Oh baby, if you want instant cash in an election year what do you do? Sell City Hall. And City Hall Annex too. The city hasn’t officially announced what’s behind this apparent sale/lease back of City Hall that could produce tens of millions, assuming there is a buyer/market. Lots of questions here. Is this an election-year fire sale? Must it be used to replenish the fund balance? The city has raided its rainy day fund for years leaving the city with little savings. Both buildings require millions of dollars of renovations. Will the city use some of the sale/lease money for operating expenses under the guise of renovations? Found this at www.bidsync.com
RFQ/RFP – SENIOR MANAGING UNDERWRITE SERVICES
Description
PURPOSE. As financial advisor to the City of Bridgeport, Connecticut (the “City”), Public Financial Management, Inc. (“PFM”) is requesting proposals from financial institutions to serve as Senior Managing Underwriter in connection with the City’s upcoming financing, which will include the sale/leaseback or lease/leaseback of City Hall and City Hall Annex. The City expects to issue either Certificates of Participation (“COPs”), Lease Revenue Bonds (“Bonds”), or other financial structures that will yield approximately $30 million in April/May 2011.
The City anticipates entering into a lease agreement with a not-for-profit entity that will serve as lessor for the term of the lease. At the end of the term, City Hall and City Hall Annex will be conveyed back to the City. A portion of the proceeds from the sale, approximately $5,000,000 – $10,000,000, will be used to renovate City Hall and City Hall Annex and install capital improvements and green energy and other energy-savings improvements.
POTENTIAL FOR JOINT PROPOSALS OR STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS WITH DESIGN-BUILDERS RESPONDING TO A SEPARATE RFQ. The City is currently also conducting a procurement for a design-build firm to design and construct certain capital improvements and energy improvements to City Hall and City Hall Annex (“Design-Build RFQ”). A potential proposer for this Underwriter RFQ may submit a joint proposal with a prospective design-build firm that identifies itself in connection with the Design-Build RFQ and, if doing so, shall identify any value-added to the City of such a joint approach in addition to the qualifications required by this RFQ. Prospective design-build firms that intend to respond to the Design-Build RFQ will be identified early in the process and prospective responders to this RFQ will receive the identities and contact information of such firms.
WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER THE PUBLICATION OF THIS RFQ, EVERY PROSPECTIVE PROPOSER TO THIS RFQ MUST PROVIDE ITS CONTACT INFORMATION TO DAWN NORTON, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE, 45 LYON TERRACE, ROOM 104, BRIDGEPORT, CT 06604, VIA FAX (203) 576-7067 OR VIA EMAIL AT dawn.norton@bridgeportct.gov. THIS WILL ENABLE THE CITY TO IDENTIFY PROSPECTIVE PROPOSERS TO THE PROPOSERS THAT IDENTIFY THEMSELVES IN CONNECTION WITH THE DESIGN-BUILD RFQ. FAILURE OF A PROPOSER TO TEAM WITH A DESIGN-BUILDER, HOWEVER, WILL NOT RESULT IN DISQUALIFICATION, BEING DEEMED NON-RESPONSIVE, OR BEING PRECLUDED FROM SUBMITTING ITS QUALIFICATIONS.
Project. This solicitation is being conducted specifically to identify the most appropriately qualified firm to provide senior managing underwriter services for the sale of Certificates of Participation, Lease Revenue Bonds or other revenue-raising vehicles for this project through issuance of this RFQ.
Minority Business Enterprises Are Encouraged to Respond. The City encourages Minority Business Enterprises (“MBEs”) to submit their qualifications. An MBE firm is entitled to Evaluation Credits (as described below) if it is a Target Group for these services under the provisions of the Minority Business Enterprise Ordinance, Section 3.12.130 of the City Ordinances (“MBE Ordinance”). Target Groups for this procurement are:
• Asian Americans
• Hispanic Americans
• Caucasian Females
• Minority Business Enterprises
• Minority Female Business Enterprises
• Caucasian Female Business Enterprises
Non-Minority Firms Are Encouraged to Joint Venture with Target Group Firms. Non-minority firms are encouraged to form joint venture arrangements (described below) with Target Group firms and the joint venture will be entitled to additional points based on the extent of the Target Group’s ownership interest in the joint venture as further described below
Companion piece to RFP/RFQ
RFQ/RFP – CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS CITY HALL AND ANNEX
Description
PROJECT DESCRIPTION. The City of Bridgeport (“City” or COB”), through its Department of Public Facilities (“DPF”), is seeking architectural/engineering firms or teams to act as a design-builder for purposes of designing and constructing necessary capital repairs and improvements (“Capital Improvements”) to two (2) specific City properties, that is, City Hall, located at 45 Lyon Terrace (“City Hall”) and the City Hall Annex, located at 999 Broad Street (“Annex”) (See Exhibit C attached for a description of these properties). The City will select the energy improvements for City Hall and the Annex that will fit within the City’s desired level of investment (“Energy Improvements”). The City intends to seek energy audits for City Hall and the Annex from others. The design-builder selected as a result of this RFQ will be responsible for designing and constructing the Capital Improvements and Energy Improvements that the City selects.
DPF will conduct this procurement for professional services in conformance with (i) the Bridgeport Municipal Code of Ordinances Section 3.08.070 “Purchasing Procedure”, (ii) its “Official Policy Concerning Quality-Based Selection Processes”, and (iii) State statutes. The Selection Committee (described below) will utilize the Evaluator’s Guide For QBS Selection Processes in the process for selecting the successful vendor.
A. POTENTIAL FOR JOINT PROPOSALS OR STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS WITH UNDERWRITER OF SALE/LEASEBACK FINANCING. The City is currently also conducting a procurement for an underwriting firm to act as Senior Managing Underwriter in connection with the City’s upcoming financing transaction that is designed in part to raise funds to complete certain Capital Improvements and Energy Improvements at City Hall and the Annex, which financing transaction will include the sale/leaseback of City Hall and the Annex facilities or another financing structure to be determined (“Underwriting RFQ”). A potential proposer for this Design-Build RFQ may submit a joint proposal with a prospective underwriting firm that identifies itself in connection with the Underwriting RFQ and, if doing so, shall identify any value-added to the City of such a joint approach in addition to the qualifications required by this RFQ. Prospective underwriting firms that intend to respond to the Underwriting RFQ will be identified early in the process and prospective responders to this Design-Build RFQ will receive the identities and contact information of such underwriters.
WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER THE PUBLICATION OF THIS RFQ, EVERY PROSPECTIVE PROPOSER TO THIS RFQ MUST PROVIDE ITS CONTACT INFORMATION TO TED GRABARZ, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SUSTAINABILITY PROGRAM COORDINATOR, 999 BROAD STREET, SECOND FLOOR, BRIDGEPORT, CT 06604 VIA FAX (203) 332-5652 OR VIA EMAIL AT TED.GRABARZ@BRIDGEPORTCT.GOV. THIS WILL ENABLE THE CITY TO IDENTIFY PROSPECTIVE PROPOSERS TO TEAM WITH AN
UNDERWRITER. FAILURE OF A PROPOSER TO TEAM WITH AN UNDERWRITER, HOWEVER, WILL NOT RESULT IN DISQUALIFICATION, BEING DEEMED NON-RESPONSIVE, OR BEING PRECLUDED FROM SUBMITTING ITS QUALIFICATIONS.
Minority Business Enterprises Are Encouraged to Respond. The City encourages Minority Business Enterprises (“MBEs”) to submit their qualifications. An MBE firm or a team of which it is a part is entitled to Evaluation Credits (See Exhibit B attached) if it is a Target Group for these services under the provisions of the Minority Business Enterprise Ordinance, Section 3.12.130 of the City Ordinances (“MBE Ordinance”). Target Groups (“Target Groups”) for this procurement are:
Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Caucasian Females
Non-Minority Firms Are Encouraged to Joint Venture with Target Group Firms.
Mandatory Walk-Throughs of City Hall and the Annex; Questions and Answers. The City will conduct mandatory walk-throughs of City Hall and the Annex at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, February 23 or Thursday, February 24, 2011 (prospective proposers need only attend one (1) walkthrough), beginning in the offices of the Department of Public Facilities, City Hall Annex, 999 Broad Street, 2nd Floor, Bridgeport, CT. The walkthrough will include both City Hall Annex and City Hall. The City representative leading the walk-through will be Art Harris, Director of Construction Management Services, telephone 203-576-3960. The City will entertain questions about the buildings, their current condition, the City’s desired Capital Improvements and Energy Improvements, and the like until Friday, March 4, 2011 at 5:00 p.m. The City will provide answers to such questions to registered vendors no later than Monday, March 7, 2011 at 5:00 p.m. on Bidsync. BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE NATURE OF THIS RFQ AND THE UNIQUE CONDITION AND FEATURES OF THE BUILDINGS INVOLVED, ANY VENDOR THAT DOES NOT REGISTER FOR OR FAILS TO ATTEND ONE MANDATORY WALK-THROUGH WILL BE PROHIBITED FROM SUBMITTING ITS QUALIFICATIONS.
Well, Well, Well. This administration is getting desperate. We are trying to sell off what we the citizens own so this desperate incompetent fool and his dumb-ass underlings can have another 4 years to screw up this city. If they succeed at this they will then tell us how they did not raise our taxes. This will also give them enough money to hire more political kiss-asses to useless jobs that mean nothing.
This administration refuses to make the hard choices such as laying off all the politically connected ass kissers, tighten their spending habits and once again for the thousandth time stop taking cars home. Bill you and your stooges should also take a pay cut, and this time really take the cut. Bill, get rid of your BS conservation Dept. Get rid of the sustainability job. (BTW what then hell is that anyway?) Get rid of CitiStat as they have done squat. Collect all the taxes we are due. You tax our homes, you tax our cars, you tax our businesses and its personal property, you tax our sewage. What’s next, the air we breathe? If someone does bid on these proposals we are screwed because the council will vote for this led by its chief ass kisser Tom McCarthy.
tc, you make some great points!
I have a great idea!!! Let’s sell all the city-owned buildings (except firehouses). Then let’s buy a large circus tent (I have a connection at Ringling Brothers). Let’s set this tent up at Remington Park and move all of the city offices there. Rent should be free as we are owed a gazillion dollars in taxes. As the political hires are starting to outnumber the regular civil service workers they will have to live with showing up at a tent office.
I think Finch should be forced to wear a top hat and tails as he is the ringmaster of this circus.
When you start liquidating assets you are in a pro-forma Chapter 9 Bankruptcy.
Maybe Mary Moran wasn’t so wrong after all. Problem is Finch will never be right on these deals. He robs from the poor to give to the rich.
3 Biggest Finch Lies in the World!
I will donate my state senate salary to the Zoo or to the city budget.
I will give back campaign contributions to Sal DiNardo.
I will provide the taxpayer with a $600.00 credit.
He forgot to say “I Love You!”
Follow the Money // Feb 21, 2011 at 2:56 pm
To your posting
One more: I will reduce the number of City cars taken home each night by City employees.
1. Senate salary–Zoo
2. Sal–Yeah right
3. Let me check on that one
4. Last but not least!!! I F*** YOU! xoxoox
Does anyone remember the reason the City Administration decided to postpone a Pension Plan contribution this year? Maybe my hearing is going?
The plans are underfunded according to latest reports … investment returns, no matter how wonderful (and have they been?) need to average over time what the retirement plan actuaries have assumed, and would only cause a waiver of contribution if there would be a consequent plan overfunding … one assumes that each union is concerned about member retirement benefits but no cry from that quarter is heard … what’s up?
And where on the City web site does information on City pension plans show? Annual funding of? Responsible trustees? Dates of meetings? Reports of plan administrators? Reports of investment advisers? Changing relationships? Where does Joe Lunchbucket (citizen taxpayer) go to see a meeting of “trustees,” those people who have a higher responsibility to see that a plan meets its objectives, exercise their fiduciary responsibilities?
And where are there any comments on the larger City liability for retiree health care benefits that have been negotiated, years ago, never funded in a meaningful way but expected by retirees I would assume?
Will it be a shock to retirees when the City sells off the last of its owned property, spends the money on current operating expenses, and then announces that the cupboard is bare? There is a multi-year budget planning process theoretically ongoing in this City? Has anyone heard about the City Hall/Annex initiatives before from the “wailing walls” of City Hall?
BEACON2 // Feb 21, 2011 at 4:58 pm
To your posting
BEACON2,
Your questioning is significant in that the answers called for are answers that this Administration at 999 does not want to go near … Your analysis is one that I would hope would guide the thinking of any individual who intends to give a 100% commitment of time, integrity and intellect to the job of Mayor for the next four years …
Can the next Mayor undo the damage soon enough?
Beacon
I’m no expert on the pensions, but I do know this. The “pass” on pension contributions pertained to the pension plan “A” which entails police and fire. This plan was replaced with plan “B” in 1983, I believe. There are still current workers on plan “A” and all the rest on “B.” The City is now negotiating all remaining employees into plan “C.” This is the State plan that already is enjoyed by other City workers, supervisors … I’m not really sure who else in already in this plan. Anyone? This plan “C” is the type where a retiree can collect on a salary based on the highest three-year average. Therefore increasing the pension payments over base salaries. The existing plans “A” and “B” are based only on base salary. How can this save money for the taxpayers and the City? Maybe the City can defer more payments by raiding the pension fund and using some of the balance for other things … I don’t know. Can anyone shed more light on this? The City is negotiating hard to get this going, but are reluctant to provide any numbers or documented actuarial study to support the change … at least that’s what I hear from the union members.
Okay, after having read this 4 times, I think I get the strategy. It appears a way to bond for operating expenses (aka city budget shortfall) without calling it bonding for operating expenses. Also, why are we making improvements to buildings with no long-term plan for the use of the buildings? At one point, I thought they were discussing selling the property outright and combining locations into one government center. Maybe they have decided not to go that route, but then what route are they going? Didn’t they ask Music and Arts Center not to move into the building (even though they had a signed lease) because they were selling it and didn’t want to put anyone else in the building let alone use public funds to upgrade a building they would not keep? This must mean they don’t see the regional sewage deal coming to fruition before July. They needed to come up with a hole plugger … oh boy!
RW & B
As CC would say: “To your posting:”
I think this fire sale will go to Wall St. and go to shore up the fund balance. If you are going to do this why sell something that performs versus non-performing assets like the golf course (I hear some howling) and airport?
Finch and his 2 Dead Crew may convert this sale into People for Excellence in Government to use as their “Fun Balance.”
More and more this administration looks like it is grabbing at straws, with little thought and less planning.
Of course, I haven’t heard much from the other candidates beyond “I’m not Bill Finch.”
Hey Phil!
We haven’t seen hide nor hair from you in almost 20 years. Welcome Home! You were the only Bridgeport Republican who had a nice run up in Hartford.
GR
Never left.
Phil, I think John Gomes and Charles Coviello are the only announced candidates at this point. Not sure of their position on this financial gymnastics event. As for Mary-Jane Foster, she is not a candidate yet. She is exploring a run. I believe if she runs, she will have a lot to say about her vision for Bridgeport’s future. We will see.
RWB
To your posting …
You and I may find our mutual candidates equally astounded as to the reaches that TOM SHERWOOD’s thinking is damaging irrefutably the financial future of Bridgeport.
Even though every thinking person knows that Finch has once again flip-flopped from his plans for 999 and City Hall, the more compelling problem is how to stop the current proposed plans.
You and I know Bill Finch doesn’t have the capacity to reason a deal like this, other than accept what SHERWOOD puts in front of him.
That’s dangerous … it doesn’t allow for a future …
As to any candidate other than Finch … will they be there in time enough to undo the damage?
Carolanne: This sale is the dying cry of a lost administration. I think any candidate for mayor should assure the voting public that ALL of the Finch incompetents should be fired on day 1 of the new administration starting with Sherwood. Putting out an RFQ or RFP or ABC to sell city hall and the annex is damaging the city to no end. You can bet if it gets before the lemmings on the council the vote will be 19 yeas and 1 No.
town committee // Feb 22, 2011 at 10:54 am
To your posting
TC,
And that would be just the first action called for on DAY ONE for the sake of this City.
Rest assured … I know the Gomes campaign can speak from direct experience as to how important it is to remove these “incompetents” … on day one.
Not for Nothin’
Whatever happened to the FED STIMULUS MONEY for the police hires? Did that go to friends of Finch hires? Just askin’.
Were new cops ever hired and on our streets, which that cash was supposed to be for?
MAKE THE SWITCH in the 126th …
If you are still undecided about your VOTE consider Mark Trojanowski.
Here’s why:
www .voteformarkfeb22.com
Vote for Mark
Secretary of the State Denise Merrill will call into the TV Show Bridgeport Now tonight after 8pm. Tonight, Feb 22 on Ch 88, seen in Bridgeport and Fairfield; live on the net at Soundviewtv.org.
This will be the first time the new Secretary of State, who replaced Susan Bysiewicz, will appear in a live TV show in Bridgeport and talking about election reform issues.
Bridgeport Now guest panel:
– President of League of Women’s Voters for CT
– Executive Director of the Connecticut Citizen Election Audit Coalition
This is a special program on “Election Reform Bridgeport” Search Google with those words for more on this topic with video.
Some questions to be addressed on the audit of the Nov. 2 election:
– What were the results? How did it compare to the results reported by Bridgeport officials?
– What changes in laws or regulations are being considered?
Note: there are no call-in opportunities tonight for the public.
So “Steal Pointe” is in jeopardy and no comments. According to the mayor the developers have spent “millions of dollars”… riiiggghhht. The developer says they’ve “spent close to a million” sounds a bit better but what was it spent on? Unless they painted the Gold fence Black. The monies spent on trips to Vegas etc.? If they haven’t been able to secure any potential tenants in all these years, the plans must not be that good.
OMG my city is falling apart— — —coo coo ca choo MJF and Johnny G!!!
Carolanne is right again. This has Tom Sherwood written all over it. Who else could possibly think up such a crazy idea? They are so freakin’ desperate right now you can almost smell it.
A primer on Pension Plans.
Plan A (Or really 2 Plans for Police and Fire.)
Employees contribute 8 Pct of their pay. Which is NOT set aside for the future. Any additional percentage of payroll is calculated by our actuaries annually based on smoothed experience figures. By now there should be zero to 10 working employees in these plans. Other plan participants are retired and a direct charge to the taxpayer until they and their widows die, so this should peak now and decline as participants die off.
There are annual actuarial reports shared with the pension boards.
The “B” plans get 6 pct of employees’ wages. The City is supposed to contribute an additional amount which the actuaries express as a percentage of covered payroll. These figures can vary from 3 – 4 if the market has done well to 25 or 30, or even higher.
If the City does not make its contribution, future annual required contributions increase. This is all laid out in the actuarial reports, which are updated annually as required by our auditors.
The pension funds are invested responsibly. This is good, since they are the source of retirees pensions, not the taxpayers.
Let us hope the market improves, the city thrives, and the City resumes making actual cash contributions to the plans.