” November, 2010. 7. “Top Retirement Town:” Bozeman was profiled in Where to Retire magazine’s November/December issue for possessing many qualities important to today’s retirees. October, 2010. 2 This list was excerpted from Robyn Erlenbush’s article “Twelve Reasons to Live in Big Sky Country” appearing in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle’s Businesss2Business publication on January 11, 2011. 194 4 | Page One of the area’s top outdoor recreational activities is trout fishing in our world class rivers and streams. The region has 82 miles of “blue ribbon” trout fishing streams and rivers including the nearby Yellowstone, Boulder, Madison, and Gallatin rivers and is surrounded by thousands of acres of national forest and other public lands. Bozeman is also distinguished by its thriving and vibrant downtown food, culture, arts, and entertainment scenes. The Bozeman community strongly supports our excellent K-12 school systems which are important to our well-educated community and workforce. Bozeman is the regional hub for retail and commerce, education, healthcare, tourism, manufacturing and innovation. Bozeman is home to notable, one-of-a-kind, worldwide organizations such as Oracle (formerly Right Now Technologies), Zoot Enterprises, Schedulicity.com, Simms Fishing Products, Mystery Ranch Backpacks, West Paw Design, Sitka, LigoCyte Pharmaceuticals, Bacterin International, Scientific Materials, BioScience Laboratories, Foundant Technologies, Bridger Photonics, ILX Lightwave, and Lattice Materials, to name but a few. Section 3 DEVELOPMENT SITE INFORMATION The 26,600 square foot proposed hotel site is located on real property owned by the City known as the Carnegie parcel (lots 17-A, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22 of Block E of the Original Townsite of Bozeman, Montana) located at 106 East Mendenhall Street (see the blue polygon on the map below). Details related to the zoning and development capacity of the site area are summarized in the City’s Unified Development Code or UDC. 195 5 | Page Section 4 PREFFERED QUALIFICATIONS The City is interested in working with a development entity who is experienced in the development and operation of a full-service hotel with meeting facilities. The City will work closely with the developer regarding site design and development. To that end, the City is soliciting Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) from a limited list of interested parties. Following review, one or more firms may be selected to submit a more detailed proposal including concept design drawings, financial projections, and the financial terms for the purchase or lease of the land. Design guidelines for the Downtown area, of which the hotel site is a part, are provided in the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan and the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay. The guiding design principles for this area are summarized as follows: 1. Reinforce the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan, Bozeman Community Plan, the City’s Economic Development Plan, and the City Commission’s 2012 - 2013 Work Plan; 2. Respect history and community landmarks; 196 6 | Page 3. Promote high standards of street design with active streetscapes and visually permeable street level facades; 4. Create a vibrant edge to the street with strong building character and proximity to the sidewalk; 5. Maintain and extend historic streetscape elements as specified in the “Downtown Business Improvement District Streetscape Plan”; and 6. Maintain and extend the traditional building form, massing, and traditional materials as seen in the surrounding commercial district; the building may express traditional form and massing while using a current architectural vocabulary. Section 5 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS The City requests a qualifications statement that expresses your entity's interest, vision and capability to develop and operate a full-service hotel with meeting facilities in downtown Bozeman, Montana. We are specifically seeking the following materials: 1. Your Firm’s Specialty. Provide a narrative that details whether your firm develops, or develops and operates full-service hotels with meeting facilities. Please identify the firm's specialization. If teams are proposed that would separately undertake the development and operating responsibilities, please provide information for each team member; 2. Vision and Development Program Summary. Identify your vision for a full-service hotel with meeting facilities and describe how constructing and operating such a facility on the Carnegie parcels would fit into your firm's overall business strategy. Translate your vision into a development program that identifies the type and quality level of a downtown, full-service hotel with meeting facilities, as well as the lodging market this facility would service. Also, please detail ancillary uses, i.e. restaurant, retail, and/or spa uses your firm, or another entity, would develop onsite in conjunction with a hotel; 3. Operations. Identify anticipated hotel operators for the hospitality venue. Also identify other proposed operators for all ancillary uses. Illustrate the brand promise, marketing program and reservation system that is unique to the hotel operator; 4. Experience. Include a detailed resume for your firm (or if a team, for each participating firm) citing specific experience with developing/operating a full-service hotel with meeting facilities in a downtown. Identify other projects your firm has developed and/or operates including the host community, size, ancillary uses, and quality level. Also provide information regarding your firm (if a development team include each firm on the team) that identifies length of time in business, ownership structure, operating structure, principal offices, and the office that would service this project. Further, identify the 197 7 | Page project manager and personnel that would be assigned to this project including their level of experience and responsibility; 5. Financial Capability. Identify the firm's or team's capacity to secure the equity and financing required to implement the proposed development program. Please disclose if your firm has ever defaulted on its financial obligations, has had developments that were foreclosed upon, or if bankruptcy has ever been filed; and 6. Implementation Time Frame. Outline the time period your firm proposes to initiate site and development program planning activities upon signing an exclusive negotiation agreement with the City. Discuss your firm's ability to initiate construction activities within 12 months after executing a disposition and development agreement. Section 6 SELECTION CRITERIA The following criteria will be used to evaluate the qualifications statement submittals: 1. The development program should feature a full-service, whole ownership, high quality hotel with dedicated meeting facilities and appropriate ancillary uses; 2. The development entity must demonstrate experience with designing, building, and operating full-service hotels with meeting facilities. Experience entails at least three or more properties; 3. The development entity must demonstrate that it has access to sufficient capital to underwrite all construction costs and at least one year of maintenance and operating costs; and 4. The development entity must demonstrate that it is ready to initiate site and development program planning activities upon signing an exclusive negotiation agreement, and that it will commence construction activities within 12 months after executing a disposition and development agreement. Section 7 EVALUATION PROCESS THE CITY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REJECT ANY OR ALL SUBMITTALS AT ITS SOLE AND ABSOLUTE DISCRETION. The City will designate a preliminary review panel (the panel) to evaluate all submittals received in response to this RFQ. Within 30 days of the submittal deadline, the panel will assess respondent qualifications based on the evaluation criteria described in Section 6, above. Panel 198 8 | Page members will score each proposal in their own preferred order. The scores assigned by each Panel member will be based on the individual member’s reasonable judgment as to the degree to which the proposal complies with the criteria and intent of the RFQ process. Members of the Panel and other City staff may contact references and industry sources, investigate previous projects and current commitments, and interview some or all of the development team. Within 60 days of the submittal deadline interviews may be scheduled for firms or teams which have been found to be the most responsive to the RFQ. Following review, one or more firms may be selected to submit a more detailed proposal including concept design drawings, financial projections, and the financial terms for the purchase or lease of the Carnegie Parcels. Within 90 days of the submittal deadline the panel may then recommend to the City Commission that one firm be considered for an exclusive negotiation agreement for the Carnegie Parcels. Section 8 SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS This request for qualifications remains open until filled. Please send submittals to the attention of: Carnegie Parcels RFQ Bozeman City Clerk 121 North Rouse Ave P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 Submissions must be in the actual possession of the Office of the Bozeman City Clerk on or prior to Friday, April 13, 2012, by 5:00pm, Mountain Time. Late submissions will not be considered. Submissions must be provided in a sealed package with the statement Carnegie Parcels RFQ and the prime contact name and address clearly labeled on the front of the package. Please submit two (2) complete paper copies and two (2) complete digital copies on CD-ROM or flash drive of the proposal. PDF digital file formats are preferred. Section 9 INQUIRIES All questions regarding the Carnegie Parcels RFQ shall be in writing via parcel post or e-mail and directed to: Brit Fontenot 199 9 | Page Director of Economic Development and Community Relations P.O. Box 1230 City of Bozeman, Montana 406-582-2258 bfontenot@bozeman.net Written questions and responses will be published on the City’s webpage at http://www.bozeman.net/Departments-(1)/Administration/Commission/BID---RFQ---RFQ. Section 10 RESERVATION OF RIGHTS BY CITY OF BOZEMAN The issuance of this RFQ and the acceptance of a submittal do not constitute an agreement by the City that any contract will actually be entered into by the City. Any costs incurred by respondents in preparation of a response to this RFQ or future RFP are completely the responsibility of the respondents. Any or all disputes arising under this RFQ and any contract negotiated as a result of this RFQ shall be governed by the laws of the State of Montana. The City reserves the right to issue written notice of any changes in the submittal process should the City determine, in its sole and absolute discretion, that such changes are necessary or desirable. In addition and notwithstanding any other provision of the RFQ, the City reserves the right to: 1. Waive any immaterial defect or informality in a submittal; 2. Extend or otherwise revise the submittal date; 3. Reject any or all submissions or portions thereof; 4. Cancel this RFQ at any time; 5. Reissue a new or revised RFQ; and 6. Request additional information or one or more teams to submit a more detailed submittal. Section 11 SUBMITTAL REJECTION/RIGHT TO DISQUALIFY Submittal of terms, condition and/or agreements may result in rejection if such terms, conditions, or agreements are deemed unacceptable by the City in its sole discretion. The City reserves the right to disqualify any team who fails to provide information or data specifically requested herein or who provides materially inaccurate or misleading information or data or who attempts to 200 10 | Page influence the selection process outside the procedures established herein. The City reserves the right to disqualify any team on the basis of any real or apparent conflict of interest. This disqualification is at the sole discretion of the City. Section 12 CITY OF BOZEMAN’S ANTI-DISCRIMINATION POLICY Each entity submitting under this notice shall include a provision wherein the submitting entity, or entities, affirms in writing it will not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, age, marital status, national origin, or because of actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability in fulfillment of this RFQ, the RFP, if selected, or in the development and operations of a hotel if a contract is entered into for such purposes and that this prohibition on discrimination shall apply to the hiring and treatment of the submitting entity’s employees and to all subcontracts. Failure to comply with the above shall be cause for the City to deem the submittal non - responsive. This solicitation does not require the City to award a contract, to pay any cost incurred with the preparation of a qualifications statement, or to procure or contract for services or supplies. The City reserves the right to accept or reject any submittals received in response to this request, to negotiate with any qualified source, or cancel in whole or part this process if it is in the best interest of the City. Prior to negotiations, prospective entities may be required to submit revisions to their qualifications statements. All proposers should note that any contract pursuant to this solicitation is dependent upon the recommendation of the City staff and the approval of the City Commission. #### END OF RFQ 201