Sec. 370.306. PROCESS FOR ENTERING INTO COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS

(a) If an authority enters into a comprehensive development agreement, the authority shall use a competitive procurement process that provides the best value for the authority. The authority may accept unsolicited proposals for a proposed transportation project or solicit proposals in accordance with this section.

(b) An authority shall establish rules and procedures for accepting unsolicited proposals that require the private entity to include in the proposal:

(1) information regarding the proposed project location, scope, and limits;

(2) information regarding the private entity's qualifications, experience, technical competence, and capability to develop the project; and

(3) a proposed financial plan for the proposed project that includes, at a minimum:

(A) projected project costs; and

(B) proposed sources of funds.

(c) An authority shall publish a request for competing proposals and qualifications in the Texas Register that includes the criteria used to evaluate the proposals, the relative weight given to the criteria, and a deadline by which proposals must be received if:

(1) the authority decides to issue a request for qualifications for a proposed project; or

(2) the authority authorizes the further evaluation of an unsolicited proposal.

(d) A proposal submitted in response to a request published under Subsection (c) must contain, at a minimum, the information required by Subsections (b)(2) and (3).

(e) An authority may interview a private entity submitting an unsolicited proposal or responding to a request under Subsection (c). The authority shall evaluate each proposal based on the criteria described in the notice. The authority must qualify at least two private entities to submit detailed proposals for a project under Subsection (f) unless the authority does not receive more than one proposal or one response to a request under Subsection (c).

(f) An authority shall issue a request for detailed proposals from all private entities qualified under Subsection (e) if the authority proceeds with the further evaluation of a proposed project. A request under this subsection may require additional information relating to:

(1) the private entity's qualifications and demonstrated technical competence;

(2) the feasibility of developing the project as proposed;

(3) detailed engineering or architectural designs;

(4) the private entity's ability to meet schedules;

(5) costing methodology; or

(6) any other information the authority considers relevant or necessary.

(g) In issuing a request for proposals under Subsection (f), an authority may solicit input from entities qualified under Subsection (e) or any other person. An authority may also solicit input regarding alternative technical concepts after issuing a request under Subsection (f).

(h) An authority shall rank each proposal based on the criteria described in the request for proposals and select the private entity whose proposal offers the best value to the authority.

(i) An authority may enter into discussions with the private entity whose proposal offers the apparent best value. The discussions shall be limited to:

(1) incorporation of aspects of other proposals for the purpose of achieving the overall best value for the authority;

(2) clarifications and minor adjustments in scheduling, cash flow, and similar items; and

(3) matters that have arisen since the submission of the proposal.

(j) If at any point in discussions under Subsection (i), it appears to the authority that the highest ranking proposal will not provide the authority with the overall best value, the authority may enter into discussions with the private entity submitting the next-highest ranking proposal.

(k) An authority may withdraw a request for competing proposals and qualifications or a request for detailed proposals at any time. The authority may then publish a new request for competing proposals and qualifications.

(l) An authority may require that an unsolicited proposal be accompanied by a nonrefundable fee sufficient to cover all or part of its cost to review the proposal.

(m) An authority may pay an unsuccessful private entity that submits a response to a request for detailed proposals under Subsection (f) a stipulated amount of the final contract price for any costs incurred in preparing that proposal. A stipulated amount must be stated in the request for proposals and may not exceed the value of any work product contained in the proposal that can, as determined by the authority, be used by the authority in the performance of its functions. The use by the authority of any design element contained in an unsuccessful proposal is at the sole risk and discretion of the authority and does not confer liability on the recipient of the stipulated amount under this subsection. After payment of the stipulated amount:

(1) the authority owns the exclusive rights to, and may make use of any work product contained in, the proposal, including the technologies, techniques, methods, processes, and information contained in the project design; and

(2) the work product contained in the proposal becomes the property of the authority.

(n) An authority shall prescribe the general form of a comprehensive development agreement and may include any matter the authority considers advantageous to the authority. The authority and the private entity shall negotiate the specific terms of a comprehensive development agreement.

(o) Subchapter A, Chapter 223, of this code and Chapter 2254, Government Code, do not apply to a comprehensive development agreement entered into under Section 370.305.

Added by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1325, Sec. 2.01, eff. June 21, 2003. Amended by: Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 264 , Sec. 2.02, eff. June 11, 2007.