2009-139-Joint Pre-Qualification System Rating ProcessRESOLUTION 2009-139
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS PURSUANT TO PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE
SECTION 20101 ADOPTING A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF RATING BIDDERS AND
AN APPEAL PROCESS FOR THE PRE-QUALIFICATION OF PROSPECTIVE
BIDDERS FOR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
WHEREAS:
A. The Town is subject to competitive bidding requirements for all public works
projects valued at or in excess of $5.,000
B. Section 20101 of the California Public Contracts Code authorizes the Town to
engage in a process of pre-qualifying prospective bidders for public works construction projects.
C. Section 20101 of the California Public Contracts Code requires that any agency
requiring prospective bidders to complete and submit questionnaires and financial statements as
part of apre-qualification process must also adopt and apply a uniform system based on objective
criteria for rating bidders on the basis of the completed questionnaires and financial statements,
in order to determine both. the minimum requirements permitted for qualification to bid, and the
type and size of the contracts upon which each bidder shall be deemed qualified to bid.
D. Section 20101 of the California Public Contracts Code further requires that any
agency employing procedures for pre-qualification of prospective bidders also establish a process
that will allow prospective bidders to dispute their proposed pre-qualification rating prior to the
closing time for receipt of bids.
E. The Town had embarked on a project to remodel an existing. commercial structure
at Villa Avenue for use as a new Los Gatos Library project, a specialty public works project
demanding the skills, knowledge and financial soundness of a public works contractor
experienced in constructing similar projects.
F. The Town Council/Redevelopment Agency desires to adopt a uniform rating
system and appeals process in order to use the pre-qualification process authorized by Section
20101 of the California Public Contracts Code for the New Library public works construction
project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Town Council/Redevelopment
Agency hereby:
1. Approves and adopts the uniform system based on objective criteria for rating
bidders on the basis of the completed questionnaires and financial statements, attached hereto,
and by this reference, incorporated herein as Exhibit "A" to this resolution.
2. Approves and adopts the process to allow prospective bidders to dispute their
proposed pre-qualification rating prior to the closing time for receipt of bids, attached hereto, and
by this reference, incorporated herein as Exhibit "B" to this resolution,
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council/Redevelopment
Agency of the Town of Los Gatos held on the 21St day of December, 2009 by the following vote;
DIRECTORS:
AYES: Joe Pirzynski, Steve Rice, Barbara Spector, Milce Wasserman, Mayor Diane McNutt
NAYS; None
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
i~G 1~1G1U
CHAIR OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
A EST:
SE ARY OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
>1xxY$rT a
PROCEDURES rOR RATING PROSPECTIVE BIDDERS
FORPUBI,IC WORKS PROJECTS.
a T.,TST or Tleoc scolz.~T~x,>c qu>asx'IOrrs ANJD T~ sco~uvc nv~?i'a~ucTTONs
The scorable questions arise in•three diffezcnt areas:
(T) History of the busincss and or a~ nizational~erformance; '
(Tn Comfiance with occupational safety and health laws, workers' compensation and
other labor legislation; and ~ .
(]~ Comuletion of recent projects and quality Of performance.
The interview questions (interviews by the public agency of project managers on projects
completed xecontly by the contractor) are included in group TIT. Tn ti pre-qualification
procedure for a sin le ro' ct this last category would also include u scoring of the .
number of xecently completed pxcjecls that are.similar to the project, on which pre-
qualification is at issue, However, scoring linked to the similarity ofpast projects would
probably not be possible or useful if the public agency as part of a procedure to pre-
qualifycontractors for an extended period,
Note: Not all questions in the,questionnairo are scorable; some questions simply ask for
information about the contractor fizm's structure, of~icexs and history. This document
includes only those questions that are "scorable," The question numbers in this document
are the numbers used in the questionnaire. Thus, the questipns included here begin with
question number 6, and there are a few breaks u~ the numerical sequence,
'the Scores Needed for T'requalifi;cation
To prequalify, a contractor would be required to have a passing grade within each of the
three large categories referred to above. '
T; or Section I, ">:Istory of the business and organizational performance,"
DIR recommends use of a passing score of S7 on this portion of the questionnaire (of ~i
maximum scone of 7b on this portion of the questionnaire). ~ ~ • .
For Section IT, Compliance with occupational safety and health laws, workers'
compensation and other labor le~slation DTIt recommends use of apassing score of 38
on this portion of the questionnaire (of a maxunum score of 53 points on this portion of
the questionnaire), ~ '
Section III, Completion'of recent projects and quality ofperformance, includes a series of
interview questions, and may also include questions about recently completed (public or
private) construction'projects. For the interview questions, DIR recommends that a '
public agency interview project managers for the. owners of two completed projects.
DIR recommends a scoring system: that would allow a maximum score of 120 points far
each interview, For these questions, DIR recommends qualification fox a contractor
whose scare on each of two interviews is 72 points or more; a denial of pre~gltalification
for a contractor whose score on either interview is less than SS points; and an additional
interview with another reference if the score resulting from one interview is between 55
points and 72 points. ~ •
DIlt wakes no recommendation about how to score a contractor's answers about
recently completed past projects, Because of the wide range o~pxoj ects that a public
agency may be planning, and She similarly wide range in the skills, abilities, and
experience that a public agency will consider most important for a pending project, it is
hnpossible to propose a useful model scoring system to apply to the answers given about
a contractor's completed projects. ,
Questions about Ttistory of the l3usiuess and Oz•ganizational ~'erfoxmance '
(16 questions) ~ '
1, H'ow many years has your organization been in business in California as a contractor under
your present business name and license numbez? • ygazs ,
3 years or more = 2 points ,
4year,~=3potnts Syears=opts. '
6 years or znor'e ~ 5 potrzis •
2. Is your fizm cuzzently the debtor in a bankruptcy case?
^ Yes ^ No
"No"= 3 points" "~'es" = 0 points .
3. Was your firm iri bankruptcy any time during the last five years? ('t'his question refers
only to a banknuptcy aclion that was not described in answer to question 7, above),
• ^ Yea ^ No
" 1V~o" = 3 pointsLO "Yes" ; 0•points
4. Has any CST.13 license held by your firm or its Ttesponsible Managing )3mployee ~)
or 1;tesponsible Managing pfficer (RMO) been suspended within-.the last five years?
^ Yes • ^ No
No=5points I'es=Opoinis
5• At any time ixl the last five years, has your firm been assessed and paid liquidated
damages after completion of a project, under a construction contract with either a pubIiG
or private owner? •
^ Yes ^ .No
No projects rvtth liquidated damages of mare tharr$50,000, or• one project wtth ltgrtidated
• damages = S potrtts.
Two~rrojects witlz liquidated damages of more than $50,000 = 3 points •
Any other ar:ewer: r:o paints
d. In the last five years has your firm, or any firm with which any of your company's owners,
• affiGexs or partners was associated, been debarred, disqualified, xemoved ox otherwise
prevented fram bidding on, or completing, any government agency ox public works project
for any reason? .
NOT);: "Associated with" refers to another construction firm in which an owner,
partnor or officer of your flan held a similar position, and which is listed in responso
to question le or 7il on this form.
^ Yes ^ No
No = S points I'es = 0 poirsts
7. In the last five years, has your firm boon deniedan award of a public works Gonixact based •
on a finding by a public agency that youx company was not a responsible bidder? .
^ Yes ^ No '
No =Spoints I'es=Opoirtts
~ * * * ~.
NOT>a: The following two questions refer only to disputes between your firm and the
owner of a project. You need not include information about disputes be(hvoen your
firm and a supplier, another contractor, or subcontractor. Yau need not include
information about °`pass-thxough" disputes in which the actual dispute is between a
sub-contractor and a•project owner, Alec, you may omit referonce to all disputes
about amounts of less than $50,000.
ij
1!
1
In the past five years, has any claim a of nst your firm. concerning your firm's work on a
construction project, been fil.edin court or arbitration?
^ Yes ^ No
X,f tlie,flrm's average gross revenue for theXast t{iree years fvas less than
$50 million, scoring is as follows:
S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating ~ such instance.
3 points far "Yes"inrlicatlrtg Z such instances. ,
0 points far "Yes" if Wrote than 2'sueh instances. •
Xf yortr firm's average gross revenue for the last three years was more than $SO
n:illlon, scoring is as follows: '
5 points for either "No" or, "Yes" indicating X, 2, or 3 snc{: instances.
3 points for "Yes" indicatir:g either Q or 5 such ir:star:ces.
0 points for "Yes" if rriore tliars 5 snob ttrstances.
9, Tu the past five years, has your firm made any claim against a project owner concezning
work on a project or paymont far a contract, and filed that ciaim in court or
arbitration?
^ Yes ^ No
If yortr firm's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO million
scorir:g is as follows: • '
5 points for either "No," or "Yes" indicating X such trtstar:ce.
3 points for "Yes" indicating ,2 suck instances.
0 points for "Yes" ifmore tlsan 2 such instances.
1f your firm's average gross revenues for'the last three years was more t{tan $50
• ntil[zon, scoring is as follows: •
5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating X,.2, ar 3 such instances,
3 potnis for "Yes" ircdicating either 4 or S such Instances.
0 points for "Yes" tf Wrote than 5 such instances.
l0, At any time during the past five yeaxs, has any surety company made any payments on
, your firm's behalf as a zesult of a default, to satisfy any claims made against a
performance or payment bond issued on your firm's behalf in connection with a
construction project, either public br private? '
^ Yes ^ No
5 points for ett)ter "No" or "Yes" indicating X such clai»:.
3 points far "Yes" indicating no rr:orc tlran 2 such claims '
' Subtractive points far "Yes"zf more than 2 such claims ,
1 1, Tn the last five yeaxs, has any insurance carrier, for any form .of insurance, refused to
renew the insurance policy for your firm? `
^ Yes ^ No
Spotnts for either "No" or "Yes" indicntirrg X such instar~c~ ,
3 points for•"Yes" indicattrcg 2 such instances.
0points for• "Yes" or ifncore than z such instances. ,
l2. Has youx firm, or any of its ov~mers, officers, or paxtners evex been found liable in a civil.
suit, or found guilty, in a criminal action, for making any false claim or mstexial
misxepresentatiorl to any public agoncy or entity? •
^ Yes ^ No .
No = 5 points Yes =subtract S points
13. ):Tas your firm, or any of its owners, officers or paxpaexs over been convicted of a cruise
involving any federal, state, or local law related to construction?
^ Yes ^ No . .
No = 5 points Yes = subtract S points ~ '
14, Has your fizzn or any of its owners, officers or partners over boon convicted of a federal or
state crime of fraud, theft, or any othez act of dishonesty?
^ Yes ^ No •
No = Spoinis I'es =subtract 5poirtts
1 S, if your firm was required to pay a premium of more than one per cent for a performance
and payment band an any project(s) on which your firm worked at any time during the
last three years, state the percentage that your firm was requited topay. You may '
pxovide an explanation for a percentage rate higher than ono per cent, if you wish to do
so.
'S polr2ts if the rate is rio more than one per cent
3 points tftlte rate yeas no higher than X.XOper cent:
0 points for any other ans-ver.
16. During the last five years, has your•fu-rn ever been denied bond credit by a surety company,
or has there ever been a period of time when your firm had no surety bond in place during a
ublic construction project when one was required?
• ~~] Yes ^ No
Na = 5 points Yes = 0 poirtis
Questions about compliance with safety, workers compensation,
proyailine wage and appl'enticeship laws.
(ll questions)
1. Has CAT. OSITA cited and assessed penalties against your furri far Tiny "sonious," "willful"
or "xepeat" violations of its safety or~health zegulations in the past five years?
Note: );f you bane tiled an appeal of a citation and the Ocenpatioual Safety and Healtlx
Appenls Boa>t•d has pat yet ruled an your appeal, yon•need:not include iniorznation
about it.
^Yes ^No'•
1f the firrrt's:average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO rnillion,
scoring is as follows:
Spoints for either "Na" or "Yes" intlicating.X such instance.
3 points for ~`Yes" indicating 2•srtch instances.
O pOL11tS fOY "Yes" if more than 2 sucli instances.
.lf the firm's average,gross revenues for the last three years was ratore than $SO million,
scoring is as fellows: •
S points far either "No" or "l'ev" indicating I, 2, or ~ such instances.
3 paints for "Yes" indicating either 4 or S srtcl: instances.
0 points. for "Y'es" if more than S srtch instances.
Has the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration cited anc~ assessed
penalties against your firm in the past five years?
Nofe: rf you :have filed an appeal of a citation'and the appropriate appeals Board
has not yet ruled on yow• appeal, your need not include infoxmation about it.
^ Yes ^ No
Tf yes, attach a separate signed page describing each citation,
Xf the ftrrn's average gross revenues for the Cast three years was less tharz~$SO ntilllon,
scoring is as, follows:
5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating X such irtstartae.
S points far "Yes" indicating Z such instances.
0 points for "Yes" or tf more than 2 snch instances.
if the frrnz's average gross revertrzes for the last three years rues more than $50
rniCCion, scoring is as follows:'
S pair:ts for either "Na" or "Yes'r indicating I, 2, or 3 such instances.
3loinls for "Yes" indicating either 4 or 5 such tnstances.
0 paints far "Yes" if more than 5 srrcli instances.
Has the B)?A or any Air Quality Management District or any ki:egional Plater Quality
Control Board cited and assessed penalties against either your firm or the owner of a
project'on which your firm was the contractor, in the past five years?
NOTE: Xf you leave filed an appeal of a citation and the Appeals Board has not yet
xuled on your appeal, or if tb.e>r:e is a court appeal pending,, you'need not incluide
information about the citation. ~ . '
^ Yes [] No ,
Xf the fr•rlt's average gross revenues for the last three years was less than $SO nsilliorr,
scoring is as follows: ~ ,
S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating X such instance.
3 points for "Yes" indicating 2 such instances. • '
0 potnis for "Yes"or if more than 2 such instances. .
if tl:e~rrn's average gross revennes for the last three ys'ars rues more than $50 million,
scoring is as follorvs:
5 points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating I, 2, or 3 such instartees.
3 points for "Yes" irtdicatirzg either A or' S suclt irtstarzces.
0 points for "Yes" if rrtore than S such tnstances. •
4. 1-low often do you require $ocumented safety meetings to be held for construction
employees and field supervisors during the course of a project?
3 poirrts far an answer of once each week or rnore often.
0 points for ar:y other ar:saver
S, List your fi'rm's Bxperience Modification Rate (EMR) (California workers' compensation
insurance) for each of thepast three premium years:
NOTE: An Experience Modification J.tate is issued fo your fnm annually l,y your
workers' compensation insurance carrier.
Current year:
Previous year:
Year prior to previous year:
if your EMR for any of these three years is or was 1.00 ox higher, you •may, ifyou wish,
attach a letter of explanation.
NOTE; An Experience 1kCodification Rate is issued to your firria annually by your
worl~ers' compensation insurance carrier.
S poir:ts for three year average E.14~Z of .95 or less
3 points for three year average of.EMR of more than .95 but no rnore than X.00 '
O paints for• any other.~.11X.R
6. Within the last five years, has there ever been a period When youx firm had employees but
was without warlcers' compensation insurance orstate-approved self insurance?
^ Yes ^ Nc• •
5 points for either ".1Vo" or "l'es".ind'icating X such instance.'
0 points for any other answer. •
7. Has there been more than one occasion during the last five years on which your firm was
required to pay Dither back wages or penalties for your own firm's failure to. comply with the
state's prevailing wage laws?
^ Yes ^ No
NOTE: This question refers only to your awn firm's violation of prevailing Wage laws,
not to violations of the prevailing wage laws by a subcontractor.
Xfyour,Jlr•rrr's average gross revenues for the last iliree years was less than $50 million,
scoring is as follows:
5 points for either "No,"or "Yes" indicating either X or 2 such instance,
3 points for "Yes" indicating 3 such instances. ,
0 points for "Yes" and'more than 3 such instances.
Xf your firm'saverage gross revenues far tree fast three years was r,:ore tl:arr $50
rnillian, SCOr'itrg r.S a5 follpiVS: ~ •
S points for either "No" or "Yes" indicating na more tltarr 4 such instances.
3 points for "Yes" indicating either 5 or 6suclz,instarrces.
0 points for• "Yes" and more than 6 such trrstanees.
8 • During the last five years, has there been more than one occasion on which your own £trm
lags been penalized or requited to pay back wages for failuxe to comply with the federal
Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements? •
^Xes • ^ No •
If your frrm's average gross revenues for the last three years teas less than X50 rrrillton,
scoring is as follows: ,
S points for either "No," or "~'es" iirdicatiug either X or Z such instance,
3 points for "Yes" indicating 3 such instances.
O points for "Yes" and store than: 5 such instances. '
Xf yOrlY~rnt's average gross revenues for the last three years was more than ~'S0
million, scoring~ts as follows:
S points far either "No" ar "Yes"indicating no more than 4 such instances,
3 points for "Xes" indicating either S or 6 such instances.
0 points for "X'es"and more than 6 such instances.
9. Provide the name, address and telephone number. of the appret~tieeship program
sponsor(s) (approved liy the California Division of Apprenticeship Standards) .that will'
provide apprentices to vent company for use on any public work project for which you .
. are awarded a contract by (Public Entity].
5 paints if at least orie approved apprenticeship progrwn ds listed.
D paints for arty other answer. ,
10, If your l`irm operates its own State-approved apptentieeship program:
{a) ldentify,the craft or crafts in which your firzxx provided apprenticeship training in
the past year. .
(b) State the •year in which each such apprenticeship program was approved, and
attach evidence of the most recent California Apprenticeship Council approval(s)
of your apprenticeship program(s). .
(c) State the number of individuals t~vho were employed by your firm as apprentiaes
at any time during. the past three years in each apprenticeship and the number of
persons who, during the past threo years, comploted apprenticeships in each. cra$
while employed by youz firm.
S'poirzts if one or mora persons aorzzpleted an approved apprenticeship .while employed
Gy your firm.
0 points if no persons completed art approved apprenticeship. while errtplayer by your
fcrm.
11. At any time during the last five years, has your firm been found to have violated any
provision of California apprenticeship laws ox regulations, ar the laws pextaixung to use of
apprentices on public woxks?
• NOTE: You may omit reference to any incident that occurred prior to January .1,
1998 if the violation was by a subcontractor and your Cn-m, as general contractor on
a prof ect, had no lrnowledge of the subcontractor's violation at• the time they ,
occurred.
^ ~'es ^ No.
if yes, provide the date(s) of such findings, and attach copies of the Depar6nont's final
.decision(s).
Xf your firrrt's average gross revenues for the last three years ryas less than $50 millfor:,
scoring is as follows: ~ •
5 points for either "No,"or "Xes" indieatlttg either X or 2 such instance.
3 poir:ts for "Yes" irtdtcating 3 such instances. •
0 paints for "Yes" and more than 3 such instances.. •
If your~irrr:'s average gross revenues for the last three years ivas more than $50
million, scoring is as follows:
5 points far either "No" or "Xes" irtdicatirtg no store than 4 such instances.
• 3 points for "Yes" it:dicating~either S or 6suclt insiartces.
0 poirtls for "Xes" artd more than 6 such instances.
Questions concerning recent construction projects completed;
(one question, plus l l interview questions)
TUe following quss6on to be scored o~ where a public agency is undertaking apre-
qualificaiionprocedure valid for a sin l~a.pzoiect only.
1. Contractor shall provide information about its si5c most recently completed public works
projects and its three largest completed private projects within the last three yaars.10 Names
and references must be current and verifiablo. Use separate sheets of paper that contain aIl
of the following information:
Project Name;
T,ocation:
Owner:
Owner Contact (Hams and current phone number):
Architect bx Engineer: ~ +
• Architect or Engineer Contact (Hams and current phone number):
Constmction Manager {name and current phone number):
Description of Project, Scape of Work Performed:
Total Value of Construction (including change orders):
Original Scheduled Completion bats:
Time Extensions Crrantcd (number of days):
Actual,Date of Completion:
ww~,~*
10 Tf you wish you may, using the same format, also provide information about other projects that you havo
completed that are similar to the projeot(s) for which you expect to bid.
Scoring of previous projects completed:
• porgre-qualification for a single project that may require speciffc skills and capabilities,
public agencies may choose to score contractors for the number of similar pxojects
• completed, and the degree of similarity between past projects and the planned projact.
1~1R has net suggested any scoring for this aspect ofthe pte-qualification process,
because of the numerous possible variations in both the type of projact to be built and the
points of sizxiilarity between the pending•project and past projects that maybe signiCcant
to the public agency.
1CXHIBIT B
APP1/ALS OF PRE-QUALIT'ICATION RATINGS
The Town of Los Gatos may refuse to .grant pre-qualification where the xequested
information and materials arenot provided in accordance with the submission deadline. There is no
appeal from a refusal due to for an incomplete or late application, but re-alplication for a later
project is permitted, The closing time for bids will not be changed in order to accommodate
supplementation of incomplete submissions, or late submissions,
Where a timely and completed application results in a rating below that necessary to pre-
qualify, an appeal can be made. An appeal is begun by the contractor delivering notice to Yl1e Town
of Los Gatos of its appeal of the decision with respect to its pre-qualification rating, no later than ten
(10) business days prior to the closing time for the receipt of bids for this public works pz•oject.
Without a timely appeal, the contractor waives. any and all rights to challenge the decision of the
Town of I os Gatos, whether by administrative process, ,judicial process or any other legal process
or proceeding,
If the contractor gives the required notice of appeal and requests a hearing, the hearizig shall
be conducted so that it is concluded no later than five (5) business days prior to the last date for the
receipt of bids on the project. The hearing shall be an informal process conducted by the Town
Manager, or the Town Manager's designee, At or prior to the hearing, the contractor will be advised
of tl~e basis for the Town of Los Gatos' pre-qualification determination. The contractor will be given
the opportunity to present information and present reasons in opposition to the rating. Within one
(I) day after the conclusion of the hearing, the Town Ma~aager or designee will render a decision.
It is the intention of the Town of Los Gatos that the date for the submission azid opening of bids wi I1
not be delayed or postponed to allow for completion of an appeal process,