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