EDA Agenda 05-13-2020 (Workshop Meeting)AGENDA
WORKSHOP MEETING - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA)
Wednesday, May 13th— 5:00 p.m.
Academy Room, Monticello Community Center
Commissioners: President Steve Johnson, Vice President Bill Tapper, Treasurer Jon
Morphew, Tracy Hinz, 011ie Koropchak-White and Council members Lloyd
Hilgart and Jim Davidson
Staff: Jeff O'Neill, Angela Schumann, EDA Executive Director Jim Thares, Jacob
Thunander, Sarah Rathlisberger
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Emergency Loan Program Review
4. Housing Study RFQ/P Review
5. Adj ournment
EDA Agenda - OS/13/20
3. Workshop - Small Business Emer�encv Assistance Pro�ram
A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
Staff has prepared a draft set of guidelines and an application for a temporary emergency
grant program to support small business funding needs. The program would act as a
mitigation tool in response to COVID-19 impact.
Additional overview on the program can be found in the regular agenda staff report.
The EDA is asked to provide direction on whether to establish such a program and to
provide necessary adjustments to the guidelines and application.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Comments and revisions are requested as part of the workshop review. Action to
establish the program with modification as directed by the EDA will be considered as
part of the regular meeting agenda, Item 6.
C. STAFF RECOMN�NDATION
Staff supports the establishment of an emergency assistance program for small
business as detailed in the Item 6 staff report. Staff has reviewed a number of
example materials from communities in Minnesota establishing such programs. Staff
has developed the Monticello guidelines using those programs as a model, but with
some modification for the needs of Monticello's small businesses.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
See regular agenda Item 6 supporting data
EDA Agenda - OS/13/20
4. Workshop - Housin� Studv RFQ/P Review
A. REFERENCE & BACKGROUND
The EDA directed the preparation of an updated community housing study and
authorized the release of a request for qualifications and proposal at its regular March
meeting.
The RFQ/P was posted to the city's website on March 13 and was sent directly to 8
firms.
The proposers were asked to submit two separate documents - 1) information on
their qualifications, understanding of the proj ect and relevant experience and 2)
detailed information on their project approach, timeline and expected project cost.
This format was used to allow the EDA first to get an understanding of the firm's
expertise, a feel for what the report deliverable would look like, and past work
experience. In the proposal document, the EDA could then review specifics on the
Monticello approach and cost. As all proposals were submitted electronically, some
proposers combined their submittals into one document.
The city did take questions regarding the request and posted responses to the RFQ/P
page for the benefit of all potential proposers.
Five proposals were received in response to the RFQ/P. The EDA is now asked to
review the submitted proposals and determine how it wishes to proceed.
Recognizing that since the time the RFQ/P was released, there have been local,
regional and national influences on housing market conditions, and that these impacts
will continue in the months and possibly years to come, staff recognizes that the
EDA will likely first wish to discuss the following:
1. Whether to proceed at this time.
2. Whether to alter the scope of the project.
If the EDA does elect to move forward with the study, staff believes the
qualifications provided by the current firms allow the EDA to proceed with a
selected firm and modify the scope as needed to address changing market.
In terms of the selection process, the EDA has been provided with all proposals,
scoring sheets for each individual proposer, and a copy of the RFQ/P.
The EDA will note that at this time, only the names of the proposers is public
information. All other information is confidential. At the time the EDA approves a
contract, other proposal information will become public.
EDA Agenda - OS/13/20
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Action to authorize staff to negotiate and/or enter into contract will be taken as part
of the regular meeting agenda, Item 5.
C. STAFF RECOMN�NDATION
Staff has reviewed all proposals and completed an evaluation and ranking. However,
staff will defer to the EDA's discussion during the workshop on the matters of
moving forward with the project and consultant selection.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
A. Public Information Notice
B. Request for Qualifications/Proposal
C. FAQ's/Question Responses
D. Scoring Sheets (complete one for a115 proposals)
E. Proposals (5)
�
MINNESOTA STATUTES 2016 13.591
13.591 BUSINESS DATA.
Subdivision 1. Not public data when bene�t requested. The following data, that are submitted to a
government entity by a business requesting financial assistance or a benefit financed by public funds, are
private or nonpublic data: financial information about the business, including credit reports; financial
statements; net worth calculations; business plans; income and expense projections; balance sheets; customer
lists; income tax returns; and design, market, and feasibility studies not paid for with public funds.
Subd. 2. Public data when bene�t received. Data submitted to a government entity under subdivision
1 become public when public financial assistance is provided or the business receives a benefit from the
government entity, except that the following data remain private or nonpublic: business plans; income and
expense projections not related to the financial assistance provided; customer lists; income tax returns; and
design, market, and feasibility studies not paid for with public funds.
Subd. 3. Business as vendor. (a) Data submitted by a business to a government entity in response to a
request for bids as defined in section 16C.02, subdivision 11, are private or nonpublic until the time and
date specified in the solicitation that bids are due, at which time the name of the bidder and the dollar amount
specified in the response become public. All other data in a bidder's response to a bid are private or nonpublic
data until completion of the selection process. For purposes of this section, "completion of the selection
process" means that the government entity has completed its evaluation and has ranked the responses. After
a government entity has completed the selection process, all remaining data submitted by all bidders are
public with the exception of trade secret data as defined and classified in section 1337. A statement by a
bidder that submitted data are copyrighted or otherwise protected does not prevent public access to the data
contained in the bid.
If all responses to a request for bids are rejected prior to completion of the selection process, all data,
other than the name of the bidder and the dollar amount specified in the response, remain private or nonpublic
until a resolicitation of bids results in completion of the selection process or a determination is made to
abandon the purchase. If the rejection occurs after the completion of the selection process, the data remain
public. If a resolicitation of bids does not occur within one year of the bid opening date, the remaining data
become public.
(b) Data submitted by a business to a government entity in response to a request for proposal, as defined
in section 16C.02, subdivision 12, are private or nonpublic until the time and date specif�ied in the solicitation
that proposals are due, at which time the name of the responder becomes public. All other data in a responder's
response to a request for proposal are private or nonpublic data until completion of the evaluation process.
For purposes of this section, "completion of the evaluation process" means that the government entity has
completed negotiating the contract with the selected vendor. After a government entity has completed the
evaluation process, all remaining data submitted by all responders are public with the exception of trade
secret data as defined and classified in section 1337. A statement by a responder that submitted data are
copyrighted or otherwise protected does not prevent public access to the data contained in the response.
If all responses to a request for proposal are rejected prior to completion of the evaluation process, all
data, other than the names of the responders, remain private or nonpublic until a resolicitation of the requests
for proposal results in completion of the evaluation process or a determination is made to abandon the
purchase. If the rejection occurs after the completion of the evaluation process, the data remain public. If a
resolicitation of proposals does not occur within one year of the proposal opening date, the remaining data
become public.
Copyright U 2016 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.
13.591 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2016
Subd. 4. Classi�cation of evaluative data; data sharing. (a) Data created ar maintained by a govemment
entity as part of the selection or evaluation process referred to in this section are protected nonpublic data
until completion of the selection process or completion of the evaluation process at which time the data are
public with the exception of trade secret data as defined and classified in section 13.37.
(b) If a government entity asks employees of other government entities to assist with the selection of
the responses to a request for bid or the evaluation of responses to a request for proposal, the government
entity may share not public data in the responses with those employees. The employees participating in the
selection or evaluation may not further disseminate the not public data they review.
Subd. 5. Internal competitive response. (a) For purposes of this subdivision, "internal competitive
response" means a bid or proposal to provide government goods or services that is prepared by the staff of
a government entity in competition with bids or proposals solicited by (1) the same government entity from
the private sector or (2) a different government entity from the private sector.
(b) Data in an internal competitive response is classif�ied as private or nonpublic until completion of the
selection process or completion of the evaluation process at which time the data are public with the exception
of trade secret data as defined and classified in section 1337.
History: 2001 c 202 s 7; 2005 c 163 s 41, 42; 2007 c 129 s 38; 2013 c 142 art 3 s 14
Copyright U 2016 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.
CITY C�1F
•
on l�e +�
Request for Qualifications and Proposals
Comprehensive Housing Study
City of Monticello EDA
Revised submittal schedule and completion timeline
March 20, 2020
General Instructions
Responses are to be submitted with complete information per the following request.
Qualification submittals are to be submitted as a self-contained document separate from the
Proposal submittal.
Electronic copy or mailed copy can be accepted at the following address until the deadline
date and time:
City of Monticello
Attn: Jim Thares
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
Monticello, MN 55362
Email: Jim.Thares(cr�,ci.monticello.mn.us
Schedule
March 12th, 2020 — Request for Qualifications/Proposals (RFQ/RFP) available
April 28th, 2020 — Qualifications/Proposals due at 1:30 p.m.
Mayl3th, 2020 (Tentative Date) — EDA selects firm(s)
August 17th, 2020 — Completion of Housing Study
Purpose of the RFQ/RFP
This Request for Qualifications-Request for Proposals (RFQ/RFP) is for the purpose of
selecting a qualified firm(s) for their approach in formulating and completing a
comprehensive Housing Needs and Market Demand Study for the City of Monticello
Economic Development Authority (EDA). Any professional service agreements to complete
the proposed work at the agreed upon price(s) will be executed and funded through the
Monticello EDA.
In 2017, the Monticello EDA adopted a Housing Study developed by WSB & Associates.
The 2017 study is attached as a resource only. The EDA's goal from the new study is to gain
a clearer understanding of housing demand in various market segments and geographic areas
of the community, layering analysis with data.
Due to the increased interest and demand for multi-family housing options, the City of
Monticello is hereby accepting proposals for a comprehensive Housing Needs and Market
Demand Study. Since 2017, the City approved two multi-family residential facilities with a
total of 143 units. There are two more multi-family proposals with 247 units that have
recently received land use approvals. In addition, the City continues to receive developer
inquiries regarding multi-family housing proposals. The City also recently approved a 327-
lot single family and townhome subdivision within its annexation area.
The successful firm authorized to proceed with the Housing Needs and Market Demand
Study will be responsible for conducting their own on-site research. City staff will provide
reference documents and studies that may be requested as a supportive step in the research.
Specifications for the Qualification Submittal
All Qualification submissions are to include the following components.
1. Project Overview
a. Proposal Understanding: include a summary of the consultant's understanding of
the project as described in this request and approach to project completion
2. Qualifications
a. General Information: provide a brief overview of firm, including qualifications to
execute the contract
b. Personal Qualifications:
i. Identification of lead proj ect manager and contact information
ii. Name, proposed role, hourly rate, anticipated time commitment to the
project, and biography of each team member
3. References
a. Include a list of at least three municipal clients for which consultant
has conducted a similar work scope
Specifications of the Proposal Submittal
Proposed Work Plan and Schedule: provide a proposed work plan divided into distinct
phases and including a list of key tasks, milestones, appro�mate dates, project
deliverables and resource needs
2. Budget: identify cost estimates for each segment of the scope of services and work plan.
a. Staff and public meetings (include anticipated number)
b. Plan research, drafting and revision (include anticipated number and any
consulting staff review)
c. Stakeholder session
d. Production of final document(s)
e. Any other anticipated budgetary needs including incidentals
3. Baseline Project Requirements: at a minimum, the project should address the following
quantitative and qualitative components.
Quantitative Data:
• Local and regional demand for all housing types, including but not limited to the
following specific types:
o Single Family
■ Upper-end/custom ($450,000+)
■ Detached townhome/single-level "patio" home
■ Narrow-lot single-family
o Multi-Family
■ Market-rate apartments
■ Townhomes
■ Duplex
■ Condominium units
■ 4-plex units
o Senior
■ Independent
■ Assisted
■ Continuum of care
• Examination of demand for affordable units as a sub-set of the above, with exception
of upper-end single-family
• Sales and turnover rate of all housing types
• Vacancy data for rental units
• Average market value for each owner-occupied unit type
• Average rental rates for each rental unit type
• Regional comparison data for cities of Becker, Big Lake, St. Michael and Albertville,
as examples
Qualitative Analysis:
Stakeholder Session
• Sales position
• Trends
• Siting factors and considerations
Projections and Analysis
• Identification of gaps and opportunities in existing housing stock.
• Projected data for a five to seven-year outlook for the various market segments.
• Demographic shifts impacting housing trends and proj ections.
• Wage, building cost, and other factors influencing housing.
• What does the data tell us about the opportunity for:
■ Upper-scale/luxury housing in the Downtown?
■ Upper-end single-family housing
• What does the data tell us about the sale quality and the ability to maintain and
improve existing 1940s-1970s core-city housing stock?
• What does the data tell us about the need for additional multi-family units,
specifically affordable or workforce units?
Right to Reject Proposals
The City and Economic Development Authority reserves the right to reject any and all proposals.
This RFP does not obligate the City to enter into a contract, nor does it obligate the City to pay
for any costs incurred in preparation and submission of proposals or in anticipation of a contract.
4/8/2020
CITY C�1F
•
on l�e +�
Freq uently Asked Questions
Request for Qualifications and Proposals
Comprehensive Housing Study
City of Monticello EDA
1. What is the amount that was budgeted for completing the Study? $18,000 was set
aside for completion of the housing study by the EDA in its 2020 budge�
2. Is it possible for the RFQ-RFP responder to propose a budget figure higher than
the amount allocated by the EDA for the Study? Yes, if the RFQ-RFP responder
feels that it is imperative to propose a cost for completion of the Study that is higher
than the allocated budget, it should feel free to do so and be prepared to justify the
reasons for the proposed funding increase.
3. In recognition of the comprehensive nature of the Study, is it possible for the
RFQ-RFP responder to propose a scope of work that is tailored to meet the budget
amount of $18,000? Yes, as an alternative to proposing an increase in the budget,
the RFQ-RFP responder should feel free to propose a more focused scope of work
that still provides a quality and comprehensive look at the housing needs and
demands for the City of Monticello.
4. Is the timeline for completing the Study flexible or does it need to be submitted to
the Community Development staff by August 17, 2020? Yes, the goal is to receive
a final report by August 17, 2020, so that it is informative to the completion of the
City's updated Comprehensive Plan (Monticello 2040 Plan). FYI - The
comprehensive planning process will be occurring throughout the remainder of 2020
and is expected to be in a final form and presented to the City Council in late 2020.
4/8/2020
Updated: 4/21/2020
CITY C�1F
•
on l�e +�
Freq uentl_y Asked Questions
Request for Qualifications and Proposals
Comprehensive Housing Study
City of Monticello EDA
1. What is the amount that was budgeted for completing the Study? $18,000 was set
aside for completion of the housing study by the EDA in its 2020 budge�
2. Is it possible for the RFQ-RFP responder to propose a budget figure higher than
the amount allocated by the EDA for the Study? Yes, if the RFQ-RFP responder
feels that it is imperative to propose a cost for completion of the Study that is higher
than the allocated budget, it should feel free to do so and be prepared to justify the
reasons for the proposed funding increase.
3. In recognition of the comprehensive nature of the Study, is it possible for the
RFQ-RFP responder to propose a scope of work that is tailored to meet the budget
amount of $18,000? Yes, as an alternative to proposing an increase in the budget,
the RFQ-RFP responder should feel free to propose a more focused scope of work
that still provides a quality and comprehensive look at the housing needs and
demands for the City of Monticello.
4. Is the timeline for completing the Study flexible or does it need to be submitted to
the Community Development staff by August 17, 2020? Yes, the goal is to receive
a final report by August 17, 2020, so that it is informative to the completion of the
City's updated Comprehensive Plan (Monticello 2040 Plan). FYI - The
comprehensive planning process will be occurring throughout the remainder of 2020
and is expected to be in a final form and presented to the City Council in late 2020.
5. Regarding the stakeholder meeting, in light of the current COVID-19 social
distancing requirements and uncertainties of those guidelines as the summer of
2020 unfolds, should the RFQ-RFP proposer submit an option for a all remote
video-conference call meeting? Yes, that is wise as the COVID-19 restrictions are
not known beyond May 3, 2020 and may be extended in some form or manner well
into the middle of 2020.. Again, itt would be wise and responsible to provide a virtual
option and/or multiple ways for stakeholders to participate in this activity.
DATE:
�, T Y�i o F CITY OF MONTICELLO
� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
505 Walnut Street, Suite 1
M�n�ICe�� Monticello, MN 55362
Phone: (763) 295-2711 Fax: (753) 295-4404
RFP Evaluation Form — Housing Study
Consultant:
Reviewer:
1. Qualifications Submittal: Demonstrated
Experience/Qualifications
Available Points Points Awarded
Includes a summary of the 5
consultant's understanding of
the project as described in
this request
Provides overview of firm 10
and lists qualifications of
study team members,
includes lead project manager
Explanation of proj ect 5
experience working on
housing plans
Includes at least three 5
municipal references, which
have completed similar
housing studies
Total 25
2. Project Work Plan and Schedule
Available Points Points Awarded
Detailed description of how 10
services will be performed:
key tasks, milestones,
deliverables
Identifies time allotted for 5
each component
Able to have final draft 5
completed by August 17,
2020
The project should address all 25
uantitative in the RFP
The proj ect addresses the and 25
qualitative components in the
RFP
Description of public 5 (Bonus)
engagement technique
proposed
Total 70 5 bonus
3. Budget/Cost Efficiency
Available Points Points Awarded
Identifies hourly rate per task 5
Must include cost estimate
for each task.
Includes: 5/item (25 points)
a) Staff and public
meetings (include
anticipated number)
b) Plan research, drafting
and revision (include
anticipated number and
any consulting staff
review)
c) Stakeholder session
d) Production of final
document(s)
e) Any other anticipated
budgetary needs
including incidentals
Total 30
Total:
Available Points Points Awarded
1. Demonstrated 25
Experience/Qualifications
2. Project Work Plan and 70 + 5(bonus)
Schedule
3. Budget/Cost Efficiency 30
Total 125 + bonus