Medford subcommittee advances RFQ timeline for CMR procurement, authorizes two members to finalize packet

The Medford Comprehensive High School Building Committee subcommittee reviewed a draft request for qualifications (RFQ) and agreed on a compressed timeline this week to recruit a construction manager at risk (CMR) for the high‑school replacement project, while authorizing two members to finalize the packet and forward it to the full building committee.

"This is really a kickoff meeting for this team just to go over the overall construction manager at risk process," Matt Rice of Left Field said as he walked the group through the two procurement phases: a pre‑qualification/SOQ stage followed by a proposal/RFP stage that will culminate in selection, interviews and guaranteed maximum price negotiations. Rice said only firms pre‑qualified in the first phase will be invited to submit full proposals in the second phase.

Why it matters: the RFQ establishes who can compete on a major, complex public‑work project and sets procedural expectations for firms, the committee and the city. Getting the RFQ language, evaluation criteria and schedule right affects how many firms apply and how the team compares similar but not identical projects from different bidders.

Key deadlines and process details discussed included advertising on July 25 (with publication listings aimed for July 1), statements of qualifications arriving in late July (a target around July 24), subcommittee review through Aug. 11 and notification of pre‑qualified firms on Aug. 14. Rice said the RFP will follow and that proposals are expected to be due on Sept. 4, with selection‑committee review Sept. 4–21 and interviews targeted for Sept. 28–30. He said the guaranteed maximum price negotiation and a notice to proceed for pre‑construction work could follow in early October, and noted the full GMP would not be executed until the later bid phase (projected in 2028).

Committee members pressed for clarifications on evaluation criteria and logistics. A member asked whether submissions must be routed through city procurement or whether Left Field may manage electronic submissions; Rice said he would confirm the city procurement office’s requirements. Members also weighed whether to supply hard copies of the RFQ to committee members; the group settled on providing at least five hard copies for district members while permitting digital access for others.

Sustainability and labor issues remained unresolved. Libby Brown told the subcommittee the RFQ should reflect that the city is "pursuing a project labor agreement" and that the possibility must be noted in procurement documents. Brown and others also requested clearer language on the project’s sustainability target: the RFQ currently references LEED v5 silver as a minimum but members said the committee has discussed a goal of higher certification (gold or platinum) that has not yet been ratified and therefore should be framed as under consideration rather than final.

On evaluation criteria, members urged flexibility about what qualifies as a 'similar' project. Because very few firms have worked on a high school of Medford’s anticipated scale in recent years, the committee discussed using bands (for example, 3 projects = not advantageous; 3–5 = advantageous; 5–10 = highly advantageous) and allowing comparable large public projects (universities, healthcare) where appropriate, while keeping the minimum mandatory criteria clear in the RFQ as required by Mass. General Laws.

Next steps: Rice said he will update the RFQ, produce the evaluation matrix for the subcommittee to use, confirm procurement preferences for submissions and hard‑copy delivery, and circulate a revised draft to the full building committee. Because the RFQ was not yet final, the subcommittee moved and passed a motion authorizing Jenny Graham and Ken Lord to finalize the RFQ and forward it to the building committee on behalf of the subcommittee after members submit comments by email. The motion passed by roll call vote, six in favor and one absent. The group then adjourned.

The committee did not take any final procurement award actions at the meeting; formal selection and contract steps will follow after the advertised SOQ, proposal evaluations, interviews and negotiation phases.