Request for Qualifications-NYC Parking System

7/31/2019 Request for Qualifications-NYC Parking System

1/19

Responses due on Tuesday, July 31, 2012

by 3:00 pm New York City time

Issued June 11, 2012

Request for Qualifications

City of New York Parking SystemPrivate Management Agreement
http://www.nycedc.com/opportunities/leasing-opportunities


2/19

Page 2 of 18

I. OVERVIEW

A.) INTRODUCTION

The City of New York (the City or New York), through its Department of Transportation (DOT), isseeking Statements of Qualification (SOQ) from companies (Respondents and each, a Respondent)in order to establish a Pre-Qualified List (PQL) of Respondents who may be selected to compete for a

potential Private Management Agreement (PMA) with respect to the Citys parking system, the largestmunicipal parking system in the U.S., which consists of approximately 89,500 spaces throughout the fiveboroughs (the Parking System).

The Citys Parking System consists of: (i) approximately 80,800 on-street spaces, which includes 54,000on-street spaces paid for via 8,500 Muni-Meters and 27,000 single-space meters (the On-StreetSystem); and (ii) 8,700 off-street spaces, which includes 9 garages with 3,700 stalls and 4,900 surfacelot stalls in 33 parking fields (the Off-Street System). As the On-Street System represents over 90% ofthe total spaces in the Citys Parking System, it is the primary focus of this Request for Qualifications(RFQ). However, the City will also welcome detailed feedback on Off-Street System alternatives ifRespondents identify opportunities for enhanced performance.

DOTs intent in developing a PQL is to establish a list of competent and experienced firms for a potential

PMA procurement, consistent with the overall policies, goals and requirements of the City. DOT willselect only highly qualified Respondents with substantial expertise and experience operating complex,large-scale parking systems.

In exploring a PMA for the Parking System via this RFQ, the City has two primary objectives:

1. To build a comprehensive understanding of the private sectors capabilities and experiencein managing large, complex parking operations. In particular, the City seeks detail withrespect to parking systems that achieve operational and financial performance at levelshigher than the Citys Parking System; and

2. To bring the private sectors expertise in operations and innovation into assessingopportunities for a potential PMA for the City.

Overall, the City wishes to evaluate detailed opportunities to improve service to the public and revenueto the City through a PMA whereby a private entity would operate and maintain the Citys ParkingSystem (the Private Manager). Any such arrangement would maintain the Citys control over meterrates, installation and removal of meters, operating hours of metered spaces, enforcement andadjudications. Further discussion of the potential PMA structure is provided on the following page.

B.) GENERAL POLICY CONSIDERATIONS

Importantly, this PMA process forms part of a broader City initiative to:

Seek private-sector guidance on innovative ways to enhance the efficiency and quality ofservices the City provides to its residents and business customers;

Develop new sources of revenue and/or relief for the City from future operating and capital

obligations; Prioritize long-term value creation over short-term gains; and Incorporate existing work forces and/or increase their productivity.


3/19

Page 3 of 18

I. OVERVIEW (CONT.)C.) POTENTIAL PMA STRUCTURE

In connection with the establishment of a PQL, the City is exploring incentive-based PMA structureswhich may include a Private Manager to:

Assume day-to-day management and operation of the Parking System and its core functions,

including collections and meter maintenance; Guarantee Parking System operational and financial results at a level higher than the level

that the City anticipates being able to achieve on its own. (Note: Such guarantee to bebacked by significant performance security, including cash collateral or one or more letters ofcredit);

Earn incentive compensation based on guaranteed levels of operational and financialperformance; and

Fund certain negotiated Parking System capital expenditures such as all costs associatedwith equipment, infrastructure and software needed to implement new technologies andinnovations.

Overall, any PMA will establish the framework and terms and conditions of a strategic relationshipbetween the City and Private Manager pursuant to which the Private Manager would manage ParkingSystem operations and, to a broad extent, introduce opportunities for innovation and improved customerservice for City residents and the travelling public.

D.) FOCUS ON INNOVATION

The City is particularly focused on exploring private-market ideas that would implement industry bestpractices and extend the Citys record of innovation in this area. A responsive SOQ will, among otherthings, demonstrate detailed technical and financial qualifications and provide detailed descriptions of thehistorical performance of parking projects undertaken by the Respondent, specific measuresimplemented and corresponding results achieved.

Importantly, exploring such ideas and qualifications is conceptually consistent with DOTs Strategic Plan,which incorporates: (i) innovative parking management programs; (ii) supportive technologies to make it

easier for motorists to find a parking space; and, (iii) introduction of a wider set of payment options.Combined with other curb-management practices, innovative parking management can improve motoristconvenience, help reduce double-parking and blockage of bus stops and hydrants, reduce vehicle milesspent searching for an available space, and increase compliance with curbside regulations.


4/19

Page 4 of 18

I. OVERVIEW (CONT.)E.) REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS

This RFQ allows Respondents to describe their experience managing sizeable parking systems and howspecifically they would apply such expertise to New York City. Sections II and III of this RFQ provide anintroductory description of the Parking System, including opportunity highlights. Section IV discusses the

Citys expectations with respect to business-plan submittals. Section V summarizes the requiredrespondent qualifications and evaluation criteria. Section VI lists the RFQ submission requirements.

For the purposes of this RFQ, the following definitions will apply:

Respondent means an individual, a company, or a consortium of individuals and/orcompanies formed to undertake the transaction.

Team Member means a member of a Respondent.

Those interested in responding to this RFQ shall do so no later than Tuesday, July 31, 2012 at 3:00 pmNew York City time. Responses received after this time will not be considered. The communicationsprotocol for the RFQ process is described in Section VI. There will be no restriction as to the number ofRespondents.

F.) PROCESS SUMMARY

The City shall review the SOQs submitted by each Respondent. SOQs submitted will be reviewed by ateam comprised of individuals from DOT, Office of Management and Budget and the EconomicDevelopment Corporation. The receipt of SOQs, preliminary business plans or other documents atany stage of this RFQ process will in no way obligate the City to enter into any contract of anykind with any party.

Respondents that are deemed to be qualified shall be notified in writing of being accepted onto the PQL.Respondents which do not meet the criteria shall be given written notice of denial of pre-qualificationstatus. Respondents that are denied pre-qualification status shall not be invited to participate in thesubsequent procurement, if any.

To assist the City with this process, the City has hired an independent financial advisory firm, Greenhill &Co., LLC (the Financial Advisor), and a law firm, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP (the Legal

Advisor) (collectively, the Advisors). A decision whether to proceed with a subsequent procurementwill be made by the City in consultation with its Advisors. Likewise, if a decision is made to engage aPrivate Manager for the Parking System, selection of such Private Manager will be made by the DOT inconsultation with its Advisors.


5/19

II. PARKING SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

A.) SUMMARY

The City of New York, first settled in 1624, is the largest city in the U.S. by population, with over 8.2million residents and nearly 18.9 million people residing in the greater metropolitan area. New Yorkconsists of five boroughs The Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens and Staten Island. With land area

of just 305 square miles, New York is the most densely populated major city in the U.S. A center ofglobal commerce, finance, media, art, fashion, education and entertainment, New York welcomes over50 million visitors annually to its diverse neighborhoods, restaurants, hotels, shops and historic sites.

DOT operates the largest metered parking system in the U.S., with approximately 80,800 on-streetspaces throughout the five boroughs. As demonstrated in Figure 1, the Citys On-Street System is overtwo times larger than the next largest U.S. municipal on-street metered parking system, Los Angeles.

Figure 1:

On-Street Metered Spaces by City

(Spaces in thousands)

80.8

37.7 35.6

24.0

0

20

40

60

80

100

New York City Los Angeles Chicago San Francisco

Source: DOT, City/Parking Authority public disclosuresFigure 2:

The Citys on-street and off-street parking spaces arevital to the health of neighborhood retail andcommercial activity, by providing parking for typicallyup to one or two hours for people shopping, going outto eat, visiting doctors and hospitals, running personalerrands and other neighborhood-based activities.Spaces with longer time limits provide parking forpeople working in the area and for park-and-ridecommuters, thus supporting the transit system.

Availability of parking spaces for these purposes ishighly valued by residents, visitors and businesses.

At the same time, curbside space is also used for avariety of other purposes, depending on location and

time of day. These purposes include bus stops, buslanes, bike lanes, curb cuts, commercial loading andunloading and fire hydrants. DOT carefully balancesthese various uses and makes changes to the use ofcurbside space based on project and communityneeds.

On-Street Spaces by Borough

Manhattan

26,500

Brooklyn

21,000

Staten Island

1,900

Queens

22,100

Bronx

9,300

Source: DOT

80,800

Page 5 of 18


6/19


7/19

II. PARKING SYSTEM DESCRIPTION (CONT.)

D.) ON-STREET REVENUE COLLECTION METHODOLOGY

Given the Muni-Meter modernization, DOT is collecting more revenue electronically via credit-cardpayments as opposed to traditional cash collection. To demonstrate the gradual change in the collectionmix, Figure 5 compares the percentage of revenue collected in the form of cash, credit-card payments

and NYC Parking Cards for FY11 and May 2012 (the most recent available data). At the close of FY11,62% of total revenue came in the form of cash, 22% by credit card payment and 16% through NYCParking Cards. As of May 2012, only 54% of total revenue came in the form of cash, while 29% and17% of total revenue came in the form of credit-card payments and NYC Parking Cards, respectively.DOT anticipates the percentage of total revenue collected via credit-card payments to continue toincrease as the Citywide Muni-Meter installations are completed throughout 2012.

Figure 5:

Cash54%

Credit29%

NYC ParkingCard

17%

FY11 May 2012

Cash62%

Credit22%

NYC ParkingCard

16%

Source: DOT

Page 7 of 18


8/19


9/19

II. PARKING SYSTEM DESCRIPTION (CONT.)F.) FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

The Parking Systems historical financial performance for FY10 and FY11 is profiled in Figure 7 below.Additionally, FY12 projected and FY13 budgeted financials are displayed to provide potentialRespondents with DOTs baseline expectations for the current and coming fiscal years.

Figure 7:

($ in millions)Fiscal Year Ending June 30, CAGR

2010A 2011A 2012P 2013B '10-'13B

Operating Revenues

On-Street Meters $131 $139 $171 $182 11.6%

Off-Street Meters(2) 9 10 12 13 13.3%

Garages 7 7 8 8 8.3%

Total Operating Revenues $147 $156 $192 $204 11.6%

% Growth - 6.3% 22.8% 6.3%

Operating Expenses $64 $63 $67 $63 (0.5%)

Total Net Revenue (EBITDA) $83 $93 $125 $141 19.3%

% Margin 56.4% 59.8% 65.2% 69.0%

% Growth - 12.8% 34.0% 12.5%

On-Street Net Revenue (EBITDA) $85 $94 $123 $136 16.9%

% Margin 64.8% 67.4% 72.0% 74.5%

% Growth - 10.3% 31.8% 10.0%

Capital Expenditures $3 $1 $26 $17

Net Revenue (EBITDA) - Capital Expenditures $80 $93 $99 $124

% Margin 54.4% 59.3% 51.8% 60.7%

Parking System Financial Summary(1)

Notes:

(1) Excludes enforcement revenue; figures may reflect rounding(2) Includes revenue from permitsSource: DOT

Historical Performance: From FY10 to FY11, total revenue grew from $147 million to $156 million, a6.3% increase. With respect to operating costs, total expenses decreased from $64 million in FY10 to$63 million in FY11, reflecting improved DOT efficiencies. Overall, Parking System Net Revenue(EBITDA) increased by 12.8% (from $83 million to $93 million) from FY10 to FY11.

Projected Performance: In FY12, total Parking System revenue is expected to total $192 million, a22.8% increase from FY11. This increase reflects continued installation of Muni-Meters across the Cityas well as various rate adjustments. For FY13, DOT projects that total revenue will reach $204 million, a6.3% increase versus projected FY12 levels.

With respect to Operating Expenses, total Parking System expenses are expected to be $67 million inFY12, a $4 million increase versus FY11. In FY13, however, budgeted expenses are reduced to $63million, primarily due to a decrease in Personnel Services costs.

Overall, Parking System Net Revenue (EBITDA) is projected to be $125 million in FY12 and is budgetedto reach $141 million in FY13.

Page 9 of 18


10/19

Page 10 of 18

II. PARKING SYSTEM DESCRIPTION (CONT.)G.) EMPLOYEES

The City currently has an authorized headcount of 466 employees in FY13 to operate, maintain andprovide other key functions to support the operations of the Parking System. Employees arerepresented by various unions and are covered by collective bargaining agreements. Respondents will

be asked to provide with their response an explanation of plans concerning the utilization of these Cityemployees.

H.) ENFORCEMENT

Parking enforcement is the responsibility of the New York City Police Department (the PoliceDepartment). Summonses, which are primarily issued by Traffic Enforcement Agents, are adjudicatedand collected by the Parking Violation Operations (PVO) of the Citys Department of Finance. For FYEJune 30, 2011, the City issued 8.96 million parking summonses (including violations for alternate sideparking and no-standing infractions). This number, as reported by the Department of Finance, includes2.54 million meter-related parking violations.


11/19

Page 11 of 18

III. OPPORTUNITY HIGHLIGHTS

Given its scale and importance to the City,the City is investigating opportunities to improve service to thepublic and Parking System performance. The current Parking System performs at a very high level ofoperability, reliability and profitability compared with its peers. However, the City is interested inexploring options that may improve service to the public and future financial returns.

Key highlights of a Parking PMA with the City would include:

A.) Largest On-Street Metered Parking System in the U.S.

With approximately 80,800 total spaces, New York Citys On-Street System is over twotimes larger than the next largest municipal system in the U.S. and serves ametropolitan area with more than 18 million residents.

B.) PMA Structure Maximizes Long-Term Value Creation versus Short-Term Gains

In contrast to certain precedent U.S. parking transactions, the Citys objective is not tostructure an upfront payment. Rather, the City views the possible PMA as an assetmanagement partnership through which a Private Manager would earn compensationfor driving long-term value and service to the public and creating Parking Systemupside for the City.

C.) Minimal Cyclicality and Sustained Revenue Growth

From FY10 to FY13B, total Parking System revenue is expected to grow byapproximately $48 million (from $156 million to $204 million). This FY10-FY13BCAGR of 11.6% demonstrates the attractive underlying fundamentals of the ParkingSystem.

D.) Committed to Innovation and Best Practices

As evidenced by Muni-Meter installations Citywide and pilot programs for technologyand parking pricing, DOT is highly committed to implementing Parking Systeminnovations that benefit the public. The purpose of this RFQ is to identify furtheropportunities for innovation that would serve the Citys parking-policy objectives andhow best a PMA may be able to improve service to the public and optimize ParkingSystem efficiency, where appropriate.


12/19


13/19

Page 13 of 18

V. RESPONDENT QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS; EVALUATION CRITERIA

This RFQ is open to prospective Respondents capable of meeting the requirements highlighted in thissection and detailed further in Section VI. The City may allow changes in the composition of aRespondent if the Respondent is comprised of more than one entity (e.g., joint venture, partnership,etc.); however, any such changes must obtain prior approval by the City. Failure to obtain such approvalmay result in disqualification from the RFQ process and the PQL.

Upon receipt, all SOQ submissions will be reviewed for completeness in accordance with the submissionrequirements highlighted in Section VI of this RFQ. At the end of the submission completeness review,the City will assess each Respondents qualifications for inclusion on the PQL based on the criteria setforth below.

A.) TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

The evaluation of technical capabilities will address whether a Respondent has the operational andtechnical capacity to maintain the System at a higher standard than is currently achieved by DOT.Importantly, a Respondent must have at least 100,000 parking spaces under management (on-street,off-street or combined) of which at least 20,000 are on-street spaces.

B.) FINANCIAL CAPABILITY

The evaluation of financial capabilities will address whether the SOQ submission adequately responds tothe financial capability requirements of the PMA with respect to the following areas:

Financial capability and ability to furnish financial instruments, such as irrevocableletters of credit, which will guarantee to the City a minimum of $100 million to secureannual parking revenue; and

General credit quality of the proposed counterparty.

C.) BUSINESS PLAN

The evaluation of Respondent Business Plans will address whether a Respondent has submitted asatisfactory Business Plan that merits inclusion in the PQL. Respondents must present a satisfactory

business plan, in accordance with the requirements of Section IV, to be included in the PQL.

D.) OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

Compliance with all federal, state, and local laws, rules, licensing requirements andexecutive orders Respondents must disclose all negative information concerning suchcompliance from the past 10 years as it relates to their past parking operations, financialcapability or business integrity;

Ability to maintain harmonious labor relations Respondents must describe pastpositive and negative information concerning their ability to maintain harmonious laborrelations;

Compliance with equal employment opportunity requirements and antidiscriminationlaws Respondents must disclose all EEO complaints from the past 10 years; and

Demonstrated commitment to working with minority and women-owned businesses.


14/19

Page 14 of 18

V. RESPONDENT QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS; EVALUATION CRITERIA (CONT.)E.) RECORD OF BUSINESS INTEGRITY

Prior to inclusion on the PQL, the Private Manager and all of its principals and affiliates, as applicable,will have to complete and submit to the City VENDEX background questionnaires and shall be subject toinvestigation by the Citys Department of Investigation, all for the purpose of determining theRespondents record of business integrity. Questionnaires and instructions on submission requirementscan be found at: http://www.nyc.gov/html/mocs/html/research/vendex.shtml.

F.) LEGAL PROVISIONS

The City has established standard terms and conditions that are required to be included in all contractsalong with bidder/contractor representations and certifications. The City hereby puts the Respondentson notice that, should the City proceed with a subsequent procurement, a successful award at the end ofthe procurement process will be contingent upon the Respondents agreement to comply with thesestandard contractual provisions, representations and certifications in substantially the form presented ina subsequent procurement.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/mocs/html/research/vendex.shtmlhttp://www.nyc.gov/html/mocs/html/research/vendex.shtml


15/19

Page 15 of 18

VI. RFQ PROCEDURES AND SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

A.) COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOL

The City and DOT are committed to a fair and open process for interested parties to receive informationabout the RFQ and procurement process. Prospective Respondents that anticipate submitting an SOQshall indicate so as soon as possible by providing contact information via e-mail to:

[email protected]

Additionally, potential Respondents may submit questions via e-mail to the above addresses. Eachpotential Respondents inquiry must identify the senders name, address, e-mail, telephone number andcompany affiliation in the correspondence. DOT will provide a written response to questions anddistribute said responses to a single representative of firms that have provided contact information. Thedeadline for submitting questions shall be: Friday, June 29, 2012 at 3:00 pm New York City time.

B.) NO LIABILITY FOR COSTS

The City and its Advisors are not responsible for costs or damages incurred by Respondents, or otherinterested parties in connection with the PQL process, including but not limited to costs associated with

preparing responses and of exploring the Parking System or participating in any conferences, or oralpresentations.

C.) CONFIDENTIALITY

DOT is subject to the New York State Freedom of Information Law (FOIL), which governs the process forthe public disclosure of certain records maintained by DOT (See Public Officers Law, Sections 87 and89). Respondents may request that DOT except all or part of information submitted, including thebusiness plan, from public disclosure, on the grounds that the information contains trade secrets,proprietary information, or that the information, if disclosed, would cause substantial injury to thecompetitive position of the individual or firm submitting the information. Such exception may extend toinformation contained in the request itself, if public disclosure would defeat the purpose for which theexception is sought. The request for such an exception must be in writing and state, in detail, thespecific reasons for the requested exception. It must also specify the information, business plan, orportions thereof for which the exception is requested. In addition, information disclosed which wouldlead to the impairment of present or imminent contract awards is also exempt and this exemption mayalso be available with regard to all or part of the business plan or other information submitted.Notwithstanding any request made pursuant to this paragraph, DOT may determine, upon receipt of aFOIL request, that no applicable exception under FOIL exists to prevent disclosure.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


16/19

Page 16 of 18

VI. RFQ PROCEDURES AND SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS (CONT.)D.) FORMAT AND REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR RFQ SUBMISSION

All RFQ submissions should meet the criteria set forth in Section V and follow the format outlined below:

1. Cover Page (Identify all Team Members)

2. Cover Letter (2 pages Maximum)

3. Table of Contents

4. Executive Summary

a) Summarize the top 10 areas in which the Respondent believes it can demonstratemanagement performance and technological innovation that are relevant to creating value forthe City in the context of an incentive-based PMA. For example, such a discussion mightinclude views on implementing customer-focused technologies, optimizing collection routes,coordinated enforcement, preventative-maintenance strategies, reducing equipment repairtimes, and other potential alternatives to introduce innovation into the Parking System. Besure to highlight the lessons learned from prior experience with public systems.

5. Respondent Information

a) Description of Respondent: Provide a description of the Respondent, including a descriptionof all Team Members, if applicable, including the identity of the current Key Person(s) of eachTeam Member, and the anticipated legal relationship among the Team Members (e.g.,partners, shareholders, client-consultants, etc.), as appropriate. (Note: To the extent theRespondent consists of Team Members, please indicate whether such Team Members areexclusively committed to the Respondent.) For purposes of this RFQ, "Key Person" meansan individual who it is anticipated will have direct operational control over the entity that willbe responsible for fulfilling the obligations under a PMA.

b) Contact Person: Provide a single contact person for all future communication between theRespondent and the Financial Advisor. Please identify the contact persons name, title,organization, address, phone numbers (office and cell), and email address.

c) Controlling Interest: Identify the individuals or entities who hold an ownership interest (director indirect) of more than five percent (5%) in the Respondent or each Team Member, as thecase may be.

6. Technical Capability

Respondents should comment on the following elements of their relevant industry expertise:

a) Operational Experience and Capability: Describe how Respondent or Team Members haveoperated large parking systems at a higher standard than is currently being achieved by DOT,based on meter operability, Net Revenue (EBITDA), customer satisfaction, credit card

utilization and other relevant metrics. The City requests that each Respondent describe itsexperience in managing formerly public parking systems, including the results achieved interms of improving service to the public, revenue results, cash flow and implementinginnovative technologies. For each parking system, specify the dates of management,whether management pertained to all or part of a parking system (and, if the latter, whichparts), number of on-street spaces, number of off-street spaces, FTE equivalent used formeter collections, annual mileage for meter collections, the annual total revenue, annual


17/19

Page 17 of 18

VI. RFQ PROCEDURES AND SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS (CONT.)cash collected, expenses and cash flow of each parking system during the applicablemanagement period and the prior two years. Respondents should also provide client contactinformation for every formerly-public parking system that they manage or have managed.

Each Respondent should describe in detail the nature of the transition process from public toprivate management, any policy, community or technical obstacles encountered, and how

those obstacles were overcome. Respondents should also describe the number and type ofpublic employees affected by the transition and how they were handled under the privatesystem. To the extent that new technology was a substantial component of the privatesystem, Respondent should describe the prior technology that was replaced/enhanced, thenature of the new technology and its cost (including any unexpected transition issues), andthe estimated contribution of the new technology to both revenues and expenses.

b) Customer Service and Satisfaction: Respondents should describe its experience in achievingthe highest standards of customer service and satisfaction. Specifically, the Respondentmust highlight its experience and qualifications providing excellent customer service to thepublic. Respondents may, at their option, include additional information concerning theirexperience in maintaining productive ongoing relationships with government entities, similarto the relationship that the Private Manager would have with the City.

c) Safety and Security: Respondents should communicate their ability to address and resolvepublic safety and security issues relating to the operating of the Parking System.

d) Other Capabilities: If the Respondent possesses other qualifications or capabilities, pleasedescribe such qualifications or capabilities.

7. Financial Capability

Respondents should demonstrate their depth of resources and financial capability to operate theParking System. Financial qualifications shall be provided as Appendix A to a RFQ submissionand shall include the following information in table format:

Income Statement and Balance Sheet Summary

Financial SummaryFiscal Year End [Date] 2009 2010 2011

A Revenue

B Operating Expenses (excluding D&A)

C Depreciation & Amortization

D Operating Income (A-B-C)

E Net Income

F Total Assets

G Current Assets

H Total Liabilities

I Current Liabilities

J Net Worth (Equity) (F-H)K Share Price (12/31)

L Shares Outstanding (12/31)


18/19

Page 18 of 18

VI. RFQ PROCEDURES AND SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS (CONT.)Credit Summary

Credit SummaryRating Company Rating Date Long-Term Short Term

Moodys

S&P

Fitch

Other

E.) RFQ SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

Twelve (12) hard copies of the RFQ Submission should be delivered to the address shown below nolater than Tuesday, July 31, 2012 at 3:00 pm New York City time . RFQ Submissions may not besubmitted via facsimile. Deliver RFQ submissions to:

New York City Department of TransportationOffice of the Chief Contracting Officer

55 Water Street, 8th

FloorNew York, New York 10041ATTN: Junaid Syed, P.E.

One electronic copy of the complete RFQ submission should be sent to:

[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


19/19

Request for Qualifications-NYC Parking System

Documents

Transcript of Request for Qualifications-NYC Parking System