Search

@ Review and approval of Policy and Procedures Manual to include documents signed by hosts or
producers of video for broadcast. Ensuring all content broadcasts meet local community
standards while ensuring that ALL 15° AMMENDMENT SPEECH IS PROTECTED AND ALLOWING
FOR NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST SPEECH as defined in the station charter.

e Technical Services Manager to be provided to efficiently resolve both studio and remote
broadcast issues as well as be the primary point of contact for equipment troubleshooting,
Comcast technical interface and ensuring compliance with FCC technical standards.

e Spanish language staff to promote participation by Nashua’s growing diverse population.

Promote volunteer production opportunities with Nashua’s Government and Educational channels to trained
producers and volunteers looking for additional production experience.

Provide and maintain a “bulletin board” on the Public Access Television channel for the purposes of announcing
programming and cable television access services, making public service and community announcements. Vendor
shall take care to ensure that announcements are updated timely and appropriately so that the information
provided is accurate and adheres to applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Vendor shall also
endeavor to publish its access programming weekly in local print media outlets, and via any feasible automated
method for inclusion in cable or online program schedules.

PROMOTION:
Promote community dialogue via cable television or other electronic media.

Produce and implement a promotion plan for Public Access Television services

« Create and implement outreach activities, special events, and partnerships with other community,
education, non-profit film and music and media organizations and local businesses.

* Promote Public Access Television programs and support the use of various media as vehicles of
artistic expression.

e Develop and promote the concept of community and Public Access Television to existing and future
communications media.

© Promote and support the entrance of locally-produced Public Access television content in industry
and community awards competitions on a regular basis.

REPORTING:
Provide quarterly updates reporting to CTAB the composition and activities of the Vendors management of the

channel.

Prepare for the City’s PEG Program Department (part of the City of Nashua Administrative Services Division) and its
advisory group the Community Television Advisory Board (CTAB), and any other appropriate City designated person
or body, such regular or special reports as may be required or deemed necessary by the City to review contract
performance

Vendor shall provide all required reports in a timely fashion as identified in this agreement.

29 [Page

City of Nashua

Purchasing Department
Administrative Services Division (603) 589-3330
229 Main Street - Nashua, NH 03060 Fax (603) 594-3233

May 19, 2022

TO: Mayor Donchess
Finance Committee

SUBJECT: Clarity of RFP Process for Public Access Television Contract

As part of our response to the recent letter received by Roy Tilsley, jr of Bernstein, Shur, Sawyer & Nelson
representing Community Media Services Group | wanted to provide some additional information regarding the
Request for Proposal process followed for this advertisement.

RFP vs IFB definitions as included in the City of Nashua’s 2019 published Purchasing Manual

Request for Proposal (RFP) - (1) Alldocuments, whether attached or incorporated by reference, utilized for soliciting
(competitive) proposals. The RFP procedure permits negotiation of proposals and prices as distinguished from
competitive bidding and an Invitation for Bids. {2} The solicitation document used in the competitive negotiation
process, The procedure allows changes to be made after proposals are opened and contemplates that the nature
of the proposals and/or prices offered will be negotiated prior to award.

Invitation for Bids (fFB} - (1) the solicitation document used for competitive sealed bidding, the customary method
used by state and local governments for the purchase of equipment, materials, supplies, and construction. (2)
All documents, whether attached or incorporated by reference, utilized for soliciting bids.

Important distinctions between these in regards to competitive bidding:

IFB’s - competitive bidding
@ JFB may be used when you know “what” and “how”
® An IFBis advertised to the public, bids are publicly opened, and the award is publicly announced.
* Negotiation is not normally used with competitive sealed bidding.
¢ |FB’s are evaluated solely by costs and the contract will be awarded solely on the basis of price.
RFP’s —- competitive proposals
e RFP may be used when you know “what” but not “how” or “how” may vary from one vendor to another.
e As with an IFB, the RFP must be announced to the public and specifies a due date.
e An RFP it is evaluated according to predetermined weighted standards that are stated in the RFP itself.
e An RFP allows for negotiation and provides more flexibility in the awarding of the contract.
There is no public opening requirement because receipt of the proposals is, under the RFP method, only
the first step, not the last step since cost is not the only factor in the awarding of the contract.
e Evaluation of the criteria for the technical and cost factors must be taken before award the contract can
be made.

Additional Factors
® Responsible Responding Vendors
e Local Preference

Criteria for weighing these proposals

Criteria

Weight

Qualifications and Experience:

Respondent must demonstrate adequate experience in the following areas: qualification, general
experience and technical competence of the project team

Innovative/unique solutions or techniques

Experience with similar type/size projects in public or private television management services, outreach

deemed earned.

activities, video production and technical experience oth
e Feedback from References with projects similar in size & scope
* Expertise, experience and resources that can perform the necessary tasks required to deliver results.
e Vendor must pravide information that demonstrates they possess the technical expertise that is
required for this scope of work
Overall Impression of Proposal
¢ Organization, clarity, conciseness and thoroughness
e Approach to the scope of services and statement of works
e Proposed project schedule
e Completeness and thoroughness of the proposal, technical data and documentation, especially in the
following areas: television promotion, programming functions, and studio management (see RFP
‘Scope of Work’ for additional details} 10%
e Demonstration of understanding and support for the goals of PEG Access in general, and Nashua’s
objectives for this service specifically
Program Implementation which best meets the goals of functions of the vendor as expressed in the
Scope of Work; also assuring the greatest Nashua community participation in the television facilities
and resources. To include: proposed hours of operation; sources of external programming; ratios of
original and locally vs. non-locally produced content
Additional Considerations (applicable only when not in conflict with state or federal guidelines)
e Evidence of good organization and management practices
e Governance structure & tools {incl. written policies and procedures}
® Clearly defined roles and responsibilities of staff members and the Board of Directors
*® Proposed plan for broadest representation and inclusion of Nashua constituents in general 10%
membership and Board of Directors
¢ Qualification as a DBE
¢ Qualification of a Local preference
® Use of Environmentally sound products in proposed solution
Cost Proposal:
Cost proposal should include any payment schedule setting forth the frequency and amount of progress
payments, and identifying the tasks and deliverables (“milestones”) to be completed for each payment to be 40%

In regards to pricing on these particular proposals:

e BRBTV's cost is highest year 1 and is reduced in both years 2 & 3 (from year 1 cost)
e CNSG‘s cost is lowest year 1 with a 5% increase each year thereafter
« CMSG proposed 4 different options — not all options are of equal cost and service to BRBTV’s proposal
e CMSG has requested additional support requirements from the City that were not factored into their cost
outlay (i.e. designated contract administrator & finance manager)
Regards,
Kelly Parkinson

Purchasing Manager

City of Nashua

Purchasing Department
Administrative Services Division (603) 589-3330
229 Main Street - Nashua, NH 03060 IU ih SES)

May 19, 2022

TO: Mayor Donchess
Finance Committee

SUBJECT: Clarity of RFP Process for Public Access Television Contract

As part of our response to the recent letter received by Roy Tilsley, Jr of Bernstein, Shur, Sawyer & Nelson
representing Community Media Services Group | wanted to provide some additional information regarding the
Request for Proposal process followed for this advertisement.

RFP vs IFB definitions as included in the City of Nashua’s 2019 published Purchasing Manual

Request for Proposal (RFP) - (1) Alldocuments, whether attached or incorporated by reference, utilized for soliciting
{competitive} proposals. The RFP procedure permits negotiation of proposals and prices as distinguished from
competitive bidding and an Invitation for Bids. (2) The solicitation document used in the competitive negotiation
process. The procedure allows changes to be made after proposals are opened and contemplates that the nature
of the proposals and/or prices offered wili be negotiated prior to award.

Invitation for Bids {IFB) - (1) the solicitation document used for competitive sealed bidding, the customary method
used by state and local governments for the purchase of equipment, materials, supplies, and construction. (2)
All documents, whether attached or incorporated by reference, utilized for soliciting bids.

Important distinctions between these in regards to competitive bidding:

IFB’s — competitive bidding
® IFB may be used when you know “what” and “how”
e An IFBis advertised to the public, bids are publicly opened, and the award is publicly announced.
e Negotiation is not normally used with competitive sealed bidding.
e = |FB’s are evaluated solely by costs and the contract will be awarded solely on the basis of price.
RFP's — competitive proposals
e RFP may be used when you know “what” but not “how” or “how” may vary from one vendor to another.
e As with an IFB, the RFP must be announced to the public and specifies a due date.
e = AnRFP it is evaluated according to predetermined weighted standards that are stated in the RFP itself.
e An RFP allows for negotiation and provides more flexibility in the awarding of the contract.
¢ There is no public opening requirement because receipt of the proposals is, under the RFP methad, only
the first step, not the last step since cost is not the only factor in the awarding of the contract.
¢ Evaluation of the criteria for the technical and cost factors must be taken before award the contract can
be made.

Additional Factors
e Responsible Responding Vendors
e = Local Preference

Criteria for weighing these proposals

Criteria

Weight

Qualifications and Experience:

deemed earned.

* Respondent must demonstrate adequate experience in the following areas: qualification, general
experience and technical competence of the project team
* = Innovative/unique solutions or techniques
® Experience with similar type/size projects in public or private television management services, outreach
activities, video production and technical experience ee
e Feedback from References with projects similar in size & scope
e Expertise, experience and resources that can perform the necessary tasks required to deliver results.
¢ Vendor must provide information that demonstrates they possess the technical expertise that is
required for this scope of work
Overall Impression of Proposal
e Organization, clarity, conciseness and thoroughness.
e Approach to the scope of services and statement of works
® Proposed project schedule
e Completeness and thoroughness of the proposal, technical data and documentation, especially in the
following areas: television promotion, programming functions, and studio management (see RFP
‘Scope of Work’ for additional details} 10%
e Demonstration of understanding and support for the goals of PEG Access in general, and Nashua’s
objectives for this service specifically
Program Implementation which best meets the goals of functions of the vendor as expressed in the
Scope of Work; also assuring the greatest Nashua community participation in the television facilities
and resources. To include: proposed hours of operation; sources of external programming; ratios of
original and locally vs. non-locally produced content
Additional Considerations (applicable only when not in conflict with state or federal guidelines)
e Evidence of good organization and management practices
® Governance structure & tools (incl. written policies and procedures)
® Clearly defined roles and responsibilities of staff members and the Board of Directors
® Proposed plan fer broadest representation and inclusion of Nashua constituents in general 10%
membership and Board of Directors
® Qualification as a DBE
* Qualification of a Local preference
e Use of Environmentally sound products in proposed solution
Cost Proposal:
Cost proposal should include any payment schedule setting forth the frequency and amount of progress
payments, and identifying the tasks and deliverables (“milestones”) to be completed for each payment to be 40%

In regards to pricing on these particular proposals:

Regards,

BRBTV's cost is highest year 1 and is reduced in both years 2 & 3 (from year 1 cost)
CNSG‘s cost is lowest year 1 with a 5% increase each year thereafter

CMSG proposed 4 different options ~ not all options are of equal cost and service to BRBTV’s proposal
CMSG has requested additional support requirements from the City that were not factored into their cost
outlay (i.e. designated contract administrator & finance manager)

Kelly Parkinson
Purchasing Manager

City of Nashua

Purchasing Department
Administrative Services Division (603) 589-3330
229 Main Street - Nashua, NH 03060 Fax (603} 594-3233

May 19, 2022

TO: Mayor Donchess
Finance Committee

SUBJECT: Clarity of RFP Process for Public Access Television Contract

As part of our response to the recent letter received by Roy Tilsley, Jr of Bernstein, Shur, Sawyer & Nelson
representing Community Media Services Group | wanted to provide some additional information regarding the
Request for Proposal process followed for this advertisement.

RFP vs IFB definitions as included in the City of Nashua’s 2019 published Purchasing Manual

Request for Proposal (RFP) - (1) Alldocuments, whether attached or incorporated by reference, utilized for soliciting
{competitive) proposals. The RFP procedure permits negotiation of proposals and prices as distinguished from
competitive bidding and an Invitation for Bids. (2} The solicitation document used in the competitive negotiation
process. The procedure ailows changes to be made after proposals are opened and contemplates that the nature
of the proposals and/or prices offered will be negotiated prior to award.

Invitation for Bids {iFB) - (1) the solicitation document used for competitive sealed bidding, the customary method
used by state and local governments for the purchase of equipment, materials, supplies, and construction. (2)
All documents, whether attached or incorporated by reference, utilized for soliciting bids.

Important distinctions between these in regards to competitive bidding:

IFB’s — competitive bidding
e IFB may be used when you know “what” and “how”
e AnIFBis advertised to the public, bids are publicly opened, and the award is publicly announced.
e Negotiation is not normally used with competitive sealed bidding.
e IFB’s are evaluated solely by costs and the contract will be awarded solely on the basis of price.
RFP's — competitive proposals
¢ RFP may be used when you know “what” but not “how” or “how” may vary from one vendor to another.
¢ As with an IFB, the RFP must be announced to the public and specifies a due date.
e 6An®FP it is evaluated according to predetermined weighted standards that are stated in the RFP itself.
e = An RFP allows for negotiation and provides more flexibility in the awarding of the contract.
® There is no public opening requirement because receipt of the proposals is, under the RFP method, only
the first step, not the last step since cost is not the only factor in the awarding of the contract.
e Evaluation of the criteria for the technical and cost factors must be taken before award the contract can
be made.

Additional Factors
e Responsible Responding Vendors
* Local Preference

Criteria for weighing these proposals

Criteria

Weight

Qualifications and Experience:

Respondent must demonstrate adequate experience in the following areas: qualification, general
experience and technical competence of the project team

lnnovative/unique solutions or techniques

Experience with similar type/size projects in public or private television management services, outreach

deemed earned.

activities, video production and technical experience ioe
® Feedback from References with projects similar in size & scope
e Expertise, experience and resources that can perform the necessary tasks required to deliver results.
e Vendor must provide information that demonstrates they possess the technical expertise that is
required for this scope of work
Overall impression of Proposal
e Organization, clarity, conciseness and thoroughness.
e Approach to the scope of services and statement of works
* Proposed project schedule
* Completeness and thoroughness of the proposal, technical data and documentation, especially in the
following areas: television promotion, programming functions, and studio management (see RFP
‘Scope of Work’ for additional details) roe
* Demonstration of understanding and support for the goals of PEG Access in general, and Nashua’s
objectives for this service specifically
Program Implementation which best meets the goals of functions of the vendor as expressed in the
Scope of Work; also assuring the greatest Nashua community participation in the television facilities
and resources. To include: proposed haurs of operation; sources of external programming; ratios of
original and locally vs. non-locally produced content
Additional Considerations (applicable only when not in conflict with state or federal guidelines}
e Evidence of good organization and management practices
® Governance structure & tools (incl. written policies and procedures)
e Clearly defined roles and responsibilities of staff members and the Board of Directors
e Proposed plan for broadest representation and inclusion of Nashua constituents in general 10%
membership and Board of Directors
e Qualification as a DBE
* Qualification of a Local preference
¢ Use of Environmentally sound products in proposed solution
Cost Proposal:
Cost proposal should include any payment schedule setting forth the frequency and amount of progress
payments, and identifying the tasks and deliverables (“milestones”) to be completed for each payment to be 40%

In regards to pricing on these particular proposals:

e BRBTV's cost is highest year 1 and is reduced in both years 2 & 3 (from year 1 cost)
e CNSG’s cost is lowest year 1 with a 5% increase each year thereafter
e CMSG proposed 4 different options — not ail options are of equal cost and service to BRBTV’s proposal
e CMSG has requested additional support requirements from the City that were not factored into their cost
outlay (i.e. designated contract administrator & finance manager)
Regards,
Kelly Parkinson

Purchasing Manager

City of Nashua

Purchasing Department
Administrative Services Division (603) 589-3330
229 Main Street - Nashua, NH 03060 BES (cI) ieee

May 19, 2022

TO: Mayor Donchess
Finance Committee

SUBJECT: Clarity of RFP Process for Public Access Television Contract

As part of our response to the recent letter received by Roy Tilsley, Jr of Bernstein, Shur, Sawyer & Nelson
representing Community Media Services Group | wanted to provide some additional information regarding the
Request for Proposal process followed for this advertisement.

RFP vs IFB definitions as included in the City of Nashua’s 2019 published Purchasing Manual

Request for Proposal (RFP) - (1) All documents, whether attached or incorporated by reference, utilized for soliciting
{competitive) proposals. The RFP procedure permits negotiation of proposals and prices as distinguished from
competitive bidding and an Invitation for Bids. (2) The solicitation document used in the competitive negotiation
process. The procedure allows changes to be made after proposals are opened and contemplates that the nature
of the proposals and/or prices offered will be negotiated prior to award.

Invitation for Bids {1FB) - (1) the solicitation document used for competitive sealed bidding, the customary method
used by state and local governments for the purchase of equipment, materials, supplies, and construction. (2)
All documents, whether attached or incorporated by reference, utilized for soliciting bids.

important distinctions between these in regards to competitive bidding:

IFB’s — competitive bidding
e =|FB may be used when you know “what” and “how”
e AnlFBis advertised to the public, bids are publicly opened, and the award is publicly announced
e Negotiation is not normally used with competitive sealed bidding.
e = IFB’s are evaluated solely by costs and the contract will be awarded solely on the basis of price.
RFP's — competitive proposals
e RFP may be used when you know “what” but not “how” or “how” may vary from one vendor to another.
As with an IFB, the RFP must be announced to the public and specifies a due date.
An RFP it is evaluated according to predetermined weighted standards that are stated In the RFP itself.
An RFP allows for negotiation and provides more flexibility in the awarding of the contract.
There is no public opening requirement because receipt of the proposals is, under the RFP method, only
the first step, not the last step since cost is not the only factor in the awarding of the contract.
e Evaluation of the criteria for the technical and cost factors must be taken before award the contract can
be made.

°e ¢« @ @

Additional Factors
e Responsible Responding Vendors
e Local Preference

Criteria for weighing these proposals

Criteria Weight

Qualifications and Experience:

Respondent must demonstrate adequate experience in the following areas: qualification, general
experience and technical competence of the project team

Innovative/unique solutions or techniques

Experience with similar type/size projects in public or private television management services, outreach
activities, video production and technical experience

Feedback from References with projects similar in size & scope

Expertise, experience and resources that can perform the necessary tasks required to deliver results.
Vendor must provide information that demonstrates they possess the technical expertise that is
required for this scope of work

40%

Overall Impression of Proposal

Organization, clarity, conciseness and thoroughness.

Approach to the scope of services and statement of works

Proposed project schedule

Completeness and thoroughness of the proposal, technical data and documentation, especially in the

following areas: television promotion, programming functions, and studio management (see RFP

‘Scope of Work’ for additional details)

Demonstration of understanding and support for the goals of PEG Access in general, and Nashua’s

objectives for this service specifically
Program Implementation which best meets the goals of functions of the vendor as expressed in the
Scope of Work; also assuring the greatest Nashua community participation in the television facilities
and resources. To include: proposed hours of operation; sources of external programming; ratios of
original and locally vs. non-locally produced content

10%

Additional Considerations (applicable only when not in conflict with state or federat guidelines}

Evidence of good organization and management practices

Governance structure & tools (incl. written policies and procedures)

Clearly defined roles and responsibilities of staff members and the Board of Directors
Proposed plan for broadest representation and inclusion of Nashua constituents in general 10%
membership and Board of Directors

Qualification as a DBE

Qualification of a Local preference

Use of Environmentally sound products in proposed solution

Cost Proposal:
Cost proposal should include any payment schedule setting forth the frequency and amount of progress
payments, and identifying the tasks and deliverables (“milestones”) to be completed for each payment to be 40%

deemed earned.

In regards to pricing on these particular proposals:

e BRBTV's cost is highest year 1 and is reduced in both years 2 & 3 (from year 1 cost)
« CNSG’s cost is lowest year 1 with a 5% increase each year thereafter
e CMSG proposed 4 different options ~ not all options are of equal cost and service to BRBTV’s proposal
e CMS5G has requested additional support requirements from the City that were not factored into their cast
outlay (i.e. designated contract administrator & finance manager}
Regards,
Kelly Parkinson

Purchasing Manager

e x

9" December 2021
To whom it may concern

Dear Sirs

DocuSign Envelope ID: 6BE73965-BAEF-4791 -B930-DABA9714DC55

Ishe Mugwira
Client Adviser

Marsh Ltd

Milton Keynes (PO Box)
Milton Keynes Postal Address:
PO Box 3264

NR7 7BH

+44 (0) 1908 846029

Ishe. Mugwira@marsh.com
www.marsh.com

CONFIRMATION OF INSURANCE -— Darktrace PLC and Subsidiaries

As requested by the above client, we are writing to confirm that we act as Insurance Brokers to the client and that we
have arranged insurance(s) on its behalf as detailed below:

PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY &

INSURER:

POLICY NUMBER:

PERIOD OF INSURANCE:

LIMIT OF LIABILITY:

DEDUCTIBLES:

GEOGRAPHICAL LIMITS

EMPLOYERS LIABILITY

INSURER:

POLICY NUMBER:

PERIOD OF INSURANCE:

LOSS LIMIT:

DEDUCTIBLES:

CYBER LIABILITY

American International Group

0034033810

1 December 2021 to 30 November 2022, both dates inclusive

Blended Professional Indemnity and Cyber Liability - GBP 5million in the
aggregate.

GBP 350,000 each and every claim or loss and 12 hour waiting period (Network
Interruption).

Worldwide

CHUBB European Group SE
UKINTC92535
1 December 2021 to 30 November 2022, both dates inclusive

GBP 10,000,000 per occurrence
GBP 5,000,000 per occurrence (Terrorism)

NIL