Loading...
CC 2015-01-13_08d Agreements for Fee StudiesMEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DEBBIE MALICOAT, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES .l)JV'- SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AWARD OF CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENTS TO WOHLFORD CONSUL TING AND COLGAN CONSUL TING CORPORATION FOR USER FEE AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDIES DATE: JANUARY 13, 2015 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council: 1) Award a consultant services agreement to Wohlford Consulting for the preparation of a full cost of services (user fee) study. 2) Award a consultant services agreement to Colgan Consulting Corporation for the preparation of a development impact fee study. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: The FY 2014-15 budget appropriated $45,000 for the user fee study and $45,000 for the development impact fee study. The proposed contracts are within this appropriation amount. The studies will involve a significant amount of personnel resources from all departments, in particular the Administrative Services and Community Development Departments. BACKGROUND: The City completed a full cost of services (user fee) study in 2007. Typically, cities complete user fee studies about every five years and adjust their fees by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) in the intervening years. Making minor CPI adjustments is the approach the City has taken since the last fee study was completed. A new study will enable to City to ensure that cost calculations are updated to reflect the latest cost information. The study will identify the full costs of providing each service, including direct, indirect and overhead costs. Identifying the full cost of a service is the first step in determining the appropriate fee and/or subsidy for each service. As a general rule, the burden of paying for specific government services should be borne by those that benefit from the service or drive the need for the service. Some services benefit the community as a whole; therefore it may not be appropriate or desirable to charge user fees that achieve 100% cost recovery for all services. Item 8.d. - Page 1 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AGREEMENTS FOR USER FEE AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDIES JANUARY 13, 2015 PAGE2 The last update to the City's development impact fees was performed in 2000. Like user fees, it is appropriate to periodically review the development impact fee programs to ensure that fee calculations are as accurate as possible and that the fees are achieving the program objectives. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: The City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for comprehensive user fee and development impact fee studies in September 2014. A review team evaluated the three responses received on October 27, 2014 based on the following criteria: thoroughness and understanding of the tasks to be completed, background and experience in organizational analysis evaluation, the firm's expertise and overall experience of personnel assigned to the work, time required to accomplish the requested services, responsiveness to project requirements, public sector experience in municipal settings conducting similar studies, and cost. The review team recommends awarding contracts to Wohlford and Colgan. These consultants prepared the City's previous user fee and development impact fee reports and they are well acquainted with the operations and fee programs of the City. In addition, they have extensive experience preparing similar studies for other municipalities and their proposed compensation and timelines were acceptable to the City. Although the City will hire consultants to prepare these fee analyses, there is a significant amount of staff time that will be involved as well. Staff will provide in-depth cost and activity information and will work closely with the consultants to make sure all activities are identified. Staff in the Administrative Services and Community Development Departments are likely to be the most involved, however, every department will be involved in this project as each department has services it provides to the community and charges user fees for. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: • Accept staff's recommendation and approve agreements with Wohlford Consulting and Colgan Consulting • Do not approv.e agreements; or • Provide direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: Both consultants are qualified to perform the scope of work of these projects. They have familiarity with the City's operations and development programs due to their prior experience completing previous fee studies for the City. The consultant proposals are within the allocated budget for the project. Completion of fee studies will ensure that the City is able to set user and development impact fees that are legally defensible, compliant with State codes and achieve Council cost recovery goals. Item 8.d. - Page 2 CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AGREEMENTS FOR USER FEE AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDIES JANUARY 13, 2015 PAGE3 DISADVANTAGES: There are no identified disadvantages to the City other than the resources that will be dedicated to this effort. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental review is required for this item. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Thursday, January 8, 2015. The Agenda and report were posted on the City's website on Friday, January 9, 2015. No public comments were received. Attachments: 1. Agreement for Consultant Services with Wohlford Consulting 2. Agreement for Consultant Services with Colgan Consulting Corporation Item 8.d. - Page 3 ATTACHMENT 1 AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of 2015, between WOHLFORD CONSUL TING ("Consultant"), and the CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, a Municipal Corporation ("City"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM This Agreement shall commence on , 2015 and shall remain and continue in effect until all services set forth herein are completed, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES Consultant shall perform the tasks described and comply with all terms and provisions~set forth in City's Request for Proposal, attached as Exhibit "A" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and the Consultant's Proposal, attached as Exhibit "B" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 3. PERFORMANCE Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his/her ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. AGREEMENT ADMINISTRATION City's Director of Administrative Services shall represent City in all matters pertaining to the administration of this Agreement. Chad Wholford shall represent Consultant in all matters pertaining to the administration of this Agreement. 5. PAYMENT The City agrees to pay the Consultant in accordance with the payment rates and terms set forth in Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated. herein by this reference. 6. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE (a) The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such Item 8.d. - Page 4 suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remaind~r of this Agreement. (b) In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to 'Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 5. 7. TERMINATION ON OCCURRENCE OF STATED EVENTS This Agreement shall terminate automatically on the occurrence of any of the following events: (a) Bankruptcy or insolvency of any party; (b) Sale of Consultant's business; or (c) Assignment of this Agreement by Consultant without the consent of City. (d) End of the Agreement term specified in Section 1. 8. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT (a) The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. (b) If the City Manager or his/her delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, he/she shall cause to be served upon the Consultant a written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 9. LAWS TO BE OBSERVED. Consultant shall: (a) Procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices which may be necessary and incidental to the due and lawful prosecution ~of the services to be per;formed by Consultant under this Agreement; Item 8.d. - Page 5 (b) Keep its~lf fully informed of all existing and proposed federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees which may affect those engaged or employed under this Agreement, any materials used in Consultant's performance under this Agreement, or the conduct of the services under this Agreement; (c) At all times observe and comply with, and cause all of its employees to observe and comply with all of said laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees mentioned above; (d) Immediately report to the City's Contract Manager in writing any discrepancy or inconsistency it discovers in said laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees mentioned above in relation to any plans, drawings, specifications, or provisions of this Agreement. (e) The City, and its officers, agents and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this Section. 10. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS (a) Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts, and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate Tecords of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records; shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records; shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary; and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to this Agreement. Such 'records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. (b) Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models,· computer files, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sol53 property of the City and may be used, reused, or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files, Consultant shall make available to the City, at the Consultant's office and upon reasonable written _request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring, and printing computer files. 11. INDEMNIFICATION Item 8.d. - Page 6 (a) Indemnification for Professional Liability. When the law establishes a professional standard of care for Consultant's Services, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless City and any and all of its officials, employees and agents ("Indemnified Parties") from and against any and all losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including attorney's fees and costs to the extent same are caused in whole or in part by any negligent or wrongful act, error or omission of Consultant, its officers, agents, employees or subcontractors or any entity or individual that Consultant shall bear the legal liability thereof) in the performance of professional services under this agreement. (b) Indemnification for Other Than Professional Liability. Other than in the performance of professional services and to the full extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, and any and all of its employees, officials and agents from and against any liability (including liability for claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, including attorneys fees and costs, court costs, interest, defense costs, and expert witness fees), where the same arise out of, are a consequence of, or are in any way attributable to, in whole or in part, the performance of this Agreement by Consultant or by any individual or entity for which Consultant is legally liable, including but not limited to officers, agents, employees or subcontractors of Consultant. (c) General Indemnification Provisions. Consultant agrees to obtain executed indemnity agreements with provisions identical to those set forth here in this section from each and every subcontractor or any other person or entity involved by, for, with or on behalf of Consultant in the performance of this agreement. In the event Consultant fails to obtain such indemnity obligations from others as required here, Consultant agrees to be fully responsible according to the terms of this section. Failure of City to monitor compliance with these requirements imposes no additional obligations on City and will in no way act as a waiver of any rights hereunder. This obligation to indemnify and-defend City as set forth here is binding on the successors, assigns or heirs of Consultant and shall survive the termination of this agreement or this section. 12. INSURANCE Consultant shall maintain prior to the beginning of and for the duration of this Agreement insurance coverage as specified in Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. 13. INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT (a) Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent Consultant. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents, except Item 8.d. - Page 7 as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees, or agents are in any manner officers, employees, or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. (b) No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 14. UNDUEINFLUENCE Consultant declares and warrants that no undue influence or pressure was or is used against or in concert with any officer or employee of the City of Arroyo Grande in connection with the award, terms or implementation of this Agreement, including any method of coercion, confidential financial arrangement, or financial inducement. No officer or employee of the City of Arroyo Grande will receive compensation, directly or indirectly, from Consultant, or from any officer, employee or agent of Consultant, in connection with the award of this Agreement or any work to be conducted as a result of this Agreement. Violation of this Section shall be a material breach of this Agreement entitling the City to any and all remedies at law or in equity. 15. NO BENEFIT TO ARISE TO LOCAL EMPLOYEES No member, officer, or employee of City, or their designees or agents, and no public official who exercises authority over or responsibilities with respect to the project during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any agreement or sub-agreement, or the proceeds thereof, for work to be performed in connection with the project performed under this Agreement. 16. RELEASE OF INFORMATION/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (a) All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories, or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. Item 8.d. - Page 8 (b) Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request fo'r admissions, or other discovery request, court order, or subpoena from any person or party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing, or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 17. NOTICES Any notice which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, which provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by notice: To City: To Consultant: 18. ASSIGNMENT City of Arroyo Grande Director of Administrative Services 300 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Wohlford Consulting Chad Wohlford, Principal 372 Florin Road, # 293 Sacramento, CA 95831 The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, without the prior written consent of the City. 19. GOVERNING LAW The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties, and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the superior or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Arroyo Grande. Item 8.d. - Page 9 20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, and statements, or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own ind~pendent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 21. TIME City and Consultant agree that time is of the essence in this Agreement. 22. CONTENTS OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL AND PROPOSAL Consultant is bound by the contents of the City's Request for Proposal, Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and the contents of the proposal submitted by the Consultant, Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. In the event of conflict, the requirements of City's Request for Proposals and this Agreement shall take precedence over those contained in the Consultant's proposals. 23. CONSTRUCTION The parties agree that each has had an opportunity to have their counsel review this Agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. The captions of the sections are for convenience and reference only, and are not intended to be construed to define or limit the provisions to which they relate. 24. AMENDMENTS Amendments to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be made only with the mutual written consent of all of the parties to this Agreement. 25. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and ·repres.ents that he/she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. Item 8.d. - Page 10 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE By: __________ _ Jim Hill, Mayor Attest: - Kelly Wetmore, City Clerk Approved As To Form: Timothy J. Carmel, City Attorney CONSULTANT By: ___________ _ Chad Wohlford Its: ------------ Principal Consultant Item 8.d. - Page 11 EXHIBIT A CITY'S REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Item 8.d. - Page 12 OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR A FULL COST ANALYSIS OF USER AND ' DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE SERVICES Item 8.d. - Page 13 Contents GENERAL INFORMATION ..................................................................................................................................... 12 Schedule of Proposal activities (ALL TIMES PACIFIC) ............................................................................................. 12 DISCRETION AND LIABILITY W AIYER .............................................................................................................. 13 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS ............................................................................................................................. 14 OUTLINE OF SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED ........................................................................................................ 14 FORMAT OF PROPOSAL ......................................................................................................................................... 16 FINAL COMMENTS .................................................................................................................................................. 16 ATTACHMENT A -SAMPLE CITY CONTRACT ................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. Page 11 Item 8.d. - Page 14 GENERAL INFORMATION The City o(Arroyo Grande is located on California's central coast approximately half way between Los Angeles and San Francisco and has a population of approximately 17,000. The City is currently a General Law city, operating under the City Council/City Manager form of government; however in the November 2014 election, residents will vote on whether the City should become a Charter City. Arroyo Grande is a· full service city, with police, streets, engineering, parks, recreation, water and sewer services. Additionally, residents in the neighboring cities of Pismo Beach, Grover Beach, and Oceano use many of Arroyo Grande's recreational services. Fire services are provided through the Five Cities Fire Authority, a joint powers authority established between the City of Arroyo Grande, the City of Grover Beach, and the Oceano Community Services District. The City has established user fees for a variety of services and is seeking a consultant to review and update existing user fees, as well as identify any new fees, as appropriate. The last formal fee study was conducted in 2007, and as a result, the City Council has requested that a new study be completed. A copy of the most recently adopted Master Fee Schedule is available on the City's website at http://www.arroyogrande.org/documentcenter/view/34. Water and Sewer user fees are NOT included in the scope of work for this study. In addition, the City wishes to engage a consultant to review and update adopted development impact fees (AB 1600) for transportation, public safety, parks, recreation, water, and traffic. The last formal impact fee study was completed in 2000. The City currently has eight (8) impact fees in place. Those impact fees are: 1. Traffic signalization 2. Transportation facility development 3. Drainage facility 4. Recreation community center 5. Park improvement 6. Police impact 7. Fire impact 8. Water neutralization Schedule of Proposal activities (ALL TIMES PACIFIC) •' . Schedule · Distribution of RFP September 22, 2014 Deadline for submission of questions to be addressed at October 3, 2014 the Pre-Proposal Teleconference Optional Pre-Proposal Teleconference October 7, 2014 2:00 om Proposal submission October 27, 2014 5:00 Dm Proposal review October 27 -Nov 7, 2014 Notification to all proposers Week ofNovember 10, 2014 Oral presentations, as needed Week of November 17, 2014 Notification to finalists December 7, 2014 Contract approval by City Council January 13, 2015 "'Project to commence By Januarv 31, 2015 Page 12 Item 8.d. - Page 15 The City has made every effort to include sufficient information within this Request for Proposal for a consultant to prepare a responsive, comprehensive proposal. In order to achieve an equitable dissemination of information, a pre-proposal teleconference will be held to allow all -interested firms/consultants to ask questions for the mutual benefit of all involved. The timing of the proposal process is subject to change, depending on the needs of the City, but is anticipated as follows: a) Distribution of Request for Proposals: September 22, 2014 b) Optional Pre-proposal Teleconference: City staff will meet collectively with firm/consultant representatives seeking additional information about the proposal process and the RFP. All firms/consultants interested in submitting a proposal are encouraged to attend the pre-proposal teleconference. The teleconference is scheduled for October 7, 2014 beginning at 2:00 pm (PST). Teleconference phone number and log in information can be obtained by contacting Debbie Malicoat at dmalicoat@arroyogrande.org no later than October 3, 2014. Additionally, any questions to be addressed at the pre-proposal teleconference should be submitted via email to Debbie Malicoat at dmalicoat@arroyogrande.org no later than October 3, 2014. c) Proposal Submission: Proposals must be clearly marked and delivered directly to the Administrative Services Department no later than 5:00 pm, October 27, 2014. Late submissions after the deadline or proposals delivered via fax will not be accepted. A total of three (3) identical proposals must be submitted and labeled as follows: City of Arroyo Grande Attention: Debbie Malicoat, Director of Administrative Services Fee Study RFP 300 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 d) Proposal Review: Our review committee will evaluate each proposal submitted. It is anticipated that the review process will be completed by November 10, 2014. e) Notification to all proposers: We anticipate sending written notification to all firms regarding the outcome of the review and contract award process by November 10, 2014. f) Oral Presentations, as needed: During the notification to all proposers, finalists will be notified to schedule an oral interview during the week of November 17, 2014. Oral Interviews will take place at: City Hall, 3 00 East Branch Street. g) Notification to finalists: All finalists will be notified of final decision by December 7, 2014. Upon written request, we will provide a copy of the successful proposal once the contract is executed. DISCRETION AND LIABILITY WAIVER The City reserves the right to exercise discretion and apply its judgment with respect to all proposals submitted. The City reserves the right to reject all proposals, either in part or in its entirety, or to request and obtain, from one or more of the consulting firms submitting proposals, supplementary information as may be necessary for City staff to analyze the proposals. Page 13 Item 8.d. - Page 16 6. Prepare a report that identifies each facility or service, its full cost, current and recommended cost recovery levels. The report should identify the direct cost, the indirect cost, and the overhead cost for each service; and provide a model for adjusting these fees and rates for the City's current and future needs. 7. Recommend appropriate fees and charges. Recommended fees are based on the analysis, together with the appropriate subsidy percentage for those fees where full cost recovery may be unrealistic. 8. Prepare a report that identifies the current fees, and recommended fees. The report must also identify percentage change, cost recovery percentage, and fee comparison with other San Luis Obispo County cities or California cities that are comparable to Arroyo Grande. A survey comparison of rates and fees with similar cities will be used to help determine the appropriate level of subsidy, if any. 9. Report on other matters that come to your attention in the course of your evaluation that in your professional opinion the City should consider. 10. Present the findings to the City's management group and make necessary adjustments as requested. 11. Prepare and deliver presentations to the City Council to facilitate understanding of the plan and its implications for the City; provide necessary adjustments as requested. 12. Provide the City with an electronic copy of the final comprehensive study, including related schedules and cost documentation in a format that can be edited and updated by City staff to accommodate changes in the organization or changes in costs. 13. Develop or modify the existing model for adjusting fees/rates; include the addition of potential service areas, future service enhancements, and the ability to calculate the estimated costs of providing the service under consideration. 14. Prepare a final fee study report and provide five bound copies, one unbound copy and a single PDF file of the plan that can be made available to City staff. Any Master fee schedule revisions developed shall also be made available to the City electronically, providing the ability to add or delete and/or update information as needed. 15. Project Budget for the Comprehensive Fee Study -a description of the project budget itemized according to individual tasks. Project budget should include: a. A project schedule with activities, milestones, and deliverables. b. Project budget defined, at minimum, as follows: i. By task with a collective total by milestone and deliverable; 1. Labor rates for all project team members; 2. General overhead rates; 3. Costs for expenses such as printing, travel and attendance at meetings. c. Proposed services to be referred to a sub-contractor anticipated sub-contractors and anticipated costs for these services. 16. Consult with the City staff should it become necessary to defend the City's User Fees as a result of any legal or other challenge. If the consultant/firm believes that additional tasks are warranted, they must be clearly identified in the proposal. Water and Sewer user fees are NO'f·1tfoiudea in 'the scope of ~ork for this study. Page 15 Item 8.d. - Page 17 FORMAT OF PROPOSAL In order for us to adequately compare and evaluate proposals objectively, all proposals must be twenty- five (25) pages or less. Transmittal Letter (one page maximum): The letter should provide a brief summary of the proposal, concisely describing the project, its goals and the proposed plan of implementation. The letter should be addressed to Debbie Malicoat and signed by the Client Manager assigned to the project. Consultant/Firm Profile: Please respond to the following sections: Overview: Provide a general overview of the firm/consultant(s) that will be assigned to the project. Experience: Describe the firm/consultant's experience in conducting similar fee studies. Include information regarding the resumes of consultant(s) that will be assigned and any other relevant information to demonstrate the firm's experience with engagements of similar size and scope. Approach: Describe the firm/consultant's approach used to gather and analyze data, expected interaction with City staff and estimated time line for completing the scope of work. Additional Information: Describe any other information not previously mentioned that the consultant believes should be given consideration. This could include any additional tasks not included in the Required Services section above. References: (minimum' 3) specifically in local/municipal/county/state agencies. • Name of agency • Contact name to include: title, phone number and email • Population of jurisdiction • Number of employees • Project start and completion date • Brief summary of project Pricing: Provide proposed price for the services as well as any proposed payment terms. FINAL COMMENTS The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, cancel all or part of this RFP, waive any minor irregularities and to request additional information from proposing firms. By requesting proposals, the City is in no way obligated to award a contract or pay expenses of the proposing consultant in connection with the preparation or submission of a proposal. The City's decision to award a contract will be based many factors including but not limited to service, cost, experience and quality. No single factor, such as cost, will determine the final decision to award. The City of Arroyo Grande appreciates. the efforts all the consultants have put forth in responding to the Request for Proposal. Page 16 Item 8.d. - Page 18 EXHIBIT B CONSULTANT'S PROPOSAL Page 17 / Item 8.d. - Page 19 L l L l L L L L L L l L L l l L L OF Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees for the City of Arroyo Grande October 27, 2014 WOHLFORD CONSULTING Chad Wohlford, Principal Consultant 372 Florin Road, #293 Sacramento, CA 95831 (916) 205-7050 chad wohlfordconsultin .com COLGAN CONSULTING Joseph Colgan, President 3323 Watt Avenue, #131 Sacramento, CA 95821 (916) 205-2446 ·col an col an-consultin .com L~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Item 8.d. - Page 20 L (L L I L L [ L \L (L I 'l IL 'L I[ I c October 27, 2014 Debbie Malicoat Director of Administrative Services City of Arroyo Grande 300 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Re: Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Dear Ms. Malicoat: We are very pleased to provide you with this proposal to partner with the City of Arroyo Grande to provide Full Cost Analysis of User.and Development Impact Fees. Wohlford Consulting and Colgan Consulting are dedicated to helping cities improve their understanding and recovery of costs, and we sincerely believe that our superior study approach and consultant experience will best help you achieve your goals. We are submitting a joint proposal that combines our services for the user fee study and the development impact fee study. The principals of our firms have a long-standing professional association and respect for one another. We are continuing this relationship through our proposal to the City of Arroyo Grande that expresses our intention to work together to accomplish the City's needs in the most effective and efficient manner possible. Our two firms bring tremendous skill and experience to this engagement, as well as proven methodologies and project approaches. Furthermore, Chad Wohlford and Joe Colgan performed the City of Arroyo Grande's most recent User Fee and Impact Fee studies, respectively. Consequently, we are familiar with the City's current fee structures. Updated studies with us will utilize the same general methodologies, albeit improved over the intervening years, which will ensure a consistent approach to help the City avoid radical swings in results and ensure that any -significant changes are due to cost factors, and not changes in methodology or consultant approach. Thank you for the opportunity to propose our services to you. We look forward to talking with you more about how Colgan Consulting and Wohlford Consulting can help you achieve the City's goals through this project. Please feel free to contact us at any time if you have questioq.s or need clarification of the proposal. Sincerely, ~L~c-nmm Wohlford Consulting 372 Florin Road, #293 Sacramento, CA 95831 (916) ~05-7050 Joa-~:~~v-- Colgan Consulting 3323 Watt Avenue, #131 Sacramento, CA 95821 (916) 205-2446 Item 8.d. - Page 21 i[ I \l (l I [ [ l I \l I l IL I l [ L /[ \l L il t (l I•-"- City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees jTable of Contentsl EXECUTIVE SUMMARY · " . · · . ' ... · · -' ·. ·» . .-· -· • ' of'•·'• COMPANY INTRODUCTIONS . . . .. · · · · · COLGAN CONSULTING 2 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ WOHLFORD CONSULTING 2 ·USER FEE STUDY: OVERVIEW AND EXPERIENCE · -. · -. -·":". · «: ; :{' COMPANY HISTORY 3 PROJECT STAFFING PLAN: ONE PROJECT-ONE CONSULTANT 3 Chad Wohlford, MPP A •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•.•••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••.••••••••••• 3 USER FEE STUDY: REFERENCES '· ., · . .. . .. . ·· · . Experience with Similar Projects ......................................................................... 5 Client References ................................................................................................... 5 .USER FEE STUDY: APPROACH AND.WORK PLAN .. · '.. .. ... · STUDY APPROACH 6 Partnership with the City of Arroyo Grande ...................................................... 6 Quality' Control ...................................................................................................... 6 METHODOLOGIES AND WORK PLANS 7 Study Approach ..................................................................................................... 7 SCOPE OF SERVICES 8 Specific Project Deliverables ................................................................................. 8 Departments ~nd Service Areas Included in the Cost of Service Study •••...•.• 12 PROJECT SCHEDULE 13 USER FEE STUDY: COST PH.OPOSAL°" : .; ·. .' . ·. _. _· -. COST PROPOSAL 14 Project Budget Detail ............................................................................................ 15 WOHLFORD CONSUL TING I COLGAN CONSULTING Item 8.d. - Page 22 [l 1l .[ IL [L [ [ [ ·[ \l jl [ L L L L l L L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees [Table of Contentsl (Continued) IMPACT FEE STUDY: OVERVIEW AND EXPERIENCE ·:IMPACT FEE.STUDY: REFERENCES AND CLIENT Lisi--· .. · ." --·:~---: . ---~ _: IMPACT FEE STUDY: APPROACH AND WORK'PLAN : · . ·· · · .... ;-. .. .,t_.~·t -.. >·"::'. APPROACH 18 ~----~~-~~-~-~--~----~-- LEG AL CONSULTING DISCLAIMER 19 FACILITY TYPES COVERED BY TBJS PROPOSAL 19 INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY 20 :WORK-PLAN 20 PROJECT TIMELINE 23 IMPACTFEEST(JDY: COST PROPOSAL ,. ~ · .· :, .. ,_ .. ,-.'-: .. · ... · NOT-TO-EXCEED COST ___________________ 24 BILLING 24 AD;DITIONAL SERVICES 24 CONCLUSION -': · · · " . · · · . " : ·,:.: .. · ' . CONCLUDING COMMENTS 25 Duration of Proposal ............................................................................................ 25 Authorized Signatures ......................................................................................... 25 Thank You ............................................................................................................. 25 WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING ii Item 8.d. - Page 23 ll l \l L ! [ [ l IL [ I l l l (l IL IL l \l l l City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees : EXECUTIVE SUMMARY · · .- , . . .. .. . . Wohlford Consulting and Colgan Consulting propose to partner with the City of Arroyo Grande to complete a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fee Services. This study will address two of the primary opportunities for the City to recover its costs for services and capital infrastructure provided by the City. The total proposed cost of this study is $70,475, including $29,975 for the User Fee Study and $40,500 for the Development Impact Fee Study. This project fee covers all services described in this proposal, including all associated expenses. This User Fee portion of the study will employ a unit cost build-up approach to determine the total reasonable cost of individual department services (e.g., Building permits) based upon the effort of staff to provide the services. The study will also identify annual revenue impacts and subsidy information. The City and consultant will work together to develop recommendations and facilitate fee changes. The goal is to provide clear cost and subsidy information to allow City leaders to set fees to recover the desired portion of the full cost (0-100%). Our communication plan will also help City leaders and the public to understand and accept the results. The Development Impact Fee portion of the study will establish the cost -of capital improvements, vehicles, and equipment needed to serve new development by analyzing the impacts of development on each type of facility addressed in this study. Eligible costs will be allocated to various types of development in proportion to their impacts, so that the fees comply with the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act (AB 1600), the Quimby Act (where it applies), and relevant case law. The overall approach to the impact fee analysis, as presented in this study, represents the process typically used to calculate defensible impact fees, but it can be varied to meet the specific situation in Arroyo Grande. User Fee Studies and Development Impact Fee Studies normally operate independent of each other, with different schedules, City staff involvement, objectives, methodologies, and deliverables. This proposal presents the studies separately, in order to give the City a more discrete opportunity to evaluate the services. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page I of25 Item 8.d. - Page 24 !l i[ I !l L l L l I ll I I [ L l l [ l [ \l 'l L (C .- City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees . . . COMPANY INTRODlCTIONS · . · · COLGAN CONSULTING Colgan Consulting Corporation is a small Sacramento-based firm specializing in development impact fees for California cities, counties, and special districts. Contact Information: Colgan Consulting Corporation 3323WattAvenue#131 Sacramento, CA 95821 916.205.2446 jcolgan@colgan-consulting.com Business Type: Corporation (California Corporation# 2650594) Responsible Person: Joseph Colgan, President and Project Manager Years in Business: Colgan Consulting has been in business since May 2004. Years of Experience Joseph Colgan, project manager for this study, has specialized in California impact fee studies for more than 24 years. WOHLFORD CONSULTING Wohlford Consulting is a small Sacramento-based firm specializing in cost studies for California cities, counties, and special districts. Contact Information: Wohlford Consulting 3 72 Florin Road #293 Sacramento, CA 95831 916.205.7050 chad@wohlfordconsulting.com Business Type: Sole Proprietor Responsible Person: Chad Wohlford, Principal Consultant and Project Manager Years in Business: Wohlford Consulting has been in business since 2005. Years of Experience: Chad Wohlford, project manager for this study, has specialized in California fee studies for more than 16 years. WOHLFORD CONSUL TING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page2 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 25 IL ' \l ' (L I l l L L l L l il l l L (L L l L l City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees · ·: USER FEE STU~Y:.OVERVIEW AND EXPERIENCE . - This section of the proposal covers the User Fee Study, which will be performed by Wohlford Consulting. COMPANY HISTORY Wohlford Consulting was founded in early 2005 by Chad Wohlford, MPPA, who left a key position in a major national government consulting firm to start an independent consulting practice (sole proprietorship) focused on quality performance to .meet the needs of local government ~gencies. The practice, based in Sacramento, California, is entirely owned by Mr. Wohlford, which ensures that all actions of the practice adhere to his standards of excellence. PROJECT STAFFING PLAN: ONE PROJECT-ONE CONSULTANT The only consultant assigned to this project will be Chad Wohlford, MPPA. ·I will personally complete all technical and project management tasks related to this study, including the interviews, meetings, data collection, analytical work, documentation, and presentations. The assignment of a single consultant to conduct all project activities is a great advantage to the City. This will ensure a consistent and stable approach, methodology, and style across all departments, divisions, tasks, and other aspects of the study. The City does not need to worry about communication breakdowns, inefficiencies, time delays, "trainee" errors, consultant reassignment, or other problems that arise when multiple consultants of varying experience and skill work on the same project, which is often the case with larger firms. In addition, the person who presents the results to the departments, City Council, or the public, will be the same person who conducted the analysis, thus enhancing the credibility of the study and the quality of the presentations. Ultimately, Arroyo Grande can rest assured that you ".Vill have only the highest quality and most experienced consultant working on everything. Chad Wohlford, MPPA Every consulting firm, large or small, is simply a collection of the staff consultants who work for it. The key to determining the potential success of a project is to understand the quality of the consultant that will work directly on your project. The years of experience of the consultant matters far more than the years the firm has been in business. Ch~d Wohlford has evaluated government costs and operations for over 27 years, and he specializes in cost analysis, with particular expertise in the cost-based analysis of building fees. His work has been cited in the second edition of the seminal building fee text, Establishing Building Permit Fees (Bouse, 2005), published by the International Codes Council. In addition, he has conducted over 100 studies and evaluated at least 30 functional areas for over 70 cities, counties, districts, and states, including the City of Arroyo Grande. Mr. Wohlford holds a Masters in Public Policy and Administration. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page3 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 26 0 \l (L \[ l [ L L L IL (L L L L l . City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a FuJI Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Mr. Wohlford's experience and background is described in greater detail below: Consulting Experience Mr. Wohlford is the founder and principal consultant for Wohlford Consulting (est. 2005). He specializes in cost of service analysis, user fee development, and cost allocation. In addition to a general expertise in cost analysis, he has developed a particular expertise and reputation in the critical area of cost-based analysis of building and safety fees, including designation as an "expert witness" and references in a published building fee text. Prior to founding Wohlford Consulting, Mr. Wohlford worked for seven years as a consultant, project manager, and state dir~ctor for Max:imus, a large, national, publicly traded, consulting firm. At Max:imus, Mr. Wohlford was the Director of Cost Services for California/Nevada, where he performed a cost and management studies and managed all aspects of the practice. He developed or enhanced the primary cost of service analysis techniques, processes, tools, protocols, and software used by the firm in the West and propagated to other states. He also trained and mentored many fee study consultants. It is important to note that, even as management responsibilities increased, Mr. Wohlford continued to maintain a high workload of direct project services for clients. Mr. Wohlford's contribution to each consulting engagement is a rare combination of significant technical experience, effective project management, and strong communication skills. He has managed and conducted a wide variety of cost analysis studies for government clients. He is a detail-oriented and hands-on consultant and project manager who excels in communicating with clients. A subsequent section of this proposal provides a more detailed listing of clients and functional areas senred. Direct Government Experience Mr. Wohlford has worked or consulted for government agencies since 1986. In particular, his experience from the "inside" of government operations has allowed him to become very knowledgeable in the functions, environment, and financing of various local government disciplines. His 12 years of internal government employment (and general· roles) included analytical and management roles for: • Sacramento County Department of Health and Human Services • Sacramento County Parking Enterprise • Sacramento County Department of General Services • Sacramento County Department of Health • City of San Luis Obispo -Human Relations Commission • State of California -California Conservation Corps • l:J.S. Department of Commerce -International Trade Administration WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page4of25 Item 8.d. - Page 27 _ City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees : . · USERFEESTUDY:REFERENCES , . . . -· : . . . Experience with Similar Projects ( L Mr. Wohlford has worked on over 100 user fee, cost allocation, operational analysis, and other 1 cost of service analysis studies-primarily in California. His past clients include cities and ; L counties ranging in size of population from over a million to less than 6,000. L I IL L IL I IL I iL . ·I \L IL I iL I IL L L l L Client References The impressions of past clients of the propos~d consultant are the best indicator of what you can expect for your study. Chad Wohlford has served over 70 different jurisdictions (some for multiple projects) in over 30 functional areas. I encourage you to contact any past clients, so I would be pleased to provide you with more comprehensive contact information at your request. The following list is a selection of references that comprise a recent representative sample of project types for Chad Wohlford: Client Contact Type of Study City of Santa Rosa • Development Services Cost of Chuck Regalia, Community Dev. Director Services Study (2013) (707) 543-3189 . • Population: 170,000 cregalia@srcity.org • # ofEmnlovees: 1,239 Imperial County Env. Health Dept. • Cost of Service Study (2011) JeffLamoure, Deputy Director • Population: 181,000 (760)336-8530 • #of Employees: 2,254 jefflamourelalco.imperial.ca.us City of Las Vegas • Building Fee Study (2014) Chris Knight, Dir. of Building and Safety • Cost-based unit fee analysis (702) 229-6257 . • Population: 589,000 chknight@LasVegasNevada.gov • # ofEmnlovees: 3,500 City ofThousand Oaks • Citywide User Fee Study (2013) Brent Sakaida, Budget Manager • Building Fee Study (2011) (805) 449-2259 • Population: 129,000 bsakaida@toaks.org • # ofEmnlovees: 489 City of Coronado • Cost Allocation Plan (2010) Jerome Torres, Sr. Mgt. Analyst • Citywide User Fee Study (2011) (619) 522-7305 • Population: 23,000 jtorres@coronado.ca.us • # ofEmnlovees: 233 City of Chico • Development Services Cost of Mark Wolfe, Planning Services Director Services Study (2014) (530) 879-6801 • Population: 88,000 mark.wolfe@chicoca.gov ~-#of Employees: 353 WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 5 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 28 I L L L L IL \L I [L I . IL 'L L L ·L l L L L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees · USER FEE STUDY: APPROACH AND WORK PLAN · : . . ~ STUDY APPROACH The City will benefit from th~ proven approach and quality-based methodologies employed by Wohlford Consulting to perform my studies. The professional analysis of costs and related data, along with a serious attention to detail, results in a top quality product and results that you can be proud to share with your City Council, other departments, the public, and your neighboring counties and cities. A description of the key features and advantages of my approach usually encompasses several pages in my proposals, but given the space limitations here, only the most critical ones are described below: Partnership with the City of Arroyo Grande One word summarizes my overall approach: PARTNERSHIP. The City of Arroyo Grande can engage a consultant with tremendous experience in government cost and operations and many dozens of client organizations. This consultant is a solid expert in the field of government user fees with a strong perspective backed by years of professional work. Nevertheless, I never let my experience or expertise get in the way of making sure that your study fits you. I understand that the best techniques are insufficient, maybe even counterproductive, if they are not adapted to the individual circumstances of each client. l will not apply a cookie-cutter approach or assume that I already know ''what is best" for you. I will listen to you and work with you in a close partnership to ensure that I understand your goals and the unique circumstances in the City. Nobody knows more about Arroyo Grande than the City staff, and I will take full advantage of your knowledge and perspective. This partnership forces us to focus each step in the study process to the ultimate goal of meeting the needs of the City. With your constant involvement, I will be continually reminded of my commitment to you, and you will form a better understanding of your study. Together we will make a great team. Quality Control A cost analysis study is an integrated process. All study components are interrelated, so bad data at any step in the process will cause the ultimate results to be flawed. A flawed study will be embarrassing to us both and may not be implemented. A flawed study will cause us to do unnecessary additional work. We want to avoid all of these situations and the resultant damage to our reputations. To avoid accuracy problems and other quality flaws, Wohlford Consulting employs a rigorous Quality Control process designed to ensure that we have covered all of the issues, appropriately accounted for positions and resources in the models, and factored all other data fairly and accurately in the study. Every critical step in my study process includes a Quality Control check The focus on quality is directly related to Wohlford Consulting's belief that a cost of service study is not simply a commodity that is best purchased based upon price. From our experience WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page6 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 29 l L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L City of A"oyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees and deep understanding of the pro~esses and outcomes of these studies, we know that simple mistakes and inferior effort can directly result in huge revenue implications for our clients. Knowing the right way to approach a particular analysis can mean the difference between recovering many (or hundreds of) thousands of dollars-or not. We work very hard to ensure that you will have the very best infonnation on which to make your fee setting decisions. METHODOLOGIES AND WORK PLANS To ensure the ?est possible outcomes for the City of Arroyo Grande, Wohlford Consulting uses a detailed, but flexible, approach and work plan. The methods are the result of years of experience that taught us the way to achieve success in the most efficient manner. The important thing to keep in mind about the study approach is that Wohlford Consulting will be readily available to City staff for consultation and assistance. We will not simply assign tasks and walk away while you struggle to understand and complete those tasks. We will be there to help whenever needed. The remaillder of this section describes the general approaches used for the study. Study Approach The methodology to evaluate user fees or service costs is deceptively simple in concept. I utilize a "unit cost build-up" approach that seeks to identify the "fully loaded" cost for each unit of service (fee activity). This approach is superior (more accurate and defensible) to the "top down approach" used by other firms (divide the total cost of services by the number of fees); since it is not dependent upon fluctuating activity levels or other unrelated factors to calculate a unit fee. Through the years of performitig and continuously improving these types of studies, Wohlford Consulting has developed an approach and work plan that facilitates a successful study. Part of this approach is to customize each baseline project step and subtask to best fit your individual circwnstances, priorities, and needs. Furthermore, I will identify new and unique issues in Arroyo Grande that will warrant special attention. In that light, the City should consider the following list simply as a general outline that addresses the basic elements of the study: Work Plan Outline 1. Establish and/or restructure the inventory of fee services (current and potentiat) 2. Identify the staff positions that work on each fee service 3. Calculate the direct productive hourly rate for each position 4. Determine the time for each position to perform fee tasks 5. Calculate the direct cost of the staff time for each fee 6. Distribute indirect and overhead costs to each fee 7. Sub-allocate supporting activities to fee services 8. Perform quality control processes (constant) 9. Calculate revenue impacts 10. Perform the "gap analysis" (unit and total subsidies) 11. Perform review-processes 12. Consider Recommendations 13. Docwnent and present results WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 7 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 30 ' [ L [ L L L L L L L L L L IL I \L 'L IL I . I City of A"oyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Since this study is a collaborative process, almost every step in the process will involve meetings or discussions with City staff, who will have the opportunity to influence, enhance, and review most aspects of the study. As you can imagine, ''the devil is in the details" of a Cost of Service Study. The specific work plan for this project would include a detailed expansion of the summary methodology described above. Each of these steps is a significant undertaking with many potential delays, inefficiencies, errors, annoyances, sidetracks, and other serious pitfalls. My job as the consultant is to facilitate the entire process to your success. I will employ my experience and expertise to identify, prevent, and resolve problems and process issues; facilitate data collection and devise alternative techniques when needed; foster communication and decision-making; and keep the . study progressing. SCOPE OF SERVICES The City of Arroyo Grande would most benefit from a project scope of services that addresses the basic needs of the City, plus something extra to ensure success. From my experience, I generally know the tasks and deliverables that are necessary to achieve your goals in an efficient and effective fashion. At the same time, I understand _that City funds to pay for consultants are limited. Consequently, I devised a scope of services that will accomplish your goals in the most cost-effective manner. This balance is important for the City to realize the full value of the· study. The proposed scope of services reflects my current understanding of the needs of the City. At the beginning of the project, I will work With the City to refine this scope of services to best meet -your objectives. Specific Project Deliverables The general scope of services for this project includes a Cost of Service Study for each user fee department. All of these studies involve the determination and distribution of costs for services performed by the City. However, I included several other "deliverables" to ensure that the City's needs are fully met. For this proposed study, Wohlford Consulting will complete and deliver the following items and information to the City of Arroyo Grande: ' Summary List of Project Deliverables ./ Cost of Service Study ./ Fee Comparison ./ Fee Study Summary Report ./ Electronic Copies of Results These deliverables are described below: ./ On-Site Meetings ./ Presentations ./ Electronic Models ./ Other Services Included WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Pa!Je 8 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 31 IL I [ l rl I I [ L [ 'l (l I !L \L i[ IL IL (l I (L IL !L I L_ City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Cost of Service Study Wohlford Consulting will work closely and collaboratively with department staff and management to set up the study and gather relevant data. I will use my proprietary analytical model(s) to calculate the full unit cost of user fee services and activities that are potentially viable new fees. In addition to the individual cost of fee services, the Cost , of Service Study will identify subsidy levels and potential fee adjustments. As part of the larger study in each department/division, the analysis will include a determination of the cost-recovery (fully-burdened) hourly rates-for each staff member. If unit data is not available or feasible, we will determine the cost-recovery performance of program areas and identify potential fee changes accordingly. If activity volume data is available, we will also determine the potential revenue impacts of current and recommended fee levels. If desired, I will work with the City to establish recommended fee levels. Wohlford Consulting will work directly with department management to reorganize and restructure the fees to best fit your current (or desired) operating practices', policy goals, customer service objectives, _and administrative needs. A fee study is often the opportunity the departments have been "waiting for" in order to solve ongoing problems . and make the fee schedule more appropriate for the department's business. I will deliver detailed worksheets that demonstrate the cost components for each fee calculation, as well as summary documentation of the unit costs and overall results. These worksheets also contain subsidy analyses for unit costs and annual performance, percentage results, change calculations, revenue impacts, and other metrics. These worksheets can be customized to meet the formatting needs of the City. The City will receive printed and pdf copies of the final results worksheets, as well as Excel worksheets · of the final fee results to facilitate future analysis and distribution. In addition, the City will receive a pdf version of the entire final model for each departm;:nt studied. Fee Comparison The City has requested comparisons of Arroyo Grande's fees with other jurisdictions. First, I will spend the necessary time to discuss the conceptual and practical issues related to fee comparisons with the City, in order to ensure that the City has a complete understanding about the utility and validity of these types of comparisons. The meaningfulness of comparisons depends greatly on the selection of the sample of appropriate target cities and the most important fees to compare. I will work with the City to select the 5-7 candidates for comparison, as well as the targeted fees. We will conduct our solicitation of fee data from other jurisdictions through website research, phone calls, email, and other approaches necessary to accomplish this task. Following the collection of the data, we will docwnent the results, which, normally consists of a matrix of fees with side-by-side comparisons. The City will have the opportunity to review the. draft results and influence the final format of the documentation, including whether it is incorporated in to th~ final report or delivered separately. - WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page9 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 32 [ L ' IL I I \l \L l [ \L 1L L ll L [ IL ( .L IL L L l L Ci(V of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Fee Study Summary Report Wohlford Consulting will produce a report (draft and final versions) to describe and document the general approach, methodologies, related issues, and study results for the· study. If requested, I will provide 5 bound copies of the final fee study report, along with a reproducible (unbound) version and electronic file (pdt) for further internal distribution by the City. However, in an effort to reduce paper consumption, I will encourage the City to forego the paper copies and accept only the comprehensive pdf version instead. Electronic Copies of Results Wohlford .Consulting will provide electronic copies (pdf and/or Excel) of the summary results for the Cost of Service Study to the City. The Excel worksheets will have the capability for the City to update the fees regularly for inflation or other factors. On-Site Meetings Communication between City management/Staff and the consultant is critical to success of the study. Consequently, Wohlford Consulting assumes that two multi-day site visits will be necessary for the Cost of Service Study, with multiple meetings during each visit. During these on-site meetings, the CitY and the consultant will discuss expectations and City issues, interview staff, assign data collection tasks, collect data, review work in progress, examine results, plan strategy for analysis and implementation, and address other issues and tasks as necessary. In order to minimize disruptions and the impact on· staff workload, I will conduct the remainder of the work with the City through webmeetings, email, phone, fax, mail, and other media. Presentations As part of my "Communication Plan," Wohlford Consulting will produce two formal presentations on-site in Arroyo Grande. Additional meetings/presentations can be· available via webmeetings. I will work with the City to determine the most appropriate audiences and best timing. These presentations include: 1. Kick-off and Orientation: I will meet with all managers and staff involved in the study to explain the project approach, processes, expectations, and potential outcomes. This is an opportunity .for all of us to start the project with a mutual understanding and commitment. And, 2. City Council Workshop: I will conduct a presentation of the study(ies) to the City Council, a subcommittee, city management, and/or key staff to ensure that they fully understand the methodology, philosophy, findings, and/or recommendations that the City .may ask them to consider and approve. The City can designate the point in the project when the second presentation should occur (e.g., draft, final results), as well as the audience (e.g., full Council, subcommittee, special public meeting). City staff will .help us focus this presentation appropriately to best WOHLFORD CONSULTING J COLGAN CONSUL TING Page 10 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 33 I[ ( [ l !l ;L I . L IL IL L l IL ll ' L /L I L jl I (l I L ,L . City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees conform to the nature of the audience and the objectives of the City. In addition to the factual findings of the study, this presentation can include a discussion of general fee issues, acknowledgement and defense of potential challenges, discussion of comparative factors, future considerations, and a number of other factors from my professional experience. To give the City of Arroyo Grande greater flexibility and cost-control, and to minimize the baseline fixed project fee, I limited the number of presentations in this proposal: Depending on the outcomes of the study, the relative involvement of critics and other interested parties in your community, and other factors, the City may recognize the need for additional presentations . Electronic Models Wohlford Consulting will provide a series of mode]s in Excel worksheet format to allow the City to simply adjust fees, rates, and charges to reflect future 'inflationary cost increases in accordance with the recommended update approach(es) provided by the consultant. The proposed deliverables do not include the full-featured proprietary cost analysis software used by the consultant· to prepare the study: At the risk of irritating you, I intend always to be honest and frank with the City. It is my considerable experience that the provision of cost analysis software to clients is problematic-for the clients. The production of these studies requires significant initial and refresher training and continued application to maintain competence. Fee consultants endure a year or more of training and project application before gaining the ability to independently conduct the studies. Given the normal workloads of City staff and the infrequency of fee study. development, it is most common for client staff to lose proficiency by the very first time they try to complete a study internally-thus necessitating involvement with a consultant again (either for study correction or additional training). In most cases, it would be more cost-effective to engage the consultant for periodic full scale updates (perhaps every three to five years) or with internal inflationary updates on an annual basis. Other Services Included The true value of a cost consultant is not in my ability to perform mathematics, develop spreadsheets, or gather data. I am most helpful when I can use my experience, expertise,. and perspective to help you solve problems and accomplish your objectives. To this end, my studies include more than just the documents and calculated results that I provide as deliverables. I want to encourage you to mine my experience to help you reach solutions that benefit your City and your public. Discussion of significant issues will occur on a regular basis during the course of the study, and I will be available for more focuse'd discussions on topics that are important to you. Some of the other areas of service include policy consultation, strategies and alternatives, historical perspective, and post- project support. · WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page ti of25 Item 8.d. - Page 34 L l L il I L IL IL l \L ([ l L 'L L (L (l (l il I l l City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Departments and Service Areas Included in the ~ost of Service Study The City of Arroyo Grande's User Fee Study in 2007 included Planning, Engineering, Building, Fire, and Police. It appears that there has been some organizational restructuring in the City, but the basic functions remain the same. Consequently, Wohlford Consulting proposes to focus this · study on the same general fee areas, although they may be organized or titled differently today, with one exception. From our review of the current City organizational structure and fee · schedule, we have identified the following candidates for analysis: • Community Development: o Building . o Planning o Engineering o Neighborhood Services • Police (Note: In 2010, the Fire Department was organized under a Joint Powers Authority. Any former Fire fee-related responsibilities not transferred to other City departments are now under the purview of the JP A, and there is no longer an Arroyo Grande Fire Department to review.) The remainder of this section describes the scope of services and approach for each of these service areas. Building Division The City of Arroyo Grande uses a cost-based Building fee approach originally deveJoped for the City by Wohlford Consulting in 2007. Wohlford Consulting proposes to maintain · the City's current general fee structure and update it with improvements in analytical methodology and study processes. Planning and Engineering Divisions, Police Department The analysis of all other fees will follow the standard approach, which is to calculate the unit cost of each fee service. For deposit-based fees (i.e., direct time charges), we will establish productive hourly rates and potential changes to deposit levels. For valuation- based fees, I will establish the cost recovery performance within the particular fee area and calculate potential charges to the percentages applied to calculate the fees. We will also calculate the cost of most non-fee services, in order to distribute those costs as necessary to help other services and functions better understand their overall costs. Neighborhood Services 'Division While the Neighborhood Services (Code Enforcement) program was not included in the previous study, Wohlford Consulting believes it is an important area to evaluate also, since some of the cost for Code Enforcement can be allocated to Planning and Building Fees, thereby enhancing overall cost recovery for the City. Consequently, we included_ at least a basic analysis of Code Enforcement into the proposed study. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 12 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 35 \L L l jl L l L L L IL L L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Project Limitations To maintain the focus of the study, enhance the City's understanding, and provide a reasonable fixed fee proposal, it is obviously necessary for us to define the limits to the scope of the study. This proposal describes the deliverables and service areas I intend to _cover. I am flexible in my approach and will modify the study as much as possible to meet the needs of the City. However, to avoid confusion and conflicting expectations, it · is important to note the key exclusions of this study, which include: taxes, levies, fines, and punitive charges; utility rates and service charges; public transit fares; parking rates;. tolls; internal service rates, allocations, and charges; public records fees'; fees set by externaJ authorities (e.g., state law/regulation, other agencies); ambulance/EMS rates, fees set by contract; equipment, facility, and infrastructure use (rental) or impact rates; contract charges to other agencies; services without discernible time data or cost factors; negotiations with cogniz.ant agency(ies); audit and/or litigation support (beyond general questions); and/or on-site visits following the conclusion of the study. As a "full cost" analysis, Wohlford Consulting will attempt to incorporate all City costs · into the study, including Citywide overhead or contributions of effort from other departments and divisions. In some cases, the City will need to provide this secondary cost information to us, since my cost analysis is limited. to the City Departments described in this proposal. PROJECT SCHEDULE Wohlford Consulting is committed to timely completion of the study to meet the objectives of the City. Under normal circumstances, the City of Arroyo Grande could expect results from the Cost of Service Study in approximately four months from the project's initiation, depending on the City's commitment to timely completion and staff responsiveness. WOID,FORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 13 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 36 L l [ IL ! L L IL (l I L IL IL ! I IL I L L l City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Imp.act Fees . USER FEE STUDY: COST PROPOSAL . .. . COST PROPOSAL Wohlford Consulting proposes a fixed professional fee of $28,375, plus a total of $1,600 in fixed eX})enses, for a total fixed project fee of $29,975. These fees cover all of the deliverables and work tasks described in the proposal for a complete cost of service analysis. These fees are "total, not to exceed" project fees for the proposed scope of s~rvice. The City of Arroyo Grande will not incur any additional charges (e.g., overhead, printing, travel) unless they are related to additional services or uncommon expenditures requested by the City outside the contracted scope of service. Wohlford Consulting endeavors to provide value to the City of Arroyo Grande, as I set rates and task fees to ensure the cost-benefit ratio is disproportionately skewed toward the benefit the City will receive. My cost structure reflects my senior-level experience and skill, quality of the work I provide, my ability to work quickly, and the lower overhead structure that a smaller practice permits. The blend of all of these factors allows us a competitive fee that still addresses all of the needs of the City. Given my lower cost structure, my rates are designed to provide for greater service and quality, and a more robust scope of services with fewer "add-ons," often for the same project fees as competing firms. A cost of service study is not a "commodity" that can be readily compared on the basis of price, since the assigned consultant makes a tremendous difference. Cost analysis results can vary by many thousands of dollars, depending on the skill and experience of the consultant. Consequently, decisions based on an unbalanced focus on the consultant fee can directly affect the quality of the study, resulting in errors or missed opportunities that can ultimately cost the City revenue equal to. many multiples of the overall project cost-not just the price difference between two competing proposals. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 14 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 37 L L il I il iL L (L IL L L L IL il [L I 1L L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Project Budget Detail The folloWing table shows the fee for each component of the proposed project: ' Full Cost Study Project Fee Details Project Component Hours FixedFee Proiect Manal!ement: Proiect Planninit and Control Included* Quality Assurance Processes Jne,luded * Communication Plan/Presentations Included"' Summarv Reports Included* Fixed ProiectHourlv Rate $ 125 Full Cost Analysis: Building 55 $ 6,875 Planning 52 $ 6,SOO Code Enforcement 10 $ 1,250 Engineering 52 $ 6,500 Police 48 $ 6,000 Fee Comparison Survey 10 $ 1,250 Expenses $ 1,600 Total Potential Project Fee: 127 $ 29,975 * The cost for Project Management tasks has been factored mto the individual project components. Billing Milestones Wohlford Consulting will work with the City to establish a series of "billing milestones" to guide invoices and payments. These milestones represent the completion of significant drafts, tasks, deliverables, or other project components. Other Services If the City wishes to engage Wohlford Consulting for services not included in the proposed scope of services, we can normally establish mutually agreeable fixed fees or use the standard hourly add-on rate of $150, plus expenses. The following table identifies the cost of certain potential "add-on" services at the City's request: Cost of Additional Services Proiect Component Fee Presentations and Meetings: On-Site $1,900 I day+ expenses Virtual (web/phone/video conference) $150 /hour New Presentation Development $150/ hour Audit or Litigation Support (per hour) $ 295 I hour+ expenses END OF USER FEE STUDY DESCRIPTION WOHLFORD CONSUL TING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 15 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 38 f L ' rl I il (L ' iL L L L 1L IL I [L L 1L IL L \l IL iL L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Anal~sis of User and Development impact Fees IMPACT FEE STUDY: OVERVIEW AND EXPERIENCE This section of the proposal covers the development fmpact fee study, which will be performed by Colgan Consulting Corporation. COMPANY HISTORY Colgan Consulting Corporation is a small Sacramento-based firm specializing in development impact fees for California cities, counties, and special districts. Colgan Consulting has been in business for over ten years. Joseph Colgan, project manager for this study, has specialized in California impact fee studies for more than 24 years. PROJECT STAFFING Joe Colgan, president of Colgan Consulting will serve as the as Project Manager and lead consultant for the impact fee study, and will personally perform all work relating to impact fees in this proposal. Joe is a professional city planner and a nationally-recognized impact fee expert who has specialized in impact fee consulting for more than 24 years. His background includes ten years of direct experience in local government as a planner and planning director. Since 1990, he has prepared at least 100 impact fee studies in six states. The vast majority of that work was done in California, but he has also prepared impact fee studies for clients in Oregon, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, and Florida. He has spoken on impact fees at many conferences and seminars nationally, and has served three terms on the Board of the National Impact Fee Roundtable, including one term as Vice Chair. Joe Colgan's key impact fee qualifications include: • A thorough understanding of the legal framework for impact fees, including the Mitigation Fee Act, the Quimby Act, and constitutional requir~ments for defensible impact fees. • Wide-ranging expertise in the technical aspects of impact analysis, fee calculation and nexus documentation and the ability to apply innovative analytical methods to complex situations. • First-hand knowledge of a wide variety of cost allocation and fee calculation methodologies • Experience calculating impact fees for water, sewer, transportation, and drainage systems; parks and open space; community and recreation centers; libraries; police and fire facilities, and general government facilities. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 16 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 39 [ L l \l [ L 'L ;L L ll L L IL :L \L ;L ' \l IL ! IL City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees •~ A background in land use planning and capital facilities planning, as well as direct involvement in the programming, planning, design, and construction of numerous of public facilities. • The ability to i'inderstand and interpret planning documents, facility master plans, and engineering studies. • Knowledge of cash flow modeling and the use of discounted present value calculations to incorporate past or future debt service payments into impact fees. • Sensitivity to local political environments, and experience in productively involving stakeholders and the public in the impact fee process. -------" " ---" -" ----" ---------------------- .. · .. IMPAtT FEE"STUDY: .REFERENCES AND CLIENT LISt · ·. .'.· ; : ,'',· • • , , f • " •. ,. ' I REFERENCES Below is a list of references for recent Colgan Consulting Corporati<;m impact fee studies. City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA Impact Fee Study for Parks, Libraries, Community and Recreation Centers and Police Facilities (Impact fee ordinance adopted by the City Council on June 4, 2014) Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer Phone: 909-477-2740 x 4020 Email: Dan.James@CityofRC.us City ofWildomar, CA Comprehensive Impact Fee Study (Impact fees adopted by City Council on 1/22/14) Dan York, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer Phone: 951-677-7551 Ext.211 Email: dyork@cityofwildomar.org City of St. Helena, CA Comprehensive Impact Fee Study (Impact fees adopted by City Council on 10/22/13) Karen Scalabrini, Finance Director (now Finance Director for the City of Ukiah) Phone:707-463-6220 Email: kscalabrini@cityofukiah.com City of Vista, CA Traffic Impact Fee Study Update (Impact fees adopted by City Council on 4/23/13) John Conley, AICP, Director, Community Development and Engineering Departments Phone: 760-639-6100 Email: jconley@cityofvista.com Previous studies for the City ofVista include Fire Protection Impact Fee Study (2008), Traffic Impact Fee Study (2007) and Park and Recreation Impact Fee Study (2006). WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 17 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 40 l :l I i[ (l I IL l ( ·L ·L L ll L ,L L 1 L I I[ (l [l L l City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees City of Moreno Valley, CA Comprehensive Impact Fee Update (Completed 2012) Mark W. Sambito, P .E., Engineering Division Manager/Land Development Division Phone:951-413-3170 Email: marksa@moval.org The 2012 impact fee study update was the fifth impact fee study prepared for the City of . Moreno Valley by Joe Colgan since 1998. · PARTIAL CLIENT LIST Joe Colgan prepared Arroyo Grande's last impact fee study, and in the p~ has done development impact fee studies for several other cities in San Luis Obispo County, including San Luis Obispo, Pismo Beach, Grover Beach, Morro Bay and Paso Robles, as well as Santa Maria and Lompoc in Santa Barbara County. Below is a list of recent Colgan Consulting Corporation impact fee study clients. • City of Albuquerque, NM. Peer Review of Impact Fee Program. (2011) • City of Desert Hot Springs, CA. Peer Review of Impact Fee Study (2009) • City of Encinitas, CA. Impact Fee Study (2014-In Progress) • Mountain House Community Services District (San Joaquin County), CA. Update of Transportation Improvement and Community Facilities Fees (2009) • City of Manhattan Beach, CA. Impact Fee Feasibility Study (2009) • City of Moreno Valley, CA. Impact Fee Update Study (2011-12) • City of Orange, CA. Impact Fee Study (2011-12) • Orange County Fire Authority, Irvine, CA. Impact Fee Feasibility Study (2007) and Impact Fee Study (2008) • City of Poway, CA. Impact Fee Study (2008)_ • CitY of Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Impact Fee Study (2014) • City of St. Helena, CA. Impact Fee Study (2012-13) • City of Vista, CA. Update of Traffic Impact Fee Study (2013) • City ofWildomar, CA. Impact Fee Study (2012-13) · . .' IMPACT FEE STUDY: APPROACH AND \VORK PLAN . c .APPROACH The approach to this study is designed to provide an objective and defensible basis for the adoption and implementation of development impact fees that satisfy the requirements of the California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.) the Quimby Act (Government Code Section 66477) and relevant case law. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 18 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 41 [ L l \l ' .[ \ I L L L \[ ;-l '[ L ·L r \l IL ! /l I ;l I ' j[ City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees The specific elements of that approach are set forth in the work plan that follows. In broad outline, this study would involve: • Working with City staff to clarify the City's needs and objectives for the study and tracking the progress of the study • Working with City staff and to update data on existing and future development in the study area • Working with City staff to establish appropriate levels of service for each facility type • Working with City staff to prepare needs analyses and cost estimates for facilities needed to serve new development • Selecting appropriate methods for measuring the impacts of development on various facilities and calculating impact fees • Creating a spreadsheet model and calculating the impact fees • Preparing a report documenting the impact fee calculations, the nexus supporting the proposed fees, and the data and methodologies used in the study • Presenting the study report and findings to the City Council • Providing implementation recommendations The specific scope of services offered in this proposal is defined by the tasks described in the work plan. The scope of this proposal excludes legal, engineering, architectural and appraisal services. LEGAL CONSULTING DISCLAIMER Consulting staff assigned to this project are experienced in calculating defensible impact fees and are highly knowledgeable regarding the technical aspects of impact fee calculations. However, Colgan Consulting Corporation does not employ attomeys and cannot provide legal advice. We expect to rely on the City Attorney for any legal review needed in connection with the impact fee study. FACILITY TYPES COVERED BY THis PROPOSAL As indicated in the Request for Proposals, this study will calculate updated impact fees for the following types of facilities: • Traffic Signals • Park Improvements • Transportation Facilities • Police FacilitiesNehicles • Drainage Facilities , • Fire FacilitiesNehicles • Recreation Community Centers • Water Neutralization WOHLFORD CONSUL TING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 19 of2S Item 8.d. - Page 42 l L L (l L L l rL L [L :L I il \l 1L [[ I !L (l ' iL I I :L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY The work to be performed by the Consultant on the impact fee study will depend extensively on information to be provided by the City. Among the types of information that may be needed by the Consultant for this study are: • -Tue current General Plan, and any specific plans or other relevant planning studies • Available data on the amount of existing and development and planned future development in the study area by land use type • The Capital Improvement Program, level of service policies, facility master plans and other facility planning data, plus inventories of existing facilities, vehicles and equipment of types to be funded by impact fees • Infonnation on service demand, such as calls for service by land use type for the Police Department • Cost estimates for land, capital improvements, vehicles, and/or equipment to be funded by impact fees · • Information on capital improvement funding sources and financing plans and any outstanding debt related to existing capital facil~ties This proposal assumes that all information needed to perform the work covered by the scope of this proposal will be provided by the City or is readily available from other sources such as the U.S. Census Bureau or the California Department of Finance. WoRKPLAN The following tasks comprise the detailed work plan for this impact fee study. These tash are based on the processes typically used to calculate impact fees. They may be varied to meet the needs of this project. Task 1. Project Initiation. To initiate this study, the Consultant will meet with key City staff members and carry out other activities required to initiate the study, including: • Attending a .kickoff meeting with staff to discuss the goals, work plan and schedule _ for the project • Piscussing the study process and information needs, as well as any issues of potential concern to the staff, th~ City Council, or others • Establishing project coordination and reporting procedures • Reviewing the City's current development impact fees • Identifying key staff and information resources • Conducting initial interviews with key staff Work Product: Technical memorandum discussing any issues identified in Task I. Task 2. Existing and Future Development Data In this task, the Consultant will collect and analyze data on existing and future development as necessary, and compile it in a form useful for this study. Steps in that process may include: WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page20 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 43 I [ L L (l il I, :l IL L L i L· (L (L ! L L ([ L l City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees • Establishing boundaries of the study area to be used in the analysis (e.g., existing City vs. sphere of influence) • Defining the breakdown of land use types to be used in the study • Analyzing available land use data to establish a baseline of existing development and a forecast of future development by land use type • Specifying demand variables and demand factors to be used in assessing the impact of development on each type of facility addressed in the study • Preparing development data tables for the impact fee analysis and the study report Work Product: Development data tables fbr the impact tee analysis and study report. Task 3. Facility Needs Analysis. Using forecasts of future development from Task 2, the Consultant will work with the City to identify new facilities, facility expansions, or vehicles and equipment needed to serve futUre development. Steps in that process include: • Reviewing adopted level-of-service standards and actual service levels for relevant facility types • Working with City staff to identify the operative level~of-service standard to be used in the impact fee analysis for each facility type • Identifying any existing deficiencies relative to the selected level of service standard and accounting for those deficiencies in the needs analysis • Projecting the additional service demand that will be created by new development, based on selected service levels • Translating service demand into facility needs by facility type • Identifying the costs that are eligible for impact fee funding Work Product: List of development-related facility needs and costs to be used in the impact fee calculations. Task 4. Impact Fee Analysis. Using the information from Tasks 2 and 3, the Consultant will prepare the impact fee analysis and calculate impact fees by land use type for each type of facility addressed in the study. The steps in that process may include: • Reviewing the methods used to calculate existing impact fees and recommending alternative methods where appropriate • Constructing a spreadsheet model incorporating data on new development, demand factors, and eligible facility costs • Specifying formulas in the model to allocate facility costs in proportion to the impact of new development by land use type • Calculating a cost per unit of service for each facility type • Converting the cost per unit of service into a schedule of impact fees per unit of development, by land use category • Projecting potential revenue from the proposed impact fees WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 21 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 44 il \L il ll I ;L !L :l I ll iL (l l 'L il I IL I (l I ' IL IL City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis o(User and Development Impact Fees Work Product: Narrative and tables explaining the nexus analysis, the impact tee calculations ... and the proposed impact fee schedules in the study report. Task 5. Impact Fee Comparison. As part of this study, the consultant will compare the City~s existing impact fees, and the impact fees proposed in this study, with those charged by up to six · ~ther jurisdictio~s selected by City staff. It is important. to note that fees calculated in this study must be justified on their own merits, irrespective of fees charged by other cities. For that reason, we recommend that the fee comparison be presented in a stqff report rather than as part of this study itself Task 6. Study Report The impact fee study report will document the nexus between proposed fees and the impacts of development for each type of impact fee calculated in the study, and explain the data, methodology and formulas used in the fee calculations. It will also propose findings to satisfy the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act. The study report will be developed in the following stages: • As a way of expediting the study process, the Consultant will submit preliminary drafts of portions of the study report for review by City staff. • Next, an administrative draft of the entire study report, incorporating any previous staffrevisions, will be submitted for staff review. • Then a final draft document will be prepared for the City Co~cil and public review. • Any additional changes will be incorporated into the final study report. The study report will include the following components: • Executive Summary • A chapter discussing the legal requirements for impact fees and methods used to calculate the fees • A chapter presenting data on existing and future development in the study area and the demand variables used to measure the impacts of development on individual facility types • A separate chapter for each type offee presenting the data and methodology used in the analysis, explaining the impact fee calculations, and documenting the nexus • A chapter on implementation, recommending steps to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act through proper administration of the impact fees Work Products: Preliminary drafts: complete draft for staffreview: final draft document for City Council and publjc distribution: final report. Draft and final reports will be submitted electronicallv in pd((ormat. For the final report. five bound hard copies and one unbound hard copy will be delivered An electronic COl!JI o(the Excel spreadsheet model will also be provided to the City upon completion of the study. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page22of25 Item 8.d. - Page 45 IL IL 1L I I \l 1L tl I L (L ;L ' \l il \L [l :L (l IL \l il I IL City of Arroyf? Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Task 7. City Council Presentation. This proposal includes a cost allowance for time and expenses for the Project Manager to a_!tend one public meeting with the City Co~sll. A. PowerPoint presentation will be prepared for that meeting. Note: Jn addition to one site visit for the City Council presentation, the proposed project budget includes the cost of two site visits by the Project Manager during the course of the study--one for the project kickoff meetings and one additional working site visit. Costs for those site visits are included in the budget for other tasks, as indicated in the project budget table. Task 8. Additional Consultations. This proposal does not include a cost allowance for additional consultations or litigation support in the event impact fees based on this study should be challenged. The Project Manager will be available for additional consultations on a time and expenses basis at the same hourly rate charged for this study. For.~positions or expert testimony an hourly rate would be negotiated. ·PROJECT TIMELINE The timeline for this type of impact fee study depends to a considerable extent on the availability of data and policy decisions provided by the City. Based on our experience with at least 100 impact fee studies, a project of this complexity can reasonably be completed in six-to-eight months.· A timeframe in that range avoids placing an excessive burden on staff to provide infonnation on an accelerated schedule, and allows ample time for review and revisions. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSUL TING Page23 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 46 City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees IMPACTFEESTUDY: COSTPROPOSAL NOT-TO-EXCEED COST The following table shows estimated costs for this study broken down by task. The hourly billing rate is shown at the top of the table. Hourly Rate>> $130.00 Task Task Colgan Staff Site Estimated Total No. Description Hours Cost Visits Expenses Cost l Project Initiation 16 $ 2,080.00 I $ 400.00 $ 2,480.00 2 Development Data 40 $ 5,200.00 $ 5,200.00 3 Facility Needs Analysis 48 $ 6,240.00 $ 6,240.00 4 Impact Fee Analysis 60 $ 7,800.00 I $ 400.00 $ 8,200.00 5 Impact Fee Comparison 18 $ 2,340.00 $ 2,340.00 6 Study Report 60 $ 7,800.00 $ 7,800.00 7 City Council Presentation 14 $ 1,820.00 l $ 400.00 $ 2,220.00 Total 256 s 33,280.00 3 $ 1,200.00 $ 34,480.00 Based on the estimated costs shown in the table above, Colgan Consulting Corporation offers to complete the work described in this impact fee proposal for a total fee not to exceed $34,480.00, including expenses. All professional consulting work covered by this proposal will be performed by Joe Colgan at an hourly rate of$130.00. Travel e~penses for lodging, car rental, etc. will be billed at actual cost. Personal car use, if any, will be billed at the IRS-approved rate, currently $0.56 per mile; meals and incidentals will be billed on a per-diem basis at $25 per half-day. BILLING Invoices will be submitted monthly base~ on time and expenses charged to the project during the previous month. ADDITIONAL SERVICES Any services requested by the City that are not covered l;ly this proposal will be charged on a time and expenses basis, at an hourly rate to be agreed between the City and Colgan Consulting. No additional services will be perfonned without written approval by the City. END OF IMPACT FEE STUDY DESCRIPTION WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 24 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 47 L L L L L L L L L L L I L L L L L L L [ / City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for·;. Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees . CONCLUSION . . · · · CONCLUDING COMMENTS We app~eciate this opportunity to propose our services to the City of Arroyo Grande. We hope that you can easily recognize the pride in our successes on behalf of our clients and ongoing work in this proposal. We also hope you are able to call our references to get an enhanced picture of the skills, approach, and personal nature that makes a project with Wohlford Consulting and Colgan Consulting a pleasant and rewarding experience. Duration of Proposal This proposal Vvill remain valid for 60 days following the due date specified in the City's RFP. Authorized Signatures As owners of our respective firms, we are authorized to bind Wohlford Consulting and Colgan Consulting to a contract to execute the proposed work: October 27, 2014 $.~ Chad Wohlford Sole Proprietor 3 72 Florin Road, #293 Sacramento, CA 95831 Phone: (916) 205-7050 Fax: (916) 393-6801 chad@wohlfordconsulting.com Thank you October 27, 2014 Joseph Colgan Colgan Consulting Corporation 3323 Watt Avenue, #131 SacramentQ, CA 95821 Phone: (916) 205-2446 jcolgan@colgan-consulting.com Thank you again for reviewing our proposal. Please contact either one of us at your convenience if you have any questions about Colgan Consulting, Wohlford Consulting, this proposal, or these types of studies in general. We would be glad_ to help, and we look forward to serving you. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page25 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 48 EXHIBITC INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Prior to the beginning of and throughout the duration of the Work, Consultant will maintain insurance m conformance with the requirements set forth below. Consultant will use existing coverage to comply with these requirements. If that existing coverage does not meet the requirements set forth here, Consultant agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existmg coverage to do so. Consultant acknowledges that the msurance coverage and policy limits set forth in this section constitute the minimum amount of coverage required. Any insurance proceeds available to City in excess of the limits and coverage required in this agreement and which is applicable to a gJVen Joss, will be available to City. Consoltant shall provide the followmg types and amounts of insurance: Commercial General Liability Insurance using Insurance Services Office "Commercial General Liability" policy from CG 00 01 or the exact equivalent. Defense costs must be paid in addition to limits. There shall be no cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Business Auto Coverage on ISO Business Auto Coverage from CA 00 01 including symbol 1 (Any Auto) or the exact equivalent. Limits are subject to review, but in no event to be less than $1,000,000 per accident. If Consultant owns no vehicles, this requirement may be satisfied by a non-owned auto endorsement to the general liability policy described above. If Consultant or Consultant's employees will use personal autos in any way on this project, Consultant shall provide evidence of personal auto liability coverage for each such person. .,, Workers Compensation on a state-approved policy form providing statutory benefits as required by law with employer's liability limits no less than $1,000,000 per accident or disease. Excess or Umbrella Liability Insurance (Over Primary) if used to meet limit requirements, shall provide coverage at least as broad as specified for the underlying coverages. Any such coverage provided under an umbrella liability policy shall include a drop down provision providing primary coverage above a maximum $25,000 self-insured retention for liability not covered by primary but covered by the umbrella. Coverage shall be provided on a "pay on behalf' basis, with defense costs payable m addition to policy limits. Policy shall contain a provision obligating insurer at the time insured's liability is determined, not requiring actual payment by the insured first. There shall be no cross liability exclusion precluding coverage for claims or suits by one insured against another. Coverage shall be applicable to City for injury to employees of Consultant, subcontractors or others involved in the Work The scope of coverage provided is subject to approval of City following receipt of proof of insurance as required herein. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Professional Liability or Errors and Omissions Insurance as appropriate shall be written on a policy form coverage specifically designated to protect against acts, errors or omissions of the Consultant and "Covered Professional Services" as designated in the policy must specifically include work performed under this agreement. The policy limit shall be no less than $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate The policy must "pay on behalf of' the insured and must include a provision establishing the insurer's duty to defend. The policy retroactive date shall be on or before the effective date of this agreement Insurance procured pursuant to these requirements shall be written by insurer that are admitted earners in the state California and with an A.M. Bests rating of A-or better and a minimum fmancial size VII. General conditions pertaining to provision of insurance coverage by Consultant Consultant and City agree to the following.with respect to insurance provided by Consultant: Page 47 Item 8.d. - Page 49 1. Consultant agrees to have its insurer endorse the third party general liability coverage required herein to include as additional insureds City, its officials employees and agents, using standard ISO endorsement No. CG 2010 with an edition prior to 1992. Consultant also agrees to require all Consultants, and subcontractors to do likewise. 2. No liability insurance coverage provided to comply with this Agreement shall prohibit Consultant, or Consultant's employees, or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. Consultant agrees to waive subrogation rights against City regardless of the applicability of any insurance proceeds, and to require all Consultants and subcontractors to do likewise. 3. All insurance coverage and limits provided by Consultant and available or applicable to this agreement are intended to apply to the full extent of the policies. Nothing contained in this Agreement or any other agreement relating to the City or its operations limits the application of such insurance coverage. 4. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing 5. No liability policy shall contain any provision or definition that would serve to eliminate so- called "third party action over" claims, including any exclusion for bodily injury to an employee of the insured or of any Consultant or subcontractor. 6. All coverage types and limits required are subject to approval, modification and additional requirements by the City, as the need arises. Consultant shall not make any reductions in scope of coverage (e.g. elimination of contractual liability or reduction of discovery period) that may affect City's protection without City's prior written consent. 7. Proof of compliance with these insurance requirements, consisting of certificates of insurance evidencing all of the coverages required and an additional insured endorsement to Consultant's general liability policy, shall be delivered to City at or prior to the execution of this Agreement. In the event such proof of any insurance is not delivered as required, or in the event such insurance is canceled at any time and no replacement coverage is provided, City has the right, but not the duty, to obtain any insurance it deems necessary to protect its interests under this or any other agreement and to pay the premium. Any premium so paid by City shall be charged to and promptly paid by Consultant or deducted from sums due Consultant,' at City option. 8. Certificate(s) are to reflect that the insurer will provide 30 days notice to City of any cancellation of coverage. Consultant agrees to require its insurer to modify such certificates to delete any exculpatory wording stating that failure of the insurer to mail written notice of cancellation imposes no obligation, or that any party will "endeavor" (as opposed to being required) to comply with the requirements of the certificate. 9. It is acknowledged by the parties of this agreement that all insurance coverage required to be provided by Consultant or any subcontractor, is intended to apply first and on a primary, noncontributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self insurance available to City. 10. Consultant, agrees to ensure that subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by Consultant, provide the same minimum insurance coverage required of Consultant Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with subcontractors and others engaged in the project-will be submitted to City for review. Page 48 Item 8.d. - Page 50 11. Consultant agrees not to self-insure or to use any self-insured retentions or deductibles on any portion of the insurance required herein and further agrees that it will not allow any Consultant, subcontractor, Architect, Engineer or other entity or person in any way involved in the performance of work on the project contemplated by this agreement to self-insure its obligations to City. If Consultant's existing coverage includes a deductible or self-insured retention, the deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to the City. At the time the City shall review options with the Consultant, which may include reduction or elimination of the deductible or self-insured retention, substitution of other coverage, or other solutions. 12. The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the Consultant, the City will negotiate additional compensation proportional to the increase benefit to City. 13. For purposes of applying insurance coverage only, this Agreement will be deemed to have been executed immediately upon any party hereto taking any steps that can be deemed to be in furtherance of or towards performance of this Agreement. 14. Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any insurance requirements in no way imposes any additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder in this or any other regard 15. Consultant will renew the required coverage annually as long as City, or its employees or agents face an exposure from operations of any type pursuant to this agreement. This obligation applies whether or not the agreement is canceled or terminated for any reason. Termination of this obligation is not effective until City executes a written statement to that effect. 16. Consultant shall provide proof that policies of insurance required herein expiring during the term of this Agreement have been renewed or replaced with other policies providing at least the same coverage. Proof that such coverage has been ordered shall be submitted prior to expiration. A coverage binder or letter from Consultant's insurance agent to this effect is acceptable. A certificate of insurance and/or additional insured endorsement as required in these specifications applicable to the renewing or new coverage must be provided to City within five days of the expiration of the coverages. 17. The provisions of any workers' compensation or similar act will not limit the obligations of Consultant under this agreement. Consultant expressly agrees not to use any statutory immunity defenses under such laws with respect to City, its employees, officials and agents. - 18. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this section are not intended as limitations on coverage, limits or other requirements nor as a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any given policy. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue, and 1s not intended by any party or insured to be limiting or all-inclusive. 19. These insurance requirements are intended to be separate and distinct from any other provision in this agreement and are intended by the parties here to be interpreted as such. 20. The requirements in this Section supersede all other sections and provisions of this Agreement to the extent that any other section or provision conflicts with or impairs the provisions of this Section. 21. Consultant agrees to be responsible for ensuring that no contract used by any party involved in any way with the project reserves the right to charge City or Consultant for the cost of additional insurance coverage required by this agreement. Any such provisions are to be deleted with reference to City. It is not the intent of City to reimburse any third party for the cost of complying with Page 49 Item 8.d. - Page 51 these requirements. There shall be no recourse against City for payment of premiums or other amounts with respect thereto. 22. Consultant agrees to provide immediate notice to City of any claim or loss against Consultant arising out of the work performed under this agreement. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City. Page 50 Item 8.d. - Page 52 ATTACHMENT 2 AGREEMENT FOR CONSUL TANT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of 2015, between COLGAN CONSUL TING CORPORATION ("Consultant"), and the CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, a Municipal Corporation ("City"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM This Agreement shall commence on , 2015 and shall remain and continue in effect until all services set forth herein are completed, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES Consultant shall perform the tasks described and comply with all terms and provisions set forth in City's Request for Proposal, attached as Exhibit "A" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and the Consultant's Proposal, attached as Exhibit "B" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 3. PERFORMANCE Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his/her ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall· employ, at a minimum generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. AGREEMENT ADMINISTRATION City's Director of Administrative Services shall represent City in all matters pertaining to the administration of this Agreement. Jo~eph Colgan shall represent Consultant in all matters pertaining to the administration of this Agreement. 5. PAYMENT The City agrees to pay the Consultant in accordance with the payment rates and terms set forth in Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 6. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE (a) The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or· terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall. imme9iately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such Item 8.d. - Page 53 suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. (b) In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall - pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 5. 7. TERMINATION ON OCCURRENCE OF STATED EVENTS This Agreement shall terminate automatically on the occurrence of any of the , following events: (a) Bankruptcy or insolvency of any party; (b) Sale of Consultant's business; or (c) Assignment of this Agreement by Consultant without the consent of City. (d) End of the Agreement term specified-in Section 1. 8. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT (a) The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. (b) If the City Manager or his/her delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, he/she shall cause to be served upon the Consultant a written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 9. LAWS TO BE OBSERVED. Consultant shall: (a) Procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices which may be necessary and incfdental to the due and lawful prosecution of the services to be performed by Consultant under this Agreement; Item 8.d. - Page 54 (b) Keep itself fully informed of all existing and proposed federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees which may affect those engaged or employed under this Agreement, any materials used in Consultant's performance under this Agreement, or the conduct of the services under this Agreement; (c) At all times observe and comply with, and cause all of its employees to observe and comply with all of said laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees mentioned abo_ve; (d) Immediately report to the City's Contract Manager in writing any discrepancy or inconsistency it discovers in said laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees mentioned above in relation to any plans, drawings, specifications, or provisions of this Agreement. (e) The City, and its officers, agents and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this Section. 10. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS (a) Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts, and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and req,ords; shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records; shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary; and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. (b) Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused, or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files, Consultant shall make available to the City, at the Consultant's office and upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring, and printing computer files. 11. INDEMNIFICATION Item 8.d. - Page 55 (a) Indemnification for Professional Liability. When the law establishes a professional standard of care for Consultant's Services, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless City and any and all of its officials, employees and agents ("Indemnified Parties") from and against any and all losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including attorney's fees and costs to the extent same are caused in whole or in part by any negligent or wrongful act, error or omission of Consultant, its officers, agents, employees or subcontractors or any entity or individual that Consultant shall bear the legal liability thereof) in the · performance of professional services under this agreement. (b) Indemnification for Other Than Professional Liability. Other than in the performance of professional services and to the full extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, and any and all of its employees, officials and agents from and against any liability (including liability for claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, including attorneys fees and costs, court costs, interest, defense costs, and expert witness fees), where the same arise out of, are a consequence of, or are in any way attributable to, in whole or in part, the performance of this Agreement by Consultant or by any individual or entity for which Consultant is legally liable, including but not limited to officers, agents, employees or subcontractors of Consultant. (c) General Indemnification Provisions. Consultant agrees to obtain executed indemnity agreements with provisions identical to those set forth here in this section from each and every subcontractor or any other person or entity involved by, for, with or on behalf of Consultant in the performance of this agreement. In the event Consultant fails to obtain such indemnity obligations from others as required here, Consultant agrees to be fully responsible according tO the terms of this section. Failure of City to monitor compliance with these requirements imposes no additional obligations on City and will in no way act as a waiver of any rights hereunder. This obligation to indemnify and defend City as set forth here is binding on the successors, assigns or heirs of Consultant and shall survive the termination of this agreement or this section. 12. INSURANCE Consultant shall maintain prior to the beginning of and for the duration of this Agreement insurance coverage as specified in Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. 13. INDEPENDENT CONSUL TANT (a) Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent Consultant. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control., Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents, except Item 8.d. - Page 56 as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees, or agents are in any manner officers, employees, or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation_, or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. (b) No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 14. UNDUEINFLUENCE Consultant declares and warrants that no undue influence or pressure was or is used against or in concert with any officer or employee of the City of Arroyo Grande in connection with the award, terms or implementation of this Agreement, including any method of coercion, confidential financial arrangement, or financial inducement. No officer or employee of the City of Arroyo Grande will receive compensation, directly or indirectly, from Consultant, or from any officer, employee or agent of Consultant, in connection with the award of this Agreement or any work to be conducted as a result of this Agreement. Violation of this Section shall be a material breach of this Agreement entitling the City to any and all remedies at law or in equity. 15. NO BENEFIT TO ARISE TO LOCAL EMPLOYEES No member, officer, or employee of City, or their designees or agents, and no public official who exercises authority over or responsibilities with resped to the project during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any agreement or sub-agreement, or the proceeds thereof, for work to be performed in connection with the project performed under this Agreement. 16. RELEASE OF INFORMATION/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (a) All information .gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories, or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpo.sna or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. Item 8.d. - Page 57 (b) Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, or subcontractors be served with any summons, · complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions, or other discovery request, court order, or subpoena from any person or party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing, or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 17. NOTICES Any notice which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, which provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by notice: To City: To Consultant: 18. ASSIGNMENT City of Arroyo Grande Director of Administrative Services 300 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Colgan Consulting Joseph Colgan, President 3323 Watt Ave, #131 Sacramento, CA 95821 The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, without the prior written consent of the City. 19. GOVERNING LAW The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties, and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the superior or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Arroyo Grande. Item 8.d. - Page 58 20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, and statements, or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 21. TIME City and Consultant agree that time is of the essence in this Agreement. 22. CONTENTS OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL AND PROPOSAL Consultant is bound by the contents of the City's Request for Proposal, Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and the contents of the proposal submitted by the Consultant, Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. In the event of conflict, the requirements of City's Request for Proposals and this Agreement shall take precedence over those contained in the Consultant's proposals. 23. CONSTRUCTION The parties agree that each has had an opportunity to have their counsel review this Agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. The captions of the sections are for convenience and reference only, and are not intended to be construed to define or limit the provisions to which they relate. 24. AMENDMENTS Amendments to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be made only with the mutual written consent of all of the parties to this Agreement. 25. -AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he/she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. Item 8.d. - Page 59 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE By: __________ _ Jim Hill, Mayor Attest: Kelly We~more, City Clerk Approved As To Form: Timothy J. Carmel, City Attorney CONSULTANT By: ___________ _ Joseph Colgan Its: ------------ President Item 8.d. - Page 60 EXHIBIT A CITY'S REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Item 8.d. - Page 61 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR A FULL COST ANALYSIS OF USER AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE SERVICES Item 8.d. - Page 62 Contents GENERAL INFORMATION ............................................................................................................. : ....................... 12 Schedule of Proposal activities (ALL TIMES PACJFIC) ............................................................................................. 12 DISCRETION AND LIABILITY WAIVER .............................................................................................................. 13 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS ............................................................................................................................. 14 OUTLINE OF SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED ........................................................................................................ 14 FORMAT OF PROPOSAL ......................................................................................................................................... 16 FINAL COMMENTS .................................................................................................................................................. 16 ATTACHMENT A -SAMPLE CITY CONTRACT ................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. Page 11 Item 8.d. - Page 63 GENERAL INFORMATION . The Citv of Arroyo Grande is located on California's central coast approximately half way between Los Angeles and San Francisco and has a population of approximately 17,000. The City is currently a General Law city, operating under the City Council/City Manager form of government; however in the November 2014 election, residents will vot~ on whether the City should become a Charter City. Arroyo Grande is a full service city, with police, streets, engineering, parks, recreation, water and sewer services. Additionally, residents in the neighboring cities of Pismo Beach, Grover Beach, and Oceano use many of Arroyo Grande's recreational services. Fire services are provided through the Five Cities Fire Authority, a joint powers authority established between the City of Arroyo Grande, the City of Grover Beach, and the Oceano Community Services District. The City has established user fees for a variety of services and is seeking a consultant to review and update existing user fees, as well as identify any new fees, as appropriate. The last formal fee study was conducted in 2007, and as a result, the City Council has requested that a new study be completed. A copy of the most recently adopted Master Fee Schedule is available on the City's website at http://www.arroyogrande.org/documentcenter/view/34. Water and Sewer user fees are NOT included in the scope of work for this study. In addition, the City wishes to engage a consultant to review and update adopted development impact fees (AB 1600) for transportation, public safety, parks, recreation, water, and traffic. The last formal impact fee study was completed in 2000. The City currently has eight (8) impact fees in place. Those impact fees are: 1. Traffic signalization 2. Transportation facility development 3 . Drainage facility 4. Recreation community center 5. Park improvement 6. Police impact 7. Fire impact 8. Water neutralization Schedule of Proposal activities {ALL TIMES PACIFIC) ... , ' . ' ·Schedule Distribution of RFP September 22, 2014 Deadline for submission of questions to be addressed at October 3, 2014 the Pre-Proposal Teleconference Optional Pre-Proposal Teleconference October 7, 2014 2:00 pm Proposal submission October 27, 2014 5:00 pm Proposal review October 27 -Nov 7, 2014 Not!fication to all proposers Week of November 10, 2014 Oral presentations, as needed Week ofNovember 17, 2014 Notification to finalists December 7, 2014 Contract aooroval by City Council January 13, 2015 Projectto commence By January 31, 2015 Page 12 Item 8.d. - Page 64 The City has made every effort to include sufficient information within this Request for Proposal for a consultant to prepare a responsive, comprehensive proposal. In order .to achieve an equitable dissemination of information, a pre-proposal teleconference will be held to allow all interested firms/consultants to ask questions for the mutual benefit of all involved. The timing of the proposal process is subject to change, depending on the needs of the City, but is anticipated as follows: a) Distribution of Request for Proposals: September 22, 2014 b) Optional Pre-proposal Teleconference: City staff will meet collectively with firm/consultant representatives seeking additional information about the proposal process and the RFP. All firms/consultants interested in submitting a proposal are encouraged to attend the pre-proposal teleconference. The teleconference is scheduled for October 7, 2014 beginning at 2:00 pm (PST). Teleconference phone number and log in information can be obtained by contacting Debbie Malicoat at dmalicoat@arroyogrande.org no later than October 3, 2014. Additionally, any questions to be addressed at the pre-proposal teleconference should be submitted via email to Debbie Malicoat at dmalicoat@arroyogrande.org no later than October 3, 2014. c) Proposal Submission: Proposals must be clearly marked and delivered directly to the Administrative Services Department no later than 5:00 pm, October 27, 2014. Late submissions after the deadline or proposals delivered via fax will not be accepted. A total of three (3) identical proposals must be submitted and labeled as follows: City of Arroyo Grande Attention: Debbie Malicoat, Director of Administrative Services Fee Study RFP 300 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 , d) Proposal Review: Our review committee will evaluate each proposal submitted. It is anticipated that the review process will be completed by November 10, 2.014. e) Notification to all proposers: We anticipate sending written notification to all firms regarding the out~ome of the review and contract award process by November 10, 2014. f) Oral Presentations, as needed: During the notification to all proposers, finalists will be notified to schedule an oral interview during the week of November 17, 2014. Oral Interviews will take place at: City Hall, 300 East Branch Street. g) Notification to finalists: All finalists will be notified of final decision by December 7, 2014. Upon written request, we will provide a copy of the successful proposal once the contract is executed. DISCRETION AND LIABILITY WAIVER The City reserves the right to exercise discretion and apply its judgment with respect tor all proposals submitted. The City reserves the right to reject all proposals, either in part or in its entirety, or to request and obtain, from one or more of the consulting firms submitting proposals, supplementary information as may be necessary for City staff to analyze the proposals. Page 13 Item 8.d. - Page 65 The City may elect to award a contract in multiple phases, as is deemed to be in the City's best interest. Should the City award projects in phases, the City reserves the right to award the phases to the same firm. The consultant, by submitting a response to this RFP, waives all right to protest or seek any legal remedies whatsoever regarding any aspect of this RFP. Although, it is the City's intent to choose only a small number of most qualified consulting teams to interview with the City, the City reserves the right to choose any number of qualified finalists. This RFP does not commit the City to award a contract, to defray any costs incurred in the preparation of a proposal pursuant to this RFP or to procure or contract for work. All proposals submitted in response to this RFP become the property of the City and public records and, as such, may be subject to public review. The City reserves the right to cancel, in part or in its entirety, this RFP including, but not limited to: selection procedures, submittal date, and submittal requirements. If the City cancels or revises the RFP, all interested firms will be notified using email. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS Proposals will be evaluated based on the following criteria: • Thoroughness and understanding of the tasks to be completed • Background and experience in organizational analysis evaluation • Firm's expertise and overall experience of personnel assigned to the work • Time required to accomplish the requested services • Responsiveness to requirements of the project • Public sector experience in municipal setting conducting similar studies • Costs OUTLINE OF SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED 1. Establish a methodology for the evaluation of fees. Work and meet with City staff to refine the project scope, purpose, uses and goals of the City's Fee Study to ensure that the study will be both accurate and appropriate to the City's needs. Review project schedule and answer any questions pertaining to the successful development of the Study. 2. Conduct a comprehensive-review of the City's existing fees, rates, and charges. Meet with staff and conduct interviews as needed tojgain an understanding of the City's processes and operations. 3. Analyze the impacts of development on specific types of facilities and calculate recommended impact fees for each type of facility in accordance with the Government Code. 4. Identify the total cost of providing each City service at the lowest reasonable activity level and in a manner that is consistent with all applicable laws, statutes, rules and regulations governing the collection of fees, rates, and charges by public entities including, but not limited to Proposition 218 and Proposition 26. Costs should include appropriate General and Administrative overhead allocations to City activities and applicable overhead rates for use in calculating the City's billable hourly rates. 5. Compare service costs with existing cost recovery levels. This should include service areas where the City is currently charging for services as well as areas where the City perhaps should charge, in light of the· City's practices, or the practices of similar and/or neighboring cities. Page 14 Item 8.d. - Page 66 6. Prepare a report that identifies each facility or service, its full cost, current and recommended cost recovery levels. The report should identify the direct cost, the indirect cost, and the overhead cost for each service; and provide a model for adjusting these fees and rates for the City's current and future needs. 7. Recommend appropriate fees and charges. Recommended fees are based on the analysis, together with the appropriate subsidy percentage for those fees where full cost recovery may be unrealistic. 8. Prepare a report that identifies the current fees, and recommended fees. The report must also identify percentage change, cost recovery percentage, and fee comparison with other San Luis Obispo County cities or California cities that are comparable to Arroyo Grande. A survey comparison of rates and fees with similar cities will be used to help determine the appropriate level of subsidy, if any. 9. Report on other matters that come to your attention in the course of your evaluation that in your professional opinion the City should consider. 10. Present the findings to the City's management group and make necessary adjustments as requested. 11. Prepare and deliver presentations to the City Council to facilitate understanding of the plan and its implications for the City; provide necessary adjustments as requested. 12. Provide the City with an electronic copy of the final comprehensive study, including related schedules and cost documentation in a format that can be edited and updated by City staff to accommodate changes in the organization or changes in costs. 13. Develop or modify the existing model for adjusting fees/rates; include the addition of potential service areas, future service enhancements, and the ability to calculate the estimated costs of providing the service under consideration. 14. Prepare a final fee study report and provide five bound copies, one unbound copy and a single PDF file of the plan that can be made available to City staff. Any Master fee schedule revisions developed shall also be made available to the City electronically, providing the ability to add or delete and/or update information as needed. 15. Project Budget for the Comprehensive Fee Study -a description of the project budget itemized according to individual tasks. Project budget should include: a. A project schedule with activities, milestones, and deliverables. b. Project budget defined, at minimum, as follows: i. By task with a collective total by milestone and deliverable; 1. Labor rates for all project team members; 2. General overhead rates; 3. Costs for expenses such as printing, travel and attendance at meetings. c. Proposed services to be referred to a sub-contractor anticipated sub-contractors and anticipated costs for these services. 16. Consult with the City staff should it become necessary to defend the City's User Fees as a result of any legal or other challenge. If the consultant/firm believes that additional tasks are warranted, they must be clearly identified in the proposal. Water and Sewer user fees are NOT included in the scope of work for this study. Page 15 Item 8.d. - Page 67 FORMAT OF PROPOSAL In order for us to adequately compare and evaluate proposals objectively, all proposals must be twenty- five (25) pages or less. Transmittal Letter (one page maximum): The letter should provide a brief summary of the proposal, concisely describing the project, its goals and the proposed plan of implementation. The letter should be addressed to Debbie Malicoat and signed by the Client Manager assigned to the project. Consultant/Firm Profile: Please respond to the following sections: Overview: Provide a general overview of the firm/consultant(s) that will be assigned to the project. Experience: Describe the firm/consultant's experience in conducting similar fee studies. Include information regarding the resumes of consultant(s) that will be assigned and any other relevant information to demonstrate the firm's experience with engagements of similar size and scope. Approach: Describe the firm/consultant's approach used to gather and analyze data, expected interaction with City staff and estimated timeline for completing the scope of work. Additional Information: Describe any other information not previously mentioned that the consultant believes should be given consideration. This could include any additional tasks not included in the Required Services section above. References: (minimum 3) specifically in local/municipal/county/state agencies. • Name of agency • Contact name to include: title, phone number and email • Population of jurisdiction • Number of employees • Project start and completion date • Brief summary of project Pricing: Provide proposed price for the services as well as any proposed payment terms. FINAL COMMENTS The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, cancel all or part of this RFP, waive any minor irregularities and to request additional information from proposing firms. By requesting proposals, the City is in no way obligated to award a contract or pay expenses of the proposing consultant in connection with the preparation or submission of a proposal. The City's decision to award a contract will be based many factors including but not limited to service, cost, experience and quality. No single factor, such as cost, will determine the final decision to award. The City of Arroyo Grande appreciates the efforts all the consultants have put forth in responding to the Request for Proposal. Page 16 Item 8.d. - Page 68 EXHIBIT B CONSULTANT'S PROPOSAL Page 17 Item 8.d. - Page 69 l l L l L L L L L L l L L l l L l OF Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees for the City of Arroyo Grande October 27, 2014 WOHLFORD CONSULTING Chad Wohlford, Principal Consultant 372 Florin Road, #293 S~cramento, CA 95831 (916) 205~7050 chad wohlfordconsultin .com COLGAN CONSULTING - Joseph Colgan. President 3323 Watt Avenue, #131 Sacramento, CA 95821 (916) 205-2446 ·col an col an-consultin .com L....___ ___________ ___. Item 8.d. - Page 70 [ [ L (L L I L L [ L \L (L I I~ JL \[ I L October 27, 2014 Debbie Malicoat Director of Administrative Services City of Arroyo Grande 3 00 East Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Re: Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of Use~ and Development hnpact Fees Dear Ms. Malicoat: We are very pleased to provide you with this proposal to partner with the City of Arroyo Grande to provide Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees. Wohlford Consulting and Colgan Consulting are dedicated to helping cities improve their understanding and recovery of costs, and we sincerely believe that our superior study approach and consultant experience will best help you achieve your goals. We are submitting a joint proposal that combines our services for the user fee study and the development impact fee study. The principals of our firms have a long-standing professional association and respect for one another. We are continuing this relationship through our proposal to the City of Arroyo Grande that expresses our intention to work together to accomplish the City's needs in the most effective and efficient manner possible. Our two firms bring tremendous skill and experience to this engagement, as well as proven methodologies and project approaches. Furthermore, Chad Wohlford and Joe Colgan performed the City of Arroyo Grande's most recent User Fee and Impact Fee studies, respectively. Consequently, we are familiar with the City's current fee structures. Updated studies with us will utilize the same general methodologies, albeit improved over the intervening years, which will ensure a consistent approach to help the City avoid radical swings in results and ensure that any significant changes are due to cost factors, and not changes in methodology or consultant approach. Thank you for the opportunity to propose our services to you. We look forward to talking with you more about how Colgan Consulting and Wohlford Consulting can help you achieve the City's goals through this project. Please feel free to contact us at any time if you have questions or need clarification of the proposal. Sincerely, ~L~~- Wohlford Consulting 372 Florin Road, #293 Sacramento, CA 95831 (916) 205-7050 J~~~~.~~~ Colgan Consulting 3323 Watt Avenue, #131 Sacramento, CA 95821 {916) 205-2446 Item 8.d. - Page 71 i[ ' \L !l ' [ I '[ l I (l I l (L L [ l (l iL L \l L (l r. ·-- City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees ff able of Contentsf EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ·, · ·. : ,. : ':;·:. · '., COMPANY INTRODUCTIONS . -· -. ' ... COLGAN CONSULTING 2 WOHLFORD CONSULTING 2 USER FEE STUD\': OVERVIEW AND EXPERIENCE . COMPANY HISTORY 3 PROJECT STAFFING PLAN: ONE PROJECT-ONE CONSULTANT 3 Chad Wohlford, MPP A •••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••..•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••. -•••••••• 3 .USER FEE STUDY: REFERENCES · · · · · . ·· . · Exp_erience with Similar Projects ...................... ,, .......................... -...................... 5 Client References .............. ,., .................................................................................... 5 -.USER FEE STUDY: APPROACH ANllWORK PLAN . '. STUDY APPROACH 6 Partnership with the City of Arroyo Grande ... .-.................................................. 6 Qtiality" Control ....................................................................................................... 6 METHODOLOGIES AND WORK PLANS 7 Study Approach ..................................................................................................... 7 SCOPE OF SERVICES 8 Specific Project Deliverables ................................................. ~ ................... : ........... 8 Departments and Service Areas Included in the Cost of Service Study ••••••••• 12 PROJECT SCHEDULE 13 USER FEE STUDY: COST PROPOSAL" . " · .' . -- COST PROPOSAL 14 Project Budget Detail ....................................................................... " ................... 15 WOHLFORD CONSUL TING I COLGAN CONSULTING Item 8.d. - Page 72 le 1l ' .L j[ IL [ [ [ ·[ 'l 1L [ L L L L l L [ _ City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees [Table of Contents) JContinued) JMPACT FEE STUDY: OVERVIEW AND EXPERIENCE . . . IMPACT FEE STUDY: REFERENCES AND CLIENT LIST · . .· IMPACT FEE STUDY: APPROACH AND WORK PLAN · --'· ·· · .:.;-; ,..,t,,;>: .~· .:.t-'., APPROACH 18 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ LEGAL CONSULTING DISCLAIMER 19 FACILITY TYPES COVERED BY THIS PROPOSAL 19 INFORMATION TO BE Pl,tOVIDED BY THE CITY 20 WORK PLAN 20 PROJECT TrMELINE 23 IMPACT FEE STUDY: COST PROPOSAL . . , ·····< ... '~-.:.,-. NOT-TO-EXCEED COST 24 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---'-~~ BILLING 24 ADDITIONAL SERVICES 24 CONCLUSION :': · .. , · · : .. : .. · ;.-.... , CONCLUDING COMMENTS 25 Du.r?tion of Proposal ............................................................................................ 25 Authorized Signatures ......................................................................................... 25 Thank You ............................................................................................................ 25 WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING ii Item 8.d. - Page 73 IC l (l L -[ [ l IL [ I l L l (l /L l L \l l L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees : EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 0 N• 0 ·~ Wohlford Consulting and Colgan Consulting propose to partner with the City of Arroyo Grande to complete a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fee Services. This study will· address two of the primary opportunities for the City to recover its costs for services and capital infrastructure provided by the City. The total proposed cost of this study is $70,475, including $29,975 for the User Fee Study and $40,500 for the Development Impact Fee Study. This project fee covers all services described in this proposal, including all associated expenses. This User Fee portion of the study will employ a unit cost build-up approach to determine the total reasonable cost of individual department services (e.g., Building permits) based upon the effort of staff to provide the services. Tue study will also identify annual revenue impacts and subsidy information. The City and consultant will work together to develop recommendations and facilitate fee changes. The goal is to provide clear cost and subsidy information to allow City leaders to set fees to recover the desired portion of the full cost (0-100%). Our communication plan will also help City leaders and the public to understand and accept the results: Tue Development Impact Fee portion of the study will establish the cost of capital improvements, vehicles, and equipment needed to serve new development by analyzing the impacts of development on each type of facility addressed in this study. Eligible costs will be allocated to various types of development in proportion to their impacts, so that the fees comply with the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act (AB1600), the Quimby Act (where it applies), and relevant case law. The overall approach to the impact fee analysis, as presented in this study, represents the process typically used to calculate defensible impact fees, but it can be varied to meet the specific situation in Arroyo Grande. User Fee Studies and Development Impact Fee Studies normally operate independent of each other, with different schedules, City staff involvement, objectives, methodologies, and deliverables. This proposal presents the studies separately, in order to give the City a more discrete opportunity to evaluate the services. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 1 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 74 (l ' i[ I ([ L l L l (l I [ L l [ [ l [ (L 'l l [C .- City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees . . COMPANY ·1NTRODlCTIONS COLGAN CONSULTING Colgan Consulting Corporation is a small Sacramento-based firm specializing in development impact fees for California cities, counties, and special districts. Contact Information: Colgan Consulting Corporation 3323 Watt Avenue# 131 S~cramento, CA 95821 916.205.2446 jcolgan@colgan-consulting.com Business Type: Corporation (California Corporation# 2650594) Responsible Person: Joseph Colgan, President and Project Manager Years in Business: Colgan Consulting has been in business since May 2004. Years of Expenence Joseph Colgan, project manager for this study, has specialized in California impact fee studies for more than 24 years. WOHLFORD CONSULTING Wohlford Consulting is a small Sacramento-based firm specializing in cost studies for California cities, counties, and special districts. Contact Information: Wohlford Consulting 3 72 Florin Road #293 Sacramento, CA 95831 916.205.7050 chad@wohlfordconsulting.com Business Type: Sole Proprietor Responsible Person: Chad Wohlford, Principal Consultant and Project Manager Years in Business: Wohlford Consulting has been in business since 2005. Years of Experience: Chad Wohlford, project manager for this study, has specialized in California fee studies for more than 16 years. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page2 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 75 IL il I j ([ l [ I I l L [ L l L L 'l L IL l l L [ City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees · : USER FEE STUDY:.OVERVIEW AND EXPERIENCE . ·. " '. This section of the proposal covers the User Fee Study, which will be performed by Wohlford Consulting . . COMPANY HISTORY Wohlford Consulting was founded in early 2005 by Chad Wohlford, MPPA, who left a key position in a major national government consulting finn to start an independent cc5nsulting practice (sole proprietorship) focused on quality performance to meet the needs of local government agencies. The practice, based in Sacramento, California, is entirely owned by Mr. Wohlford, which ensures that all actions of the practice adhere to his standards of excellence. PROJECT STAFFING PLAN: ONE PROJECT-ONE CONSULTANT The only consultant assigned to this project will be Chad Wohlford, MPPA. I will personally complete all technical and project management tasks related to this study, ,including the interviews, meetings, data collection, analytical work, documentation, and presentations. The assignment of a single consultant to conduct all project activities is a great advantage to the City. This will ensure a consistent and stable apprc;>ach, methodology, and style across all departments, divisions, tasks, and other aspects of the study. The City does not need to worry about communication breakdowns, inefficiencies, time delays, "trainee" errors, consultant reassignment, or other problems that arise when multiple consultants of varying experience and skill work on the same project, which is often the case with larger firms. In addition, the person who presents the results to the departments, City Council, or the public, will be the same person who conducted the analysis, thus enhancing the credibility of the study and the quality of the presentations. Ultimately, Arroyo Grande can rest assured that you will have only the highest quality and most experienced consultant working on everything. Chad Wohlford, MPPA Every consulting firm, large or small, is simply a collection of the staff consultants who work for it. The key to determining the potential success of a project is to understand the quality of the consultant that will work directly on your project. The years of experience of the consultant matters far more than the years the firm has been in business. Chad Wohlford has evaluated government costs and operations for over 27 years, and he specializes in cost analysis, with piµticular expertise in the cost-based analysis of building fees. His work has been cited in 'the second edition of the seminal building fee text, Establishing Building Permit Fees (Bouse, 2005), published by the International Codes Council. In addition, --he has conducted over 100 studies and evalua~d at least 30 functional areas for over 70 cities; counties, districts, and states, including the City of Arroyo Grande. Mr. Wohlford holds a Masters in Public Policy and Administration. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page3 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 76 u (L (L (l l l L L L IL (l L L L l . City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Mr. Wohlford's experience and background is described in greater detail below: Consulting Experience Mr. Wohlford is the founder and principal consultant for Wohlford Consulting (est. 2005). He specializes in cost of service analysis, user fee development, and cost allocation. In addition to a general expertise in cost -analysis, he has developed a particular expertise and reputation in the critical area of cost-based analysis of building and. safety fees, including designation as an "expert witness" and references in a published building fee text. Prior to founding Wohlford Consulting, Mr. Wohlford worked for seven years as a consultant, project manager, and state dir~ctor for Maximus, a large, national, publicly traded, consulting firm. At Maxim.us, Mr. Wohlford was the Director of Cost Services for California/Nevada, where he performed a cost and management studies and managed all aspects of the practice. He developed or enhanced the primary cost of service analysis techniques, processes, tools, protocols, and software used by the firm in the West and propagated to other states. He also trained and mentored many fee study consultants. It is important to note that, even as management responsibilities increased, Mr. Wohlford continued to maintain a high workload of direct project services for clients. Mr. Wohlford's contribution to each consulting engagement is a rare combination of significant technical experience, effective project management, and strong communication skills. He has managed and conducted a wide variety of cost analysis studies for government clients. He is a detail-oriented and hands-on consultant and project manager who excels in communicating with clients. A subsequent section of this proposal provides a more detailed listing of clients and functional areas served. Direct Government Experience Mr. Wohlford has worked or consulted for government agencies since 1986. In particular, his experience from the "inside" of government operations has allowed him to become very knowledgeable in the functions, environment, and financing of various local government disciplines. His 12 years of internal government employment (and general· roles) included analytical and management roles for: • Sacramento County Department of Health and Human Services • Sacramento County Parkin& Enterprise • Sacramento ,County Department of General Services • Sacramento County Department of Health • City of San Luis Obispo -Human Relations Commission • State of California -California Conservation Corps • U.S. Department of Commerce -International Trade Administration WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page4of25 Item 8.d. - Page 77 \~ ! :L ~. iL (l I :L f L IL 1L l (L ! !L I I iL I I IL 1 IL I I iL ! IL L L l L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees · · ·: · USER FEE STUDY: REFERENCES · : -· . . . Experience with Similar Projects Mr. Wohlford has worked on over 100 user fee, cost allocation, operational analysis, and other cost of service analysis studies----primarily in Califoqria. His past clients include cities and counties ranging in size of population from over a million to less than 6,000. Client References The impressions of past clients of the proposed consultant are the best indicator of what you can expect for your study. Chad Wohlford has served over 70 different jurisdictions (some for multiple projects) in over 30 functional areas. I encourage you to contact any past clients, so I would be pleased to provide you with more comprehensive contact information at your request. The following list is a selection of references that comprise a recent representative sample of project types for Chad Wohlford: Client Contact Type of Study City of Santa Rosa • Development Services Cost of Chuck Regalia, Community Dev. Director Services Study (2013) (707) 543-3189 • Population: 170,000 cregalia@srcity.org • # ofEmolovees: 1,239 Imperial County Env. Health Dept. • Cost of Service Study (2011) JeffLamoure, Deputy Director • Population: 181,000 (760)336-8530 • #of Employees: 2,254 . iefflamoure@co.imoerial.ca.us City of Las Vegas • :Building Fee Study (2014) Chris Knight, Dir. of Building and Safety • Cost-based unit fee analysis (702) 229-6257 . • Population: 589,000 chknight@LasVegasNevada.gov • # ofEmplovees: 3,500 City of Thousand Oaks • Citywide User Fee Study (2013) Brent Sakaida, Budget Manager • Building Fee Study (2011) (805) 449-2259 • Population: 129,000 bsakaida@toaks.org • # of Emnlovees: 489 City of Coronado • Cost Allocation Plan (2010) Jerome Torres, Sr. Mgt. Analyst • Citywide User Fee Study (2011) (619) 522-7305 • Population: 23,000 jtorres@coronado.ca.us • #of Employees: 233 City of Chico • Development Services Cost of Mark Wolfe, Planning Services Director Services Study (2014) (530) 879-6801 • Population: 88,000 mark.wolfe@chicoca.gov • # ofEmoloyees: 353 WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 5 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 78 L L IL L L I 'L IL I [L IL 'L L L L L L L IL · City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees · USER FEE STUDY: APPROACH AND 'VORK PLAN . . . ~ . STUDY APPROACH The City will benefit from the proven approach and quality-based methodologies employed by Wohlford Consulting to perform my studies. The professional analysis of costs and related data, along with a serious attention to detail, results in a top quality product and results that you can be proud to share with your City Council, other departments; the public, and your neighboring counties and cities. A description of the key features and advantages of my approach usually eq.compasses several pages in my proposals, but given the space limitations here, only the most critical ones are described below: Partnership with the City of Arroyo Grande One word summarizes my overall approach: PARTNERSHIP. The City of Arroyo Grande can engage a consultant with tremendous experience in government cost and operations and many dozens of client organizations. This consultant is a solid expert in the field of government user fees with a strong perspective backed by years of professional work. Nevertheless, I never -let my experience or expertise get in the way of making sure that your study fits you. I understand that the best techniques are insufficient, maybe even counterproductive, if they are not adapted to the individual circumstances of each client. I will - not apply a cookie-cutter approach or assume that I already know ''what is best" for you. I will listen to you and work with you in a close partnership to ensure that I understand your goals and the unique circumstances in the City. Nobody knows.more about Arroyo Grande than the City staff, and I will take full advantage of your knowledge and perspective. This partnership forces us to focus each step in the study process to the ultimate goal of meeting the needs of the City. With your constant involvement, I will be continually reminded of my commitment to you, and you will form a better understanding of your study. Together we will make a great team. Quality Control A cost analysis study is an integrated process. All study components are interrelated, so bad data at any step in the process will cause the ultimate results to be flawed. A flawed study will be embarrassing to us both and may not be implemented. A flawed study will cause us to do unnecessary additional work. We want to avoid all of these situations and the resultant damage to our reputations. To avoid accuracy problems and o1her quality flaws, Wohlford Consulting employs a rigorous Quality Control process designed to ensure that we have covered all of the issues, appropriately accounted for positions and resources in the ,models, and factored all other data fairly and accurately in the study. Every critical step in my study process includes a Quality Control check The focus on quality is directly related to Wohlford Consulting's belief that a cost of service study is not simply a commodity that is best purchased based upon price. From our experience - WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING ·Page6 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 79 l L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees and deep llllderstanding of the processes and outcomes of these studies, we know that simple mistakes and inferior effort can directly result in huge revenue implications for our clients. Knowing the right way to approach a particular analysis can mean the difference between recovering many (or hundreds of) thousands of dollars--or not. We work very hard to ensure that you will have the very best information on which to make your fee setting decisions. METHODOLOGIES AND WORK PLANS To ensure the best possible outcomes for the City·of Arroyo Grande, Wohlford Consulting uses a detailed, but flexible, approach and work plan. The methods are the result of years of experience that taught Us the way to achieve success in the most efficient manner. The important thing to keep in mind about the study approach is that Wohlford Consulting will be readily available to City staff for consultation and assistance. We will not simply assign tasks and walk away while you struggle to understand and complete those tasks. We will be there to help whenever needed. The remaihder of this section describes the general approaches used for the study. Study Approach The methodology to evaluate user fees or service costs is deceptively simple in concept. I utilize a "unit cost build-up" approach that seeks to identify the "fully loaded" cost for each unit of service (fee activity). This approach is superior (more accurate and defensible) to the ''top down approach" used by other firms (divide the total cost of services by the number of fees); since it is not dependent upon fluctuating activity levels or other unrelated factors to calculate a unit fee. Through the years of performing and continuously improving these types of studies, Wohlford Consulting has developed an approach and work plan that facilitates a successful study. Part of this approach is to customize each baseline project step and subtask to best fit your individual circumstances, priorities, and needs. Furthennore, I will identify new and unique issues in Arroyo Grande that will warrant special attention. In that light, the City should consider the following list simply as a general outline that addresses the basic elements of the study: Work Plan Outline 1. Establish and/or restructure the inventory of fee services (current and potentiiil) 2. Identify the staff positions that work on each fee service 3. Calculate the direct-productive hourly rate for each position 4. Determine the time for each position to perform fee tasks 5. Calculate the direct cost of the staff time for each fee 6. Distribute indirect and overhead costs to each fee 7. Sub-allocate supporting activities to fee services 8. Perform quality control processes (constant) 9. Calculate revenue impacts 10. Perform the "gap analysis" (unit and total subsidies) 11. Perform review processes 12. Consider Recommendations 1-3. Docwnent and present results WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 7 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 80 [ L L L [ L L L L L L L L L· L IL I IL jL I' L I / e "l.~'11- _ City of Arroyo Grande fJf ................ _.,,, Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Since this study is a collaborative process, almost every step in the process will involve meetings or discussions with City staff, who will have the opportunity to influence, enhance, and review most aspects of the study. As you can imagine, ''the devil is in the details" of a Cost of Service Study. The specific work plan for this project would include a detailed expansion of the summary methodology described above. Each of these steps is a significant undertaking with many potential delays, inefficiencies, errors, annoyances, sidetracks, and other serious pitfalls. My job as the consultant is to facilitate the entire process to your success. I will employ my experience and expertise to ideµtify, prevent, and resolve problems and process issues; facilitate data collection and devise alternative techniques when needed; foster communication and decision-making; and keep the . study progressing. SCOPE OF SERVICES The City of Arroyo Grande would most benefit from a project scope of services that addresses the basic needs of the City, plus something extra to ensure success. From my experience, I generally know the tasks and deliverables that are necessary to achieve your goals in an efficient and effective fashion. At the same time, I understand that City funds to pay for consultants are limited. Consequently, I devised a scope of services that will accomplish your goals in the most cost-effective manner. This balance is important for the City to realize the full value of the· study. The proposed scope of services reflects my current undeFstancling of the needs of the City. At the beginning .of the project, I will work with the City to refine this scope of services to best meet your objectives. Specific Project Deliverables The general scope of services for this project includes a Cost of Service Study for each user fee department. All of these studies involve the determination and distribution of costs for services performed by the City. However, I included several other "deliverables" to ensure that the City's needs are fully met. For this proposed study, Wohlford Consulting will complete and deliver the following items and information to the City of Arroyo Grande: Summary List of Project Deliverables ./ Cost of Service Study ./ On-Site Meetings ./ Fee Comparison ./ Presentations ./ Fee Study Summary Report ./ Electronic Models ./ Electronic Copies of Results ./ Other Services Included These deliverables are described below: WOIIl..FORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page8 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 81 l rl I I [ ·l I IL (l I :L \.l il IL L ) (L I (L L !L I City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Cost of Service Study W~hlford Consulting will work closely and collaboratively with department staff and management to set up the study and gather relevant data. I will use my proprietary analytical model(s) to calculate the full unit cost of user fee services and activities that are potentially viable new fees. In addition to the individual cost of fee services, the Cost of Service Study will identify subsidy levels and potential fee adjustments. As part of the larger study in each department/division, the analysis will include a determination of the cost-recovery (fully-burdened) hourly rates for each staff member. If unit data is not available or feasible, we will determine the cost-recovery performance of program areas and identify potential fee changes accordingly. If activity volume data is available, we will also determine the potential revenue impacts of current and recommended fee levels. If desired, I will work with the City to establish recommended fee levels. . Wohlford Consulting will work directly with department management to reorganize and restructure the fees to best fit your current (or desired) operating practices, policy goals, customer service objectives, and administrative needs. A fee study is often the opportunity the departments have been "waiting for" in order to solve ongoing problems . and make the fee schedule more appropriate for the department's business. I will deliver detailed worksheets that demonstrate the cost components for each fee calculation, as well as summary documentation of the unit costs and overall results. These worksheets also contain subsidy analyses for unit costs and annual performance, percentage results, change calculations, revenue impacts, and other metrics. These worksheets can be customized to meet the formatting needs of the City. The City will receive printed and pdf copies of the final results worksheets, as well as Excel worksheets of the final fee results to facilitate future analysis and distribution. In addition. the City will receive a pdf version of the entire final model for each department studied. Fee Comparison The City has requested comparisons of Arroyo Grande's fees with other jurisdictions. First, I will spend the necessary time to discuss the conceptual and practical issues related to fee comparisons with the City, in order to ensure that the City has a complete understanding about the utility and validity of these types of comparisons. The meaningfulness of comparisons depends greatly on the selection of the sample of appropriate target cities and the most important fees to compare. I will work with the City to select the 5-7 candidates for comparison, as well as the targeted fees. We. will conduct our solicitation of fee data from other jurisdictions through website research, phone calls, email, and other approaches necessary to accomplish this task. Following the collection of the data, we will document the results, which normally consists of a matrix of fees with side-by-side comparisons. The City will .have the opportunity to review the draft results and influence the final format of the documentation, including whether it is incorporated in to th<? final report or delivered separately. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page9 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 82 [ L ' il I I \l !L t [ lL 1L L \l [ [ IL ( ·L IL L L L L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Fee Study Summary Report Wohlford Consulting will produce a report (draft and final versions) to describe and document the general approach, methodologies, related issues, and study results for the· study. If requested, I will provide 5 bound copies of the final fee study' report, along with a reproducible (unbound) version and electronic file (pelf) for further internal distribution by the City. However, in an effort to reduce paper consumptfon, I will encourage the City to forego the paper copies and accept only the comprehensive pelf version instead. Electronic Copies of Results Wohlford Consulting will provide electronic copies (pelf and/or Excel) of the summary results for the Cost of Service Study to the City. The Excel worksheets will have the capability for the City to update the fees regularly for inflation or other factors. On-Site Meetings Communication between City management/staff and the consultant is critical to success of the study. Consequently, Wohlford Consulting assumes that two multi-day site visits will be necessary for the Cost of Service Study, with multiple meetings during each visit. During these on-site meetings, the CitY and the consultant will discuss expectations and City issues, interview staff, assign data collection tasks, collect data, review work in progress, examine results, plan strategy for analysis and implementation, and address other issues and tasks as necessary. In order to minimize disruptions and the impact on · staff workload, I will conduct the remainder of the work yv.ith the City through · webmeetings, email, phone, fax, mail, and other media. Presentations As part of my "Communication Plan," Wohlford Consulting will produce two formal presentations on-site in Arroyo Grande. Additional meetings/presentations can be · available via webmeetings. I will work with the City to determine the most appropriate audiences and best timing. These presentations include: 1. Kick-off and Orientation: I will meet with all managers and staff involved in the study to explain the project approach, processes, expectations, and potential outcomes. This is an opportunity for all of us to start the project with a mutual under5tanding and commitment. And, 2. City Council Workshop: I will conduct a presentation of the study(ies) to the City Council, a subcommittee, city management, and/or -key staff to ensure that they fully understand the methodology, philosophy, findings, and/or recommendations that the City may ask them to consider and approve. The City can designate the point in the project when the second presentation should occur (e.g., draft, final results), as well as the audience (e.g., full Council, subcommittee, special public meeting). City staff will help us focus this presentation appropriately to best WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSUL TING Page JO of25 Item 8.d. - Page 83 I[ I [ l [l l 'L !L ·L IL l IL IL L IL I L /L I (l I L 1L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees conform to the nature of the audience and the objectives of the City. In addition to the factual findings of the study, this presentation can includ~ a discussion of general fee issues, acknowledgement and defense of potential challenges, discussion of comparative factors, future considerations, and a number of other factors from my professional experience. To give the City of Arroyo Grande greater flexibility and cost-control, and to minimize the baseline fixed project fee, I limited the number of presentations in this proposal. Depending on the outcomes of the study, the relative involvement of critics and other interested parties in your community, and other factors, the City may recognize the need for additional presentations. Electronic Models Wohlford Consulting will provide a series of mode]s in Excel worksheet format to allow the City to simply adjust fees, rates, and charges to reflect future inflationary cost increases in accordance with the repommended update approach(es) provided by the consultant. The proposed deliverables do not include the full-featured proprietary cost analysis software used by the consultant to prepare the study. At the risk of irritating you, I intend always to be honest and frank with the City. It is my considerable experience that the provision of cost analysis software to clients is problematic-for the clients. The production of these studies requires significant initial and refresher training and continued application to maintain competence. Fee consultants endure a year or more of training and project application before gaining the ability to independently conduct the studies. Given the normal workloads of City staff and the infrequency of fee study. development, it is most common for client staff to lose proficiency by the very first time they try to complete a study internally-thus necessitating involvement with a consultant again (either for study correction or additional training). In most cases, it would be more cost-effective to engage the consultant for periodic full scale updates (perhaps every three to five years) or with internal inflationary updates on an annual basis. Other Services Included The true value of a cost consultant is not in my ability to perform mathematics, develop spreadsheets, or gather data. I am most helpful when I can use my experience, expertise,. and perspective to help you solve problems and accomplish your objectives. To this end, my studies include more than just the documents and calculated results that I provide as deliverables. I want to encourage you to mine my experience to help you reach solutions that benefit your City and your public. Discussion of significant issues will occur on a regular basis during the course of the study, and I will be available for more focused discussions on topics that are important to you. Saine of the other areas of service include policy consultation, strategies and alternatives, historical perspective, and post- project support. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 11 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 84 L l L il I L L IL l ( 'l (l l L .L L (L (l \l IL I - !l l City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Departments and Service Areas Included in the Cost of Service Study The City of Arroyo Grande's User Fee Study in 2007 included Planning, Engineering, Building, Fire, and Police. It appears that there has been some organizational restructuring in the City, but the basic functions remain the same. Consequently, Wohlford Consulting proposes to focus this study on the same general fee areas, although they may be organized or titled differently today, with one exception. From our review of the current City organizational structure and fee · schedule, we have identified the following candidates for analysis: • Community Development: o Building o Planning o Engineering o Neighborhood Services • Police (Note: In 2010, the Fire Department was organized under a Joint Powers Authority. Any former Fire fee-related responsibilities not transferred to other City departments are now under the purview of the JP A, and there is no longer an Arroyo Grande Fire Department to review.) The remainder of this section describes the scope of services and approach for each of these service areas. Building Division The City of Arroyo Grande uses a cost-based Building fee approach originally developed for the City by Wohlford Conswting in 2007. Wohlford Consulting proposes to maintain · the City's current general fee structure and update it with improvements in analytical methodology and study processes. ' Planning and Engineering Divisions. Police Department The analysis of all other fees will follow the standard approach, which is to calculate the unit cost of each fee service. For deposit-based fees (i.e .• direct time charges), we will establish productive hourly-rates and potential changes to deposit levels. For valuation- based fees, I will establish the cost recovery performance within the particular fee area and calculate potential charges to the percentages applied to calculate the fees. We will also calculate the cost of most non-fee services, in order to distribute those costs as necessary to help other services and :functions better understand their overall costs. Neighborhood Services Division While the Neighborhood Services (Code Enforcement) program was not included in the previous study, Wohlford Consulting believes it is an important area to evaluate also, since some of the cost for Code Enforcement can be allocated to Planning and Building Fees, thereby enhancing overall cost recovery for the City. Consequently, we included at least a basic analysis of Code Enforcement into the proposed study. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 12 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 85 \l L l IL L l ·L L L L ·L IL L IL L L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Project Limitations To maintain the focus of the study, enhance the City's understanding, and provide a reasonable fixed fee proposal, it is obviously necessary for us to define the limits to the scope of the study. This proposal describes the deliverables and service areas I intend to cover. I am flexible in my approach and will modify the study as much as possible to meet the needs of the City. flowever, to avoid confusion and conflicting expectations, it · is important to note the key exclusions of this study, which include: taxes, levies, fines, and punitive charges; utility rates and service charges; public transit fares; parking rates;. tolls; internal service rates, allocations, and charges; public records fees; fees set by external authorities (e.g., state law/regulation, other agencies); ambulance/EMS rates, fees set by contract; equipment, facility, and infrastructure use (rental) or impact rates; contract charges to other agencies; services without discernible time data or cost factors; negotiations with cogn.iz.ant agency(ies); audit and/or litigation support (beyond general questions); and/or on-site visits following the conclusion of the study. As a "full cost" analysis, Wohlford Consulting will attempt to incorporate all City costs into the study, including Citywide overhead or contributions of effort from other departments and divisions. In some cases, the City will need to provide this secondary cost information to us, since my cost analysis is limited to the City Departments described in this proposal. PROJECT SCHEDULE Wohlford Consulting is committed to timely completion of the study to meet the objectives of the City. Under normal circumstances, the City of Arroyo Grande could expect results from the , Cost of Service Study in approximately four months from the project's initiation, depending on the City's commitment to timely completion and staff responsiveness. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 13 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 86 l l [ (L ! !L L !L \l I L IL ' 1L I IL I L L l /l I (l ! ~ -f)..~:l .,,-. ""'"•· .. --'lt City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees . USER FEE STUDY: COST PROPOSAL COST PROPOSAL Wohlford Consulting proposes a fixed professional fee of $28,375, plus a total of $1,600 in fixed expenses, for a total fixed project fee of $29,975. These fees cover all of the deliverables and work tasks described in the proposal for a complete cost of service analysis. These fees are ''total, not to exceed" project fees for the proposed scope of service. The City of Arroyo Grande will not incur any additional charges (e.g., overhead, printing, travel) unless they are related to additional services or uncommon expenditures requested by the City outside the contracted scope of service. Wohlford Consulting endeavors to provide value to the City of Arroyo Grande, as I set rates and task fees to ensure the cost-benefit ratio is. disproportionately skewed toward the benefit the CitY will receive. My cost structure reflects my senior-level experience and skill, quality of the work I provide, my ability to work quickly, and the lower overhead structure that a smaller practice permits. The blend of all of these factors allows us a competitive fee that still addresses all of the needs of the City. Given my lower cost structure, ~y rates are designed to provide for greater service and quality, and a more robust scope of services with fewer "add-ons," often for the same project fees as competing firms. A cost of service study is not a "commodity" that can bf? readily compared on the basis of price, since the assigned consultant makes a tremendous difference. Cost analysis results can vary by many thousands of dollars, depending on the skill and experience of the consultant. Consequently, decisions based on an unbalanced focus on the consultant fee can directly affect the quality of the study, resulting in errors or missed opportunities that can ultimately cost the _ C_ity revenue equal to many multiples of the overall project cost-not just the price ~ifference between two competing proposals. 'WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 14 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 87 L 1L L L L il l il iL L ; (L i jl . L L L [L IL [L I 1L I L I ' City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Pr:oject Budget Detail The following table shows the fee for each component of the proposed project: Full Cost Study Project Fee Details Project Componen.t Hours Fixed Fee Proiect Manaeement: PrQiect Plannim! and Control Included* Quality Assurance Processes Included* Communication Plan/Presentations Included"' Summarv Reports Included* Fixed Project Hourly Rate $ 125 Full Cost Analysis: Buildimi: 55 $ 6,875 Planning. 52 $ 6,SOO Code Enforcement 10 $ 1,250 Engineering 52 $ 6,SOO Police 48 $ 6,000 Fee Comparison Survey 10 $ 1,250 Exnenses $ 1,600 Total Potential Project Fee: 227 $ 29,975 * The cost for Project Management tasks has been factored into the individual project components. Billing Milestones Wqhlford Consulting will work with the City to establish a series of "billing milestones" to guide invoices and payments. These milestones represent the completion of significant drafts, tasks, deliverables, or other project components . Other Services If the City wishes to engage Wohlford Consulting for services not included in the proposed scope of services, we can nonnally establish mutually agreeable fixed fees or use the standard hourly add-on rate of $150, plus expenses. The following table identifies the cost of certain potential "add-on" services at the City's request: Cost of Additionizl Services Proiect Component Fee Presentations and Meetings: On-Site $1,900 I day+ expenses Virtual (web/phone/video conference) $150 /hour New Presentation Development $150/ hour Audit or Litigation Suooort (per hour) $ 295 I hour+ expenses ENI) OF USER FEE STUDY DESCRIPTION WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 15 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 88 /l ' 1L I iL (L ' iL L~ L L 1L IL I [L L JL 'L l ·( l (L : ' L L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees IMPACT FEE STUDY: OVERVIEW AND EXPERIENCE This section of the proposal covers the development impact fee study, which will be performed by Colgan Consulting Corporation. COMPANY HISTORY Colgan Consulting Corporation is a small Sacramento~based finn specializing in development impact fees for California cities, counties, and special districts. Colgan Consulting has been in business for over ten years. Joseph Colgan, project manager for this study, has specialized in California impact fee studies for more than 24 years. PROJECT STAFFING Joe Colgan, president of Colgan Consulting will serve as the as Project Manager and lead consultant for the impact fee study, and will personally perform all work relating to impact fees in this proposal. Joe is a professional city planner and a Iµltionally-recognized impact fee expert who has specialized in impact fee consulting for more than 24 years. His background includes ten years of direct experience in local government as a planner and planning director. Since 1990, he has prepared at least 100 impact fee studies in six states. The vast majority of that work was done in California, but he has also prepared impact fee studies for clients in Oregon, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, and Florida. He has spoken on impact fees at many conferences and seminars nationally, and has served three terms on the Board of the National Impact Fee Roundtable~ including one term as Vice Chair. Joe Colgan's key impact fee qualifications include: • A thorough understanding of the legal framework for impact fees, including the Mitigation Fee Act, the Quimby Act, and constitutional requirements for defensible impact fees. • Wide-ranging expertise in the technical aspects of impact analysis, fee calculation and nexus documentation and the ability to apply innovative analytical methods to complex situations. • First-hand knowledge of a wide variety of cost allocation and fee calculation methodologies • Experience calculating impact fees for water, sewer, transportation, and drainage systems; parks and open space; conununity and recreation centers; libraries; police and fire facilities, and general government facilities. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSl)LTING Page 16 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 89 rl ! . IL L tl [ L 'L ;L L ll L :L L L \L 1L ll IL I IL City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees • A background in land use planning and capital facilities planning, as well as direct involvement in the programming, planning, design, and construction of numerous of public facilities. • The ability to understand and interpret planning documents, facility master plans, and engineering studies. • Knowledge of cash flow modeling and the use of discounted present value calculations to incorporate past or future debt service payments into impact fees. • Sensitivity to local political environments, and experience in productively involving stakeholders and the public in the impact fee process. " ----" ~ · .. livIPACT FEE.STUDY: .REFERENCES .t\ND CLJENT'LIST · · -· :. -,· ' l • • I • ' ~ • ,>I •• REFERENCES Below is a list of references for recent Colgan Consulting Corporation impact fee studies. City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA Impact Fee Study for Parks, Libraries, Community and Recreation Centers and Police Facilities (Impac! fee ordinance adopted by the City Council on June 4, 201.4) Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer Phone: 909-477-2740 x 4020 Email: Dan.James@CityofRC.us City ofWildomar, CA Comprehensive Impact Fee Study (Impact fees adopted by City Council on 1122/14) Dan York. P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer Phone: 951-677-7551 Ext.211 Email: dyork@cityofwildomar.org City of St. Helena, CA Comprehensive Impact Fee Study (Impact fees adopted by City Council on I 0/22/13) Karen Scalabrini, Finance Director (now Finance Director for the City of Ukiah) Phone: 707-463-6220 , Email: kscalabrini@cityofukiah.com City of Vista, CA Traffic Impact Fee Study Update (Impact fees adopted by City Council on 4/23/13) John Conley, AICP, Director, Community Development and Engineering Departments Phone: 760-639-6100 Email: jconley@cityofvista.com Previous studies for the City of Vista include Fire Protection Impact Fee Study (2008), Traffic Impact Fee Study (2007) and Park and Recreation Impact Fee Study (2006). WOHLFORD CONSUL TING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 17 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 90 l :L I i[ (l I IL 1l :L ·L L \[ L ,[ L 1 L I it rL [l L l City of Arroyii Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees City of Moreno Valley, CA Comprehensive Impact Fee Update (Completed 2012) Mark W. Sambito, P.E., Engineering Division Manager/Land Development Division Phone:951-413-3170 Email: marksa@moval.org The 2012 impact fee study update was the fifth impact fee study prepared for the City of Moreno Valley by Joe Colgan since 1998. PARTIAL CLIENT LIST Joe Colgan prepared Arroyo Grande's last impact fee study, and in the past has done development impact fee studies for several other cities in San Luis Obispo County, including San Luis Obispo, Pismo Beach, Grover Beach, Morro Bay and Paso Robles, as well as Santa Maria and Lompoc in Santa Barbara County. Below is a list of recent Colgan Consulting Corporation impact foe study clients. • City of Albuquerque, NM. Peer Review of Impact Fee Program. (2011) • City of Desert Hot Springs, CA. Peer Review oflmpact Fee Study (2009) • City of Encinitas, CA. Impact Fee Study (2014-In Progress) • Mountain House Community Services District (San Joaquin County), CA. Update of Transportation Improvement.and Community Facilities Fees (2009) • City of Manhattan Beach, CA. Impact Fee Feasibility Study (2009) • City of Moreno Valley, CA. Impact Fee Update Study (2011-12) • City of Orange, CA. Impact Fee Study (2011-12) • Orange County Fire Authority, Irvine, CA. Impact Fee Feasibility Study (2007) and Impact Fee Study (2008) • City of Poway, CA. Impact Fee Study (2008) • City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Impact Fee Study (2014) • City of St. Helena, CA. Impact Fee Study (2012-13) • City of Vista, CA. Update of Traffic Impact Fee Study (2013) • City ofWildomar, CA. Impact Fee Study (2012-13) · UYIPACT FEE ST_UDY: APPROACH AND \VORK PLAN :· ' . APPROACH The approach to this study is designed to provide an objective and defensible basis for the adoption and implementation of development impact fees that satisfy the requirementS of the California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.) the Quimby Act (Government Code Section 6647?) and relevant case law. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 18 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 91 c ;L !L \l , ( i [ L L l L '[ -1 ;l '[ l ;L I \l il I IL I 1 l I I [[ City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees The specific elements of that approach are set forth in the work plan that follows. In broad outline, this study would involve: • Working with City staff to clarify the City's needs and objectives for the study and tracking the progress of the study • Working with City staff and to update data on existing and future development in the study area • Working with City staff to establish appropriate levels of service for each facility type • Working with City staff to prepare needs analyses and cost estimates for facilities needed to serve new development • Selecting appropriate methods for measuring the impacts of development on various facilities and calculating impact fees - • Creating a spreadsheet model and calculating the impact fees • Preparing a report documenting the impact fee calculations, the nexus supporting the proposed fees, and the data and methodologies used in the study • Presenting the study report and findings to the City Council • Providing implementation recommendations The specific scope of services offered in this proposal is defined by the tasks described in the work plan. The scope of this proposal excludes legal, engineering, architectural and appraisal services. LEGAL CONSULTING DISCLAIMER Consulting staff assigned to this project are experiencedJn calculating defensible impact fees and are highly knowledgeable regarding the technical aspects of impact fee calculations. However, Colgan Consulting Corporation does not employ attorneys and cannot provide legal advice. We , expecUo rely on the City Attorney for any legal review needed in connection with the impact fee study. FACILITY TYPES COVERED BY Tms PROPOSAL As indicated in the Request for Proposals, this study will calculate updated impact fees for the following types of facilities: · • Traffic Signals • Park Improvements • Transportation Facilities • Police FacilitiesNebicles • Drainage Facilities • Fire FacilitiesN ehicles • Recreation Community Centers • WaterNeutralization WOHLFORD CONSUL TING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 19 of2S Item 8.d. - Page 92 l .._; L L (l L L L rL L (L L ~; L (l 1L I ll I IL IL ' iL I 1L City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY The work to be performed by the Consultant on the impact fee study will depend extensively on information to be provided by the City. Among the types of information that may be needed by the Consultant for this study are: • The current General Plan, and any specific plans or other relevant planning studies • Available data on the amount of existing and development and planned future development in the study area by land use type • The Capital Improvement Program, level of service policies, facility master plans and other facility planning data, plus inventories of existing facilities, vehicles and equipment of types to be funded by impact fees • Infonnation on service demand, such as calls for seivice by land use type for the Police Department • Cost estimates for land, capital improvements, vehicles, ~d/or equipment to be funded by impact fees • Information on capital improvement funding sources and financing plans and any outstanding debt related to existing capital faci~ties This proposal assumes that all information needed to perform the work covered by the scope of this proposal will be provided by the City or is readily available from other sources such as the U.S. Census Bureau or the California Department of Finance. WoRKPLAN The following tasks comprise the detailed work plan for this impact fee study. These tasks are based on the processes typically used to calculate impact fees. They may be varied to meet the needs of this project. Task 1. Project Initiation. To initiate this study, the Consultant will meet with key City staff members and carry out other activities required to initiate the study, including: • Attending a kickoff meeting with staff to discuss the goals, work plan and schedule for the project • Piscussing the study process and information needs, as well as any issues of potential concern to the staff, the City Council, or others • Establishing project coord~tion and reporting procedures • Reviewing the City's current development impact fees • Identifying key staff and information resources • Conducting initial interviews with key staff Work Product: Technical memorandum discussing any issues identified in Task I. T_ask 2. Existing and Future Development Data. In this task, the Consultant will collect and analyze data on existing and future development as necessary, and compile it in a fonn useful for this study. Steps in that process may include: WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page20 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 93 .. , ( ' ,.,., ... L \L L :l IL L L iL tL ' IL I L L ([ L l L L. City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees • Establishing boundaries of the study area to be used in the analysis (e.g., existing City vs. sphere of influence) • Defining the breakdown of land use types to be used in the study • Analyzing available land use data to establish a baseline of existing development and a forecast of future development by land use type • Specifying demand variables and demand factors to be used in assessing the impact of development on each type of facility addressed in the study • Preparing development data tables for the impact fee analysis and the study report Work Product: Development data tables tor the impact fee analvsis and studv report. Task 3. Facility Needs Analysis. Using forecasts of future development from Task 2, the Consultant will work with the City to identify new facilities, facility expansions, or vehicles and equipment needed to serve future development. Steps in that process include: • Reviewing adopted level--of-service standards and actual service levels for relevant facility types • Working with City staff to identify the operative level~of-service standard to be used in the impact fee analysis for each facility type • Identifying any existing deficiencies relative to the selected level of service standard and accounting for those deficiencies in the needs analysis • Projecting the additional service demand that will be created by new development, based on selected service levels • Translating service demand into facility needs by facility type • Identifying the costs that are eligible for !mpact fee funding Work Product: List of development-related facility needs and costs to be used in the impact fee calculations. Task 4. Impact Fee Analysis. Using the information from Tasks 2 and 3, the Consultant will prepare the impact fee analysis and calculate impact fees by land use type for each type of facility addressed in the study. The steps in that process may include: • Reviewing the methods used to calculate existing impact fees and recommending alternative methods where appropriate • Constructing a spreadsheet model incorporating data on new development, demand factors, and eligible facility costs • Specifying formulas in the model to allocate facility costs in proportion to the impact of new development by land use type • Calculating a cost per unit of service for each facility type • Converting the cost per unit of service into a schedule of impact fees per unit of d~velopment, by land use ~tegory • Projecting potential revenue from the proposed impact fees WOIIl..FORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 21 of2S Item 8.d. - Page 94 ll I ;L IL I :l I ll 1l (l l 'L l IL I {l I ' IL IL City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees . Work Product: Narrative and tables explaining the nexus analysis, the impact fee calculations,_ and the proposed impact fee schedules in the study report. Task 5. Impact Fee Comparison. As part of this study, the consultant will compare the City~s existing impact fees, and the impact fees proposed in this study, with those charged by up to six · ~ther jurisdictio~ selected by City staff. It is important-to note that fees calculated in this study must be justified on their own merits, irrespective of fees charged by other cities. For that reason, we recommend that the fee comparison be presented in a staff report rather than as part of this study itself. Task 6. Study Report Tue impact fee study report will document the nexus between proposed fees and the impacts of development for each type of impact fee calculated in the study, and explain the data, methodology and formulas used in the fee calculations. It will also propose findings to satisfy the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act. The study report will be developed in the following stages: • As a way of expediting the study process, the Consultant will submit preliminary drafts of portions of the study report for review by City staff. • Next, an administrative draft of the entire study report, incorporating any previous staff revisions, will be submitted for staff review. • Then a final draft document will be prepared for the City Council and public review. ·• Any additional changes will be incorporated into the final study report. The study report will include the following components: • Executive Summary , • A chapter discussing the legal requirements for impact fees and methods used to calculate the fees • A chapter presenting data on existing and future development in the study area and the demand variables used to measure the impacts of development on individual facility types • A separate chapter for each type of fee presenting the data and methodology used in the analysis, explaining the impact fee calculations, and documenting the nexus - • A chapter on implementation, recommending steps to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act through proper administration of the impact fees _Work Products: Preliminary drafts.· complete draft for staff review.· final drafi document for City Council and public distribution,· final report. Draft and final reports will be submitted electronicallv in pdf.fOrmat. For the final report. five bound hard copies and one unbound hard copy will be delivered An electron;c corzy of the Excel spreadsheet model will also be provided to the City upon completion .o(the study. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page 22 ()f25 Item 8.d. - Page 95 IL il 1L I I \l 1L I l L ([ ;L ll I il (L IL :L (L IL ~l il j lL City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees Task 7. City Council Presentation. This proposal includes a cost allowance for time and expenses for the Project Manager to a~end one public meeting with the City Co~~tl. A. PowerPoint presentation will be prepared for that meeting. Note: Jn addition to one site visit for the City Council presentation, the proposed project budget includes the cost of two site visits by the Project Manager during the course of the study--one for the project kickoff meetings and one additional working site visit. Costs for those site visits are included in the budget for other tasks, as indicated in the project budget table. Task 8. Additional Consultations. This proposal does not include a cost allowance for additional consultations or litigation support in the event impact fees based on this study should be challenged. The Project Manager will be available for additional consultations on a time and expenses basis at the same hourly rate charged for this study. For depositions or expert testimony an hourly rate would be negotiated. PROJECT TIMELINE The timeline for this type of impact fee study depends to a considerable extent on the availability of data and policy decisions provided by the City. Based on our experience with at least 100 impact fee studies, a project of this complexity can reasonably be completed in six-to-eight months. - ,,-· A timeframe in that range avoids placing an excessive burden on staff to provide information on an accelerated schedule, and allows ample time for review and revisions. WOHLFORD CONSUL TING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page23 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 96 City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees IMPACT FEE STUDY: COST PROPOSAL · NOT-TO-EXCEED COST The following table shows estimated costs for this study broken down by task. The hourly billing rate is shown at the top of the table. Hourly Rate>> $130.00 Task Task Colgan Staff Site Estimated Total No. Description Hours Cost Visits Expenses Cost 1 Project Initiation 16 $ 2,080.00 I $ 400.00 $ 2,480.00 2 Development Data 40 $ 5,200.00 $ 5,200.00 3 Facility Needs Analysis 48 $ 6.240.00 $ 6,240.00 4 Impact Fee Analysis 60 $ 7,800.00 I $ 400.00 $ 8,200.00 5 Impact Fee Comparison 18 $ 2,340.00 $ 2,340.00 6 Study Report 60 $ 7,800.00 $ 7,800.00 7 City Council Presentation 14 $ 1,820.00 l $ 400.00 $ 2,220.00 Total 256 $ 33,280.00 3 $ 1,200.00 $ 34,480.00 Based on the estimated costs shown in the table above, Colgan Consulting Corporation offers to complete the work described in this impact fee proposal for a total fee not to exceed $34,480.00, including expenses. All professional consulting work covered by this proposal will be performed by Joe Colgan at an hourly rate of $130.00. Travel expenses for lodging, car rental, etc. will be billed at actual cost. Personal car use, if any, will be billed at the IRS-approved rate, currently $0.56 per mile; meals and incidentals will be billed on a per-diem basis at $25 per half-day. BILLING Invoices will be submitted monthly base~ on time and expenses charged to the project during the previous month. ADDITIONAL SERVICES Any services requested by the City that are not covered by this proposal will be charged on a ·time and expenses basis, at an hourly rate to be agreed between the City and Colgan Consulting. No additional services will be perfonned without written approval by the City. END OF IMPACT FEE STUDY DESCRIPTION WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING Page24 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 97 L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L [ / City of Arroyo Grande Proposal for a Full Cost Analysis of User and Development Impact Fees . CONCLUSION - CONCLUDING COMMENTS We appreciate this opportunity to propose our services to the City of Arroyo Grande. We hope that you can easily recognize the pride in our successes on behalf of our clients and ongoing work in this proposal. We also hope you are able to call our references to get an enhanced picture of the skills, approach, and personal nature that makes a project with Wohlford Consulting and Colgan Consulting a pleasant and rewarding experience. Duration of Proposal This proposal \J\.'ill remain valid for 60 days following the due date specified in the City's RFP. Authorized Signatures As owners of our respective firms, we are authorized to bind Wohlford Consulting and Colgan Consulting to a contract to execute the proposed work: October 27, 2014 d!vf//I_ Chad Wohlford Sole Proprietor 372 Florin Road, #293 Sacramento, CA 95831 Phone: (916) 205-7050 Fax: (916) 393-6801 chad@wohlfordconsulting.com Thank you October 27, 2014 Joseph Colgan Colgan Consulting Corporation 3323 Watt Avenue, #131 Sacramento, CA 95821 Phone: (916) 205-2446 jcolgan@colgan-consulting.com Thank you again for reviewing our proposal. Please contact either one of us at your convenience if you have any questions about Colgan Consulting, Wohlford Consulting, this proposal, or these types of studies in general. We would be glad.to help, and we look forward to serving you. WOHLFORD CONSULTING I COLGAN CONSULTING -Page 25 of25 Item 8.d. - Page 98 EXHIBITC INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Prior to the beginning of and throughout the duration of the Work, Consultant will maintam insurance in conformance with the requirements set forth below. Consultant will use existing coverage to comply with these requirements. If that existing coverage does not meet the requirements set forth here, Consultant agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage to do so. Consultant acknowledges that the insurance coverage and policy limits set forth in this sectton constitute the minimum amount of coverage required. Any insurance proceeds available to City in excess of the limits and coverage required in this agreement and which is applicable to a given loss, will be available to City. Consultant shall provide the following types and amounts of insurance: Commercial General Liability Insurance using Insurance Services Office "Commercial General Liability" policy from CG 00 01 or the exact equivalent. Defense costs must be paid in addition to limits. There shall be no cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Business Auto Coverage on ISO Business Auto Coverage from CA 00 01 including symbol 1 (Any Auto) or the exact equivalent. Limits are subject to review, but in no event to be less than $1,000,000 per accident. If Consultant owns no vehicles, this requirement may be satisfied by a non-owned auto endorsement to the general liability policy described above. If Consultant or Consultant's employees will use personal autos in any way on this project, Consultant shall provide evidence of personal auto liability coverage for each such person. Workers Compensation on a state-approved policy form providing statutory benefits as required by law with employer's liability limits no less than $1,000,000 per accident or disease. Excess or Umbrella Liability Insurance (Over Primary) if used to meet limit requirements, shall provide coverage at least as broad as specified for the underlying coverages. Any such coverage provided under an umbrella liability policy shall include a drop down provision providing primary coverage above a maximum $25,000 self-insured retention for liability not covered by primary but covered by the umbrella. Coverage shall be provided on a "pay on behalf' basis, with defense costs payable in addition to policy limits. Policy shall contain a provision obligating insurer at the time insured's liability is determined, not requiring actual payment by the insured first. There shall be no cross liability exclusion precluding coverage for claims or suits by one insured against another. Coverage shall be applicable to City for injury to employees of Consultant, subcontractors or others involved in the Work. The scope of coverage provided is subject to approval of City following receipt of proof of insurance as required herein Limits are subject to review but in no _event less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Professiona!'Liability or Errors and Omissions Insurance as appropriate shall be written on a policy form coverage specifically designated to protect against acts, errors or omissions of the Consultant and "Covered Professional Services" as designated in the policy must specifically include work performed under this agreement. The policy limit shall be no less than $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. The policy must "pay on behalf of' the insured and must include a provision establishing the insurer's duty to defend. The policy retroactive date shall be on or before the effective date of this agreement Insurance procured pursuant to these requirements shall be written by msurer that are admitted carriers in the state California and with an A. M. Bests rating of A-or better and a minimum fmancial size VII. General conditions pertaining to pro'vision of insurance coverage by Consultant. Consultant and City agree to the following with respect to insurance provided by Consultant: Page 47 Item 8.d. - Page 99 1. Consultant agrees to have its insurer endorse the third party general liability coverage required herein to include as additional insureds City, its officials employees and agents, using standard ISO endorsement No. CG 2010 with an edition prior to 1992. Consultant also agrees to require all Consultants, and subcontractors to do likewise. " 2. No liability insurance coverage provided to comply with this Agreement shall prohibit Consultant, or Consultant's employees, or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. Consultant agrees to waive subrogation rights against City regardless of the applicability of any insurance proceeds, and to require all Consultants and subcontractors to do likewise. 3. All insurance coverage and limits provided by Consultant and available or applicable to this agreement are intended to apply to the full extent of the policies. Nothing contained in this Agreement or any other agreement relating to the City or its operations limits the application of such insurance coverage. 4. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing. 5. No liability policy shall contain any provision or definition that would serve to eliminate so- called "third party action over" claims, including any exclusion for bodily injury to an employee of the insured or of any Consultant or subcontractor. 6. All coverage types and limits required are subject to approval, modification and additional requirements by the City, as the need arises. Consultant shall not make any reductions in scope of · coverage (e.g. elimination of contractual liability or reduction of discovery period) that may affect City's protection without City's prior written consent. 7. Proof of compliance with these insurance requirements, consisting of certificates of insurance evidencing all of the coverages required and an additional insured endorsement to Consultant's general liability policy, shall be delivered to City at or prior to the execution of this Agreement. In the event such proof of any insurance is not delivered as required, or in the event such insurance is canceled at any time and no replacement coverage is provided, City has the right, but not the duty, to obtain any insurance it deems necessary to protect its interests under this or any other agreement and to pay the premium. Any premium so paid by City shall be charged to and promptly paid by Consultant or deducted from sums due Consultant, at City option. 8. Certificate(s) are to reflect that the insurer will provide 30 days notice to City of any cancellation of coverage. Consultant agrees to require its insurer to modify such certificates to delete any exculpatory wording stating that failure of the insurer to mail written notice of cancellation imposes no obligation, or that any party will "endeavor'' (as opposed to being required) to comply with the requirements of the certificate. 9. It is acknowledged by the parties of this agreement that all insurance coverage required to be provided by Consultant or any subcontractor, is intended to apply first and on a primary, noncontributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self insurance available to City. · 10. Consultant agrees to ensure that subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought bnto or involved in the project by Consultant, provide the same minimum insurance coverage required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. Consultant agrees that, upon request, all agreements with subcontractors and others engaged in the project will be submitted to City for review. Page 48 Item 8.d. - Page 100 11. Consultant agrees not to self-insure or to use any self-insured retentions or deductibles on any portion of the insurance required herein and further agrees that it will not allow any Consultant, subcontractor, Architect, Engineer or other entity or person in any way involved in the performance of work on the project contemplated by this agreement to self-insure its obligations to City. If Consultant's existing coverage includes a deductible or self-insured retention, the deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to the City. At the time the City shall review options with the Consultant, which may include reduction or elimination of the deductible or self-insured retention, substitution of other coverage, or other solutions. 12. The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the Consultant, the City will negotiate additional compensation proportional to the increase benefit to City. 13. For purposes of applying insurance coverage only, this Agreement will be deemed to have been executed immediately upon any party hereto taking any steps that can be deemed to be in furtherance of or towards performance of this Agreement. 14. Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any insurance requirements in no way imposes any additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder in this or any other regard. 15. Consultant will renew the required coverage annually as long as City, or its employees or agents face an exposure from operations of any type pursuant to this agreement. This obligation applies whether or not the agreement is canceled or terminated for any reason. Termination of this obligation is not effective until City executes a written statement to that effect. 16. Consultant shall provide proof that policies of insurance required herein expiring during the term of this Agreement have been renewed or replaced with other policies providing at least the same coverage. Proof that such coverage has been ordered shall be submitted prior to expiration. A coverage binder or letter from Consultant's insurance agent to this effect is acceptable. A certificate of insurance and/or additional insured endorsement as required in these specifications applicable to the renewing or new coverage must be provided to City within five days of the expiration of the coverages. 17. The provisions of any workers' compensation or similar act will not limit the obligations of Consultant under this agreement. Consultant expressly agrees not to use any statutory immunity defenses under such laws with respect to City, its employees, officials and agents. 18. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this section are not intended as limitations on coverage, limits or other requirements nor as a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any given policy. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue, and is not intended by any party or insured to be limiting or all-inclusive. 19. These insurance requirements are intended to be separate and distinct from any other provision in this agreement and are intended by the parties here to be interpreted as such. 20. The requirements in this Section supersede all other sections and provisions of this Agreement to the extent that any other section or provision conflicts with or impairs the provisions of this Section. 21. Consultant agrees to be responsible for ensurin~ that no contract used by any party involved in any way with the project reserves the right to charge City or Consultant for the cost of additional insurance coverage required by this agreement. Any such provisions are to be deleted with reference to City. It is not the intent of City to reimburse any third party for the cost of complying with Page 49 Item 8.d. - Page 101 these requirements. There shall be no recourse against City for payment of premiums or other amounts with respect thereto. 22. Consultant agrees to provide immediate notice to City of any claim or loss against Consultant arising out of the work performed under this agreement. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, buf has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City. Page 50 Item 8.d. - Page 102