The RTA selected nine proposals from the three proponents. These nine were considered throughout the evaluation process. Each of these proposals was based on the $2.50 maximum toll and 30 year concession term. Proposals other than these nine, which suggested alternative tolls and concession terms, were ruled out earlier as not feasible. The result was that the evaluation process focused largely on the upfront payment. A viable proposal that had the highest upfront payment was difficult to reject. Therefore, the upfront payment was a decisive criterion in the evaluation of bids. This gave a clear result in favour of CCM's non-conforming bid which offered the highest upfront payment.
The advantage of this tendering process (once the bids proposing different tolls or concession terms were ruled out) was that it made it easy to compare the bids. The weakness was the risk of pushing up the toll. We consider that the risks of this approach should have been explicitly notified and discussed at an appropriately senior level of government. That discussion should also have included consideration of what to do with the Business Consideration Fee component of the upfront payment. This is examined further in Section 2.5.