TO: HONORABLE MAYOR FROM: Jon Cicirelli
AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: LONG-TERM LEASE OF DATE: March 2, 2023
MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSES
Approved Date
3-2-23
SUPPLEMENTAL
REASON FOR SUPPLEMENTAL
This supplemental memorandum provides an update on the Golf Course Management, Operations and Maintenance Services Request for Proposal (RFP) process, which is summarized in the staff’s memorandum to City Council dated February 13, 2023. Specifically, it includes updates related to Golf Automation, Inc.’s (Golf Automation) appeal to staff’s decision to reject the November 14, 2022 protest related to the City’s Notice of Intent to Award Contract to CourseCo, Inc. (CourseCo).
With this supplemental memorandum, staff continues to recommend that the City Council award a golf course lease agreement to CourseCo for the three City-owned golf courses (Los Lagos, Rancho del Pueblo, and San José Municipal).
Appeal and protest documents are included in Appendix A. This includes Golf Automation’s appeal, dated February 24, 2023, the original protest, dated November 14, 2022, and staff’s subsequent protest determination letter, dated February 16, 2023. The concerns raised by Golf Automation and staff’s subsequent responses are summarized below.
Concern 1: Arbitrary and Capricious Methodology for Determining Proposer Interviews – Golf Automation asserted that the City was arbitrary and capricious in that it did not provide a procedure for comparing proposer scores without interviews to proposer scores with interviews. Staff responded to the objection, noting that the RFP document advised prospective proposers that the City reserved the right to interview only “top proposers.” In the protest determination letter, staff informed Golf Automation that because its pre- interview point total (40.85) was significantly lower than the point totals for the two competing proposals (93.94 for CourseCo and 80.07 for Touchstone Golf, LLC (Touchstone), staff determined that Golf Automation was not a “top proposer.” Staff explained that the total points available through the interview process would not have been sufficient to raise Golf Automation’s score to within range of the pre-interview points given to the other competing proposers. In addition, staff informed Golf Automation that it had the COUNCIL AGENDA: 3/14/2023
FILE: 23-373
ITEM: 7.3
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
March 3, 2023
Subject: Supplemental – Long-Term Lease of Municipal Golf Courses
option to object to the City’s requirements and specifications presented in the RFP document, but did not do so by the deadline of August 5, 2022, and therefore waived its right to do so.
Concern 2: Failure to Disclose Documentation Concerning Proposers’ Responsiveness and Conflict of Interest – Golf Automation asserted that the City had not disclosed all proposals, evaluations and scoring sheets at the conclusion of the scoring process and therefore was not compliant with California Public Contract Code Sec. 10344 (c)(2). As a result, Golf Automation asserted that insufficient information was available to determine if all proposers were responsive, including compliance with conflict of interest requirements. Staff responded that the obligation cited by Golf Automation under the Public Contract Code is applicable only to state agencies and that the City complied with its obligations under the Public Records Act. The City provided responsive documents, including the questionnaire, lease terms, and budget, as requested by Golf Automation’s Public Records Act request on November 3, 2022. In addition, the City provided overall evaluation panel comments, as well as overall summary scoring sheets. These documents were sufficient to determine responsiveness among the three proposers that were provided pre-interview proposal evaluation scores.
Concern 3: Two Competing Proposals are Non-responsive – Golf Automation asserted that both CourseCo and Touchstone were non-responsive to various RFP questions and/or requirements. As the recommendation to the City Council is to approve the selection of CourseCo as the lessee for the three City-owned golf courses, staff gave greater attention to affirming CourseCo’s responsiveness in the protest determination letter. Specifically, Golf Automation asserted that CourseCo was non-responsive in one question posed under Request for Proposal Part 6 - Environmental Stewardship; however, staff clarified that CourseCo’s responses to questions 1 and 2 sufficiently addressed the information requested about Environmental Stewardship. Ironically, Golf Automation’s own proposal was deemed to be incomplete and/or non-responsive in some areas by the rating panel, resulting in a lower score and staff’s decision to not advance Golf Automation to the interview process.
Furthermore, Golf Automation alleged that CourseCo misrepresented or provided inaccurate information in the way it presented responses regarding digital marketing, merchandise purchases, and diversity of staff. Staff reviewed the independent research Golf Automation provided and determined that the concerns would not have had a material impact on the City’s scoring or recommendation to the City Council.
Golf Automation raised concerns involving Touchstone’s failure to disclose a personal injury lawsuit and a potential class-action lawsuit involving failure to pay staff overtime. Neither issue came to light prior to Golf Automation’s protest. Staff responded by noting that the RFP document does not automatically disqualify proposers for being part of active litigation.
Furthermore, staff noted that the RFP only provides that wage theft may result in disqualification. Regardless, because staff is recommending an award of contract to CourseCo, there was no need to research and re-assess Touchstone’s proposal or consider retroactive disqualification.
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
March 3, 2023
Subject: Supplemental – Long-Term Lease of Municipal Golf Courses
Concern 4: A Conflict of Interest Exists – Golf Automation asserted that there exists a conflict of interest between the City and CourseCo and questioned whether the City gave preferential treatment to CourseCo. In the protest determination letter, staff acknowledged that CourseCo has been the golf course operator at Los Lagos and Rancho del Pueblo golf courses for over twenty years. With that, staff confirmed that CourseCo provided the necessary Conflict of Interest Form, which included disclosure regarding relationships, stocks and investments, employment and consulting, payment or gifts, real estate, or positions held of an entity that would be affected by or involved in the proposed assignment.
In its review of CourseCo’s Conflict of Interest Form, staff determined that no perceived or actual conflict exists. In addition, staff denies the implication that any preferential treatment had been given to CourseCo. Staff confirms that the RFP rating criteria were consistently applied by the evaluation panel to all rated proposals and no evidence was provided to merit Golf Automation’s implication of preferential treatment.
If the City Council does not accept the Administration’s recommendation, there will be several impacts to the management, operations and financial results of the City’s three municipal golf courses. A new RFP would need to be conducted that would require significant staff time, create a many month delay for contract execution, and be undertaken in a different bidding environment as residents and visitors have become increasingly comfortable with indoor recreation, leisure and entertainment opportunities that were more limited during the pandemic.
During the contract execution period delay, the golf courses would not begin receiving the significant capital investment required under the recommended lease and the City would not receive lease revenue as the three golf courses would continue operating under any existing agreements. Los Lagos and Rancho del Pueblo golf courses would continue operations under month-to-month qualified management agreements with CourseCo, where the financial risks fall on the City. In addition, the City’s existing lease for San José Municipal Golf Course was extended to March 31, 2023, to align with the execution of a new lease for all three golf courses, and as such no operator would be under contract with the City for that course starting April 1, 2023. There is no guarantee the existing lessee would consider another extension, and if it did, the terms may have a high cost to the City.
Based on the background and analysis presented in the Long-Term Lease of Municipal Golf Courses staff memorandum, along with the supplemental information presented above, staff continues to recommend that the City Council award a golf course lease agreement to CourseCo for the three City-owned golf courses (Los Lagos, Rancho del Pueblo, and San José Municipal).
/s/
JON CICRELLI
Director of Parks,
Recreation and Neighborhood Services
For questions, please contact David DeLong, Division Manager, at [email protected].
Appendix A: Appeal and Protest Documents
'FLORESRYAN, LLP
CONSTRUCTION LAW ATTORNEYS
February 24, 2023
VIA PERSONAL DELIVERY AND EMAIL
City of San Jose
Attention: City Clerk
200 East Santa Clara Street, 14th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
Email: [email protected]
Re: Appeal of Bid Protest Rejection
Owner:' City of San Jose ("City")
Protestor: Golf Automation, Inc. ("Golf Automation")
Aaron J. Flores, Esq.
[email protected]
Bid: Golf Course Management, Operations, and Maintenance Services Bid No.: PRNS-Parks-06 RFP ("Bid")
Dear City Clerk:
Pursuant to San Jose Municipal Code section 4.12.460, Golf Automation hereby appeals the City's denial of its bid protest for the above-referenced Bid and requests a hearing on the same to occur. Enclosed herewith is Golf Automation's initial bid protest letter, which is the basis of Golf Automation's appeal, along with the City's denial. Please contact me at your earliest opportunity to discuss this matter and to schedule a hearing on the appeal.
Golf Automation hereby reserves all of its rights and no action or inaction should be interpreted as a waiver or release of any kind, without limitation.
I look forward to your prompt response.
cc: Golf Automation, Inc.
Enclosure:
Very truly yours,
Golf Automation's Bid Protest, dated November 14, 2022
City's Bid Protest Denial, dated February 16, 2023
115 W. California Blvd., #9010 I Pasadena, CA 91105 I (626) 514-0950 I www.floresryan.com
A PPENDIX A
Appeal and Protest Documents
rEJ
. ENCLOSURE
-BID PROTEST
E] FLORES RYAN , LLP
CONSTRUCTION LAW ATTORNEYS
November 14, 2022
VIA EMAIL & OVERNIGHT COURIER SERVICE
David DeLong
City of San Jose
200 East Santa Clara Street, 9th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113 ·
Email: [email protected]
Re: Bid Protest - Golf Automation, Inc.
Owner: City of San Jose ("City")
Protestor: Golf Automation, Inc.
Aaron J. Flores, Esq.
[email protected]
Bid: Golf Course Management, Operations, and Maintenance Services Bid No.: PRNS-Parks-06 RFP ("Bid")
Dear Mr. DeLong:
Please be advised that Flores Ryan, LLP ("Firm") has been retained to represent the interests of protestor, Golf Automation, Inc. ("Golf Automation"), concerning the above referenced bid. If you have retained legal counsel for this matter, please provide this letter to that legal counsel. Kindly direct all future communications concerning this matter to the Firm.
For the reasons further detailed herein, Golf Automation hereby protests the Bid because:
(1) the Request for Proposal, Section 10, contains a method which is arbitrary, capricious, entirely lacking in evidentiary support, and inconsistent with proper procedure for evaluating the proposals when there is a combination of proposers who were interviewed and proposers who were not interviewed, which has unduly prejudiced Golf Automation's proposal score and undermined the entire evaluation process (Ghilotti Construction Co. v. City of Richmond (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 897, 903); (2) the City has not yet made available all the proposers' proposals, evaluations, and complete scoring sheets, as required by law, so that a full determination of proposals ' responsiveness can be made, in addition to whether all proper disclosures have been made concerning conflicts of interest (Pub. Contract Code, § 10344, sub. (c)(2)); (3) based upon the City's partial disclosure of the proposers' proposals and scoring sheets, it is clear that both CourseCo, Inc. 's and Touchstone, LLC's proposals are nonresponsive and must be rejected; and (4) based upon the City's partial disclosure of the proposers' proposals and scoring sheets, a conflict of interest exists between the City and CourseCo, Inc., which could also amount to collusion, and CourseCo, Inc. must be disqualified from bidding pursuant to Section 13.
Accordingly, Golf Automation respectfully requests that the City withdraw its Notice of Intent to Award the contract to Courseco, Inc. and · instead make a contract award to Golf 115 W. California Blvd., #9010 I Pasadena, CA 91105 I (626) 514-0950 I www.floresryan.com Automation, the proposer who provided a legally responsive proposal and is not subject to disqualification.
In the event the City is not inclined to grant Golf Automation's instant bid protest, Golf Automation alternatively requests that the City grant it an extension to complete its bid protest so that Golf Automation may receive copies of all the proposers' proposals, evaluations, and complete scoring sheets in order to determine whether further legal action is necessary. ·. I, The City's Evaluation Process is Arbitrary and Capricious As you are aware, the Request for Proposal, Section 10, contains the following language:
The City reserves the right to interview ( oral interviews) the top proposers based on the interim proposal scores (Total Score Without Oral Interview). If the City elects to conduct oral interviews, the final scoring and ranking will be based on the Total Score With Oral Interview. If the City elects not to conduct oral interviews, the final scoring and rankings will be based on the Total Score Without Oral Interview.
Despite the language contained in Section 10, the City elected to only interview CourseCo, Inc. (the current operator of two of the subject courses) and Touchstone, LLC. For reasons that are currently unclear, the City elected not to interview Golf Automation. Given the above language, in addition to the City's decision not to interview Golf Automation, there is no way to fairly reconcile and compare the scores of CourseCo, Inc., Touchstone, LLC, and Golf Automation.
Specifically, Section 10, provides for two different evaluation methods, i.e., total score without oral interview and total score with oral interview. However, there is no language in Section 10 addressing how to compare scores between proposers who were interviewed with those who were not interviewed. Absent any such language, as is apparent from the City's Notice of Intent to Award, the City has no defined process for comparing the scores of proposers who were interviewed with those who were not. Without a defined process, by necessity, the City is engaging in a comparative process which is entirely arbitrary, capricious, entirely lacking in evidentiary support, and inconsistent with proper procedure for evaluating the proposals.
Given the foregoing, there is no way to rectify the arbitrary process which the City has allowed to occur, nor to undue the prejudice caused to Golf Automation's proposal score or the undermining of the entire evaluation process. As such, the City must reject all proposals and send the contract out for a rebid.
II. The City Has Not Made All of the Proposals. Evaluations. and Scoring Sheets Available as Required by Law. Yet Neither CourseCo. Inc.'s nor Touchstone. LLC's Proposals Are Legally Responsive andTherefore Must Be Rejected
California Public Contract Code section 10344, subdivision ( c )(2), states, in relevant part, that, "All proposals and all evaluation and scoring sheets shall be available for public inspection at the conclusion of the committee scoring process."
2 Although Golf Automation formally requested the complete proposals, evaluations, and complete scoring sheets on November 3, 2022, to date, the City has failed to produce all of the documents. In fact, the City finally provided a portion of the requested documents on November 14, 2022, the same day which Golf Automation's bid protest was due, and the City refused to grant an extension to the bid protest deadline without any explanation or justification. While Golf Automation has already identified misrepresentations and nonresponsive sections. in CourseCo, Inc.'s and Touchstone, LLC's proposals based upon the limited documents provided to date (summarized in Exhibit 1 enclosed herewith), without all of the requested documents, Golf Automation has been unable to further verify all the bases upon which CourseCo, Inc. 's and Touchstone, LLC's proposals are legally nonresponsive. In fact, as detailed in Exhibit 1, neither CourceCo, Inc. 's nor Touchstone, LLC's proposals are legally responsive, as they fail to completely answer many of the Bid's questions.1
Based upon these initial discoveries, both CourceCo, lnc.'s and Touchstone, LLC's proposals must be rejected as non-responsive. Further, nonetheless, Golf Automation hereby demands that the City comply with California Public Contract Code section 10344, subdivision ( c )(2), and provide all of the evaluations, scoring sheets, and conflict of interest forms of CourseCo, Inc. and Touchstone, LLC.
III. The City Must Disqualify CourseCo, Inc.
Whereas CourseCo, Inc. is the current operator of two of the subject golf courses, i.e., Los Lagos and Rancho del Pueblo, the City's failure to produce all of CourseCo, Inc.'s proposals, evaluations, and complete scoring sheets raise serious questions and concerns regarding whether CourseCo, Inc. made all of the required disclosures concerning possible conflicts of interest - which, per Section 16 of the Request for Proposals, as well as Form 9-Conflict of Interest Form, disqualifies CourseCo, Inc. as a proposer.
Indeed, based upon the limited documents provided to date, it is apparent that CourseCo, Inc. inappropriately included a letter of recommendation from the City's current operator of the San Jose Municipal Golf Course, Mike Rawitser, i.e., a representative of the City. (CourseCo, Inc.
Proposal, Form 4, P. 3.) This letter of recommendation is apparently tied to some form of an agreement with the San Jose Municipal Golf Course, as referenced expressly on page 44 of Courseco, Inc.'s proposal. (CourseCo, Inc. Proposal, Form 4, P. 44 [" ... coupled with our agreement with the current operation at San Jose Muni..."].) Based upon the documents currently available, as cited here, it is clear that disqualification of CourseCo, Inc. is required pursuant to Section 13, Grounds for Disqualification, contained in the City's Bid Document Addendum ("Contact regarding this procurement with any City official or employee or evaluation team member other than the Procurement Contract or Purchasing Officer ... ") While Golf Automation is still undertaking its investigation into CourseCo, Inc.'s 1 Note, because Golf Automation was only provided with the partial documents on November 14, 2022, the same day its bid protest was due, Golf Automation is enclosing a list of nonresponsive issues in CourseCo, Inc.'s and Touchstone, LLC's proposals, which is enclosed herewith as Exhibit 1.
3 proposal documents, Golf Automation hereby demands that CourseCo, Inc. be disqualified accordingly.
*******
Any contract award to CourseCo, Inc. is illegal because CourseCo, Inc.' s proposal must be disqualified as discussed herein. Any · award to Touchstone, LLC is also illegal because its proposal is nonresponsive and must be rejected. Accordingly, Golf Automation respectfully requests that the City withdraw its Notice of Intent to Award the contract to Courseco, Inc. and instead make a contract award to Golf Automation, the proposer who provided a legally responsive proposal and is not subject to disqualification.
This bid protest requires your immediate attention in order to avoid further escalating the issues contained herein. Whereas Golf Automation has not received a fair opportunity to receive and review all of the proposals, evaluations, and full scoring sheets, Golf Automation again renews its request that the City grant it an extension to submit its full bid protest to a date at least seven (7) calendar days after the date which the City provides all of the requested documents.
Please contact me at your earliest opportunity to discuss this matter. I look forward to your prompt response.
cc:
Enclosure:
Golf Automation, Inc.
Exhibit 1.
Very truly yours,
4 EXHIBIT 1
EXHIBIT 1
A. DEVIATION FROM THE EVALUATION CRITERIA
1. COURSECO PROPOSAL - PAGE 44 - RESPONSE TO STAFFING QUESTION The fact that we are the incumbent operator at Los Lagos and Rancho de/ Pueblo coupled with our agreement with the current operation at San Jose Muni, there is no difference in staffing during a start-up period. That is a significant inherent advantage for CourseCo and the City as the cost and risk of a transition can have a large negative financial and operational impact on a golf course ...
We question if preference might have been given to the incumbent without mentioning such preference in the evaluation criteria
2. COURSECO PROPOSAL-PAGE 125-NON RESPONSIVE
We note CourseCo's response on page 125. City evaluated the proposer's responses even though it should have been non responsive.
.,
PROPOSAL QUESTION: 2. How will you continue to implement these priorities with the City of San Jose Golf Courses?
PROPOSE'S RESPONSE:
As outlined above and in other sections our commitment to environmental sustainability has been in place since our inception and is represented in our core values. Further, our track record in partnership with the City of San Jose speaks to on ongoing commitment.
We look forward to bringing this commitment to San Jose Municipal Golf Course and continuing to be leaders in this field.
B. EVIDENCE OF SUBMITTING INCORRECT INFORMATION
Incorrect Information according to the section 13 of the solicitation document - Evidence of submitting Incorrect information , misrepresenting or failing to disclose material facts
1. COURSECO PROPOSAL - PAGE 45 - DIGITAL MARKETING
The services of our digital marketing team, including basic graphic design work, is based out of our corporate office. All web design work, socicJ.I media management, email communications and digital marketing campaign /flanagetnent is handled directly by CourseCo staff.
This is in contrast to CourseCo's website claim. In reviewing the courses under management by CourseCo, ( https://www.courseco.com/courses ) Almost all the
EXHIBIT 1
websites for the courses CourseCo has managed show a footer '.'Designed and Hosted by1i1 Marketing.I'
2. COURSECO PROPOSAL - PAGE 67, MERCHANDISE PURCHASES -
EXHIBIT 1
Proposal incorrectly submitted states that "As long as the merchandise is in good condition there is no time limit on returns or exchanges" We contacted over 10 CourseCo managed properties and asked for a return policy and whether a purchase in March of this year ·with receipt is returnable. All properties replied that it is not possible to return with a valid receipt regardless of pristine condition or not • Riverside Golf Course - Sale is Final No Returns
• Petaluma Golf - Sale is Final NO returns
• Boundary Oak Golf Course - NO Returns ·
• Bryden Canyon Golf Course - NO Return
• Salmon Run Golf Course - NO Returns
• Rancho Del Pueblo - NO Returns
3. COURSECO PROPOSAL - PAGE 122 - DIVERSITY
Proposal falsely claims the company hires diverse candidates. However, looking at the employee reviews, many employees complain the company is male dominated which is contrary to the information stated in the proposal.
CourseCo Employment
While we understand that alternative uses and giving access to underserved groups is important, we also believe that having a specific plan for offering jobs to a diverse workforce is important as well. Below you will find a specific approach to hiring, training and promoting employees from underserved groups.
Our commitment to maintaining a diverse workforce starts with our hiring process. As we mentioned above, the typical job posting for positions in the golf industry tend to produce a very non-diverse applicant pool. At CourseCo we realize this challenge and have been very active in finding specific recruiting techniques for attr~cting the most diverse applicant pool possible. These techniques and resources include:
Diversityjobs.com Partnership- We have a partnership that provides access to underrepresented candidate groups including:
o Women
o Veterans
oLGBTQIA
o Asian American/Pacific Islander
I
o Native and Indigenous People
o Hispanic/Latinx
o African American/Black
o Individuals with Disabilities
EXHIBIT 1
1.0 * V
Former Employee
Stagnant Environment
Sep 23, 2021- Digital Marketing Specialist in Petaluma, CA X Recommend O CEO Approval - Business Outlook
Pros
- hands off bosses, no micromanagement from CEO/COO
• golf industry remained steady through COVID hits, did not suffer as greatly as other industries beyond needing to work from home. • friendly & helpful IT guy
Cons
• Marketing department i~ severely isolated, overworlwd, underpaid, t111dervalued, & understaffed. - Most of the golf course managers in communication with marketing individuals have little to no understanding of email marketing, brand strategy, or social media management. This lack of education is not being addressed properly due to lack of care and attention.
Also becausethe department manages too many clients at one time to focus on intensively rebuilding the specific golf courses marketing strategy.
· Marketili& department is also responsible for managing the Fairview wedding & event celiter collateral, graphics, & email marketing.
Their current •·team" of two specialists is not equip properly to manage successful marketing for this avenue of the business. They should be working to employ more marketing individuals who specialize in these industries, and p;iying them well to have the attention to detail needed to
improvements to keep up with the times. Often, myself and other female employees would be dismissed & subtly undervalued. I witnessed a co-worker become subject to gaslighting, they were left wilhno choice but to quit. This situation was not addressed properly by the team, nor by HR.
PS
1.0 * t· V
Former Employee, fess than 1 year
Isolated
Jan 27, 2021-Digital MarketingCoordinatol' in Petaluma, CA X Recommend O CEO Approval - Business Outlook
Pros
Work from home during COVIO pandemic
Cons
No strategic rneetings with a company this large, its by far necessary. You are totally alone.
Overly male dominated,
Left job for being bullied by new appointed supervisor.
When you go above and beyond you are told your making management look bad, confusing.
Advice to Management
No tolerance for bullies and give the proper title and compensation for the iob being asked to do.
EXHIBIT 1
4. COURSECO PROPOSAL - PAGE 90 - DIGITAL MARKETING: SOCIAL MEDIA Proposer claims that they post weekly social media posts across all CourseCo Courses.
We reviewed many course and
Social Media - We have a weekly social media schedule to share relevant golf news and stories across all CourseCo courses. Meanwhile, .content from the course allows customers to feel connected to the property strengthening our relationship and loyalty while driving revenue.
We reviewed the social media posting across the courses being managed by CourseCo and as shown below, proposer falsely claims weekly submission to social media. For example, as you can see in the screenshot below, golf course 1 had a posting on October 7 and no posting until the following month, therefore the weekly social media schedule is incorrectly stated. In fact that appears to be the case for all the courses under management of CourseCo, even Los Lagos.
am: .... ..,..~~ closed today, Wednesday, November 2nd
for maintenance . We plan on opening it back up on Thursday, November 3rd.
fD Like 0 Comment {¢ Share
i ; e is at Boundary Oak Golf Course .
\' f;'
TaylorMa g Experience~ Use the code to book your
appointment before their all gone! #t aylorrnadegolf #boundaryoak #golflife
EXHIBIT 1
eyOaksGol
to ber ·10 • lnstr1gr
#pl.ayvalleyoaks
#playrnoregolf
0 '17
rfJ Like
yOaks Golf C
1be-r 18 • lnstac
CJ Conm1ont
~ Share
otos
EXHIBIT 1
Los Lagos Golf C
Septomber 13 • 0
C,"11:!M-i~~~~~•MM.rme Helen Lengfeld Memorial High
School Girls Golf Tournament. Congrats to Valley Christian High School for winning the overall team championship and to Joyce Zhang, Valley Christian, for winning the individual title with a 4 under par round of 64!!
rfJ Like
Los Lagos Gol
July 4 · (i
CJ Comment
1 Share
,¢ Share
Most relevant •
5. COURSECO PROPOSAL - PAGE 91 - CERTIFIED GOOGLE PARTNER CourseCo states that they are Certified Google Partners. We checked on the Google Partner site https://partnersdirectory.withgoogle.com/search?query=Courseco and do not see CourseCo Listed.
EXHIBIT 1
Google Partners Directory , °'- Search for partner name < All partner$
Search results for 'Courseco'
(D
No partners found
Try adjusting your search
6. TOUCHSTONE'S PROPOSAL -APPARENT FAILURE TO DISCLOSE MATERIAL
FACTS REGARDING OPEN AND ACTIVE LAWSUITS AND EMPLOYMENT
PRACTICES
ft HOME 0, SEARCH t;') CALENDARS fi,l TRAFFIC PAYMENT ~ REMOTE HEARINGS !,. LOGIN Business Search Request for Touchstone Golf
Show 25 v entries Search:
View Case Number case Style
I i'/IMSBI
20CV369392 Joseph Rubino vs Touchstone Golf, LLC
Showing 1 to 1 of I entries
a
Federal Cases
case Status . Case Type
Active Other PIIPD/WD
Unlimited (23)
• • Flllng Date
8/1312020
Previous .•• Next
EXHIBIT 1
Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik De Blouw LLP, Hits Touchstone Golf, LLC, with a Class Action Lawsuit for Allegedly o 2. Failing to Pay Overtime to Their California Employees · New~ ! forcl,111,H,,s.hcmltc Ki111:domof ! 46,7Words 'Jun 28. 2018 : lcg ill MonitorWodclwid(> ,., Blumenthal Nordrchaug Bhowmik De Olouw LLP, Hits Touchstone Golf, LLC. with a Cl.us Action Lawsuit for Allegedly Failing to Pay Overtime. to Their California EmploycC?s ...
... (_PRWcb) ~_T~c S~n Diego t,,bor law attorneys at Blunicnth:il Nordrchau~_0howinik Oc 81ouw llP, filed ,1 class .1ction l;lwSuit .:igai_nst Touchstone Golf, LLC,. allegfng: that thrz company failed to properly calculate overtime comp~nsatlon for their hourly ... ... employees. Furlhe<rnore, the?complaint ,1lf cgcs that TouchStonoGolf. LLC, foiled to provide m.1ndJtory men1 and rest b(caks to its employees.
The Touchstone Golt. LLC, l.;1wst1it. Ca!.c No. 37•2018·00028865·CU·OE·<;TL. i$ currently pending in the San Diego County ...
CJ 3. DeBell Golf Course Unde r New Management
News I u_.S. Fedu ,,I 3•16 Words , J.,n oa, 20 19 , us OHici,11 Ne-wr; ... Burbank: Burbank City of California has Issued the following new release;, On Occcinbcr 11. 2018, the Burbank CHyCouncif approved an Agrecme_nt between the City of Dur bank Parks·and Recreation Department-and Touchstone Gqlf to man,1ge and operate ... • ~cll'll!!$lf .QJ.1tr.5.!,W9JJS.tu~G.P.lf.2fhsj~J.!!Y.19i>!l..illT!JJJ£..!.ll:!.~S~ ~ ggfu1!.U£ ,_ f1!Q.1h.QP.,!'1i.Yl!J,5-LlOf.f:.Jltili:J10lq P;1r .J . £rullid!ll!&!!lL:uu!J.i1rn!.1.u111c.111;!.l1,tc,,:,nr" 011 D•1<-1:iri!J.t£.1l,~m~r.~u.L clJlmb.ru.L1.!.l.dlw~e.s2P...1Gl!JQ.n1"'- U· folfowcd on Jan~~ry 1. 20_19. Tho qty-owned facility has been undcrp_qrform!ns for_~ num~c~ of y12ars and this new partnership was cstablishruJ wi~h_ rc_ncwcd optimism In the Juturc success of the OcBeU Golf Course. Toucf,s_tone, Golf customiics management... ... pay Touchstone Golf a monthly fe.c to coordinate and directly manage all three opcr.,t/on:il componcntsatDeBcll, which i11cludc golf course operations, food and beverage, :.u,d golf and l.mdscape maintenance, Touchstone will optimize management of the., . .. , • Touchstone GOif was founded_ 1n·2006by brothers StCphon and Douglas Hi,rkcr.-'T~clrtomp~ny is currently the 10th largest full -service golf course management co,np3ny Jnd has 3 12-ycar succt.1ssful ,ost-cffcctivc track rcC:ord. Touchs~anc, Golf has turned around ... o 4. People v. Petri (Cal . Ct. App. - Feb. 12, 2020)
News ] U.S. Fcde:rnl: (,1Jifornia , 2 1)~Word s May 01.2020 \ ?h:nm MJrt in ' Ncwstc>: Dlogs . ... rcstituUonordcr(11 from $4,049.19 to$9.Q19.19. Sc:cFootnotc 2 at P,1&e 3 ("The felony .,bslr ,1ct of J_udgmcnt dated Ju.Ile 4, 2018, incorreclty states that Pruncrldgc Touchstone Golf was awari:lcd only $'1,049.19 i~ restitution. We will direct the trial CO\lrt to ... lJ s. Neighborhood improvements
7. TOUCHSTONE'S PROPOSAL· PAGE 22 • EQUIPMENT RENTAL
Proposer states that "Golf club rentals are a standard at all of the golf courses we manage. We have special pricing from our vendors on rental sets priced as low as $250 per set. Other rentals to be offered would include pull carts." We contacted a few courses under management by Touchstone and note the club rental set as follows:
Pruneridge Golf Club $15
Chula Vista Golf Course $35
Debell Golf Club $60
-----------·-·--·-----
Dos Lagos Golf Course $40
Mill Valley Golf Course $21
Presidio Golf Course $25-$50
Rancho Carlsbad Golf Club $20
,-~------•·--- -~-----~·-·
Canyon Golf Course $25
Mountain Golf Club $35
EXHIBIT 1
[Omitted]
GLS.
Ship From
FLORES RYAN, LLP
AARON J. FLORES, ESQ./NANNETTE
SCHNEIDER
115 W. CALIFORNIA BLVD., #9010
PASADENA, CA 91105
Ship To .
CITY OF SAN JOSE
DAVID DELONG
200 EAST SANTA CLARA STREET, 9TH
FLOOR
SAN . JOSE, CA 95113
COD: $0.00
Weight: 0 lb(s)
Reference:
00210
Dellvery Instructions:
Signature Type: NOT REQUIRED
LABEL INSTRUCTIONS:
Tracking #: 558210627
1111111111111111111111111111111111111
SAN JOSE
S95113A
75244443
800-322 -5555
www.gls-us.com
PDS
HAY CA945-HC1
Print Date: 11/14/2022 4:41 PM
Do not copy or reprint this label for additional shipments - each package must have a unique barcode.
Step 1: Use the "Print Label" button on this page to print the shipping label on a laser or inkjet printer.
Step 2: Fold this page in half.
Step 3: Securely attach this label to your package and do not cover the barcode.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
By giving us your shipment to deliver, you agree to all of the General Logistics Systems US, Inc. (GLS) service terms & conditions including, but not limited to; limits of liability, declared value conditic;ms, and claim procedures which are available on our website at www.gls-us.com.
Nannette Schneider
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Delivery Notification
donotreply@gls-us .com on behalf of GLS-US <[email protected]> Tuesday, November 15, 2022 12:48 PM
Nannette Schneider
GLS Delivery Notification
Parcel I Express I Freight ·
Your shipment has been delivered.
Ship From:
Ship To:
Tracking Number(s):
Reference:
Delivered On:
Signed By:
Aaron J. Flores, Esq./Nannette Schneider, Flores Ryan, LLP David Delong, City of San Jose
200 East Santa Clara Street, 9th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113
558210627
00210
11/15/2022 12:45 PM
D.Elon
Track your package
Please DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE. This email was sent from a notification-only email address that cannot accept incoming email.
1 ENCLOSURE
-BID PROTEST
DENIAL
February 16, 2023
VIA E-MAIL AND us' MAIL ONLY
Aaron J. Flores
115 W. California BLVD, #91105
Pasadena, CA 951105
Email: [email protected]
----SANJOSE----
PARKS, RECREATION &
NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES
SUBJECT: Response to Golf Automation, Inc. Protest to the Notice of Intent to Award (Golf Course Management, Operations, and Maintenance Services RFP) Dear Mr. Flores,
This letter is to inform you that City of San Jose ("City") has carefully reviewed, evaluated, and considered the letter from Golf Automation, Inc. ("Golf Automation") dated November 14, 2022, entitled "2022 1114 Golf Automation Bid Protest" ("Protest Letter"). The review was conducted independently by the Assistant Director of the City's Department of Parks, Recreation, and Neighborhood Services, who was not a member of the evaluation panel nor involved with the Request for Proposal (RFP). This letter contains the City's response to the Protest Letter. The Protest Letter lists a total of four reasons for Golf Automation's protest.
Each of the reasons provided are addressed separately below . Golf Automation's concerns have been summarized for easier reference.
Protest Reason 1: Request for Proposal, Section 10, contains a method which is arbitrary, capricious, entirely lacking, in evidentiary support, and inconsistent with proper procedure for evaluating the proposals when there is a combination of proposers who were interviewed and proposers who wer~ not interviewed, which has unduly prejudiced Golf Automation's proposal score and undermined the entire evaluation process.
City Response to Protest Reason 1: The City's evaluation process is neither arbitrary nor capricious and provides clear, articulable standards and criteria which were clearly provided to all proposers through the RFP documents. Specifically, Section 10 of the Request for Proposals document states:
The City reservea the right to interview (oral interviews) the top proposers based on the Interim proposal scores (Total Score Without Oral Interview). If the City elects to conduct oral Interviews, the final scoring and ranking will be based on the Total ,Score With Oral Interview. If the City elects not to conduct oral Interviews, the final scoring and rankings will be based on the Total Score Without Oral Interview.
The plain language of Section 10 clearly states that the City reserved the right to interview to proposers based on the interim proposal scores and exclude lower-scoring proposers from interviews . The language is common in RFPs to narrow the list of candidates and focus the interview process on the top and competitive proposers. The City is under no legal obligation or any obligation to interview low scoring or non-competitive proposers.
Se.ction 10 clearly states that only "top proposers" would be chosen for interview . Golf Automation's pre-interview proposal score was significantly lower than the scores for CourseCo and Touchstone Golf, LLC (Touchstone Golf). The proposal scores without interview were as follows: 1) CourseCo's score was 93.94; 2) Touchstone Golf's score was 80.07; and 3) Golf Automation's score was 40.85. Therefore, the City did not consider Golf Automation to be a "top proposer" and opted to not extend an interview to it. One determining factor in the decision to not interview Golf Automation was that Golf Automation's score could not mathematically reach or exceed the scores of CourseCo or Touchstone Golf, even if Golf Automation received full scores for the interview portion and CourseCo and Touchstone Golf received zero interview points. For that reason, staff chose not to advance Golf Automation to the interview process.
Regardless, Section 5 of the Request for Proposals document dearly stated that all objections to the City's requirements and specifications needed to be submitted to the City by the deadline of August 5, 2022. If Golf Automation believed the City's process to be arbitrary and capricious or had objections to the City's evaluation process, it was free to voice its objection priorto the August 5 deadline, yet Golf Automation did not do so and therefore waived its rights.to do so.
Specifically, Section 5 of the Request for Proposals document states:
I
5 OBJECTIONS
Any objections as to tile structure, conten!, or di!lbibulion of this RFP must be submitted lhrough tile Question and Answer portal on Blddlngo. Objections must be asopecilic as poosible and must Identify the RFP section number and title, O.ll well as a descripUon and rationale for the objection.
All objections, questions, and inquiries pertaining to this RFP must be received by tile Deadline for Ol!estions and Objections specified on lf)e cover sheet.
The City's evaluation process was clearly outlined through the RFP documents and communicated to all potential proposers. The decisions notto interview Golf Automation and to not compare its score with the highest scoring proposals that were granted interviews are supported by the use of clear key evaluation criteria in evaluating Golf Automation's submitted proposal and the evaluation panel comments (see Attachment A below).
Protest Reason 2: City has not yet made available all the proposers' proposals, evaluations, and complete scoring sheets, as required by law, so that a full determination of proposals' responsiveness can be made, in addition to whether all proper disclosures have been made concerning conflicts of interest.
City Response to Protest Reason 2: The City has provided the requested documents in accordance with the Public Records Act and applicable City requirements. The Protest Letter cites to California Public Contract Code§ 10344(c){2) as its authority for requiring the City disclose complete scoring sheets yet fails to acknowledge that the cited statute applies only to the acquisitions of certain goods and services by State Agencies (see Pub. Contract Code, § 10335. 7). As you are aware, the City is not a state agency and therefore the State statue is inapplicable to this RFP process.
All relevant public documents have been provided from the City to Golf Automation. In response to the Public Records Act request received on November 3, 2022, the City provided copies of responsive documents including the questionnaire, lease terms, and budget.
Subsequently, the City provided additional documents on November 23, 2022. Further, the City provided overall evaluation panel comments and overall summary scoring sheet, which was shared on February 10, 2023 in response to the original Public Records Act request. The City acknowledges that it received complete proposal documents from three proposers who were provided scores, including Conflict of Interest Forms from each proposer. Each proposal was thoroughly reviewed as part of the evaluation process.
In summary, the City has provided all relevant public documents to Golf Automation and there is no basis to find the other proposals non-responsive. The City's evaluation panel scored each proposal based on clear and objective evaluation criteria.
Protest Reason 3: Based upon the City's partial disclosure of the proposers' proposals and scoring sheets, it is clear that both CourseCo. lnc.'s and Touchstone, LLC's proposals are nonresponsive and must be rejected.
City Response to Protest Reason 3: The City does not deem CourseCo's response in that example to be nonresponsive. The Protest Letter does not provide reasoning or specific evidence as to why CourseCo or Touchstone Golf's proposals are nonresponsive, other than one example provided in Exhibit 1 of the Protest Letter: The Exhibit copies CourseCo's response to Question 2 in Part 6- Environmental Stewardship of the Proposal Questionnaire. In responding to this question, CourseCo referenced their response to Question 1, (/Explain how your company prioritizes environmental safety and preservation in your current operations." See Attachment B for CourseCo and Golf Automation proposal responses to questions included in this section of the RFP.
Specifically, Courseto's stated in their response to Question 1 that "Environmental Stewardship is another one of CourseCo's Four Core Values." The response also included reference to their receipt of Audubon Certifications for their operations at both Los Lagos and Rancho del Pueblo golf courses and for a recycling and composting program at all of their 40 locations. Related to this response, it is important to note that the Audubon Society awards certifications to recognize program members that demonstrate their commitment to environmental quality by meeting required standards for protecting the environment, conserving natural resources, and providing wildlife habitats.
Ironically, Golf Automation's claim that CourseCo's response to this question should be deemed non responsive applies even more so to Golf Automation's own response. As seen in Attachment B, Golf Automation's response to this particular question was "As, mentioned previously, Los Lagos has certainly [response left incomplete]." The City's evaluation panel cannot conjecture as to what Golf Automation certainly has done, or plan to do. Nor was this the only incomplete response submitted as part of Golf Automation's application, including at least one question that was left entirely unanswered. The evaluation panel found that CourseCo's response the questions posed in the RFP were consistently more responsive, more detailed, and provided concrete examples when compared to Golf Automation's responses to the same questions, resulting in CourseCo scoring higher in several categories. The City did not find CourseCo's responses to the RFP to be non-responsive, but did find Golf Automation's submitted responses to be lacking.
The Exhibit of the Protest Letter provides screen shots of independent research conducted by Golf Automation that purports to be evidence of material misrepresentations or evidence of submitting incorrect information. Based on the information submitted in the proposals, the City found no evidence that "material facts" were withheld or misrepresented by CourseCo during the proposal evaluation process. The City has reviewed the information provided in Golf Automation's protest and determined the few selected examples provided do not constitute evidence of submitting incorrect information and would not materially impact CourseCo's overall score or their ability to efficiently and effectively administer the City's golf courses.
Regarding the screenshot provided of a personal injury lawsuit against Touchstone Golf and a potential class-action lawsuit for failure to pay overtime, this information certainly would be material to the City's evaluation and the C::ity would have expected Touchstone Golf to disclose this information as part of the RFP process. However, Section 13 of the RFP does not automatically disqualify proposers due to active litigation, but states that evidence of wage theft judgments may also result in disqualification. At this point, the City does not plan to retroactively disqualify Touchstone Golf, given the decision to recommend award of the contract to CourseCo.
Protest Reason 4: Based upon the City's partial disclosure of the proposers' proposals and scoring sheets, a conflict of interest exists between the City and CourseCo, Inc., which could also amount to collusion, and CourseCo, Inc. must be disqualified from bidding pursuant to Section 13.
City Response to Protest Reason 4: The City did not identify a conflict of interest with CourseCo's proposal. The City requires that proposer personnel who would be assigned to work on the proposed assignment respond to specific questions on the Conflict of Interest Form related to any personal relationships, stocks and investments, employment and consulting, payment or gifts, real estate, or positions held of any entity that would be affected by or involved in the proposed assignment. CourseCo did disclose that it has been the operator at both Los Lagos and Rancho del Pueblo for over twenty years and through this work have a professional relationship with City staff associated with the golf course .. CourseCo further stated that this relationship would not affect their judgement or ability to execute an agreement in a fair and impartial manner. The City reviewed CourseCo's Conflict of Interest Form and determined that no perceived or actual conflict exists.
The Exhibit of the Protest Letter also questions whether preferential treatment was given to CourseCo as an incumbent without mentioning such preference in the evaluation criteria. No evidence of preferential treatment was provided in support of this speculation. No preferential consideration was explicitly or implicitly given to CourseCo, and scoring of each proposal was conducted strictly according to the evaluation criteria that was provided.
CourseCo was not provided a higher score due to being an incumbent. Rather, their experience operating golf courses and management proficiency was considered as a whole when evaluated by the panel.
Neither the evaluation panel nor the independent review conducted in response to this Protest Letter identified any conflict of interest with CourseCo. The City will not disqualify CourseCo as a bidder under the RFP.
Conclusion
The City has carefully reviewed, evaluated, and considered the Protest Letter and the administrative record for this RFP. The appeal as set forth in the Protest Letter is denied based on all of the reasons set forth above. As explained in detail above, Golf Automation's proposal was lacking key items that were assessed using the City's evaluatio·n criteria, including experience and qualifications; management, operations, and maintenance plan; alternative use plan and expanding public access; and community benefit and diversity initiative strategies.
The evaluation panel noted several items were either not provided in the response or details to allow the City's scoring panel to assess Golf Automation's ability to provide the services requested under the Request for Proposal (RFP),. which ultimately led a final proposal score of 40.85. This low score is the reason Golf Automation was not interviewed or selected for contract award.
The City will not extend the protest period to allow Golf Automation to second-guess the City's award decision. The City has complied with all of its obligations under the Public Records Act and disclosed all responsive documents and evaluation panel comments. The City also found that CourseCo properly disclosed its professional relationship with the City, as they currently manage, operate, and maintain the Los Lagos and Rancho del Pueblo Golf Courses, and that no conflict of interest exists.
While the City appreciates Golf Automation's interest in this procurement and the concerns that were raised, the issues raised in the protest are not of sufficient merit to overturn the award to CourseCo. Consequently, the City will be continuing with the determination made in the initial Notice of Intent to Award Contract pursuant to this RFP.
Please note that pursuant to San Jose Municipal Code section 4.12.460, any appeal of this decision must be filed with the City Clerk within ten calendar days of the sending of this decision.
Neil Rufino
Assistant.Director of Department of Parks, Recreation and Neighborhood Services Attachment A- Golf Automation, Inc. Proposal Evaluation Summary Attachment B- Responses to Environmental Stewardship Questions •
ATTACHMENT A
Golf Automation, Inc. Proposal Evaluation Summary
Evaluation Area Key Evaluation Criteria Evaluation Panel's Comments Regarding Golf Automation Responses
1. Proposer has sufficient history a. Stated their.experience but very limited working on 18-hole and 9-hole detail
courses. b. 30 years of experience, 9-19 hole
Experience and experience, states that they meet
Qualifications requirements on Form 3 but does not
provide specific details
2. Proposer has sufficient a. States more than 5 yec)rs' experience. experience on recent projects Project descriptions were vague for of similar size and scope of b. Exec staff has minimum experience in the City. Proposer should have the industry but not extensive. Gave one listed minimum five years of example of a course they brought up to project experiences. standards. Lacking depth on how or the overclll results
C. Described what experience they will
need to hire. Did not refer to industry
certifications.
d. Has the minimum experience. Didn't
describe an extensive experience
e.- Features 1 project, does not provide
specific details on size and scope of
project in relation to the City properties
3. Proposer articulates clearly the a. Noted that any staff would hold experiences of the' proposed ~n- qwalifications but did not name or site manager, resident describe anyone except Executive Staff professional, and resident b. Avail<lbility of personnel may change, superintendent AND these confirmed that any assigned personnel experiences a re satisfactory would meet and exceed the given the above standards. requirements set forth in the proposal.
4. Proposer provided the Minimal details provided for 3 staff management staffs resumes, C. States that they meet minimum certifications, and/or proof of qualification but does not provide any credentials AND staff documentation
documentation is satisfactory d. Did not indicate specific experiences given the above requirement with public golf courses or meeting the standards. certification required for management
staff
5. Proposer clearly outlines a. Repeated main initiatives without detail previous critical success factors. on how to achieve them or the impact for its current or previous
;
b. No previous critical success factors
operations. provided
C. Recommends that revenue could be
increased in restaurants and golf shop
but does not provide details
6. Evaluate the staffing plan a. Little to no actual information about according to the guidelines staffing model, assignments and tasks. listed above. Staffing plan b. Did not provide a staffing plan. Talked should include duties of each about recruitment methods . Did not position 1 differences between provide expected job duties or initial start-up and future qualifications. Did not address the ongoing operations, proposed courses individually .
staffing coverage across C. Describes recruitment process, 1:1 with operating hours and staff and performance evaluations,
maintenance hours, emergency provides data collection model for operations staffing procedu res, staffing plan development, no staff plan labor and training proce<;lures, submitted
and a list activities which might
occur off-site (i.e., regional
offices). This response will also
include synergies and difference
between the proposals of each
course. Include whether or not
the synergies and difference are
properly and holistically
evaluated.
1. !:valuate the quality and breadth 1. Minimal info provided on guest service of the guest service training training. Did not connect training to plan. results or a follow up plan
2. Does the proposed speed of a. No information provided on the Management, service guidelines seem feasible following speed of service guidelines, Operations, and and/or reasonable? guest service policies and quality ' assurance procedures, guest guarantees, Maintenance Plan exchange, and refund policies, guest
service research or Wi-Fi access
3. Proposer provides a service a. No information provided on the policy and quality assurance following speed of service guidelines, plan that will adequately meet guest service policies and quality the needs of the facility. assurance procedur,es, guest guarantees, Differentiation of service based exchange, and refund policies, guest on segment of the operation will service research or Wi-Fi access , be viewed favorably (i.e., how
service policies differ based
private venue rentals) .
4. At minimum, the proposer a. Copied Maintenance component of includes a physical maintenance Exhibit C in RFP exemplar and plan that indicates the maintenance , equipment list not equipment necessary to manage included
the property and the chemicals
necessary to manage the
property. Responses that
acknowledge the obligations
listed in the exemplar
i;\greement as well plans that
outline a fiscally responsible and
efficient maintenance plan will
be viewed favorably. Plans that
identify expected process of
obtaining, leasing, or buying
equipment from current vendors
should be evaluated.
5. Proposer outlines their a. Role model in environmental safety and projected practices that include preservation by stewarding positive prioritizing environmental safety impact ofthe golf courses and open and preservation. These plans space, utilize renewable energy, should match goals and ideals eliminate water waste, reduce the use of with tangible practices to enact harmful pesticides, and continue to them. facilitate ecologically friendly golf course
maintenance practices which protect the
environment and wildlife habitats,
Provide recycling in house, not enough
detai I on how these items will be
implemented.
b. Sections of Part 6 were not completed
c. Extremely minimal plan for
environmentally friendly practices.
Stated the importance of this issue.
Additional/ Alternative 1. Proposer provides an innovative a. Plan described an understanding of the Uses and Expanding and actionable plan to expand need and multiple events/programs that Public Access public access and recreational could address it. Plan was limited on uses. Recreational uses can be access solutions or how these programs widespread but responses that would be implemented, funded . Events indicate programming with c:ind programs were listed with no under-represented explanation of what they are or would communit ies, and activities that do.
are b. Programs suggested addressed general
culturally/socially/geographically popularity but did not demonstrate an relevant Will be viewed understanding of community interest or favorably. need
2. Alternative use and public
access expansion plans that seek
to represent and increase
inclusion for low-income
residents.
1. Proposer outlines a plan to bost a. Combining golf, fitness, aquatics, both golf and non-golf related bowling, tennis, pickleball, golf events. Proposers who outline simulators, miniature golf, footgolf, Community Benefit events relevant (socially and racket ball, boxing, etc., to social Circles and Diversity Initiative culturally) to the neighboring within the Golf Automation family of Strategies communities, will be viewed products ~rnd services, No events more favorably. outlined
2. Proposer includes a diversity b. Plan described an understanding of the and inclusion perspective. need and multiple events/programs that Suggests reduced fee events. could address it. Plan was limited on access solutions or how these programs
would be implemented, funded. Events
and programs were listed with no
explanation of what they are or would
do.
C. Mentions mixed use but does not define
or mention reduced fees
d. Diversity and Inclusion Plan was lacking
inaddressing financial access and
barriers to golf. It addressed alternative
activities atthe site more.
e. Mentjon of possible events to draw
community (drive in movie) no mention
of fees or howthey will reach out to
community to increase diversity/
inclusion .
1. Proposer provides a marketing a. Marketing plan was basic and lacking plan that Is innovative, innovations that would address the need · actionable, and feasible given to target additional demographics where the staffing plan. Marketing they are. Overall answer was not plans target all populations comprehensive or in depth enough to especially those traditionally left provide advancement out of golfing, Marketing plans b. Provided a Market Plan overview but not should include market research a full marketing plan
approaches. C. No direct impacts described for
2. Proposer includes a diverse marketing plan
range of advertising and d. Gave examples or CSJ failures rather marketing methods (i.e., their than examples of how they have had website, social media, success in the past. No solutions networking with other SJ provided in this proposal.
departments). Plans that show
relevant communication
·- methods to different audiences
should be viewed more
favorably (i.e., school outreach
for youth, social media for
young adults, television or radio
I for adults).
3. Proposer provides a satisfactory
previous marketing plan.
ATTACHMENT B
Responses to Environmental Stewardship Questions
Evaluation Area CourseCo, Inc. Response Golf Automation, Inc. Response Management, Ehvironmental Stewardship is another one of Our company culture has long Operations, and CourseCo Four Core Values. With a focus on included the need for environmental Maintenance Plan, the envirohment and sustainable practices sustainability. Primarily running Environmental since our inception in 1989, it is no surprise municipal golf courses, we think it is Stewardship that CourseCo is the most decorated golf important to the comfort and safety management company in terms of of the community. Especially with the Ql. Explain how environmental sustainability. Similar to our unique design and environmental your company Community Inclusion, the list of qualities of these three golf courses prioritizes achievements is too long to detail here. (especially ih the case of Los Lagos). environmental However, for the purpose of illustration we Our plan is to preserve the current safety and have included detai ls on five relevant environmental requirements by preservation in practices and related recognition that we training our staff, maintenance crew, your current believe is relevant to the City of San Jose. and players. In performing our operations. 1. Audubon Certification - Both Los Lagos responsibilities, we will comply with and Rancho del Pueblo are amongst the 19 all federal, state, and local laws and CourseCo courses that are currently regulations pertaining to storing, Audubon certified. With 2 more to receive uSing or disposing of hazardous or certification this fall and 10 more in the toxic substances or materials or process and expected to be completed wastes such as, but not limited to, within the next 18 months we will be on herbicides, pesticides, algicides or target to have 75% of our courses certified. other water treatment chemicals.
2. Solar Initiative - CourseCo has
spearheaded solar installation at three
separate properties with an additional five
projects pehding in 2022 and 2023. Included
in the already installed projects was a
covered parking lot at ijouhdary Oak in
Walnut Creek where solar power provides
the majority of electricity needs for the
entire facility.
3. Recycling and Composting Program~
CourseCo has implemented recycling and
composting standards at all 40 locations.
Managers received training on the programs
during semi-annual educations seminars and
implementation of the program has reduced
waste and associated disposal costs by _30%
to 60% per location.
4. Use of Sustainable Products - Whether
retrofitting existing buildings, or used during
the design phase of new building, we focus
on the use of sustainable building products
and techniques along with other course
supplies. Specifics include: o Light Fixtures -
The majority of our properties have
upgraded light fixtures to LED lighting, in
many cases using grant and rebate programs
to 100% offset the cost of the upgrades. o
Recycled Paint - We use recycled paint when
possible, including when we painted the
interior of the clubhouse at Glendoveer
where we were able to work with Metro to
access 100% recycled paint for the project. o
Recycled Plastic - When ordering tee. signs,
benches and other on course accessories we
limit our orders to recycled plastics, often
receiving grant funds to offset the cost of the
products. In addition, we have partnered
with our municipal clients, including the City
of Walnut Creek in California, to use recycled
plastic programs to receive grants for
outdoor patio furniture. o Scorecards - It is
our company standard that scorecards be
printed on recycled paper.
s. Reduction of Chemical Use and Use of
Organic Fertilizers -Through training and
education of our staff members we have
been able to greatly reduce the number of
chemicals used·on our golf courses. In many
cases we are also able to work with org,rnic
fertilizers lessening the environmental
impact both in the production of the
fertilizer as well as the actual use.
Implementation Timeline and Performance
History of Sustainable Practices
When it comes to sustainable operations we
believe the timeline often tells an important
part of the story. As you can see below our
commitment to environmental sustainability
goes back to our inception and the proof is
in what we have done instead of promises of
the future.
1. Audubon Certification - Our first Audubon
Certified golf course was Crystal Springs
which was certified in 1998 becoming the
first golf course to receive certification in the
State of California. With 19 courses currently
certified, our commitment to the program
continues with two additional courses
scheduled to receive certification before the
end of this year.
ll>
2. Solar Initiative - Our first solar project was
the Glendoveer Cart Barn which was
constructed in 2013 and has been
accelerated with the current projects under
development starting in 2021.
3. Recycling and Composting Program - This
program was beta tested at one of our
locations in 2019 and then further
developed with company-wide launch in
April 2022.
4. Sustainable Building Products - This has
been a company-wide commitment for over
three decades. There is no specific launch
date but evidence can be seen from our
early days in using recycled paper for
scorecards, installing recycled plastic tee
signs in the late 90's to LED upgrades
starting in 2012. These best practices are
trained, coached and constantly being
updated and upgraded as we are always
striving to be better.
5. Reduction of Chemicals - This has been
part of our operating plans since our first day
of operations in 1989. It was more formally
introduced when we began Audubon
Certification in the late 90's and continues
through our maintenance planning today.
Management, As outlined above and in 01ther sections our As mentioned previously, Los Lagos Operations, and commitment to environmental sustainability has certainly [Response was Maintenance Plan, has been ih place since our inception ahd is incomplete] Environmental represented in our core values. Further, our Stewardship track record in partnership with the City of San Jose speaks to on ongoing commitment.
Q2. How will you We look forward to bringing this
continue to commitment to San Jose Municipal Golf
implement these Course and continuing to be leaders in this priorities with the field.
City of S,an Jose
Golf Courses?
r{ECEIVED
San ,Jose Ci1y Clerk
ore, ~
1 202) FEB 2r.. PH 2: 59
CITY 1\TTOHi'ff: y' ···-,
CITY rn=- SAf\l JOSE
FEB 2 4 2023