RFP GIS Boundary Alignment

1. RFP Process Summary
1.1.City of Missoula Description
The City of Missoula is a Montana municipal government within Missoula
County. The City of Missoula maintains authoritative GIS data for
administrative boundaries such as City Limits, wards, service areas, planning
areas, easements and more.
The City is in the process of adopting a new ESRI Parcel Fabric dataset
provided by Missoula County with significantly improved spatial accuracy. The
legacy administrative boundary layers were originally digitized and
maintained relative to the previous parcel geometry and now exhibit spatial
misalignment with the updated parcel fabric.
The City seeks a qualified GIS consultant to perform spatial adjustments and
data reconciliation to align boundary datasets with the new parcel fabric while
preserving legal intent and topological integrity. In summary, the consultant
shall:
Re-align administrative boundary datasets to the updated parcel fabric.
Preserve legal descriptions and jurisdictional intent.
Update/Correct Attributes (Book/Page, Date, URL) based on
the referenced document.
Maintain or improve topology and data integrity.
Deliver production-ready, enterprise-compliant GIS datasets.
For vendor's proposal development purposes, the project context includes:
Authoritative datasets involved: ~55
Number of features to evaluate for updates: ~19,700
GIS Infrastructure:
o ArcGIS Enterprise v11.4
o Versioned feature services can be provided (Branch or
Traditional)
o ArcGIS Pro v3.4
Current authoritative services can be discovered within the City's open
data portal at: www.MissoulaMaps.com
1.2.Purpose of the RFP
The purpose of this RFP is to solicit proposals from qualified GIS consultants
to make updates to the City's authoritative boundary and related GIS datasets

in support of the City's migration from an isolated parcel dataset to the
County's authoritative parcel dataset.
1.3.RFP Timeline
Milestone Date
RFP Issued Friday, April 9, 2026
Vendor Questions Due Friday, May 1, 2026
Proposals Due Wednesday, May 13, 2026
Notice of Intent to Award Friday, May 22, 2026
Target Contract Execution Monday, June 1, 2026
1.4.Contacts
All submitted questions should be directed to Eric Andersen by EMAIL ONLY
at GISRFP@ci.missoula.mt.us. A consolidated reply will be provided by the
City in the bid details.
2. Response Guidelines
2.1.Due Dates
Vendor responses must be received by the deadline specified in Section 1.3.
All documents and spreadsheets must be submitted using this proposal file
link File Link. Pricing and contractual terms must remain valid for a minimum
of ninety (90) days following submission.
2.2.Confidentiality / Legal Statement
Any vendor and its representatives must agree to hold information contained
in this RFP as confidential and use it solely for preparing a response.
Public Records: Materials submitted in response to this RFP may become
public records and subject to disclosure under applicable law. Vendors must
clearly mark proprietary or confidential information and provide justification
consistent with applicable public records requirements.
2.3.Vendor Response is Binding
Responses to this RFP may be incorporated into the final contract and may
be binding upon execution.
3. Project Overview and Requirements
3.1.Guiding Principals

The City maintains its authoritative datasets using ESRI technology
within ArcGIS Enterprise v11.4 in an enterprise geodatabase
environment with the ability to leverage either branch versioning or traditional
versioning.
The Missoula County Parcel Fabric is the authoritative spatial framework for
land-based geometry. City boundaries are maintained separately, not integrated
into the parcel fabric.
Under no circumstances shall the consultant edit, reshape, re-coordinate, or
otherwise modify parcel fabric features, parcel lines, parcel polygons, or
associated cadastral control data. Parcel geometry shall remain unchanged
throughout the project. All boundary datasets shall be adjusted to align with the
parcel fabric - not vice versa.
3.2.Objectives and Desired Outcomes
The consultant shall:
Re-align boundary datasets to the updated parcel fabric while preserving
legal intent.
Differentiate between:
o Survey-defined boundaries
o Parcel geometry-derived boundaries (eg east 10 feet of lot x)
o Cartographic/service area boundaries
o Infrastructure location-derived boundaries (eg relative to a service
line or main)
Reconstruct boundaries from parcel fabric geometry where legally
appropriate.
Maintain all attribution, unique identifiers, and relational integrity.
Ensure no introduction of:
o Sliver polygons;
o Gaps where contiguity is required;
o Overlaps where exclusivity is required.
Maintain versioning integrity if applicable based on agreed upon
methodology.
Document features that are discovered during the course of
research/work that are not included in the City's dataset. Documentation
shall include feature type and reference source.
3.3.Adjustment Methodology and Data Integration Development

The Consultant must describe a defensible adjustment approach for each data
category that addresses:
Dependencies between datasets (eg. city limits is dependent
upon/derived from the annexation resolutions; right-of-way derived
from parcel boundaries)
Document research
Methodology for adjustment
The proposal must include a suggested methodology for integrating edits into
the City's authoritative datasets. Integration of changes must be responsive to
changes in authoritative data over time. The City can provide traditional or
branched versioned data connections to authoritative datasets.
The City expressly prohibits:
Global affine transformations
Uniform rubbersheeting applied to entire feature classes
Bulk geometric shifting without parcel-level validation
Methodology must:
Differentiate between legally fixed boundaries and cartographic
boundaries. [is this being identified and part of a deliverable]
Avoid blind geometric transformations.
Ensure parcel fabric remains authoritative.
Spatial adjustment methods must:
Be parcel-edge driven where applicable.
Be legally defensible.
Be documented per data category.
Upon selection the Consultant shall submit a detailed Adjustment and Version
Management Plan including:
Dependencies between datasets (eg. city limits is dependent
upon/derived from the annexation resolutions; right-of-way derived
from parcel boundaries)
Document research methodology
Methodology for adjustment
Decision matrix for conflicting geometry
Documentation standards
Version management
Work shall not proceed until the Adjustment Plan is approved by the City.

3.4.Dataset-Specific Scope of Work
The Consultant shall evaluate and adjust the following data categories as
described below
3.4.1. Annexations and De-Annexations
Validate each annexation polygon against its referenced legal
description.
Rebuild boundaries from parcel fabric where applicable.
Preserve/Update/Correct ordinance/resolution reference attributes.
3.4.2. City Limits
Adjust City Limits to align precisely with parcel fabric boundaries
where limits are defined by:
Annexation resolutions/ordinances containing:
o Legal descriptions referencing parcels
o Right-of-way centerlines
o Section lines or survey control
3.4.3. Council Wards
Re-align ward boundaries to parcel edges where legally defined.
Ensure topology prohibits overlaps or gaps.
3.4.4. Neighborhood Boundaries
Evaluate whether boundaries are legal or cartographic.
Snap to parcel lines where appropriate.
Preserve adopted neighborhood extents.
3.4.5. Easements
Align easements to parcel boundaries and right-of-way lines where
applicable.
Preserve recorded geometry intent.
Identify and document easements that require city/legal review rather
than geometric adjustment.
3.4.6. Fire Districts
Snap to parcel boundaries or City Limits as applicable.
Ensure no gaps in service coverage within jurisdiction.
Avoid fragmentation of parcels across districts unless legally required.
3.4.7. Police Patrol Zones
Snap to parcel boundaries or City Limits as applicable.
Ensure no gaps in service coverage within jurisdiction.
Avoid fragmentation of parcels across patrol zones unless legally
required.

3.4.8. Infrastructure Operations Boundaries
Includes utility service areas, maintenance districts, and operational
response zones.
Snap to parcel and right-of-way, or ROW centerline boundaries as
applicable.
Ensure no gaps in service coverage within jurisdiction.
3.4.9. Public Parks
Align park boundaries with parcel fabric where parks are parcel-
defined.
Where parks span multiple parcels, reconstruct using parcel
aggregation.
Where parks are a subset of a parcel, document for City GIS to
evaluate and make adjustments outside of this contract.
Preserve legal park extent as defined by ordinance/resolution/plat.
3.4.10. Right-of-Way Obtained
Align acquired ROW polygons with parcel fabric geometry.
Preserve acquisition references.
Maintain separation from vacated ROW dataset.
3.4.11. Right-of-Way Vacated
Validate vacated geometry against ordinance/resolution.
Align with parcel updates resulting from vacation.
Ensure parcel ownership transitions are reflected without editing
parcel fabric.
3.4.12. Subdivisions
Align subdivision boundaries with parcel fabric boundaries unless
originally created otherwise.
Update features to include platted ROW for each platted
subdivision/COS.
Preserve/Update/Correct recording reference attributes.
3.4.13 Additional Administrative Boundaries
Align administrative boundaries with parcel fabric boundaries unless
originally created otherwise.
Preserve/Update/Correct recording reference/creation attributes,
when possible.
3.5.Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QAQC)

3.5.1. Topology Validation
The consultant shall provide a report representing topological validation that
shows:
No gaps in required contiguous layers
No overlaps in exclusive layers
Proper adjacency to parcel boundaries
No orphan polygons
3.5.2. Map Deliverables
The consultant shall provide a web-based application that facilitates review
of data changes. For example, a web app with a slider widget that allows
spatial comparison of before/after for each data category.
3.5.3. Change Documentation
The consultant shall provide a percentage of features edited per data
category.
3.6.Legal Integrity Safeguards
If geometry adjustments require interpretation of legal descriptions:
Consultant shall flag features for City review. The City and the
consultant will conduct weekly or semi-weekly Teams status meetings
to discuss these flagged items. Either the City will provide guidance
to the consultant on how to proceed or take over the completion of
any noted RFP Submittal Link feature.
Consultant shall not independently reinterpret ordinance language.
City retains authority for legal boundary determinations.
3.7.Deliverables
The Consultant shall deliver:
Adjustment and Version Management Plan.
Updated boundary feature classes (enterprise database ready) or
versioned data as determined by the approved Adjustment Plan.
File geodatabase backup.
Metadata updates.
Documentation of additional relevant features discovered.
QA/QC report.
Any project files provided to the City shall be ArcGIS Pro project file
(.aprx) format compatible with ArcPro v3.4.3
4. Vendor Response Requirements

4.1.Experience
Proposers must demonstrate:
Expertise with:
o ArcGIS Pro
o ESRI Parcel Fabric
o Spatial Adjustment tools
o Enterprise Geodatabases (SQL Server)
Experience with:
o Municipal boundary maintenance
o Cadastral datasets
o Interpretation of the various types of legal descriptions and
understanding of legal boundary implications
4.2.Customer References
Describe relevant project experience and provide examples of three (3) projects
of similar size and complexity. Provide three (3) references (municipal or county
government preferred) for completed projects of similar scope and complexity.
4.3.Project Team
Provide named project team with roles, related qualifications and experience,
and percentage allocation of time to this project. Subcontracts are not preferred.
4.4.Proposed Methodology
Describe technical approach to identifying dataset dependencies, document
research, and methodology for adjustment.
4.5.Proposed Data Integration
Describe your suggested methodology for integrating edits into the City's
authoritative datasets and maintaining version control over the timeline of the
project.
4.6.Proposed Quality Assurance / Quality Control
Describe approach to Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QAQC) throughout
the project.
4.7.Point of Contact
Identify the primary and secondary points of contact for this engagement.
4.8.Pricing
Provide detailed pricing.

4.9.Timeline
Provide detailed proposed timeline for this engagement. The City requires that
all work be completed on or before June 1, 2027.
5. Evaluation and Selection Process
Proposals will be evaluated based on technical approach, approach to quality
assurance, vendor experience, reference checks, cost, and timeline.
6. Terms and Conditions
6.1.The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, waive informalities,
request clarifications, and cancel or modify this solicitation.
6.2.The City is not liable for any costs incurred by vendors in preparing or submitting
responses.
6.3.Submission of a proposal constitutes acceptance of the requirements and
conditions of this RFP.