Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Procurement Contract Award topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Ada County awards appraisal-system contract to Soft Resources LLC

2173946 · January 1, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Ada County Board of Commissioners voted Dec. 23 to accept the procurement committee's recommendation and award RFP 25006, a contract to replace the county's computer-aided mass appraisal system, to Soft Resources LLC, the top-ranked proposer.

The Ada County Board of Commissioners voted Dec. 23 to award RFP 25006, a contract to replace the county—omputer-aided mass appraisal system, to Soft Resources LLC.

Procurement staff told the board the evaluation committee completed written scoring and interviews of the top three proposers and issued a final ranking. Evan Navigant, procurement, read the evaluation letter, which showed Soft Resources LLC ranked first with a score of 130.60; Plan Moran PLLC ranked second with 113.39; MSS Business Transformation Advisory ranked third with 109.29; Takusaku Consulting and Fidelity Partner Services followed with lower scores.

The board ccepted the evaluation committee ward recommendation and approved the contract award to Soft Resources LLC by voice vote. Commissioners recorded unanimous support; no dollar amount for the contract was provided during the meeting.

The procurement memorandum presented to the board described independent evaluator scoring followed by committee discussion and an interview phase for the top proposers. The evaluation letter was dated Dec. 23, 2024.

No public comments or legal objections were raised during the award item.

The board—hair called the motion and the motion carried without recorded dissents. Next administrative steps discussed were finalizing award documents and proceeding to contract execution as allowed under the county's procurement process.

Details required for auditing contract value and timelines were not specified during the public discussion and would be available in the procurement file.