(i) The City shall set forth selection criteria in the Solicitation Document. Examples of evaluation criteria include price or cost, quality of a product or service, past performance, management, capability, personnel qualification, prior experience, compatibility, reliability, operating efficiency, expansion potential, experience of key personnel, adequacy of equipment or physical plant, financial wherewithal, sources of supply, references and warranty provisions. Evaluation factors need not be precise predictors of actual future costs and performance, but to the extent possible, such factors shall be reasonable estimates based on information available to the City;

(ii) When the City is willing to negotiate terms and conditions of the Contract or allow submission of revised Proposals following discussions, the City must identify the specific terms and conditions in or provisions of the Solicitation Document that are subject to negotiation or discussion and authorize Offerors to propose certain alternative terms and conditions in lieu of the terms and conditions the City has identified as authorized for negotiation. The City must describe the evaluation and discussion or negotiation process.

(iii) If the City chooses to engage in Competitive Range discussions and negotiations it will set forth that process in the Solicitation Document.

(iv) When the City intends to Award Contracts to more than one Proposer, the City must identify in the Solicitation Document the manner in which it will determine the number of Contracts it will Award. The City shall also include the criteria it will use to determine how the City will endeavor to achieve optimal value, utility and substantial fairness when selecting a particular Contractor to provide Personal Services or Work from those Contractors Awarded Contracts.

(v) Competitive Proposals are not required to comply with first-tier subcontractor disclosure or reciprocal preferences.

(i) Evaluation. The City shall evaluate Proposals only in accordance with criteria set forth in the RFP and applicable law and Section 2.585. The City shall evaluate Proposals to determine the Proposer or Proposers submitting the Proposal or Proposals that are the most advantageous to the City.

(ii) Cancellation. Nothing in this rule shall restrict or prohibit the City from canceling the Solicitation at any time.

(i) Full Integration. Obtaining, through a design-build team, engineering design, plan preparation, value engineering, construction engineering, construction, quality control and required documentation as a fully integrated function with a single point of responsibility;

(ii) Value Engineering. Integrating value engineering suggestions into the design phase, as the construction contractor joins the project team early with design responsibilities under a team approach, with the potential of reducing contract changes;

(iii) Risk Reduction. Reducing the risk of design flaws, misunderstandings and conflicts inherent in construction contractors building from designs in which they have had no opportunity for input, with the potential of reducing contract claims;

(iv) Project Time. Shortening project time as construction activity, including, but not limited to, early submittals, mobilization, subcontracting and advance work, commences prior to completion of a "biddable" design, or where a design solution is still required, as in complex or phased projects; or

(v) Collaborative Problem Solving. Obtaining innovative design solutions through the collaboration of the contractor and design team, which would not otherwise be possible if the contractor had not yet been selected.

(vi) In addition to the above, Design-Build contracts are authorized for disaster relief efforts.

(i) Licensing. If a design-build contractor is not an Oregon licensed design City shall require that the design-build contractor disclose in its written offer that it is not an Oregon licensed design professional, and identify the Oregon licensed design professional or professionals who will provide design services. See ORS 671.030(5) regarding the offer of architectural services, and ORS 672.060(11) regarding the offer of engineering services that are appurtenant to construction services.

(ii) Performance Security. The surety's obligation on performance bonds, or the offeror’s obligation on cashier's or certified checks accepted in lieu thereof, includes the preparation and completion of design and related professional services specified in the contract. This additional obligation, beyond performance of construction services, extends only to the provision of professional services and related design revisions, corrective work and associated costs prior to final completion of the contract, or for such longer time as may be defined in the contract. The obligation is not intended to be a substitute for professional liability insurance, and does not include errors and omissions or latent defects coverage.

(iii) Contract Elements.

(i) Time Savings. The public improvement has significant schedule ramifications, such that concurrent design and construction are necessary in order to meet critical deadlines and shorten the overall duration of construction. Operational and financial data may be considered that show significant savings or increased opportunities for generating revenue as a result of early completion, as well as less disruption to public facilities as a result of shortened construction periods;

(ii) Cost Savings. Early contractor input during the design process is expected to contribute to significant cost savings. Value engineering, building systems analysis, life cycle costing analysis and construction planning may be considered that lead to cost savings. Any special factors influencing this analysis should be considered, including high rates of inflation, market uncertainty due to material and labor fluctuations or scarcities, and the need for specialized construction expertise due to technical challenges; or

(iii) Technical Complexity. The public improvement presents significant technical complexities that are best addressed by a collaborative or team effort between the City, design professionals and contractor, in which the contractor will assist in addressing specific project challenges through pre-construction services. The need for contractor input on issues such as operations of the facility during construction, tenant occupancy, public safety, delivery of an early budget or GMP, financing, historic preservation, difficult remodeling projects and projects requiring complex phasing or highly coordinated scheduling may be considered.

(iv) In addition to the above, Design-Build contracts are authorized for disaster relief efforts.

(i) Basis for Payment. The CM/GC process adds specified Construction Manager services to traditional general contractor services, requiring full contract performance within a negotiated Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). The basis for payment is reimbursable direct costs as defined under the contract, plus a fee constituting full payment for work and services rendered, which together shall not exceed the GMP.

(ii) Setting the GMP. The GMP shall be set at an identified time, after supporting information reasonably considered necessary to its use has been developed, and the supporting information shall define with particularity both what is included and excluded from the GMP. A set of drawings and specifications shall be produced establishing the GMP scope.

(iii) Adjustments to the GMP. The contract shall clearly identify the standards or factors under which changes or additional work will be considered outside of the work scope that warrants an increase in the GMP, as well as criteria for decreasing the GMP. The GMP shall not be increased without a concomitant increase to the scope defined at the establishment of the GMP or most recent GMP amendment.

(iv) Cost Savings. The contract shall clearly identify the disposition of any cost savings resulting from completion of the work below the GMP; that is, under what circumstances, if any, the CM/GC might share in those cost savings, or whether they accrue only to the City's benefit. Unless there is a clearly articulated reason for sharing such cost savings, they should accrue to the City.

(v) Cost Reimbursement. The contract shall clearly identify what items or categories of items are eligible for cost reimbursement within the GMP, including any category of "General Conditions" (a general grouping of direct costs that are not separately invoiced, subcontracted or included within either overhead or fee), and may also incorporate a mutually-agreeable cost-reimbursement standard.

(vi) Audit. Cost reimbursements shall be made subject to final audit adjustment, and the contract shall establish an audit process to ensure that contract costs are allowable, properly allocated and reasonable.

(vii) Fee. Compensation for the CM/GC's services shall be paid on the basis of a fee that is inclusive of profit, overhead and all other indirect or non-reimbursable costs. Costs determined to be included within the fee should be expressly defined wherever possible. The fee, first expressed as a proposed percentage of all reimbursable costs, shall be identified during and become an element of the selection process. It shall subsequently be expressed as a fixed amount when the GMP is established.

(viii) Incentives. The contract shall clearly identify any economic incentives, the specific criteria that apply and their relationship to other financial elements of the contract (including the GMP).

(ix) Controlled Insurance Programs. For projects anticipated to exceed $75 million, the contract shall clearly identify whether an owner controlled or contractor controlled insurance program is anticipated or allowable. If so, the contract shall clearly identify (1) anticipated cost savings from reduced premiums, claims reductions and other factors, (2) the allocation of cost savings, and (3) safety responsibilities and/or incentives.

(x) Early Work. The Request for proposals shall clearly identify, whenever feasible, the circumstances under which any of the following activities may be authorized and undertaken for compensation prior to establishing the GMP:

(xi) Subcontractor Selection. The contract shall clearly describe the methods by which the CM/GC shall receive, open and record bids or price quotations, and competitively select subcontractors to perform the contract work based upon price, as well as the mechanisms by which the City may waive those requirements. The documents shall also describe completely the methods by which the CM/GC and its affiliated or subsidiary entities may compete to perform the work, including, at a minimum, advance notice of the CM/GC's intent to compete and a public opening of bids or quotations by an independent party.

(xii) Subcontractor Approvals and Protests. The contract shall clearly establish whether the City must approve subcontract awards, and to what extent, if any, the City will resolve procurement protests of subcontractors and suppliers. The related procedures and reporting mechanisms should be established with certainty, including whether the CM/GC acts as the City's representative in this process and whether the CM/GC's subcontracting records are considered to be public records. In any event, the City shall retain the right to monitor the subcontracting process in order to protect City’s interests.

(xiii) CM/GC Self-Performance. Whenever feasible, the contract shall establish the elements of work the CM/GC may self-perform without competition, including, for example, the work of the job-site general conditions. In the alternative, the contract shall include a provision for City approval of CM/GC self-performance.

(xiv) Socio-Economic Programs. The contract shall clearly identify conditions relating to any required socio-economic programs (such as Affirmative Action or Prison Inmate Labor Programs), including the manner in which such programs affect the CM/GC's subcontracting requirements, the enforcement mechanisms available, and the respective responsibilities of the CM/GC and City.