My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Res 2006-061
San-Marcos
>
City Clerk
>
03 Resolutions
>
2000 s
>
2006
>
Res 2006-061
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/8/2006 3:05:22 PM
Creation date
8/8/2006 3:03:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
City Clerk - Document
Resolutions
City Clerk - Type
Agreement
Number
2006-61
Date
4/4/2006
Volume Book
166
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
83
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />2. Experience: Proponent will have experience in all aspects of the work specified in <br />this RFP and be able to demonstrate direct recent experience on similar projects. <br />The proponent will own and maintain tools and equipment necessary for successful <br />installation and testing, and employ personnel who are adequately trained. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />3. Technical Capability: Proponents will provide the information on personnel as <br />requested on Response Form. <br /> <br />4. Subcontractors: Any subcontractor who assists the proponent in the performance <br />of this work will meet the same training and certification requirements as the <br />proponent. <br /> <br />D. REFERENCES: Proponent and proponent subcontractor(s) must successfully pass <br />reference checks, evidencing possession of qualifications as required in RFP. Proponents <br />will submit a minimum of three references for which they have installed the proposed <br />service(s). Each reference must be complete with all information requested on Response <br />Form, and must contain the name, telephone number, and contact person. <br /> <br />1. Ratinq: Proponent references may be used as a basis for inquiry concerning <br />proponent's quality of service. References may be contacted by the City and CCG <br />and may be asked to rate each proponent's performance as either: 1) Excellent- <br />Exceeded Expectations; 2) Good - Met Expectations; 3) Poor-Did Not Meet <br />Expectations. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />2. Site Visits: The City reserves the right to make site visits to any references' sites, <br />and reserves the right to check and visit references that are independently derived. <br /> <br />3. Results: A contract will not be awarded to a proponent that has failed to perform in <br />a satisfactory or faithful manner on any previous contracts with the City. The <br />decision to eliminate any proponent from further consideration due to "poor" <br />reference checks, or for incorrect and/or incomplete information will be at the sole <br />discretion of the City and will not be subject to appeal. <br /> <br />E. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: The proposal submitted will include an implementation <br />plan (see Section 3.K.). <br /> <br />F. DISASTER RECOVERY: The proposal submitted will include a disaster recovery plan <br />for acts of God; such as flood, hurricane, fire, earthquake; as well as acts of terrorism (see <br />Section 3.Q). <br /> <br />G. REMOTE MONITORING CAPABILITIES: The proposal submitted will include detailed <br />information of remote monitoring capabilities of the T1 services installed at City location(s) <br />(see Section 3.R). <br /> <br />H. MONTHLY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS: The proposal submitted will include a sample <br />monthly traffic analysis of installed services for the first year after acceptance (see Section I <br />3.S). <br /> <br />.22. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.