In July 2018, following a pattern of business tax receipt (BTR) and customer service complaints  that indicated deficiencies in the City’s permitting process, the City Manager launched an initiative aimed at BTR process improvement. The City Manager assembled a team to, first, identify flaws in the process and, second, to implement reforms to the system. Among other specific objectives, the initiative was tasked with formulating a new and improved standard operating procedure and developing a new user-friendly application process with an automated option. One recurring issue expressed by the public was confusion about where to start the review process, therefore, an interface tool could provide a universal beginning point for users to obtain accurate information and begin the process.  

To assess the options that exist in the marketplace for an interface tool that may assist residents, developers, and businesses with navigating throughout the various licensing, permitting and regulatory processes, the Administration issued Request for Information (RFI) No. 2019-278-WG  The purpose of the RFI was not to obtain permitting, zoning, or business regulatory software for internal use by City staff, but, rather, to identify if a proven solution existed that could assist public stakeholders in navigating through these processes on their own. For example, the proposed interface tool could assist residents with understanding the various approvals required for home renovation projects, developers could easily access applicable zoning requirements specific to their projects, and businesses could obtain information regarding the necessary steps and costs associated with a new or existing operation. The goal of the RFI was to gather information on interface tools that would integrate the City Code’s land use and zoning regulations.

On June 14, 2019 the City received seven responses to the RFI. To ensure that the City was only considering market-tested solutions, the RFI stated that all responses must propose solutions that had already been developed and deployed in at least three public sector agencies where the solution provides the same functionality as required by the City. The RFI further stated that responses offering to develop an entirely new program would not be considered. This is a critical factor necessary to avoid the cost and risk associated with subsidizing the development of an entirely new product that has not yet been tried and tested by other governmental entities. The potential failure of an untested system would be detrimental to the City’s efforts to improve service delivery to customers. 

Four responses failed to document three public sector agencies in which the solution was currently deployed and already providing the same functionality as needed by the City. Therefore, those four responses were not further considered. Two respondents, Camino, Inc. and Open Counter Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a OpenCounter, submitted proposals for solutions that have already been deployed. 

Both solutions offer a online functionality that provides information based upon specific responses entered by the public user (e.g., intuitive zoning maps, permit scoping, fee estimations), both feature modern design with an intuitive interface and GIS functionality, as well as a back-end administrative tool for staff. OpenCounter provided client references for agencies where its solution has been implemented. These agencies, include; Orlando, FL, Gainesville, FL, Atlanta, GA, San Diego, CA, and Charlotte, NC. Although Camino, Inc., provided client references, staff discovered that, despite Camino, Inc.’s working relationship with at least three entities, not all of the listed entities have deployed the solutions.  

Although a cost proposal was not a required element requested by the City, price would certainly be a factor into any decision made by the City. Camino, Inc. informed City staff that costs were too variable to even provide any estimate and that a price estimate could only be prepared if they were awarded the contract. In comparison, OpenCounter, proposed an initial one-time cost of $22,500 to configure the solution and recurring subscription costs of $57,500 each year (including the first year). Based on the foregoing, staff is recommending that the City award a contract to OpenCounter, for a first year cost of $80,000, and $57,500 each subsequent year.