• Rain Forest Valencia responds to CAC that it has no objection to the information in its Contracting File being delivered to Parques Reunidos Valencia.
• In fact, it is still waiting for CAC to provide it with the documentation related to the Award and the possibility of knowing the other proposals presented.

With departure date June 22, CAC sent Rain Forest Valencia, SA a communication in which it was informed of the request from Parques Reunidos Valencia, SA, to exercise the right of access to file 7/14 de “Contracting the Management and Operation of the buildings and facilities of the Oceanogràfic and the Ágora and support to CACSA for the revitalization of the City of Arts and Sciences”. The operator of the Oceanogràfic until now refused to participate in the Tender considering that the new conditions established in the specifications made the contract not viable.

Rain Forest Valencia has responded, today, July 6, to said request stating: “has shown from the beginning the will and desire for the entire process to be carried out with maximum transparency.” and, in fact, it does not have no problem in providing said information to anyone who requests it, “By virtue of art. 12 of Law 19/2013 and article 105.b) of the Spanish Constitution, which both contemplate the right to information of all the people protected by the Constitution, without exception”.

In that line of bet on transparency, Rain Forest Valencia offered, together with its partners Costa Edutaninment SPA, EFS Mantres SLU and Italian Entertainment Network SPA, and prior to the Opening of the File, information about its Proposal regarding both the technical and economic content. Subsequently, Asprocio, another of the 3 bids competing in the contest, publicly explained its bid to Valencian society through the media.

On April 21, after the opening of envelope B “Technical Documentation of the File” and prior to the final award, Rain Forest Valencia requested information from CAC,SA Relative to:

• Review of the score obtained.
• Justification of comparison criteria with the rest of the offers.
• Criterion by which the maximum score was assigned to the offer with the highest valuation, taking into account that this point was not included in the Tender Document.
• And regarding the economic offer, “Since the disproportionate economic difference between the two is manifest, we consider it necessary to substantiate the Quality Plan to justify this economic disproportion that could otherwise be considered manifestly unfounded and therefore abnormal or disproportionate.”

On April 30, CAC, SA responded that the evaluation of the offers in the technical areas was carried out by 10 evaluation commissions, one per plan, with a total of 22 evaluators and 39 evaluations participating in them. AND “The offers have been comparatively analyzed and the valuation method has been applied equally to all bidders and in all criteria and sub-criteria.” And andn relation to the economic offer “The Contracting Committee has not considered the offer unfounded because supporting documentation is provided and, furthermore, it responds to the design and estimates provided by CAC, SA for this contract.".

Given the insufficient clarification that provided said response, with entry date June 18 Rain Forest Valencia requested the information complete about the awarding of the aforementioned tender file, of which as of today has not had a response.