Text + -

Land Management Software RFP - Q&As

Friday, May 8, 2020

Hello Vendors,

The City of Mission Viejo has reviewed all questions received about the Land Management Software System RFP. Below are all questions along with Mission Viejo’s answers.

  1. I see G1 and G2 for Project Costs, but wasn’t sure how you wanted me to handle Interface Costs and Modification costs since they differ between the two models.  Is it acceptable to create H1/H2 and J1/J2 pages in the workbook, or how would you like us to handle that?

    That would be fine.
  2. Of the forty (40) total Unique ID users, are fifteen (15) of those read-only or are the fifteen (15) in addition to the forty (40)?

    Read-only, in addition to 40 full-access users.
  3. A minor error was found in Appendix G2 - Cloud/Hosted Project Estimates where it includes a banner titled "On-premise One-Time costs as well as "On-Premise Annual Recurring Costs".

    Typo. Appendix G2 is for Cloud/Hosted Pricing
  4. Has this project been budgeted for within the current calendar year or current fiscal year?

    The City will appropriate project funding once the RFP process is completed and the cost of chosen system is determined. 
  5. What impact has COVID19 had on the City’s Community Development department and its current business processes? Are there any new business requirements or reporting requirements that have been identified?

    The COVID-19 situation is fluid.  The Community Development department has continued providing essential services to the community while working with a closed lobby relying on technology and virtual services.  The situation is assessed day to day and city hall may be opened by the time this RFP process is completed.  Providing business for building functions has not stopped during this time. 
  6. How has COVID19 impacted the timeline of this project for vendor selection & award as well as project kick off?

    None known at this point.
  7. Will the City be open to remote vendor presentations due to the impact of COVID19?

    If necessary, depending on timing.
  8. What is the City's budget range or cap for this project?

    There is no pre-determined budget or cap, but obviously cost is a factor in making our decision especially in light of revenue losses due to COVID-19.  The City will appropriate project funding once the vendor is selected and the cost is determined. 
  9. Given that Mission Viejo is a contract City, what are some of the unique needs that are important for the City given that there are contracted staff members who will be using the solution? City and contract staff work side-by-side.  RFP requirements assume all city and contract staff using the same new land management system.
    1. How frequently on an annual basis does the City manage new staff members using the systems from the contracted service providers?
    2. Are there additional training requirements needed post go live to address this need?
  10. Does the City utilize centralized or de-centralized cashiering today?

    Decentralized.  However, most payments are received at one counter.
  11. Is the City in need of an IVR solution with this project? N/A Does the City currently have an existing IVR vendor relationship?

  12. Has a project team or key stakeholder evaluation team been established?

    Yes (Process Owners, Power-Users, Module/Function Leads and other stakeholders by Module/Function).
  13. What is the City's preference with regards to on-premise or cloud deployment and what are the reasons for that preference? What concerns, if any, are there regarding going to the cloud? 

    None. The best overall solution for the city will be determined.
  14. What permit types does the City currently manage that require annual renewals, fees, and/or inspections?

    Building Department does not regulate or manage any annual permits.
  15. Can the city identify any resource challenges that would require additional support during the active implementation phases?

  16. For your end users, what are the three most important features and/or functions that the staff are in need of? 

    See RFP
  17. For your technology team, what are the three most important factors in a software solution and vendor that the team is in need of?

    See RFP
  18. Did you receive any outside help writing this RFP? If so, can you provide the name of company? 

    Yes, ClientFirst conducted a process review and assisted with system requirements.
  1. Is the City leveraging a consulting firm to help conduct the RFP evaluations and implementation? If so, could you please provide the name of the consulting firm?

    Yes, ClientFirst assistance.  However, the City is making the vendor decision.  City will manage implementation.
  2. Has the company seen any product demos from Land Management Software vendors in the past 18 months? If so, could you list what companies have demoed to the city?

  3. Can the agency please define inquiry only user? Are these users just needing access to reports or additional functionality?

    Reports and view only access.
  4. Does the City have other software solutions not included in the RFP that, given the right solution, could be consolidated with this effort for future cost savings? If so, what areas or departments would benefit? 

  5. Is the City interested in using ArcGIS as the system of reference for Address, Parcel and Owner data thus eliminating the ASSESSOR INTERFACE?

    Future intention, but the City does not currently have an ArcGIS system.
  6. Does the City require integration to On-Base or would the City consider using the software vendors integrated document management system. 

  7. Can the City provide any information on GoGov CRM API capabilities? 

    Not at this time.  Refer to vendor.
  1. The RFP requirements matrix contains a number of code enforcement requirements that have to do with citizen complaint submission, management, and linking to code cases. However, within the RFP - page 16, Section 3 Integrations – Code Enforcement, a two-way integration has been requested for the City’s current CRM solution, GoGov. Can the City provide clarification on the preferred solution – a vendor’s CRM option or an integration with their current solution? 

    The City is interested in considering and/or using both options for citizens to submit complaints.
  2. We license by “named users.”  I assume from your proposal that you will have 40 named users? 

    55 total estimated user ID’s.  40 full access and 15 that would view only or run reports.
  3. How many of those users will require mobility?

  4. Are you interested in electronic markup for your plan reviewers?  Yes. If so, how many users to you expect? 

  5. As far as payments on the public web, do you have a specific payment gateway that you expect to use?  If so, which gateway?

    No, looking for vendor recommendations/partners.
  6. What financial software are you using now? 

    Tyler Munis
  7. Are you interested in Outlook integration?

  8. Our program comes with a document management system.  Would we be integrating with another document management system, such as Laserfiche or others? 

    We will consider the best overall approach for the specific vendor chosen. 
  9. Have you seen any vendor demonstrations for software in the past year?  If so, which ones?

  10. What is your budget?

    There is no pre-determined budget or cap, but obviously cost is a factor in making our decision especially in light of revenue losses due to COVID-19.  The City will appropriate project funding once the vendor is selected and the cost is determined.
  1. Currently how is the address/data in the permitting system maintained and connected with GIS. Manually. Is the assessor data in sync properly with permitting in the current system.?

  2. How does the city handle mixed use and commercial property permit issuance? is it tied to land address or individual units /assessor parcel numbers?

    Building department issues permits when all appropriate agencies have approved of project.
  3. Does the city policy have any address zoning based finance fees ? Ex : 1 street is charged higher fee rate as it is in X zone but 2nd street is charged less as it is Y zone 

  4. Does the city have/maintains centralized public user database with SSO capabilities like OAuth & OpenID connect for online portal or any other?

  5. Does the city already have accounts with PayPal/authorize.net or any other finance setup already done?

  6. How are the payments of permits collected internally is there a centralized cashiering system for permitting?

    Cash register. No. 
  7. What is the preferred cut-over plan to the new system.  Are Land Management activities currently in process with the existing platform to be moved to the new system and completed in the new system?  Or is the city planning to run systems parallel for a given period of time?

    Move and cutover to new system.  The city does not have a current land management system.
  8. I see for the electronic plan review portion of this RFP, you have listed 15 full access users with an additional 5 inquiry access users for a total of 20 users. I just was wondering what that 5 inquiry access users entails? When giving pricing, would you like us to submit for 20 users or 15? 

    5 inquiry only users would view documents only, not update any data or markups.  Users to propose would depend on your licensing requirements.  There are 20 unique user ID’s.


Thanks for your continued interest and we look forward to receiving your proposals.

City of Mission Viejo

city seal

MV Life

Keep your finger on the pulse of Mission Viejo with the MV Life app.
Get timely information about events, amenities, shopping, dining, and recreation so you can savor the good life in Mission Viejo.
Improve your community by reporting an issue within seconds.
Don’t delay in downloading this app today to take advantage of all this great community has to offer.
Download App https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.missionviejo
MV Life Smart Phone App