BID # 4925-07
REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY
October 31, 2007
The attached addendum supersedes the original Information and Specifications regarding BID
#4925-07, where it adds to, deletes from, clarifies or otherwise modifies them. All other
conditions and previous addendums shall remain unchanged.
1. On Page 19, you request an electronic copy of our user manual. You have indicated this can
be in one of the following formats: CD, DVD, Website, Word or PDF. Our current
documentation for our product is quite through and thus lengthy. Are you requesting a sample of
a user document? Or would you prefer our entire documentation library, which would be over
1500 pages. We can also provide you with a URL with login credentials so that you and your
staff may review our entire library. Please indicate your preference.
The URL will work fine.
2. In the General Appraisal section, can you please elaborate on the following questions:
· 'Store a unique account number and a Parcel number (multiple Account numbers per
Account number is the single unique property identifier (key). We need to be able to have
multiple accounts that have the same parcel number. Ie: severed improvements on the same
parcel of land belonging to different owners is such a case. Also, some accounts may not have
any parcel number assigned.
· Ability to Override/Reconcile of either the total value of the property or a portion of the
value (i.e. account, model, use, improvement, or land level) by transaction or in mass.
This means setting value to any or all land or improvements of an account(s) with an
externally provided value either by hand data entry or by an import process.
· Multiple approaches to value displayed at one time (Cost, Market, Income, Override and
user defined algorithms). What is your definition of a user defined algorithm?
User algorithms refer to things like but not limited to formulae derived for external process
like SPSS, Table curve and the like being “implanted” in the valuation processes of the system
as yet “another approach to value” available to transactional and mass appraisal.
3. In the I.T. System requirements section, can you please describe what you are defining as
'archiving process'? Does this refer to system backups, log shipping, transaction logs, exports, or
something else entirely?
We like to see applications that provide administrators the ability to delete or archive
information out of the database. For example, we may only want to keep 4 years of
information in the database. When we get to year 5 we want the ability to move out of the
database year 5 information.
4. In Phase 2, you mention that you will require onsite training sessions for your staff. Is it
your intention that we would leave this software behind for your staff to evaluate or
would we be able to remove the software upon our leaving your facilities?
Leave it behind for post-training testing and evaluation. The system will be uninstalled
before the contract is awarded.
5. How many people in the office need to be trained?
At least a dozen. Our training facility imposes this limitation. The population of the classes
may change depending upon the subject matter.
6. How many years of historical data will be converted?
Year end data back to 1994 as well as at least two intra-year events (NOVs and Certification)
in addition to year end for years 2002 thru current.
7. How much of the historical data will be converted (Sales and Admin are understood, but
what about CAMA data, Appeals, Exemption Applications, Building Permits, ect.)?
All of it. CAMA and certain admin data will follow the snapshot cycles/versions referenced
in question 6.
8. How many different data sources will be converted?
This depends upon what the target schema demands. Right now there are roughly 62 in the
Assessor application and several from our in-house ASRGRID application.
9. What is your definition of Software As A Service (SaaS)?
We define Software As A Services as: When a vendor hosts the application at a
remote site. Users access the application through the internet.
10. What is your database of choice – SQL server or Oracle?
SQL Server is our first choice. Oracle is acceptable.
11. Are you currently using SPSS to calibrate the models? If so, are you valuing the
properties within SPSS?
We do use SPSS to calibrate models. We externally value selected groups with Spatialest (ie:
Residential, Condos, Vacant land). We also derive our Income approach values from another
12. Please identify the number of buildings for each construction type are valued using
Marshall and Swift (these number are used to calculate the Marshall & Swift license fee)
c. Manufactured Home
d. Agricultural outbuildings
Presently we provide a cost approach value for roughly 6000 Commercial and Industrial
improvements only. We expect to be able to provide an M&S cost value for all improvements
which number roughly 108,000.
13. From the System Requirements section, page 5 - Are the cost tables for personal property
and oil and gas sent electronically to the County from the State? If they are, can you
please provide the data file format.
These tables from the state are provided in ARL volume 5 chapter 4 and chapter 6 and
available to you online at
All tables can be requested in Excel format from the Colorado Division of Property Taxation
at the URL above.
14. From the System Requirements section, page 5 - What data fields would be updated in
the assessment database from the GIS.
We would like the ability to update any field in the CAMA system from the GIS based on a
selection set of accounts created in the GIS.
15. From section System Requirements, page 5 - Is the County currently running on Vista
Not yet but the new system must be Vista compliant at the point of delivery.
16. From the General Appraisal section, page 6 - Please explain further: “Handle and manage
sequenced buildings (i.e. building with multiple uses or where different sections were
built at different times)”.
Different areas of a single building need to be able to be valued based on their specific use
and/or their characteristics/attributes that are not common to the structure as a whole.
17. From the General Appraisal section, page 6 - Explain the difference between Account
number and Parcel number.
Account number is the unique identifier for each property/ownership combination. Parcel
number is the non-unique identifier of the land. Thus multiple accounts can rest on a single
parcel. Some accounts have no parcel number assigned.
18. From the General Appraisal section, page 6 - Please identify how many levels of
locational groupings would be required.
This would mostly be through the use of attributes at the model level (subdivision,
neighborhood, marketing area, economic area, etc.,) and should be able to handle as many
levels as deemed necessary by our office. But there should also be at least several fields
(preferably user defined) available at the account level to track location information
(neighborhood #, tax district, a field for the appraisal team that is responsible for that
19. From the General Appraisal section, page 6 - Please provide details on the user-defined
rounding capabilities required for multiple account types.
In our case real estate actual values are presently rounded to the nearest $100 and assessed
values rounded to the nearest $10. This rounding occurs at the classification level (ie: the sum
of the land values then the sum of the improvements). Other account types such as Personal
Property and Oil & Gas round differently at different levels within each. In other words we
cannot have one single rounding scheme for all account types. Also, for very low valued
accounts we need to be able to set minimum actual and minimum assessed values and never
have an account where the assessed value is equal to or greater than the actual value.
20. From the Addressing section, page 7 - Please provide detail on the address domain
The address domain requirements can be found in the Draft FGDC Street Address Standards
document and in the USPS Addressing Standards (Publication #28).
21. From the Modeling section, page 8 - “All variables stored on the account are available to
the model with 3+ lookup capability in the model.” What is “3+ lookup capability”?
User defined lookup rules specifying conditions by which attributes are related to one another
and the resulting valid combinations.
22. From the Personal Property section, page 9 - Please provide the Leasing information data
file that would be used to upload to the system and assign proper location/tax district.
Information is provided in either Excel or PDF formats with each lessor having different
formatting. (ie: Column names and location can vary)
23. From the Personal Property section, page 10 - Please explain further: “Ability to
compress detail of personal property to print declaration at a reduced number of pages for
cost reduction of mailing.”
As data is entered in detail there may have as many as 15,000 lines of information for an
account. When declarations and other documents are queried or printed there should be the
choice of either seeing the detail or having a compressed version. (Summarize all items with
the same year acquired, same life, depreciation factor and class code as one value using the
major heading for that class code as the compressed name).
24. From the Ownership and Transfer section, page 10 - What system does the Clerk of
Recorder office currently have installed? Does the system have an API? What database is
this system currently running? Is this integration currently working between your current
assessment software and the Clerk of Recorder.
The Clerk and Recorder currently uses CRIS+Plus, Eagle Computer Systems, Tyler
Technologies Inc. Currently this is an internal custom workflow process. The database is
Oracle. GAP analysis needs to include examination of potential data sources that could enable
25. From the GIS section, page 11 - Please provide more details on the integration required
with Hart Intercivic and ParcelPoint. Do these systems have an API? Are there data file
The Hart Intercivic ParcelSync (formerly ParcelPoint and formerly Integrated Parcel
Maintenance) software does have an API. The ParcelSync software uses ESRI format GIS
software and data structure and can integrate with Oracle, SQLserver, and SDE
geodatabases. Please contact:
Phone: (303) 385-6459
26. From the Integration section, page 12 - Please provide more details on the integration
required with content management system and Accela. Do these systems have an API?
Are there data file formats available?
We expect that the investigation of such APIs is the responsibility of the vendor since there
may be more than one depending upon how the vendor has implemented integration avenues
in their system. Generally, for this question and any other question regarding APIs, we expect
the vendor to describe the capability of their product to communicate seamlessly with third
party products. We believe that their software that connects to Assessor data, is called APO,
Address Parcel Owner, is by a WebService provided by Accela. Please contact Accela directly
for more information.
27. From the Integration section, page 13 - Please provide more details on the requirements
to integrate with municipalities and external agencies. Can you name the specific
municipalities and external agencies? How many other are there? Are there data file
At present we provide flat text files to the city of Boulder and a similar text file to title
companies and the public. We anticipate you designing and implementing a new file format(s)
whose purpose is to provide our entire property dataset to the public and those jurisdictions
that do not have access to our data online in mass. Boulder County presently has four school
districts, ten municipalities, and numerous additional service districts. We also allow “view
read only” query to several municipalities which we also expect would change with any new
vendor’s schema. Specific format alternatives we expect to be designed during GAP analysis.
28. From the Integration section, page 13 – Regarding the Integrated Public web component.
Is your expectation to “feed” data into your existing Web application or is the County
requiring a new Web component?
A new Web component.
29. Manatron submitted a response to Boulder County’s RFI in July of this year, but was not
notified that this RFP was released on October 10th and only learned of its release via a
contact with another vendor. Can the county explain how the release of the RFP was
communicated to the vendor community and why Manatron was not part of that list? We
are concerned that we may not learn of future addendums to the RFP unless we maintain
a vigilant watch on the county’s purchasing website.
This is the address we provided to Purchasing:
510 E. Milham Ave.
Portage, MI 49002 USA
30. On the fist page of the RFP it states: “Award of this RFP is contingent upon budgetary
funding approval for 2008.” When does the County receive approval of the 2008 budget?
Will the County please identify the amount of budget monies it is seeking for this
Our 2008 budget will be approved by mid November. The amount requested in the
2008 budget for this project is not important at this point in the process.
31. The RFP states:“Phase I will consist of a written RFP response.” While the Submittal
Section describes with some detail many of the elements of the RFP, the initial section
provides basically a listing of requirements, but no description as to what the County
expects in the response other than to provide a “description of how our Company can
meet the above requirements.” Is the County not seeking a Yes/No/Modify style
response to any of the business components? Please describe the county’s expectations in
The RFP stated at the beginning of the Technical Requirements section on page 4:
“Explanatory answers or specific topic references in the product documentation provided
with the RFP response are encouraged where appropriate. “
Simple Yes/No answers are not the best choice in answering most of the questions
32. In Phase II the RFP states that the top 3 or 4 vendors submitting responses will then be
obligated at their own expense to provide 2 to 3 days of product training. What are the
County expectations related to the test data to be used in these training sessions? Will
data be provided by the County to be converted into the test system, or can the vendor use
its own representative test data? Also, while it states that the vendors will provide a
“complete on-site training program”, it is not possible to do so in just 2 or 3 days. These
usually take weeks to perform. How does the County suggest vendors approach this
The vendors may use their own test data but that data needs to be complete enough so that no
function in the system is inoperative.
Complete training means that enough has to be provided so that functionality throughout the
system can be taught. We think of this as an “extensive demo”. Users of both transactional
screens and mass and batch processes must be able to try out those functions during the
training since the training is expected to be with users hands on.
33. The RFP states: “…that all vendors must submit a copy of the product’s ERD and data
dictionary.” Based upon our experience, separating submissions such as this and marking
them confidential does not insulate the items as exempt under Open Records law. Is it the
position of Boulder County Purchasing, or that of the County Prosecuting Attorney’s
office that these critical components can be kept from being disclosed should the County
receive a request for such materials? Same questions relate to the request for a firm’s
non-disclosure agreement. Is it the County’s position that endorsing such a document
provides insulation from Colorado Open Records law? The RFP does state that “Neither
a proposal, in its entirety, nor proposal price information will be considered
confidential/proprietary.” Please clarify.
Unless your material is proprietary to your firm it will be releasable under the Open
34. The RFP states: Minimum requirements that must be met for the RFP response to be
• Must run on architectures listed in IT requirements above.
• Application being proposed must be in production at more than one site.
• Colorado statutory requirements and deliverables must be provided by statutory due
• 24/7 system support.
Is it the County’s position that the vendor must be in the business of providing product
support 24/7 as normal business practice? Or is it satisfactory that the vendor can provide
support during off-hours by previous arrangement for upcoming identified critical
processing times? The way this statement reads is that if the vendor does not provide 24/7
system support, that vendor’s response cannot be considered.
Prearranged is fine in most cases, but the County expects such service is available on
demand within 4 hours of making the first call or service ticket submittal whether that
call is actually answered by a live person or not. Some activities such as mass or batch
processes occur on weekends or off prime time. Recovery from failures in such cases
cannot wait for next business day attention.
35. The RFP provides a sample contract, many components of which would not seem related
to an implementation agreement for what is requested by the county. Is it the county’s
expectation that vendors review the sample contract and provide comments?
Our preference is for the vendor to submit a copy of the contract the vendor would
prefer to use (Internal contract).
36. Page 4, Technical Specifications, “Application/version submitted for consideration
MUSTmeet these minimal requirements:,” Does this statement apply to all the
requirement listed inthe RFP, or only to the System Definition paragraph that
immediately follows the statement?
The System Definition Paragraph.
37. Will Boulder County consider a proposal for a solution that does not currently have all
the minimal requirements, but will have them available in a specified timeframe?
Yes, but those requirements must be satisfied before system certification testing begins.
38. Page 5, 3rd item from bottom, “Domain capabilities to maintain data integrity,” Please
explain what is meant by this requirement.
This means data items that validate against other data items such as situs address within
jurisdiction (city) is a valid address there. We also expect that individual fields have validation
schemes like drop down lists.
39. Page 15, I.T. SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, Are responses to these items to be included in our
proposal, or are they provided for information as examples of what will be included in the
Phase III letter of qualification?
Responses to I.T. specific questions are expected as part of the response to this RFP.
40. Page 20, item 14, 24/7 system support. Please explain the minimum expectation of the
County for 24/7 system support.
See the answer to item 34.
RFP's are due in the Purchasing office for time and date stamping by 2:00 p.m., on Tuesday,
November 27, 2007. Two (2) unbound copies of your proposal, printed double-sided, 11 point, on at
least 30% post-consumer, recycled paper along with two (2) electronic copies of the response on CD
in either Word or PDF format must be submitted in a sealed envelope clearly marked as RFP
#4925-07. RFP’s should be delivered to the Purchasing Division, 2020 13th Street, Boulder, CO
80302, or mailed to Boulder County Purchasing, P.O. Box 471, Boulder, CO 80306. All Overnight,
Express and Priority Mail should be directed to the above street address. All RFP's must be received
and time and date stamped in the Purchasing office by the above due date and time. Any RFP's
received after due date and time will be returned unopened to the bidder. No faxed or emailed RFP's
will be accepted.
Jenny Olberding, C.P.M., CPPB
RECEIPT OF LETTER
October 31, 2007
This is an acknowledgment of receipt of Addendum#1 for RFP # 4925-07, REAL AND PERSONAL
PROPERTY ASSESSMENT SYSTEM.
In an effort to keep you informed, we would appreciate your acknowledgment of receipt of the attached
fax. Please sign this acknowledgment and fax it back to us as soon as possible. Our fax number is
303-441-4524. If you have any questions, or problems with transmittal, please call us at 303-441-3525.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. This information is time and date sensitive; an immediate
response is requested.
Boulder County Purchasing
Signed by: _______________________________ Date: _______________
Name of Company_____________________________________________