SLED Opportunity · CALIFORNIA · CITY OF VICTORVILLE
AI Summary
The City of Victorville seeks qualified environmental consultants for on-call services supporting CEQA and NEPA compliance. Contracts are one year with possible extensions, compensation up to $125,000 per term. SOQs due April 21, 2026.
The City of Victorville is soliciting Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) from qualified environmental consultants, including specialists, to provide on-call environmental services to assist the City in its role as Lead Agency and Responsible Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and, when applicable, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Respondents must demonstrate at least five years of relevant experience. The City anticipates selecting up to five (5) consultants for on-call contracts with one (1)-year terms and up to three (3) one (1)-year extensions. Selected Consultants will enter into a Professional Services Agreement with the City. Compensation for services shall not exceed $125,000 per term, with a total not-to-exceed amount of $500,000 if all extensions are exercised.
Addendum #1
Relevant experience providing environmental services for public agencies, including CEQA and, where applicable, NEPA. Experience will be evaluated in relation to the Consultant’s proposed role and area of expertise.
Evaluation Considerations:
Demonstrated understanding of the scope of services, regulatory requirements, and proposed approach to effectively supporting the City.
For specialized consultants, evaluation will focus on methodologies within their discipline.
Evaluation Considerations:
Qualifications, experience, team structure (if applicable), roles, and availability of proposed staff, including project managers and technical specialists, and ability to support on-call assignments.
Evaluation Considerations:
Successful completion of similar projects, including quality of work, adherence to schedule and budget, and client satisfaction.
Evaluation Considerations:
Clarity, completeness, and professionalism of the submittal.
Evaluation Considerations:
Familiarity with applicable agencies, permitting processes, and regional environmental conditions, as relevant to the Consultant’s role.
Ability to respond to on-call assignments, manage workload, and meet schedules. Capacity will be evaluated commensurate with firm size and proposed scope of services.
Evaluation Considerations:
All of the following documents are completed, fully executed, and included in my submittal as required in the RFQ. I understand that failure to complete and/or submit any of the required documents may be cause for rejection of my submittal.
Submission Certification
Consultants Identification
Consultant Required Document Upload
Consultant Fee Schedule
Signature Authorization
Worker's Compensation Certification
Public Contract Code Section 102851.1 Statement
Public Contract Code Section 10232 Statement
Debarred Certification Acknowledgement
Addenda and/or Notices and Q&A Acknowledgement
I understand on this Submittal Certification is affirmation that all items listed above are fully completed and executed and are hereby submitted with the Request for Qualifications Submittal as required. I understand that failure to complete and/or submit any of the required documents may be cause for rejection of my Submittal.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
The Consultant shall execute the following form as required by the California Labor Code, Sections 1860 and 1861:
I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and on behalf of my firm, I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the services of any contract entered into.
In conformance with Public Contract Code Section 10285.1, the consultant hereby declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the consultant has____, has not ____ been convicted within the preceding three years of any offenses referred to in that section, including any charge of fraud, bribery, collusion, conspiracy, or any other act in violation of any state or Federal antitrust law in connection with the bidding upon, award of, or performance of, any public works contract, as defined in Public Contract Code Section 1101, with any public entity, as defined in Public Contract Code Section 1100, including the Regents of the University of California or the Trustees of the California State University. The term "consultant" is understood to include any partner, member, officer, director, responsible managing officer, or responsible managing employee thereof, as referred to in Section 10285.1.
In conformance with Public Contract Code Section 10232, the Consultant, hereby states under penalty of perjury, that no more than one final unappealable finding of contempt of court by a federal court has been issued against the Consultant within the immediately preceding two-year period because of the Consultant's failure to comply with an order of a federal court which orders the Consultant to comply with an order of the National Labor Relations Board.
Note: The above Statements are part of the Request for Qualifications. Signing the Request for Qualifications Submittal on the signature portion thereof shall also constitute signature of this Statement. Consultants are cautioned that making a false statement may subject the certifier to criminal prosecution.
(a)(1) The Offeror/Bidder certifies, to the best of its knowledge and belief, that-
(i) The Offeror/Bidder and/or any of its Principals-
(A) Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, or declared ineligible for the award of contracts by any Federal agency;
(B) Have not, within a three-year period preceding this solicitation, been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for: commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (Federal, State, or local) contract or subcontract; violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes relating to the submission of bids; or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, tax evasion, violating Federal criminal tax laws, or receiving stolen property;
(C) Are not presently indicted for, or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity with, commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (a)(1)(i)(B) of this provision;
(ii) The Offeror/Bidder has not, within a three-year period preceding this offer, had one or more contracts terminated for default by any Federal agency.
(2) “Principal,” for the purposes of this certification, means an officer, director, owner, partner, or a person having primary management or supervisory responsibilities within a business entity (e.g., general manager; plant manager; head of a division or business segment; and similar positions).
This Certification Concerns a Matter Within the Jurisdiction of an Agency of the United States and the Making of a False, Fictitious, or Fraudulent Certification May Render the Maker Subject to Prosecution Under Section 1001, Title 18, United States Code.
(b) The Offeror/Bidder shall provide immediate written notice to the City if, at any time prior to contract award, the Offeror/Bidder learns that its certification was erroneous when submitted or has become erroneous by reason of changed circumstances.
(c) A certification that any of the items in paragraph (a) of this provision exists will not necessarily result in withholding of an award under this solicitation. However, the certification will be considered in connection with the with a determination of the Offeror’s/Bidder’s responsibility. Failure of the Offeror/Bidder to furnish a certification or provide such additional information as requested by the City may render the Offeror/Bidder nonresponsible.
(d) Nothing contained in the foregoing shall be construed to require establishment of a system of records in order to render, in good faith, the certification required by paragraph (a) of this provision. The knowledge and information of an Offeror/Bidder is not required to exceed that which is normally possessed by a prudent person in the ordinary course of business dealings.
(e) The certification in paragraph (a) of this provision is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when making award. If it is later determined that the Offeror/Bidder knowingly rendered an erroneous certification, in addition to other remedies available to the City, the City may terminate the contract resulting from this solicitation for default.
Please download the below documents, complete, and upload.
Will this solicitation require a bid bond?
Would you like to have bidders respond to an electronic pricing table through ProcureNow?
Some examples of of when to say "yes":
If you are NOT using the Electronic Pricing Table option, will you want your bidder to separate a Price Proposal from the rest of their Response? You'll want to do this if you open your bids initially WITHOUT showing price, and then come back in after a technical evaluation to unseal pricing later.
Will there be an evaluation committee to review the proposals and score them based on weights and multiple criteria?
Please provide a brief description of the project, a few sentences or one paragraph. You may want to use the first lines or paragraph of the SOW, if any.
Q (Private Clients-COI): If we have existing or potential future private development work, would that be considered a conflict of interest or can we support both the City and private clients?
A: Thank you for your question. At this time, there are no specific projects under this solicitation. As such, potential conflicts of interest will be evaluated on a project-by-project basis as request for proposals/quotes are issued. The City recognizes that consultants providing on-call environmental services may also support private sector clients within the region. This is not inherently considered a conflict of interest; however, the City requires that consultants avoid any actual or perceived conflicts in the performance of their work. A conflict of interest may arise if a consultant is placed in a position to review, prepare, or influence environmental documents or project approvals for a private development in which they are also involved. In such cases, the consultant shall not perform work that would compromise objectivity or create a lack of independence. Consultants are required to disclose any existing or potential conflicts of interest to the City as soon as they are identified. The City will evaluate such disclosures and determine the appropriate course of action, which may include restricting the consultant’s role, requiring separation of project teams, or recusal from specific tasks. The City’s priority is to ensure a fair, transparent, and objective environmental review process while allowing flexibility for consultants to support multiple clients where no conflict exists.
Q (Incumbents?): Has the City contracted for on-call environmental services in the past? If so, which firms are the "incumbents" (current / previous contract holders)?
A: No, the City has not contracted for on-call environmental services in the past.
Q (Subconsultant Markup Allowance): What is the maximum allowable subconsultant markup percentage established by the City?
A: The City has not established a maximum allowable subconsultant markup percentage. Any markup must be clearly identified and will be evaluated for reasonableness. The City reserves the right to negotiate final rates.
Q (Placement of Fee Schedule Form): Should the provided Fee Schedule template be uploaded exclusively under OpenGov section “4. Consultant Fee Schedule,” or should it also be included in section “3. Consultant Required Document Upload”?
A: The Consultant Fee Schedule only needs be provided under section 4. Consultant Fee Schedule. You can include it in section 3 as well, but it is not required to be in both spots.
Q (Subconsultants Fee Schedules): If our team includes multiple subconsultants, each with at least roughly 6-12 staff classifications, but the Fee Schedule form provides only one table and a single row per subconsultant (which isn’t enough space to include multiple people’s classifications * rates), may we attach one page for each subconsultant that includes a table that looks like the table on page 1 for prime consultants?
A: The City has updated the Fee Schedule template to better accommodate multiple subconsultants and their respective staff classifications. Proposers shall use the updated Fee Schedule Word document provided. The revised template includes additional space for subconsultant staff classifications and rates, as well as instructions outlining the required information. If additional space is still required, proposers may attach supplemental pages for each subconsultant. Please ensure all information is complete, consistent, and clearly organized for review.
Q (No subject): Since this is an on-call, we will show many staff members in our org chart to show our depth. Are you looking for resumes for each staff member or does key personnel resumes suffice?
A: We are only requiring resumes for key personnel and then a summary of qualifications for all staff identified in the organizational chart, including roles, years of experience, and relevant qualifications.
SLED stands for State, Local, and Education. These are solicitations issued by state governments, counties, cities, school districts, utilities, and higher education institutions — as opposed to federal agencies.
SamSearch Platform
AI-powered intelligence for the right opportunities, the right leads, and the right time.