12-1002_NBS GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP_D13_Agenda Report10/2/2012
4`� � w�� D13
�. q..P
[,j//PoR,v�,
City of San Juan Capistrano
TO: Karen P. Brust, Cit.
FROM:
it
W '
Cindy Russell, Chief Financial Officer/City Treasure
DATE: October 2, 2012
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Personal Services Agreement for an Update to the Cost
Allocation Plan, a City-wide User Fee Study; Review of the City's Park and
Recreation and Capistrano Circulation Fee Program Fees; and an Appropriation
of Funds (NBS Government Finance Group, DBA NBS)(City Council Urgent
Strategic Priority)
RECOMMENDATION:
By motion,
Approve the Personal Services Agreement with NBS Government Finance Group,
DBA NBS (NBS) to update the City's cost allocation plan; conduct a City-wide user fee
study; and review the City's Park and Recreation and Capistrano Circulation Fee
Program (CCFP) fees, in the amount not to exceed $49,070; and,
2. Appropriate $14,350 from the Capistrano Circulation Fee Program fund reserves to
fund the review of the Capistrano Circulation Fee Program (CCFP) Fees.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In Fiscal Year 2011-2012, staff identified the need for a review of the City's cost allocation
plan and a City-wide user fee study as part of the City Council's Urgent Strategic Priority to
"Get our Fiscal House in Order." The Ralph Andersen Management and Operations audit
findings also recommended the development of a formal cost allocation plan. Additionally,
the City Council also identified the desire to evaluate the City's developer impact fees. In
order to provide for this work, the City Council approved funding of $35,000 in the Fiscal Year
2012-2013 General Fund operating budget. Based on the results of a Request for Proposals
(RFP) process, staff is recommending NBS Government Finance Group, DBA NBS (NBS) to
review and make recommendations for the City's cost allocation plan, and the City-wide user
fees and charges at a cost of $30,790. Staff is also recommending the review and update of
the City's Park & Recreation fees for $3,930; and the Capistrano Circulation Fee Program
(CCFP) projects and fees for $14,350. The cost of the CCFP fee review and update can be
funded from the CCFP funds and requires an appropriation of funds.
City Council Agenda Report
October 2, 2012
Paae 2 of 3
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
In support of the City Council's Urgent Strategic Priority to "Get our Fiscal House in Order",
staff identified the need for a review of our current user fees to identify the cost of services,
make a comparison of the City's current fees to the costs identified and to the fees charged
by surrounding cities, and make recommendations to the City Council regarding these fees
and charges. Likewise, an update to the cost allocation plan used by the City is needed to
assure that all costs supporting City functions are accounted for and appropriately allocated.
Although, these items had been updated from time to time over the years, a formal study by
an outside expert has not been conducted since the early 1980s.
Based on the City Council's direction, staff prepared an RFP (see Attachment 2) and
submitted this RFP to 15 firms. The City received six (6) proposals as follows:
Proposed Firm
Firm Name Cost Interviewed
Matrix $17,500
NBS $30,790 Yes
Clearsource $33,000
MGT $35,000 Yes
Capital Accounting Partners $43,790 Yes
Revenue & Cost Specialists $56,500 Yes
A committee representing most of the City's departments reviewed the proposals and
recommended interviewing four (4) firms as noted above. Since the original RFP had already
been issued and proposals received when the City Council expressed its desire to evaluate
all developer impact fees, staff asked all firms interviewed about their ability to provide a
review of developer impact fees.
The group recommended NBS based on its presentation; which demonstrated not only its
expertise, experience and knowledge in the field; it also demonstrated also its understanding
of the community and its needs. Reference checks of NBS' previous engagements and its
staff to be assigned to this engagement confirmed their knowledge and expertise; as well as
their ability to deal with each agency's unique characteristics and ability to meet their
deadlines. Their references also commented on NBS' ability to assist staff with the
identification of the information necessary to develop the correct fee, and their understanding
of the organizations for which they were conducting the studies.
After reviewing the City's developer impact fees, staff recommends the City's water and
sewer related developer impact fees be reviewed in conjunction with the next water and
sewer user rate study. The City Council voted against establishing any new fees related to
storm drain maintenance and/or improvements during the next two fiscal years; therefore,
staff did not request a proposal to review this fee. Housing In -Lieu Fees were recently
reduced by 10% and it is not recommended to incur additional cost at this time for another
review. Staff requested a proposal for the review of two remaining developer impact fees,
Park and Recreation and the Capistrano Circulation Fee Program fees. NBS is able to
conduct the review of the developer impact fees, through a sub -consultant, PMC.
City Council Agenda Report
October 2, 2012
Paqe 3 of 3
The CCFP's projects and fees have not been reviewed since its establishment in May 2002.
The CCFP fee currently provides funding for the projects identified in the original program
(see Attachment 3 to this report). The CCFP identified the need to update project costs and
fees regularly. In addition to updating the existing project costs, it is also important to ensure
that as the City's needs change, that the projects make sense for the community and are
aligned with the City Council's priorities
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost to conduct the cost allocation plan update and the City-wide user fee study is
$30,790 and the cost to update the Park and Recreation fees is $3,930 for a total of $34,720.
The Fiscal Year 2012-2013 adopted budget includes $35,000 which is sufficient to cover this
portion of the contract.
Resolution 02-05-21-06 establishing the Capistrano Circulation Fee Program Fees includes
an administrative amount for the administration of the program, including updates to the fee.
Therefore, staff is recommending an appropriation of $14,350 from the CCFP fund reserves
to fund the portion of the study related to this fee. There are sufficient reserves in the CCFP
fund to make this appropriation.
The total amount of this contract is a not to exceed amount of $49,070
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
Not applicable.
PRIOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW
Not applicable.
COMMISSION/COMMITTEE/BOARD REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Not applicable.
NOTIFICATION
Michael Rentner, NBS
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 — Personal Services Agreement
Attachment 2 — Request for Proposals for the Cost Allocation Plan and Citywide User Fee
Study
Attachment 3 — Current Capistrano Circulation Fee Program Projects, Costs and Vicinity Map
PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made, entered into, and shall become effective this day
Of , 2012, by and between the City of San Juan Capistrano (hereinafter referred to
as the "City") and NBS Government Finance Group, DBA NBS (hereinafter referred to as
the "Consultant").
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, City desires to retain the services of the Consultant regarding the City's
proposal to develop a Cost Allocation Plan and conduct a City-wide User Fee and Rate
Study; and,
WHEREAS, the City also desires to retain the services of Consultant to review and
recommend updates to the City's Park & Recreation and Capistrano Circulation Fee
Program Fees; and,
WHEREAS, Consultant is qualified by virtue of experience, training, education and
expertise to accomplish such services.
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Consultant mutually agree as follows:
Section 1. Scope of Work.
The scope of work to be performed by the Consultant shall consist of those tasks as
set forth in Exhibits "A" and 'B" attached and incorporated herein by reference. To the
extent that there are any conflicts between the provisions described in Exhibits "A" and "B"
and those provisions contained within this Agreement, the provisions in this Agreement
shall control. The scope of work to be performed will not include the optional services, to
perform an "Art in Public Places In -Lieu Fee Analysis" as set forth in Exhibit "B."
Section 2. Tenn.
This Agreement shall commence on the effective date and shall terminate, and all
services required hereunder shall be completed, no later than June 30, 2013.
Section 3. Compensation.
3.1 Amount.
Total compensation for the services for the Cost Allocation Plan and City -
Wide User Fee and Rate Study hereunder shall not exceed $30,790, including expenses
as set forth in Exhibit "A". Total compensation for the review and update of the City's Park
and Recreation and Capistrano Circulation Fee Program Fees hereunder shall not exceed
$18,280, including expenses, as set forth in Exhibit "B", by reference.
ATTACHMENT
3.2 Method of Payment.
Subject to Section 3.1, Consultant shall submit invoices based on the total
services which have been satisfactorily completed and as outlined in Exhibits "A" and "B"
The City will pay approved invoices in accordance with this Section.
3.3 Records of Expenses.
Consultant shall keep complete and accurate records of all costs and
expenses incidental to services covered by this Agreement. These records will be made
available at reasonable times to the City. Invoices shall be addressed as provided for in
Section 16 below.
Section 4. Independent Contractor.
It is agreed that Consultant shall act and be an independent contractor and not an
agent or employee of the City, and shall obtain no rights to any benefits which accrue to
City's employees.
Section 5. Limitations Upon Subcontracting and Assignment.
The experience, knowledge, capability and reputation of Consultant, its principals
and employees were a substantial inducement for the City to enter into this Agreement.
Consultant shall not contract with any other entity to perform the services required without
prior written approval of the City. This Agreement may not be assigned, voluntarily or by
operation of law, without the prior written approval of the City. If Consultant is permitted to
subcontract any part of this Agreement by City, Consultant shall be responsible to the City
for the acts and omissions of its subcontractor as it is for persons directly employed.
Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create any contractual relationships between
any subcontractor and City. All persons engaged in the work will be considered employees
of Consultant. City will deal directly with and will make all payments to Consultant.
Section 6. Changes to Scope of Work.
For extra work not part of this Agreement, a written authorization from City is
required prior to Consultant undertaking any extra work. In the event of a change in the
Scope of Work provided for in the contract documents as requested by the City, the Parties
hereto shall execute an addendum to this Agreement setting forth with particularity all
terms of the new agreement, including but not limited to any additional Consultant's fees.
lI
Section 7. Familiarity with Work and/or Construction Site.
By executing this Agreement, Consultant warrants that: (1) it has investigated the
work to be performed; (2) if applicable, it has investigated the work site(s), and is aware of
all conditions there; and (3) it understands the facilities, difficulties and restrictions of the
work to be performed under this Agreement. Should Consultant discover any latent or
unknown conditions materially differing from those inherent in the work or as represented
by City, it shall immediately inform the City of this and shall not proceed with further work
under this Agreement until written instructions are received from the City.
Section 8. Time of Essence.
Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.
Section 9. Compliance with Law.
Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, codes and regulations
of federal, state and local government.
Section 10. Conflicts of Interest.
Consultant covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not acquire any
interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the
performance of the services contemplated by this Agreement. No person having such
interest shall be employed by or associated with Consultant.
Section 11. Copies of Work Product.
At the completion of the work, Consultant shall have delivered to City at least one
(1) printed copy of any final reports and/or notes or drawings containing Consultant's
findings, conclusions, and recommendations with any supporting documentation and an
electronic copy. All reports submitted to the City shall be in reproducible format, or in the
format otherwise approved by the City in writing.
Section 12. Ownership of Documents.
All reports, information, data and exhibits prepared or assembled by Consultant in
connection with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential
to the extent permitted by law, and Consultant agrees that they shall not be made available
to any individual or organization without prior written consent of the City. All such reports,
information, data, and exhibits shall be the property of the City and shall be delivered to the
City upon demand without additional costs or expense to the City.
3
Section 13. Indemnity.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant agrees to protect, defend, and
hold harmless the City and its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents, and
employees from any and all claims, liabilities, expenses, or damages of any nature,
including attorneys' fees, for injury or death of any person, or damages of any nature,
including interference with use of property, arising out of, or in any way connected with the
negligence, recklessness and/or intentional wrongful conduct of Consultant, Consultant's
agents, officers, employees, subcontractors, or independent contractors hired by
Consultant in the performance of the Agreement. The only exception to Consultant's
responsibility to protect, defend, and hold harmless the City, is due to the active
negligence, recklessness and/or wrongful conduct of the City, or any of its elective or
appointive boards, officers, agents, or employees.
This hold harmless agreement shall apply to all liability regardless of whether any
insurance policies are applicable. Any policy limits shall not act as a limitation upon the
amount of indemnification to be provided by Consultant.
Section 14. Insurance.
Before beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this
Agreement, Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall carry, maintain for the duration
of the agreement, and provide proof thereof that is acceptable to the City, the insurance
specified below with insurers and under forms of insurance satisfactory in all respects to
the City. Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any
subcontract until all insurance required of the Consultant has also been obtained for the
subcontractor. Insurance required herein shall be provided by Insurers in good standing
with the State of California and having a minimum Best's Guide Rating of A- Class VII or
better.
14.1 Comprehensive General Liability.
Throughout the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall maintain in full force
and effect Comprehensive General Liability coverage in an amount not less than one
million dollars per occurrence ($1,000,000.00), combined single limit coverage for risks
associated with the work contemplated by this Agreement. If a Commercial General
Liability Insurance form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the
general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this
Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence
limit.
CI
14.2 Comprehensive Automobile Liability.
Throughout the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall maintain in full force
and effect Comprehensive Automobile Liability coverage, including owned, hired and non -
owned vehicles in an amount not less than one million dollars per occurrence
($1,000,000.00).
14.3 Workers' Compensation.
If Consultant intends to employ employees to perform services under this
Agreement, Consultant shall obtain and maintain, during the term of this Agreement,
Workers' Compensation Employer's Liability Insurance in the statutory amount as required
by state law.
14.4 Proof of Insurance Requirements/Endorsement.
Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement, Consultant shall submit
the insurance certificates, including the deductible or self -retention amount, and an
additional insured endorsement naming City, its officers, employees, agents, and
volunteers as additional insured as respects each of the following: Liability arising out of
activities performed by or on behalf of Consultant, including the insured's general
supervision of Consultant; products and completed operations of Consultant; premises
owned, occupied or used by Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed
by Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection
afforded City, its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.
14.5 Errors and Omissions Coverage
Throughout the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall maintain Errors and
Omissions Coverage (professional liability coverage) in an amount of not less than One
Million Dollars ($1,000,000). Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement, Consultant
shall submit an insurance certificate to the City's General Counsel for certification that the
insurance requirements of this Agreement have been satisfied.
14.6 Notice of Cancellation/Termination of Insurance.
The above policy/policies shall not terminate, nor shall they be cancelled, nor
the coverages reduced, until after thirty (30) days' written notice is given to City, except that
ten (10) days' notice shall be given if there is a cancellation due to failure to pay a
premium.
14.7 Terms of Compensation.
Consultant shall not receive any compensation until all insurance provisions
have been satisfied.
5
14.8 Notice to Proceed.
Consultant shall not proceed with any work under this Agreement until the
City has issued a written "Notice to Proceed" verifying that Consultant has complied with all
insurance requirements of this Agreement.
Section 15. Termination.
City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement without cause by giving thirty
(30) days' advance written notice of termination to Consultant.
In addition, this Agreement may be terminated by any party for cause by providing
ten (10) days' written notice to the other party of a material breach of contract. If the other
party does not cure the breach of contract, then the agreement may be terminated
subsequent to the ten (10) day cure period.
Section 16. Notice.
All notices shall be personally delivered or mailed to the below listed addresses, or
to such other addresses as may be designated by written notice. These addresses shall
be used for delivery of service of process:
To City: City of San Juan Capistrano
32400 Paseo Adelanto
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Attn: Cindy Russell, Chief Financial Officer/City Treasurer
To Consultant: NBS Government Finance Group, DBA NBS
32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Attn: Michael Rentner, President & CEO
Section 17. Attorneys' Fees.
If any action at law or in equity is necessary to enforce or interpret the terms of this
Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees, expert
witness fees, costs and necessary disbursements in addition to any other relief to which he
may be entitled.
Section 18. Dispute Resolution.
In the event of a dispute arising between the parties regarding performance or
interpretation of this Agreement, the dispute shall be resolved by binding arbitration under
the auspices of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service ("JAMS"), Orange County
Office.
G
Section 19. Entire Agreement.
This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement between the
parties and supersedes all previous negotiations between them pertaining to the subject
matter thereof.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement
ATTEST:
Maria Morris, City Clerk
�171
-
r.,M&MA
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
By:
Larry Kramer, Mayor
CONSULTANT
NBS GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP, DBA NBS
Michael Rentner, President & CEO
N
;a C=ocgle E,,ti,
Tro
posal to Prepare a
Cost Aflocation Plan and
Wer Foo',and Raie Study
forltbe
City of San Juan
istrano
Marc�9•
,201z,
R Hilt
-el
32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Tall tree: 800.676.7516 (P) 951.296.1997
(F) 951296.1998
nbsgovcom
Cindy Russell
Chief Financial Officer/City Treasurer
City of San Juan Capistrano
32400 Paseo Adelanto
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Re: Proposal to Conduct a Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study
Dear Ms. Russell and Members of the Selection Committee:
NBS is pleased to submit this proposal to conduct a Full Cost Allocation Plan and Citywide User Fee
Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano.
How would we proceed?
NBS' Financial Consulting practice area focuses on development of well managed and implementable
user and regulatory fee cost of services studies. If selected, we would collect relevant budget and staffing
data from the City. Then, we would discuss and explore with the City relevant cost recovery based fee
structure options created by our professional staff over the life of their careers. We can customize a fee
structure that will be easy to implement and understandable for San Juan Capistrano customers.
What is NBS' experience?
We at NBS have a wealth of experience with local government finance overall, and specifically with
similar efforts. Our proposed professional staff for this engagement have worked with many Californian
cities and counties over the past 20+ years. They are regularly invited to speak on cost recovery based
fee structures and budget management for prominent local government professional organizations.
The pricing noted in this document is valid for a period of 180 days. Our Corporate Headquarters is the
NBS office location closest to San Juan Capistrano, at: 32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100, Temecula,
CA 92592 and can be reached at 800.676.7516 and the project will be managed from this location.
Thank you for reading this proposal. We appreciate your consideration of NBS to perform this work for
you. We look forward to discussing with you our ideas and welcome your questions or feedback. I am
our proposed Project Manager for this effort and the author of this proposal, so please contact me at any
time you need: 800.676.7516 or nkissam@nbsgov.com. We are excited at the prospect of serving you
and contributing positively to your community.
Sincerely,
Nicole Kissam
Director of Financial Consulting
Mike Rentner
Chief Executive Officer
helping communities fund tomorrow
1-2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The follaving Proposal has been prepared by NBS to provide comprehensive infomratlon in response to the City of San Juan Capistrano's
Request for Proposals:
Cover Letter and Exhibit A.................................................................................................. Previous Page
Chapter Page #
Chapter 1. Background and Project Summary ..............................................................................1-1
Chapter2.
Methodology...................................................................................................................2-1
ImplementationPlan ...................... .......................................... .......................................
.2-3
ClientSatisfaction ................... .........................................................................................
2-9
ProjectSchedule ..................... ....................................... .......................................
........... 2-9
CityStaff Responsibilities............................................... .................................................
2-9
Chapter3.
Staffing........................................................... .................................................................
3-1
Project Team Structure and Roles ....................... .......................................
..................... 3-1
Professional Biographies ........................... ......................................................................
3-2
Chapter4.
Qualifications.................................................................................................................4-1
Chapter5.
Fee Proposal...................................................................................................................5-1
FeeProposal .......................... ....................................... ...................................................
5-1
Consultant Labor Effort and Cost Detail..........................................................................5-2
Proposal to Prepare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS— March 9, 2012
CHAPTER 1. BACKGROUND AND PROJECT SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
The City of San Juan Capistrano is embarking upon development of a professionally City of Chula Vista
prepared Full Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study. The goal of JUS11N GIPSON
these efforts, combined, is to define the full cost of service internally, in the form of City- DEPUTY FIRE Ct ITEF /
wide overhead/indirect costs, and externally, in the form of user/regulatory fees imposed F1RE? bL1R HAL
on individual/entities for discrete services and activities.
The outcome of this Study will:
✓ Reflect the high level of service that is provided in a community like San Juan
Capistrano.
✓ Assist city management in using acute fiscal foresight, as well as maximizing every
available opportunity for economic success.
✓ Provide information for establishment of cost -based interfund transfers for the water,
sewer enterprise funds, as well as for recovery of overhead costs from fees, special
revenue and other funding sources.
✓ Determine the upper limit for user/regulatory fees imposed on the public, and assist
in crafting of the City's policy position on appropriate levels of cost recovery at or
beneath that ceiling.
The following describes the goals, objectives, and deliverables of each project area
proposed for the City of San Juan Capistrano:
PROJECT SUMMARY
Cost Allocation Plan
The goals of the Cost Allocation Plan include acquisition of a documented and
defensible analysis that generates general/administrative allocation amounts that may
be used in the City's annual budget, indirectloverhead rates, and fully -burdened hourly
rates for City personnel. This version of the City's Cost Allocation Plan allocates all
reasonably identifiable administrative overhead costs to receivers of these services
within the organization, that have not already been captured by the City's internal
service funds (ISFs). All costs, whether acceptable for federal reimbursement purposes
or not, are considered in the results of this Plan.
In addition, the City of San Juan Capistrano has indicated the desire to provide an
additional cost allocation plan that is prepared in accordance with OMB A-87 in order to
recover overhead reimbursement from State or Federal grants or reimbursable
programs.
User Fee and Rate Study
The City's goals for the Comprehensive User Fee Study are to identify the full cost of
service in fee -related activities and to facilitate the development of strategies/policy for
recovery of those costs in user/regulatory fees. Departments and activities to be
included in this study's scope primarily include, but are not limited to:
Planning
Building
Engineering (Land Development)
Water and Sewer
• Police
Recreation and Animal Control
Administrative Fees (City Clerk, Finance, etc.)
• Community Services- Facility Rentals and Recreation
` RV it one ofthe best f e
consultants that I have worked
with thus far. Tbey're Bary to
work with and things didn't
have to fit into a template. AGo,
N6S isgreat at listening and
finding ways to apply fees to your
proms."
Pmposalto Prepare a 1 1
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS — March 9, 2012
In general, the scope of services for each department and activity noted above includes
all fees for service that can be analyzed on a time estimate per activity basis. Taxes,
penalties, fines, and fees regulated or set by the State, as well as development impact
fees and utility rates would be excluded from this analysis.
NBS takes the extra steps to understand what goals are important in the community for
the outcome of each project. While fiscal sustainability is one of the City's defined goals,
expanding technology to achieve efficiency is also an important goal that has been
established by the City Council through development of an Information Technology
Master Plan. As part of this cost analysis, NBS will ensure that the City's appropriate
technology costs are included.
1 - 2 Propos! to Prepare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS — March 9, 2012
CHAPTER 2. METHODOLOGY
METHODOLOGY
The following sub -sections describe the methodology employed by NBS in studying
overhead cost allocation and user/regulatory fees for California cities.
Overhead Cost Allocation Model
An Overhead Cost Allocation Plan is an analysis — accompanied by supporting
documentation — which distributes the general governmental and support services costs
of the City to the direct municipal services and activities provided to the public. Costs
allocated in a non -federally restricted plan include functions such as legislative, City
management, financial services, administrative services, human resources, legal
services, information technology support, facilities maintenance, facilities and equipment
use, and others as identified during the plan's development. These costs are typically
referred to as City-wide overhead.
Common uses for the results of a cost allocation plan are:
• Application in the cost basis for governmental fees and charges
• A component in the derivation of fully -burdened hourly rates for agency
personnel
Interfund charges, for recovery to the General Fund of support provided to areas
outside it, such as the City's Special Revenue Funds, Internal Service Funds
and Enterprise Funds
Rates applicable to cost accounting, such as charging labor time to capital
projects
• Mark-ups on costs directly passed -through to users
• Recovery of costs from external funds such as grants or agreements with other
agencies
NBS provides well documented indirect overhead support calculations for General Fund
reimbursement by Water and Sewer enterprise funds, which are under close scrutiny
are subject to Proposition 218.
In the NBS approach, the Overhead Cost Allocation Plan encompasses the following
analytical steps:
Compiles actual City cost data
Expresses costs according to the functions of service they provide
• Makes any necessary adjustments to costs for compliance with OMB A-87 (if
City selects this option)
• Assigns a factor to use as a basis for allocation
Performs a minimum of two-step series of allocations
Derives total assigned overhead amounts by public servicelfund
• Expresses rates that represent total indirect costs assigned
Aside from accurately reflecting City costs, the most important step in preparing a
reasonable cost allocation plan is the selection of allocation factors. These data sets
should represent either the actual or estimated workload of the function allocated or a
reasonable and generally accepted means of apportioning benefit for the function
allocated. In this way, resulting cost allocations represent a reasonable component to
the full cost of City services that may be recovered from individualslentities through fees
and charges or other external sources of cost recovery.
Pmporal to Prepare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano 2-1
Prepared by NBS — March 9, 2012
Comprehensive User Fee Study
User/regulatory fees represent cost recovery opportunities entirely within the City's
control: revenues which the City Council may — at its sole discretion upon public hearing
— implement and/or modify without further public process or approval. The City does not
have to conduct a Proposition 218 process to impose these fees, nor are they covered by
the strict guidelines of the Mitigation Fee Act.
User fees are charges imposed by the City for a service provided or required due to the
request or action of an individual/entity, while regulatory fees are those imposed to
recover costs associated with the City's power to govern certain activities, such as
development or construction. Examples of the types of fees considered here include:
development review, inspection, and approval (planning, engineering, and building);
parkstfacilities use and rental; recreational and community programs; public safety
services; public infrastructure operations/maintenance; and administration. In most
cases, the only legal limitation on the establishment of these fees is that they may not
exceed the estimated and reasonable costs incurred to provide the service or perform the
function.
NBS ensures a customized approach to inclusion of the necessary and reasonable costs
that are specific to San Juan Capistrano, including the appropriate level of technology
costs, as well as any changes regarding the streamlining of development
review/entitlement processes.
To determine the City's maximum in imposing these fees, NBS will conduct a cost of
service analysis and fee design exercise. These efforts identify the full cost of service
eligible for recovery from fees and translate those costs into a fee structure for various
programs and/or services. Determination of the full cost of service is an analytical
exercise combining City expenditure and organizational information with time -tracking
data, time estimates, and/or volumetric information. The full cost of service is derived for
each service or activity, which includes direct labor, direct services or supplies, indirect
labor, indirect non -labor expenses, programmatic overhead, and City-wide overhead. In
most cases, the full cost of service is first expressed as a fully -burdened hourly rate
applicable to the time necessary to perform the service or activity.
In executing this approach, NBS organizes efforts in the following key areas:
• Fee Structure Design — reviewing existing fees for service, setting the best
structure for cost recovery, adding new fee items where applicable.
• Organizational and service time analysis — identification of who performs work,
how it is performed, and how long it takes to provide aspects of service.
• Time valuation — placing a value on an increment of time within different
organizations providing service.
• Cost of service analysis — determining the cost incurred or associated with
individual fee -related services.
• Recommended Fee and Revenue Analysis — defining policies for best use of
available resources (i.e., fee revenues versus general subsidy), deriving a
proposed fee amount, analyzing potential annual revenue impacts of current and
proposed fee amounts.
• Master Fee Schedule Development — compiling all individual departmental fees
into a common document that will accompany the ordinance or resolution for
Council adoption.
2 - 2 Proposal to Prepare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS — March 9, 2012
Translating costs of service into a new or updated fee structure often generates a
significant policy discussion for a municipality, particularly with respect to optimal use of
revenues available for public services. In setting cost recovery goals through fees — a
major part of this type of study will involve the discussion and/or development of a Cost
Recovery Policy for the City. Important considerations will include:
Matching available funding sources to the public and private benefits achieved
through an individual service, with public benefits often linked to use of General
Fund resources and private benefits funded by fees on the individual.
Broad public health and safety goals enhanced or impacted by an increase or
decrease in fees for service.
• Cohesiveness or conflict with City goals or priorities, such as economic
development or community wellness.
• Compliance achievement with law, local regulations, and/or City policy.
Level of service, service access and affordability to resident citizens, groups,
and businesses.
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The outline below describes the step-by-step Work Plan to be followed by NBS in the
completion of the scope of services.
NBS is sensitive to the City's current workload, especially in light of the staff
reorganization and streamlining workflow efforts. As a result, our project management
approach to minimize the project impact includes: strong project management skills,
including periodic progress reports, clear expectations of consultant verses staff roles
and a realistic schedule. We assist our clients with data collection and manipulation
wherever possible. In addition, as part of our control measures, our models, draft
reports and final reports are proofed and reviewed by a senior member of the project
team to ensure accurate and quality work product and results.
Deliverable #1: Overhead Cost Allocation Model
Commencement and Data Collection
The purpose of this task is to initiate the project on solid footing and establish common
understanding. Sub -tasks are as follows:
A. Gather and Analyze Initial Data
Gather and review published City information and readily -available data. Issue
a comprehensive data request to City staff, to include items such as detailed
revenue and expense budgets for the current and last completed fiscal year,
any timekeeping data currently recorded by City staff, and any relevant
volume/activity statistics currently tracked by the City. (The latter two items will
be requested in a more refined basis after project commencement.)
B. Identify Initial Plan Structure
Identify initial indirect cost centers and recipients for preliminary discussion with
City staff. Indirect cost centers generally include, but are not limited to:
• Building and Equipment Use allowance
• City Manager
• City Clerk
Legal
Human Resources
• Management Services
Facilities and Grounds Maintenance
Proposal to Prebare a 2 - 3
Cost Alloration Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS — March 9, 2012
Additionally, NBS would like to discuss the City's current Internal Service Funds,
including the Facilities Operations Fund and the Insurance Benefits Fund to
determine current levels of funding included.
NBS is aware that some cities may defer funding of equipment and vehicle
replacement, however, as part of the analysis, it is crucial to include the full and
complete cost of equipment and vehicle replacement. This will enable the
appropriate level of costs to be included in indirect overhead rates and fees for
service, so that the City can potentially fully fund these costs in future years.
C. Meet with City Staff
Meet with a gathering of participating City staff in one onsite event to kick-off the
project, discuss initial ideas regarding cost allocation, and prepare for
subsequent analytical review efforts.
Cost Allocation Model Development
The purpose of this task is to develop the customized technical model capable of
performing the necessary cost allocations and generating the outcomes desired by the
City from this effort. Sub -tasks are as follows:
A. Conduct Organizational Review
Upon initial discussion with City staff, conduct a more thorough examination of
the City's current organizational and financial structure and finalize the City-wide
indirect/support services that should be included in the overhead cost allocation
plan. Identify departments, divisions, and potential functional service levels in
which to summarize indirect costs. Compile associated costs and make any
necessary adjustments to costs to ensure capture only of support services costs.
Work with the City staff to discuss the identified structure and ensure that the
proposed direction will satisfy all City-wide requirements for overhead allocation.
B. Develop Cost Allocation Model
Develop an overhead cost allocation model in the Microsoft Excel spreadsheet
environment. Reflect the City's organizational and financial structure and target
a user-friendly, sustainable configuration for the City's future use. Include easily -
identifiable and annotated data entry areas, the necessary computations to
perform at least two levels and layers ("step-downs") of cost allocations City-
wide, and summary reports identifying total annual costs allocated and
corresponding indirectloverhead rates. Functionality includes an OMB Circular
A -87 -compliant outcome applicable to grants or other mechanisms requiring such
compliance.
C. Prepare Allocation Factors
Discuss with City staff the recommended cost allocation detail and corresponding
bases for apportioning costs City-wide. With City staff buy -in and cooperation,
embark on data collection to develop sets of information to be used as factors for
cost allocation. Incorporate data sets into the new allocation model, annotating
data sources for the City's ease of use in the future.
D. Input Data
Input cost and allocation factor data into the overhead cost allocation model, and
complete the functionality of the plan.
Derivation of Outcomes
The purpose of this task is to generate the specific outcomes necessary from this effort.
Using the model and core data/assumptions developed in the prior phase, generate
annual allocated costs by budget unit and fund. Review outcomes with City Staff during
this process. Collect one to two rounds of input and revisions to the draft plan results.
Provide final results in PDF and Excel formats.
2 _ q Proposal to Prepare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS — March 9, 2012
Documentation and Presentation
The purpose of this task is to provide the substantive documentation necessary to
support implementation of cost allocation outcomes. This task also includes delivery of
the technical models to the City. Sub -tasks are as follows:
A. Prepare and Distribute Draft Report
Prepare a draft report documenting the Cost Allocation Plan. The draft will be
issued to City staff in a PDF format. Report includes: Executive summary; citation
of data sources and key analytical assumptions, illustration of analytical methods,
presentation of findings, narrative descriptions of allocations, delineation of a
proposed near- and long-term action plan related to implementation and
maintenance of the plan's results, and, technical appendix showing the analysis
and any relevant data sources.
B. Prepare and Present Outcomes
Prepare for and present outcomes to City staff and management in one
combined session. Prepare for and present outcomes to City Council.
C. Issue Final Report
Upon receipt of any further direction or modification of assumptions from City
staff, management, or Council, issue the report as final. Deliver an electronic
version of the reports in an Excel format as well as PDF format. Provide five (5)
bound copies and an electronic copy of the plans available for presentation
purposes, as requested in the City's RFP.
Deliverable #2: Comprehensive User Fee Study
Commencement and Data Collection
In combination with commencement of the Overhead Cost Allocation Model, Deliverable
#1, NBS will initiate the Comprehensive User Fee Study as follows:
A. Conduct Administrative Kick -Off Meeting
Conduct an onsite administrative project commencement meeting with City staff
members, such as those from Finance, who will manage the progress,
completion, and implementation of the study's findings. This meeting will
include a discussion of expectations and an overview of the process for
conducting the analysis, including: coordination for onsite and remote
interactions with City personnel in all divisions, timeline for project completion,
and other topics.
B. Gather and Analyze Accessible Data
Acquire published or accessible data from the City, centering on adopted
budgets, recent financial performance (revenues and expenditures), current
labor cost detail and classifications, organizational structures, existing relevant
policies, existing time -tracking and volumetric data, and other items of a more
global nature. NBS consultants will gather information independently as
accessible through online resources, and issue a consolidated data request to
City Finance staff for the balance.
Fee Structure Design and Organizational Analysis
The purpose of this task is to review existing documentation supporting the City's
current fee and rate structures, and to acquire and develop information describing the
core services required across departments and divisions City-wide to provide the
services under review in this study. Sub -tasks are as follows:
A. Design Fee Structure and Commence Divisional Meetings
Conduct onsite project commencement events with individual divisions initially
known to provide the fee -related services under review in this study. The chief
Pmpwal to Prepare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano 2-5
Prepared by NBS — March 9, 2012
purpose of these meetings is to acquire a broad understanding of each
division's organization, performance of core services, functions of service,
staffing structure/lines of command, current fee structures and systems, known
issues/deficiencies in current fees, known areas for new fees, and availability of
existing time -tracking and volumetric data. Applying industry expertise, NBS
consultants will recommend and develop fee structures (as opposed to
amounts) for each area under review. Fee structures include flat fees, variable
fees based on measurable service characteristics (e.g., project types, size, etc.),
and variable fees based on staff time (e.g., hourly rates with deposits), etc. Fee
structure can also mean rewriting fee categorical descriptions to retain flat fees
for administrative ease but introducing variation in the applicable fee for an
applicant or user.
B. Conduct Time Study
Determine and communicate the subsequent steps to acquire and/or develop
organizational, performance, and time information necessary for establishing
costs of service for justifying fees. Consultants will also preliminarily identify any
other divisions outside those immediately identified that are involved in the direct
provision of the services under review and will schedule comparable
commencement events with those areas. Develop an approach and tools for
acquiring and/or developing the organizational, performance, and time
information necessary for justifying fees. For areas where simple remote
questionnaires may suffice, develop and route the forms to key personnel within
each division. For areas where onsite interviews will be necessary, coordinate
scheduling and develop interview toots. Conduct onsite events with individual
divisions — and potentially small groups within each division — to generate
organizational, performance, and time information necessary for justifying fees.
C. Prepare Iterations and Time Study Module
After acquiring historically -tracked and/or currently -available time and volumetric
data, as well as information developed through questionnaires and/or interviews,
determine any necessary secondary course of action to continue and/or refine
organizational, performance, and time data. One to two iterations of the time and
service analysis are generally required to ensure that the cost of service analysis
is defensible and reasonable. It is important that the sum product of volumetric
and service level estimates do not exceed available staffing and expenditure
resources. Iterative efforts will be manageable through the use of highly-
concentrated/targeted remote questionnaires, which will be routed to the
appropriate divisional personnel. The product of this sub -task will be a model of
the complete organizational, performance, and time requirements for the services
under review in this study.
Time Valuation
The purpose of this task is to place a value on an increment of time within each division,
core function, or classification of employee performing any of the services under review in
this study. Sub -tasks are as follows:
A. Develop Time/Cost Module
As part of the Microsoft Excel -based fee/cost of service model to be delivered to
the City at the conclusion of the project, prepare the module that will perform the
time valuation analysis. This module will determine the full cost of service on an
annual basis for each division, for various functions of service, and on an hourly
basis for the entire division, for core functions within a division, and as warranted,
by classification of personnel. Integrate City financial/budget data, payroll/labor
data, and established overhead charges or cost allocations, as follows:
• Define the direct costs of service for each division involved in each service
under review in this study. Direct costs reflect those specifically related to
2 _ 6 Proposal to Pmpare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
., . Prepared by NBS — March 9, 2012
the provision of service embodied by the activities reflected in the fee
schedule, as well as any potential additions to that list.
Define the indirect costs of service for each division involved in each service
under review in this study. Indirect costs are those incurred to support the
provision of direct service, and may be reflected in many functional forms,
depending on the division and/or direct services in questions. Examples of
indirect functions include administrative support, customer service/public
information, code/policy/standards maintenance, training, and management.
Outside of discrete functions, indirect costs may also include tangible items,
such as materials and supplies.
Determine applicable City-wide indirect costs, such as those defined by the
overhead cost allocation plan or other analysis maintained by the City to
determine appropriate shares of administrative, support services, and/or
governance costs. (If Deliverable 1 for a Full Cost Allocation Plan is
initiated before or concurrent with this Comprehensive User Fee and Rate
Study project, City-wide indirect costs will be acquired from the Cost
Allocation Plan's work product.)
B. Develop Fully -burdened Hourly Rates
Calculate fully -burdened hourly rates for all divisions directly involved in the
provision of the services under review in this study. Hourly rates will be
computed at various levels: composite rates for each division, composite rates
for core functions of service within divisions, and where warranted, composite
rates for different classifications of employee within each division. Consider the
applicability of productive hours or direct -billed hours as the basis for the rate
calculation, depending on the division or function in question.
Cost of Service Analysis
The purpose of this task is to establish the full cost of service for each individual activity
under review in this study. The full cost of service defined by NBS serves as the
analytically -justified maximum amount that may be recovered through a user/regulatory
fee adopted solely by the City Council. Sub -tasks are as follows:
A. Determine Full Cost of Services
As part of the Microsoft Excel -based fee/cost of service model to be delivered to
the City at the conclusion of the project, prepare the module that will perform the
cost of service analysis. This module will determine the full cost of service at an
activity level for each individual service currently associated with a fee or
selected as a candidate for a new fee. Integrate applicable information
developed in the Organizational Analysis and the Time Valuation to develop
activity costs of service. Apply performance/time estimates at identified activity
levels to the fully -burdened hourly rates developed in the Time Valuation tasks
to determine the full cost of service for each fee -related service. Add any
discrete materials/services costs not reflected in the time valuation for specific
activities, such as substantial equipment and incremental contract services.
B. Conduct Divisional Meetings / Revisions
Conduct review events with each individual division to review the results of the
Time Valuation and the Full Cost of Services analysis. Determine any
necessary refinements to core assumptions. Discuss applicability in current
and/or alternative fee structures. Discuss pricing objectives from the divisional
perspective, i.e., the division's comfort with full cost recovery or some alternative
level of cost recovery. Consultants will facilitate this conversation by discussing
public/private benefits or causation of each activity, potential market sensitivity,
interaction with established City goals or policies, behavior modification
influence, and other considerations.
%pora/io Prep= a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano 2 -
Prepared by NBS — March 9, 2012
C. Revise Time/CostlActivity Modules
Based on review with City staff, revise core analytical modules and finalize the
activity costs of service. (This represents a planned iteration of the analytical
work products.) Calculate the final unit costs of service that will serve as the
foundation for any revised fee amounts and/or fee structure.
D. Conduct Comparative Fee Survey
Conduct a comparative fee survey of up to 5 jurisdictions of the City's choice.
Survey will be structured to include up to 10 of the most comparable items /
project types for each department studied.
E. Develop Recommended Fees and Cost Recovery Policy
The results of this analysis have thus far determined the estimated, reasonable,
and total cost of providing services from both the per activity (fee item), and
annual perspectives, As discussed in the Methods sub -section of this Chapter,
there are many considerations specific to each community when setting a "price"
for services. The purpose of this task is to define recommended cost recovery
levels which the community can bear. Apply existing cost recovery policies
and/or pricing objectives to the activity costs of service determined with staff in
the previous task. Based on their professional experience, NBS Consultants will
discuss typical pricing and cost recovery objectives seen in other jurisdictions.
From adjusted fee levels, estimate total annual revenue impacts from current fee
performance.
Documentation
The purpose of this task is to provide the substantive documentation necessary to
support any change to fee levels. Sub -tasks are as follows:
A. Prepare and Distribute Draft Report
Prepare a written report describing the complete work and findings of the project.
Include an executive summary, narrative sections detailing the Fee Structure
Design, Organizational Analysis, Time Valuation, and Cost of Service Analysis.
Include discussion of cost recovery policies advocated in the final, recommended
schedule of fees and revenue impacts. Include technical appendices detailing
the entire body of analysis supporting outcomes. Issue the draft report in
electronic form (portable document format) to City staff and management for
review.
B. Present Draft to City Staff and Council
In anticipation of City Council review, prepare foundational presentation materials
for use in public meetings. Conduct one onsite meeting presentation to selected
City Staff and City Council to review the findings issued in the draft report.
Assume minor revisions to the fees presented therein. Revise fee schedules and
documentation upon review and comment.
C. Issue Final Report
Issue the final report to City staff and management in the following formats: five
bound paper copies, one unbound paper copy, and one electronic copy in Word
and portable document format (PDF). Issue the final technical models and
supporting information to the City in Microsoft Excel (XLS) format for future in-
house use and modification.
Legislative Process
The purpose of this task is to support actively the City's process to legislatively review,
approve, and implement any changes to fees stemming from this study. NBS will
prepare for and attend two meetings of the City Council at which a public hearing is
expected in advance of a City Council action to approve modified and/or new fees. We
will present, and respond to questions on behalf of or in support of City staff.
2 _ 8 Pmpora! to Prepare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS—March 9, 2012
CLIENT SATISFACTION
The implementation Plan outlined in Chapter 2 provides a chance for City Management
and City Council to review, ask questions, provide comments and feedback at the draft
results phase as well as the final report phase. This provides an opportunity for
adjustment to the final results to ensure satisfaction with the project results. We feel that
this high level of project management offered by our team of experts, including detailed
work plans, quality control measures, efforts to minimize project impacts on City staff
combined with the draft and final review process, provides effective measures for our
proven track record of client satisfaction. We believe the above points are critical
success factors for any consulting engagement.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
NBS suggests a 90 day timeline from project commencement to issuance of the final
report for the Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive Fee Study. The project
components will be worked on simultaneously, however, the Cost Allocation Plan will be
completed first for use in the fee study. At project commencement, NBS will prepare a
detailed timeline with specific calendar dates of key events for the City's review,
comment, and mutual acceptance. The timeline for implementation of the final report is at
the discretion of City. NBS will provide periodic progress reports to assure progress is
maintained according to timeline objectives.
Task
Weeki Week2 Week Weeke Week5 Week6 WeekT Week6 Week9 Week 10 Week 11 Week 12
OVERHEAD COST ALLOCATION MODEL
Commencement Data Collection
Cost Allocation Model Deaelopment
Derivation of Outcomes
CITYWIDE USER FEES STUDY
Fee Structure Design / Organizational Analysis
T me Valuation
Cost of Service Analysis
Documentation
Legislative Process
mu By nn
CITY STAFF RESPONSIBILITIES
NBS plans to work closely with City staff in conducting this study, To that end, we assume
that City staff will provide the following:
• Data as Requested — This includes financial data such as current and projected
budgets, detailed operating costs, capital improvements plans (types of projects, costs
and timing), updated water sales, and related data.
• Summary of City Policies — Particularly policies, whether written or assumed. (Much
of this has already been included in the City's RFP.)
• Coordination and Attendance of Meetings — While NBS will work with City staff to
schedule meetings and presentations, we would expect City staff to coordinate internal
schedules to ensure that appropriate staff members will attend meetings as needed.
• Provide Study Direction and Guidance — As we develop and propose alternative
financial and rate design scenarios, we will expect City staff to provide direction and
decisions on how they would like to study to proceed. We will expect staff to coordinate
with City management to ensure alternatives pursued are in line with the City's overall
objectives.
• Coordination of Workshops and Presentations — Staff will need to coordinate and
schedule any meetings and/or presentations with the City Council and/or Financial and
Administration Committee as needed.
• Presentation Materials — We will assume that any handouts or copies of
presentations to the public and/or Board or Committee members for public meetings,
workshops, and presentations will be provided by City staff.
Proposal to Prepare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano 2-9
Prepared by NBS — March 9, 2012
CHAPTER 3. STAFFING
PROJECT TEAM STRUCTURE AND ROLES
NBS is staffed with seasoned experts who are dedicated to providing our clients with the
best possible results. The NBS staff of over 35 consultants and engineers has extensive
experience in the fields of finance, management, engineering, and local governance and
combine their knowledge to produce a synergy that results in maximum success and
minimum risk.
The NBS staff is fully conversant with all changes to laws, codes, and regulations
affecting local governments. Recognized as leaders in their field, they are often asked to
teach university courses, serve as expert witnesses, and participate in workouts for
troubled agencies. In addition, NBS staff works with our clients as partners by
developing an intimate knowledge of their needs and responding with strategic and timely
solutions.
NBS is pleased to make the following individuals available to San Juan Capistrano for
this important project:
Nicole Kissam — Project Manager: Ms. Kissam will manage the ongoing
administration of the project, serving as the primary point of contact for San
Juan Capistrano staff and directing the work efforts of our project team. Ms.
Kissam will work closely with San Juan Capistrano' designated project manager
to monitor schedule and delivery of work products to satisfaction. While
designing and directing analytical efforts, she will also provide senior -level
technical analysis as warranted throughout the project.
Greta Davis — Senior Consultant: Ms. Davis will lead data acquisition and
validation efforts with Lynwood staff, direct specific areas of model design, and
prepare technical analysis supporting the determination and justification of cost
allocations, at the direction of our Project Manager. Ms. Davis will work actively
with departmental staff members who oversee and perform services under
review in this effort. Ms. Davis will be fully conversant in all findings and will be
onsite for progress, findings, and public events. She will present
recommendations and findings to staff, and any other public bodies or public
hearings, as specified in the Work Plan for this project.
Kim Boehler — Analyst: Ms. Boehler will perform large-scale data analysis and
validation, design and implement allocation and rate models, and prepare
technical outcomes at the direction of our Project Manager and Senior
Consultant.
In addition to our direct project team members, NBS assigns another director to this
engagement in a Client Services role: ensuring the fundamental objectives are met at all
times. This is an additional control measure that NBS has built into our project
implementation plan which adds to our high level of client satisfaction. Danielle Wood will
perform this role. Furthermore, Ms. Kissam and Ms. Davis will tap, as necessary, the
NBS staff of financial analysts to parse large data sets and perform supporting tasks to
the primary modeling in this project.
The organization chart shown as Exhibit A illustrates the reporting relationships within our
proposed project team.
Proposal to Prepare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS — February 24, 2012
w:.
City of Vacaville
GEOPFBUNTON
IN V ESTVfENT
OFFICER
"Lt my opinion what
distinguishes NBS is the
gaaho ofthe staffIhatyou
have been able to recruit and
trtain dating thepast 15
years: 1 he work product
bwahmp beenpmfersional
and staff has ahvays been a
pleasure to work with
since rhe fimz began."
3-1
Exhibit A.
NBS Project Team for
the City of San Juan
Capistrano
PROFESSIONAL BIOGRAPHIES
The following sections provide a narrative description of the experience and background
of our proposed project team members.
Nicole Kissam, Project Manager
Nicole Kissam is Director of Financial Consulting for NBS. She has over 10 years total
work experience in public sector consulting, city government, marketing, and public
relations. Nicole has been a financial and management consultant to local government
for the majority of her career, specializing in cost allocation plan, and user fee and rate
studies for California agencies.
Ms. Kissam joined NBS in 2010 after four years with the Matrix Consulting Group as the
Vice President and Secretary of the firm, where she was primarily responsible for
origination and development of their Financial Services Practice in the Western United
States. She also performed management audits to improve the operational efficiency of
various municipal services, with a special focus in the area of community development
departments. Nicole was also previously a Senior Consultant for a large national
consulting firm, providing identical professional services in the areas of cost allocation
studies offered in this document by NBS,
Ms. Kissam's cost allocation plan development experience includes both "full" or "total"
cost allocation plans as well as OMB A-87 compliant plans. Additionally, her user fee
analysis project experience covers most public sector programs, including
administration/general government, development review (building inspection, plan review,
engineering, and planning), fire, police, parks and recreation, emergency services, code
enforcement, probation, and libraries. She has participated in, managed, and completed
more than 100 separate consulting engagements throughout her career, from small
jurisdictions with less than 10,000 population, to large jurisdictions such as the
City/County of San Francisco's Building Inspection Department, and City of Los Angeles'
Planning and Fire Departments. In addition to her California experience, she has also
consulted with public agencies cities in the states of Virginia, Hawaii, Nevada, Arizona,
and Washington.
Ms. Kissam holds a Bachelor of Sciences degree in Business Administration from the
California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo, California, with a
concentration in International Business. Throughout her career, she has performed
pioneering work in the area of cost -based building fee analysis, helping municipalities
move away from charging fees based on valuation. Ms. Kissam has been invited
3 - 2 Proposal to Prepare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS — March 9, 2012
ice,.. ..
regularly by various professional organizations to speak at local meetings and annual
business meetings, including recently for the California Association of Building Officials,
and the County Building Officials Association of California, where she presented on the
subject of Changing the Business Model of Building and Safety Departments.
Greta Davis, Senior Consultant
Greta Davis is a Senior Consultant with the Financial Consulting practice of NBS. She
has over 24 years total work experience as a government employee and public sector
consultant. Over the life of her career, she has performed full time management analyst
roles in three different California cities, has lead the Financial Services practice for two
prominent national consulting firms and performed extensive cost allocation and cost of
service studies for various cities, counties, and special districts across the United States.
She manages studies, provides consulting services, and serves as a subject -matter
expertise in the following areas:
Cost of service analysis
• Indirect Cost Rate Studies/Federal OMB A-87 Indirect Cost Allocation Plan
development
• User fees and regulatory fees
Training and Quality Assurance
Federal/State Jail Rates
Federal IV -D Indirect Cost Reimbursement Agreements
Revenue Maximization
Process Re-engineering and Process Improvement
Program Management and Budget Analysis
Ms. Davis' financial consulting services cover most public sector programs, including
development review (planning, building inspection, plan review, engineering, and fire),
fire prevention, transportation, parks and recreation, police/emergency services,
community services, library, and public administration. Ms. Davis holds a Bachelor of
Arts degree in Social Science with an emphasis in Finance from the University of
California, Irvine.
Kim Boehler, Analyst
Kim Boehler is a Financial Analyst at NBS. She has supported financial consulting
projects and provided special financing district administration services to over 34 cities,
counties and special districts in California, during the four years she has spent with NBS.
In the Financial Consulting practice of NBS, Ms. Boehler supports project teams
completing cost allocation, user fee and rate, and water and wastewater utility rate
studies for cities and special districts in California. Her engagements with NBS in cost
allocation and fee study subject matter recently included the Cities of Fresno, Dixon, San
Juan Capistrano, and Napa, the County of Santa Clara, and the Sacramento Public
Library Authority.
Prior to joining NBS, Ms. Boehler earned her Bachelor of Science Degree from California
State University, San Bernardino, where she graduated with honors in 2004. She studied
Business Administration with a specialization in Finance. Throughout the course of her
studies, Ms. Boehler held positions in the retail and hospitality industries, while also
gaining hands-on work experience in both private and public sector organizations. With
over ten years total work experience, in a variety of fields, Kim has a diverse skill set that
allows her to effectively tackle the many challenges that arise in public sector consulting.
Proposal to Prepare a 3 - 3
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS — February 24, 2012
CHAPTER 4. QUALIFICATIONS
COMPARABLE PROJECTS AND REFERENCES
NBS submits the following five descriptions and references for projects we have
performed comparable to the needs of the City of San Juan Capistrano.
(1) CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study
Greta Davis, the project manager for this engagement, and newest member of the
NBS Project Team, prepared a Full Cost Allocation Plan and OMB A-87 version for
the City of Rancho Santa Margarita. Additionally, she performed a user fee study for
the planning, building and Public Work/Engineering departments. This work was
performed within the last two years of her employment as Senior Manager at
Maximus.
Project Start & End Dates: March 2008 —August 2008
Key Staff & Roles: Greta Davis — Project Manager and Lead Consultant
Client Project Manager:
Paul Boyer, Administrative Services Director, 949.635.1815, pboyer@cityofrsm.org
(2) CITY OF FRESNO
User Fee Study
NBS recently completed a user and regulatory fee analysis for the City of Fresno's
Fire Department. Work completed n this project included calculation of the total
estimated reasonable cost of providing annual inspection services, as well as
creation of a simplified cost recovery based fee structure for review and inspection of
building permit projects.
Project Start & End Dates: April 2011 — September 2011
Key Staff & Roles: Nicole Kissam — Project Manager and Lead Consultant
Client Project Manager:
Michael Despain, Deputy Chief, 559.621.4155 mdespain@fresno.gov
(3) CITY OF LOS ANGELES, DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING
Review of Expedited Services Fully Burdened Hourly Rates and Fee Structure
NBS was selected by the City of Los Angeles' Planning Department to study fully
burdened hourly rates and fee structure policies related to provision of expedited
project review services. Key consulting tasks include development of a deliverable
fully burdened hourly rate model, and recommendation regarding a fair and equitable
fee structure for specialized services.
Project Start & End Dates: January 2010 — September 2010
Key Staff & Roles: Nicole Kissam — Project Manager and Lead Consultant
Client Project Manager:
Eva Yuan -McDaniel, Deputy Director, 213-978-1273, eva.yuan-mcdaniel@lacity.org
Proposal to Prepare a 4-1
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS — February 24, 2012
(4) CITY OF RICHMOND
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Studies for Planning, Building, Engineering,
City of Richmond Code Enforcement, and Medical Marijuana Dispensaries
CHAD DAVISSON Nicole Kissam, the project manager for this engagement, prepared a Full Cost
XVASTFWATER Allocation Plan and OMB A-87 version for the City of Richmond. Additionally, she
MANAGER performed a user fee study for the planning and building departments. This work was
performed within the last two years of her employment as Vice President and
`T rra(4 appreciate allgfthe Secretary of the Matrix Consulting Group. The NBS project team has also recently
extra timeyou.rpent educating completed several successful user and regulatory fee analyses for the City of
me (and my stat on the basis Richmond, including a third party review of fully loaded hourly rate calculations for the
jortheraus. tlwaaextremedy Engineering, Wastewater, and Stormwater departments, as well as review of the
valuable andgiues me the detail City's existing approach to establishing Wastewater and Stormwater utility rates
itreed toexplalnaadjustr# subject to Proposition 218 procedures. NBS also performed complete user and
a y inneaser." regulatory fee analyses pertaining to the Code Enforcement division and the
permitting process for the recently adopted Medical Marijuana Collectives Dispensary
Ordinance.
Project Start & End Dates: December 2010— April 2011
Key Staff & Roles: Nicole Kissam — Project Manager and Lead Consultant
Client Project Manager:
Antonio Banuelos, Revenue Manager: 510-620-6741,
Antonio—banuelos@ci.richmond.ca.us
(5) SACRAMENTO PUBLIC LIBRARY AUTHORITY
Cost Allocation Plan
NBS conducted a recent OMB a-87 compliant cost allocation plan analysis for the
Sacramento Public Library Authority. NBS is also currently under contract to update
this Plan for the next two fiscal years.
Project Start & End Dates: November 2010 — February 2011 and January 2012 to
Present
Key Staff & Roles: Nicole Kissam/Greta Davis — Project Mgr and Lead Consultant
Client Project Manager:
Roxana Puerner, Admin. Services, 916.264.2790, rpuerner@saclibrary.org
4 - 2 Proposal to Prepare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS — March 9, 2012
CHAPTER 5. FEE PROPOSAL
FEE PROPOSAL
NBS will complete the Scope of Services outlined in Chapter 2 of this proposal for a total
cost not to exceed $30,790. A breakdown across all included project scopes is shown
below:
These fees are based on our understanding of the City's needs and the effort we believe
is necessary to complete the scope of services/task plan described.
Upon the City's review of our articulation of the scope of services and our suggested
work plan, NBS is willing to commit to the fee as a not -to -exceed amount for the
services described. This means that NBS will complete the project(s) following Chapter
2 of this document and at no time will we invoice for charges in excess of the fee to
which the City of San Juan Capistrano and NBS mutually agree. Should the City
specifically request additional services beyond those described in this document, we will
discuss those requests and associated costs at that later time and only invoice for
additional fees upon separate written authorization from the City.
NBS has used the following hourly rates to derive the overall not -to -exceed pricing for
the requested scope of services. These hourly rates will apply for the duration of our
contract:
Project Manager, $190 per hour
Senior Consultant, $150 per hour
Analyst, $100 per hour
NBS proposes to invoice the City on a monthly basis, following recorded consultant time
on the project, paralleling our completion of the work. With a total project timeline
proposed to cover approximately three months, we will likely issue a total of three to four
invoices, with one issued at the close of each calendar month. Total invoices submitted
will not exceed the project cost proposed in this document.
CONSULTANT LABOR EFFORT AND COST DETAIL
The fee proposed by NBS has been derived based on our estimate of the labor effort
required to complete each task identified in the work plan shown in our technical
proposal. The tables at the end of this document illustrate the detailed computation of
our total consulting fee, including labor distribution across phases and tasks of work for
our project team, hourly rates for each individual, and a small provision for direct
expenses we incur, primarily associated with document production.
We illustrate the detail of our fee estimate to express it honestly and transparently for
your consideration. It is based on our best understanding of the City's needs and our
experience in other studies. However, should this fee estimate fall outside the City's
expectations, we would be glad for the opportunity to discuss the City's concerns, so we
might possibly generate a scope of work and consulting fee that is mutually agreeable.
Proposal to Prepare a 5-1
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS — February 24, 2012
Thank you for your time in considering our ideas. We hope to be your trusted guide
through this important work.
Exhibit A: Project Budget Detail for Overhead Cost Allocation Model
PROJECT COST DETAIL
Consultant Labor (Hours)
Grand Totals
Consultant
Labor (Hours)
Consultant
Costs($)
Task Plan Project Senior Analyst
Manager Consultant
Hourly Rate
$190
$150
$100
Commencement Data Collection
A. Gather/analyze data
0.5
1.0
-
1.5
$ 245
B. Identify i nitial structure
0.5
1.5
-
2.0
320
C. Meet with City staff
1.0
2.0
3.0
490
6.5
1,055
Subtotal 2.0 4.5 -
AilestoneJDekwabk: Xkk-oJ/rrreetWif.
Cost Allocation Model Development
A. Conduct organizational review
1.0
4.0
-
5.0
790
B. Develop model
2.0
4.0
8.0
14.0
1,780
C. Prepare allocation factors
1.0
4.0
8.0
13.0
1,590
D. input data
0.5
2.0
8.0
10.5
1,195
Subtotal
4.5
14.0
24.0
425
5,355
MilestociAMdlverablr CitylFeWew A Confirmatbn otPkrnStructure ,
Derivation of Outcomes
A. General annual allocations
1.0
4.0
4.0
9.0
1,190
B. Finalize Deliverable
1.0
4.0
4.0
9.0
1,190
Subtotal
2.0
8.0
8.0
18.0
2,380
Milestonr✓Debverablr. Draft Cost Allocotlon plan
-
GRAND TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED
9
27
32
67
8,790
5 - 2 Pmparal to Prepare a
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS - March 9, 2012
Exhibit B: Project Budget Detail for User Fees Study
PROJECT COST DETAIL
Consultant Labor (Hours)
Grand Totals
Consultant
Labor(Hours)
Consultant
Costs($)
Project Senior
Task Plan Manager Consultant Analyst
Hourly Rote
$190
$150 $100
Commencement Data Collection
A. Conduct admi nistrative ki ck-off meeti ng
1.0
1.0 -
2.0
$ 340
B. Gather/a na lyze accessi bl a data
0.5
1.0 -
1.5
245
Subtotal
1.5
2.0 -
3S
585
AlRertoae/oekWrobk.'Kkkvhmeetbp
Fee Structure Design and Organizational Analysis
A. Design fee structure/ divisional meetings
1.0
8.0 4.0
13.0
1,790
B. Conduct ti me study
1.0
12.0 6.0
19.0
2,590
C. Prepare iterations and time study module
1.0
6.0 8.0
15.0
1,890
Subtotal
3.0
26.0 18.0
47.0
6,270
ARlestone/DelAwable: Feestructur4 fimeestfou to and volume datarevlew and
contifffmation
Time Valuation
A. Devel op ti me/cost module
1.0
8.0 8.0
17.0
2,190
B. Develop fully -burdened hourly rates
1.0
2.0 2.0
So
690
Subtotal
2.0
10.0 10.0
22.0
2,880
MilestoneJDeliveruble:Cast and FullyBardened Hourly Rate review ands nfirmatkn
Cost of Service Analysis
A. Deter mi ne ful l cost of services
1.5
8.0 4.0
13.5
1,885
B. Conduct divisi onaI meetings/revisions
2.0
8.o 4.0
14.0
1,980
C. Revise ti me/cost/acti vity moduI es
1.0
4.0 4.0
9.0
1,190
D. Conduct comparative fee survey
0.5
2.0 16.0
18.5
1,995
E. Develop recommended fees / policy
2.0
6.0 4.0
12.0
1,680
Subtotal
7.0
28.0 32.0
67.0
8,730
MRestona(DdAwrable: On-slterevkwmMlogs to
rojfne tart; prellminarydraft
ravkw and revisions, rolew draft comparathrastudy;;develop recommended fees
,
.
Documentation
A. Prepa re/distribute draft report
2.0
8.0 -
10.0
1,580
B. Conduct onsite meeting. all parties
2.0
2.0 -
4.0
680
C. Issuefinal report
0.5
2.0 2.0
4.5
595
Subtotal
4.5
12.0 2.0
18.5
2,855
Milestane/OW[varoble: Draft User Fee Report
Legislative Process
Subtotal
1.0
3.0 -
4.0
640
MlleseonefOeWavabla{GXy counipmeefingar4logidatNe Procecskupport
Direct Expenses
40
Atliertome1De1lverabk.Final RepartprkrtFegarzrishlppkzg "
.
GRANDTOTAL NOTTO EXCEED
19.0
81.0 62.0
162.0
22,000
Proposal to Prepwr a 5-3
Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee and Rate Study for the City of San Juan Capistrano
Prepared by NBS - February 24, 2012
C
n
c
W
�
u
y
E
u
4
y
U
a�
M
O
ItK
G
2
a
w
3
O
1/1
Z
2
ts
CFC
d
x:: •
'
.
pSp
o
o
a
S
a
;.,iie
a'.' .:
a
'
N
.sit.{�
r'•�
p
�
�
N
a
a
a
o
o
c
o
xi
ID
u
a
a
u
-
a
d
u
y
d
O
a
a
c
m
°Py'
o
v
,2
I.
o
Om
C
O
1'
O
✓t
\
d ..
� >
ref,
O
EXHIBIT C to NBS Proposal
EXHIBIT C to NBS Proposal
3
a
r
a
O
0
m
O
wi
0
Z
lbO
N
Z
01
O
Z
N
O
Z
.n
u
O
or
N
m
N
�
Z
a
v
LL
N
�
G
O
T
N
L
Q
W
C
m
Q
N
L
O
0
E
Z
j
O
aO
U
O
U
Oo
E
u~i
a
0
O
m
4
w
a
Q
m
L
O
LL
C
y
O
v
O
d
V
O
O
O
E
o
W
U
C
S
Y
W
E
w
E
V
m
m
W
V
EXHIBIT C to NBS Proposal
=7*) N BS
harping communities
fund tomorrow
tir0 k'arte; Shee6 1�`3
San I rarcdero. CA 9410'_
Tcil fie 800 434 6r 114
nbsgov.com
August 13, 2012
Cindy Russell
Chief Financial Officer/City Treasurer
City of San Juan Capistrano
32400 Paseo Adelanto
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Subject: Proposal to Conduct a Development Impact and Housing In -Lieu Fee Analysis
Dear Ms. Russell:
On behalf of NBS, Greta Davis and I thank you for last week's opportunity to discuss cost recovery
objectives related to impact fees for the City of San Juan Capistrano. Per your request, the following
proposal presents a work plan and cost estimate for these services.
I SCOPE OF SERVICES I
PMC, as a sub -consultant to NBS, will prepare a report updating development impact fees to fund
development mitigations in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act as contained in Government Code
(GC) Section 66000 et seq. Based on our discussion with the City Finance Director, newer traffic impact
fees such as for auto dealerships have been perceived as being very high and are of concern to the
development community and stakeholders.
Our scope of services includes a review of the City's existing impact fees to determine whether the fees
are fair and reasonable. This will include a review of the nexus findings previously made to justify the
existing fee rates. In addition, we will coordinate our work with that of the NBS team to help clarify with
public stakeholders the technical and regulatory differences among the fees, rates and charges imposed
by the City.
We have separated the City's housing in -lieu development fee from the other existing impact fees due to
the differing nature of how these fees are to be updated. The following task plan provides PMC's
approach and process toward the City's affordable housing in -lieu fee program. We are aware that the
City's Housing Advisory Committee is developing alternative solutions that will help the city meet its
affordable housing requirements while still encouraging developers to build. As part of our work effort, we
will review and evaluate these alternative solutions and make findings and suggested recommendations.
helping communities fund tomorrow
EXHIBIT B - Page 1
TRAFFIC DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDY AND NEXUS REPORT
PMC, as a subconsultant to NBS, will conduct a nexus study and prepare a report
updating the Capistrano Circulation Fee Program to fund traffic mitigations in
accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act as contained in Government Code (GC) Section
66000 et seq. PMC has also been asked to include in the nexus study the circulation
improvements identified in the Historic Town Center Master Plan.
Our scope of services includes a review of the City's existing circulation impact fees to
determine whether the fees are fair and reasonable. This will include a review of the
nexus findings previously made to justify the existing fee rates. In addition, we will
coordinate our work with that of the NBS team to help clarify with public stakeholders
the technical and regulatory differences among the fees, rates and charges imposed by
the City
Task 1: Kick Off Meeting/Data Collection/Stakeholders
PMC will conduct a kick-off meeting with City staff to make any refinements to the
scope of work, schedule, and assignments. We will provide an overview of the study
schedule, facilities, methodology, and process for providing input. PMC will begin the
data gathering process by providing the City with an advance list of documents and
data that will be required by the consulting team. Data will be collected on the traffic
mitigation improvements identified in the following current traffic impact fee program
and master plan documents:
• Capistrano Circulation Fee Program
Historic Town Center Master Plan
PMC's Project Manager will confirm communication protocols with the City and confirm
expectations and schedules for product deliverables.
Task 2: Identify and Address Policy Issues
In reviewing the justification for the current impact fees, PMC will identify and address
policy issues involved in formulating a development impact fee program. These issues
may involve, but not be limited to, the following:
• When the impact fee applies;
• Level of Service standards;
• Cost and fee burdens shared between residential and non-residential land uses;
• Funding sources for existing deficiencies;
• Development time -horizon: either build -out or specific year;
• Prioritization of improvement projects to be funded by the impact fee;
EXHIBIT B - Page 2
Phasing of fee amounts and discounting for "pipeline" projects;
Recoupment, waivers, and credits.
PMC will identify and report on other matters as appropriate that may arise during the
course of the project that PMC determines should be considered by the City.
Task 3: Identify Future Development by Land Use Cateaory
PMC will identify assumptions to be used in the calculation of future land uses in terms
of Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU) that creates the demand for future traffic facilities
and improvements. PMC will refer to the land uses categories and land use capacity
and/or projections, at build -out or an agreed-upon horizon year, contained in the
General Plan and the Historic Town Center Master Plan, and related documents. PMC
will identify specific land use types and allocate costs in a rough proportionality to the
impacts arising from each land use type.
Task 4: Identify and AnalVze Levels of Service
PMC will identify and describe the basis for assumptions regarding the existing level of
service in the City for the identified facilities, including a general description of existing
facilities. PMC will also address the impact that new development will have upon the
level of service for existing facilities including a description and analysis of any varying
impacts caused by residential development versus commercial and industrial
development.
The discussion will also address the impacts upon levels of service for new
development after the additional facilities are constructed.
Task 5: Develop Cost Estimates for Eligible Improvements
Where available PMC will review the cost estimates and list of projects included in the
existing Capistrano Circulation Fee Program, and evaluate their relation to new
development. For the Historic Town Center Master Plan, PMC will prepare conceptual -
level cost estimates of all eligible improvements, or portions of improvements that are
to be included in the fee program. The estimates will include right-of-way acquisition (if
applicable), design, and construction. For some projects, credits arising from
developer construction may need to be capitalized into the improvement costs.
Task 6: Conduct an Impact Fee Comparison
PMC will prepare a matrix of similar impact fees in adjacent and similar communities or
other jurisdictions to be suggested by City staff. We will conduct the comparison for up
to five (5) similar communities. The comparison is for information purposes, but will
also serve as a benchmark for further recommendations.
EXHIBIT 8 - Page 3
Task 7: Conduct Nexus Analysis
Should existing fees be updated, PMC will prepare the fee methodology for each facility
category in conformance with GC 66000 et seq. that requires local governments to
document findings in the following manner when adopting an impact fee:
1) Identify the purpose of the fee;
2) Identify the use of fee revenues;
3) Determine a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of
development paying the fee;
4) Determine a reasonable relationship between the need for the fee and the type
of development paying the fee; and
5) Determine a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost
of the facility attributable to development paying the fee.
Task 8: Prepare and Submit Draft Nexus Report
PMC will prepare a draft nexus report and submit an electronic copy in PDF format to
City staff for review. PMC will present and discuss the report's findings with City staff.
Task 9: Prepare Final Nexus Report/Attend Public Hearing
Following staffs review and comment, we will prepare the final report. The Final Report
will summarize key results and findings, fee methodology, existing deficiencies, and fee
amounts. We will attend one (1) public hearing with the City Council to be coordinated
with the operational fee update (completed by NBS). Additional meetings may be
requested by City at which PMC will attend on a time and materials basis.
PMC, as a subconsultant to NIBS, will conduct a nexus study and prepare a report
updating development impact fees to fund future park development as impact
mitigation in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act as contained in Government Code
(GC) Section 66000 et seq..
Our scope of services includes a review of the City's existing Park and Recreation
Facilities Development fees to determine whether the fees are fair and reasonable. This
will include a review of the nexus findings previously made to justify the existing fee
rates. In addition, we will coordinate our work with that of the NIBS team to help clarify
with public stakeholders the technical and regulatory differences among the fees, rates
and charges imposed by the City
Task 1: Kick Off Meeting/Data Collection/Stakeholders
PMC will conduct a kick-off meeting with City staff to make any refinements to the
scope of work, schedule, and assignments. We will provide an overview of the study
EXHIBIT B - Page 4
schedule, facilities, methodology, and process for providing input. PMC will begin the
data gathering process by providing the City with an advance list of documents and
data that will be required by the consulting team. Data will be collected on existing
eligible park and recreation facilities.
PMC's Project Manager will confirm communication protocols with the City and confirm
expectations and schedules for product deliverables.
Task 2: Identify and Address Policy Issues
In reviewing the justification for the current impact fees, PMC will identify and address
policy issues involved in formulating a development impact fee program. These issues
may involve, but not be limited to, the following:
• When the impact fee applies;
• Park acreage standard and facilities to include in the standard;
• Funding sources for existing deficiencies;
• Phasing of fee amounts and discounting for "pipeline" projects;
• Recoupment, waivers, and credits.
PMC will identify and report on other matters as appropriate that may arise during the
course of the project that PMC determines should be considered by the City.
Task 3: Identify Future Development by Land Use Category
PMC will identify assumptions to be used in the calculation of future land uses in terms
of Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU) that creates the demand for future park and
recreation facilities and improvements. PMC will refer to the land uses categories and
land use capacity and/or projections, at build -out or an agreed-upon horizon year,
contained in the General Plan and related documents. PMC will identify specific
residential land use types and allocate costs in a rough proportionality to the impacts
arising from each land use type.
Task 4: Identify and Analyze Levels of Service
PMC will identify and describe the basis for assumptions regarding the existing level of
service in the City for the existing park facilities, including a general description of
existing facilities. PMC will also address the impact that new development will have
upon the level of service of existing facilities.
Task 5: Develop Cost Estimates for Eligible Improvements
We will review the cost estimates and list of projects included in the existing impact fee
programs, and evaluate their relation to new development. PMC will prepare proto-type
cost estimates for future parks needed to serve new development.
EXHIBIT B - Page 5
Task 6: Conduct an Impact Fee Comparison
PMC will prepare a matrix of impact fees in adjacent and similar communities or other
jurisdictions to be suggested by City staff. We will conduct the comparison for up to
five (5) similar communities. The comparison is for information purposes, but will also
serve as a benchmark for further recommendations.
Task 7: Conduct Nexus Analysis
Should existing fees be updated, PMC will prepare the fee methodology for each facility
category in conformance with GC 66000 et seq. that requires local governments to
document findings in the following manner when adopting an impact fee:
1) Identify the purpose of the fee;
2) Identify the use of fee revenues;
3) Determine a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of
development paying the fee;
4) Determine a reasonable relationship between the need for the fee and the
type of development paying the fee; and
5) Determine a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the
cost of the facility attributable to development paying the fee.
Task 8: Prepare and Submit Draft Nexus Report
PMC will prepare a draft nexus report and submit an electronic copy in PDF format to
City staff for review. PMC will present and discuss the report's findings with City staff.
Task 9: Prepare Final Nexus Report/Attend Public Hearing
Following staff's review and comment, we will prepare the final report. The Final Report
will summarize key results and findings, fee methodology, existing deficiencies, and fee
amounts. We will attend one (1) public hearing with the City Council to be coordinated
with the Traffic Impact Fee Update, and/or operational fee update (completed by NBS).
Additional meetings may be requested by City at which PMC will attend on a time and
materials basis.
III. OPTIONAL SERVICE
Art in Public Places In -Lieu Fee Analysis
While not classified as an impact fee, an in -lieu fee charged to new development to pay
for public art programs can enhance economic development and be funded by both the
public and private sectors. The majority of public art programs at the county and city
level are funded through a law or ordinance that sets aside a percentage of funds from
the construction budget of an eligible capital improvement project or private
development project. These "percent -for -art" mandates generally provide a percentage
of total eligible CIP costs or the value of private construction for the acquisition and
EXHIBIT B - Page 6
commissioning of artworks. The in -lieu fee would be paid by the project developer in -
lieu of actual installation of an artwork of the specified valuation.
Task 1: Kick Off Meeting/Information Gathering
PMC will conduct a kick-off meeting with City staff to make any refinements to the scope
of work, schedule, and assignments for the Art in Public Places Program. We will
provide an overview of the study schedule, facilities, methodology, and process for
providing input. PMC will begin by researching program descriptions, reports,
resolutions, ordinances and other relevant information from a number of California cities
and counties that have implemented public art funding programs.
Task 2: Identify and Address Policy Issues
PMC will summarize its findings and discuss the potential policy issues with City staff.
Issues may include, but not limited to:
• Applicable projects: public (capital improvements projects), private development
or both;
• Use of funds: defining criteria for the program;
• Selection/design review process for public artwork (what should qualify as art);
• Methods for determining minimum expenditure on art (minimum project cost
threshold, percentage of final construction cost, estimated cost or negotiated
amount);
• Waiver and/or exemption of the art installation requirement and/or in -lieu fee.
Task 3: Prepare and Submit Draft Fee Report
PMC will prepare a fee report that describes the program, presents findings, explains
the methodology and rationale for the recommended approach, and review the draft
with City staff.
Task 4: Draft In -lieu Fee Ordinance or Resolution
PMC will draft a fee ordinance or resolution for review and approval by the City
Attorney, prior to a City Council hearing.
Task 5: Prepare a Final Fee Report/Attend Public Hearing
The final report will address any changes proposed by City staff. PMC will attend one (1) public
hearing. Additional meetings may be requested by City at which PMC will attend on a
time and materials basis.
EXHIBIT B - Page 7
PMC Overview, Qualifications and Personnel
PMC has grown to become a recognized leader in providing a full range of
environmental, planning, and municipal services. We attribute our success to our focus
on understanding and meeting our clients' needs in the most efficient and creative
manner possible. No matter what the assignment, PMC operates as an extension of
staff to ensure a team approach in identifying effective strategies for resolving project
challenges. With over 100 professionals and six primary offices in California, we offer a
local perspective enhanced by our broad experience to help clients achieve a
successful outcome. Our clients include over 650 cities, counties, special districts, and
public agencies throughout California and the West.
Our staff includes municipal finance specialists, urban designers, current, advance, and
environmental planners, and technical specialists to assist with projects. We have
professionals with the experience to ensure a quality and timely response to any issue
that might arise during a project.
PMC staff has broad experience creating, structuring, and updating impact fee
programs for cities and counties. For these clients, our staff has provided nexus
documentation to support impact fees funding a wide range of public facilities, including
utilities (water, wastewater, and storm drainage), roadways and transit, parks, fire,
police, health clinics, and other government facilities such as civic center and
corporation yards. Most of the impact fee studies that we have prepared have included
participation by developers and presentations to elected officials.
PMC provides turnkey finance services, enabling our clients to maintain, enhance, and
assure long-term viability in their growing communities. Our finance services include,
but are not limited to, the following:
• Financial planning and revenue enhancement, including financial projections and
policy analysis, plus rate and user fee studies.
• Capital improvement planning and financing, including infrastructure financing
plans and development impact fee and connection fee studies.
• Economic and fiscal policy analysis of proposed projects and plans, including
government reorganization studies.
• Special district creation and implementation, including district formation and
Prop. 218 voter campaigns.
With a municipal orientation, PMC personnel often operate as an extension of agency
staff with the goal of providing legally defensible fee programs and other financial/fiscal
documents in the most efficient manner possible. Project managers are given the
freedom and flexibility needed to respond directly to the requirements of the
municipalities we serve. Given the breadth and depth of expertise among our staff,
PMC is able to offer clients a broad range of financial services.
EXHIBIT B - Page 8
Staff
DINO SERAFINI P.E. — PROJECT MANAGER/PROJECT ENGINEER
Mr. Serafini has over 30 years of public infrastructure planning, financing, design, and
construction management experience in the State of California working with city,
county, school district, military and private clients. He has facilitated the formation of
Mello -Roos Community Facilities Districts that were specifically created to finance
facilities and the maintenance of such facilities serving new development. Mr. Serafini
has extensive experience in the development of cost estimates, phasing plans,
threshold criteria, and policy determinations that go into public facilities financing plans
and reimbursement agreements between agencies and private developers.
Mr. Serafini holds a Bachelor of Sciences degree in Economics from University of
California, Riverside, and a Master of Environmental Administration from University of
California at Riverside. He has completed the curriculum for a Master's Degree in Civil
Engineering from San Diego State University. He also completed the Urban Planning
and Development Certificate Program at the University of California, San Diego
Extension. Mr. Serafini holds professional registration as a California Registered Civil
Engineer, 51164.
TOM BANDY — ASSISTANT PROJECT MANAGER/PUBLIC FINANCE SPECIALIST
With over 30 years of experience in city government and consulting, Mr. Bandy provides
consulting services that include the preparation of public facility financing plans
identifying the cost, phasing, and financing of public improvements including the use of
development impact fees, in accordance with the nexus requirements of Government
Code Section 66000. Mr. Bandy also conducted a fee -for -art study for the City of
Lynwood resulting in adoption of Art In Public Places ordinance that provides for a
contribution to public artwork in the amount of 1.5% of the value of private development.
Mr. Bandy received his Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Redlands, a
Master of Public Administration from the University of Southern California, and a Master
of Business Administration from Pepperdine University.
DEREK WONG, AICP — PUBLIC FINANCE SPECIALIST
Derek has 17 years of consulting experience specializing in financing of public facilities.
He has managed complex engagements that require the identification and analysis of
revenues and costs for local and regional projects and programs, including for the
transportation and development communities. He has developed various revenue
strategies and funding mechanisms that involve consensus building with local
community stakeholders and governing boards to bridge funding shortfalls in
operations and with capital facilities. Derek also conducts organizational performance
audits of regional planning agencies and provides recommendations for process
improvement and compliance with state law. He has taught seminars on public financial
management to planning and finance professionals throughout California, with
EXHIBIT B - Page 9
coursework including revenue strategies and financial planning techniques. He works in
the area of project management, infrastructure financing, fiscal and economic analysis,
and user and impact fees.
Mr. Wong received a Bachelor of Sciences degree in Environmental Policy Analysis
and Planning from University of California, Davis, with an emphasis in Transportation
Planning, and a Master of Business Administration from California Polytechnic State
University, San Luis Obispo. He is a member of the American Institute of Certified
Planners (AICP) of the American Planning Association.
SCHEDULE
Upon receiving a Notice to Proceed, we will submit the draft impact fee report to the City
for review by December, 2012. This assumes no significant delays in gathering the data
required to conduct the analysis. Upon receiving any comments, we will prepare the
final report. If the optional service is included, an additional 2 weeks would be needed to
complete and submit a draft report.
COST PROPOSAL
PMC's cost for the Traffic Impact Fee Update alone is $14,350. If a Parks and
Recreation Fee Nexus Study is done in conjunction with the Traffic Impact Fee Study
the incremental cost for the Park Nexus Study is $3,930, for a total cost of $18,280 (the
incremental cost of the Park Nexus Study applies only if conducted together with the
Traffic Impact Fee study). The cost of the optional Art in Public Places In -Lieu Fee
Study is $7,500.
EXHIBIT B - Page 10
w
W
LL
H
V
Q
IL
2
U
M
LL
O
LL
J
z
Q
W
W
LL
1—
Q
a
W
2
IL
O
w
W
M
N
m
m
o_
m
F-
m
2
X
LU
G)
Y
O
O
O
LO
O
LO
Cf)
O
O
O
N
N
00
'cr
n
00
CD
U)
M
V
(3)
N
LL
m
V'
O)
O
N
D)
O
in
f`
Cfl
M
V)
'
N
N
r
613
r
N
4
w+
L
d
NA
61)
fA
69
6s
CA
69
r
V!
O
a
Y
m
i
1l-
00
N
a0
'7
N
0{
O
S
m
a
c
E
O
N
N
Q
d Q
6�9
60.
cm
N
U U
O
OO
O
N
N
N
N
to
M
M
N
f00
a LL�
I
6q
f R
0
-c
L L
U C
O
O
N
Cn
N c
O
Lj
O
r
O
O
N
O
N
M
M
O
CD
r
m
O
CO
c-
d
Cr)
C
w
»
w
0
.N
O
t
y)
a)
E
C
m
0
U
=
o
�o
a
O
t-
(1)
a'
N
?
a)
co
-0
o
to
N
O
'LM
W
)
U
a)
c
y
L
m
<i'
to
v
a
E
N
o
y
m
Y
m
CL
o
ami
_r
°
U
�'
D
Q
c
>N
E
CU
c
E
'O
N
W
Q
X
N
c
Q
o
m
r_Z
uj
i)
cau
j
y
N
'D
-OO
N
E
X
N
U
C
m
C
c�
ca
LL
c
m
U_
Z
m
jL
O
w
w
O
U
-O
U
m
N
Y
Y
c
C
VCL
c>
a
O
CL
N
Ya_
-
a
s
U
Uma
CL
D"
.-
N
Co
'V'
U0
CD
f-
00
m
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
m
N
m
N
m
N
m
N
m
N
m
N
m
N
m
N
m
N
m
m
o_
m
F-
m
2
X
LU
J
Q
O
IL
w
IL
U
W
W
LL
O
H
Q
LU
U
W
w
06
Y
a
a
w
O
LLD
cn
J
a
Q
LU
LU
LL
a
I --
CL
Z
LU
2
a
O
LU
w
0
N
N
rn
m
a
m
F
m
2
X
LU
d
Y
LO
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Lo
O
0
y
M
I,_
(D
00
M
O
O
M
M
LL
m
N
N
00
00
LO
V
V
M
01
F
69
6-J
69
6-T
6-3
K3
69
69
(9
e")
w
4)
69
O
0)
�
a
Y
O
`
R
M
C
N
N
O
O
V
M
M
co
`
=
a
c
c
O
O
O
EE
on6n
Q
aQ
�
CN
O
UO
C.�
O
M
-0(0 U
O
O
O
N
N
N
N
r
c 0)
r
V-
fn
69
a
c
f0
U of N
U)
00
'� CO
LO
N
O
't
'IT
N
N
N
Cl)
c
CO
N
c
a W
1
w
0
N
c
tm
c
N
w
f6
0
U
N
2
pcl
U
am+
O
=
O
F
U
E
0)
Z
CD0
c
CD
M
O
:3
=
O
N
n
O
LLI
c)
—
c
Z
It
O
U
0)
O
O
O
cl
cc
m
y>
N
E
NC
O
N
0)
Z
LL
E
X
t5
W
U
Z
i='
Q
a)
rz
Q
N
Q
>
y
OE
X
N
O
c
m
c
c�
c
U
Z
m
m
LL
m
a
U
U
N
N
O
-
_
_
O
7
7
m
U
N
N
N>
o
o
N
Q
0)
O
U
U
n
d
N
Cl)
V
LO
(D
I,-
00
O
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
(n
N
N
(n
N
N
N
N
0)
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
H
H
H
H
F
F
F
H
H
N
N
rn
m
a
m
F
m
2
X
LU
FF
�
�
«
2
«
o w
§ w
D
w
00
b § 2 -
w :3U)
anILLU
R § Q
p2- -i
Q a
� U
%
a
�W�
w
�
«
0
0
a
\\//
2
/
®
P
I
)
/
)
x
Lo
)
2
It
__
00_
§
E
k E
C14
C147
<
�<
&
-
k 0a
j"t
k
3o
/}}k
n
N
m
N
Cl)
-
m
7\\§
§
o=
§
o
I
g
�o
/
2
}
\
ƒ
k
}
)
)
\
)
/
)
m
a
e
/
�
CL
a) wfn
}-
2
~®__
E0
e
f<72ı
(D a)
k/7Dj[t\[
\
$
aa)
a
' m
3Cl)
C
to
ƒ
�)
)
f
CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
FOR COST ALLOCATION PLAN AND CITYWIDE USER FEE AND RATE STUDY
FINANCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Released on January 23, 2012
ATTACHMENT 2
3. SCOPE OF WORK
The consultant shall conduct a comprehensive review of the City's fee and rate structure with
the goal of establishing a consistent and objectively based fee and rate structure meeting the
needs of the City and residents. The fee and rate system shall comply with all applicable laws
and regulations, and will be compatible with the City's financial system.
1. Mandatory Project Specifications: FULL COST ALLOCATION STUDY
Project tasks shall include, but are not necessarily limited to the following:
A. Work and meet with City staff to define and refine the project scope, purpose, uses and
goals of the City's Cost Allocation Plan to ensure it is accurate and appropriate to the
City's needs.
B. Meet with various departmental staff to conduct interviews as needed to gain an
understanding of the City's practices and operations.
C. Develop a Full Cost Allocation Plan that:
• Establishes a full cost allocation methodology for specific administrative overhead
costs that will properly reimburse the City's General Fund and estimate the
anticipated reimbursements to the General Fund.
Allows for additions, revisions or removal of direct and indirect costs so the cost
allocation plan can be easily adapted to a range of activities both simple and
complex.
Provides the ability to continuously update the plan from year to year to
accommodate organizational changes.
D. Assist the Financial Services Department in presenting the draft cost allocation plan to
selected City staff, the Utilities Commission, and the City Council. It is expected that
comments and concerns will be collected during the draft presentation phase for
inclusion in a final cost allocation plan and model.
E. Provide the City with five bound and one unbound copy of the final cost allocation
plan; as well as an electronic copy of the final version, including related schedules and
cost documentation in an Excel format so it can be updated and/or edited by City staff
on an ongoing basis.
F. It is desirable for qualified bidders to provide the following:
1. A methodology appropriate for the calculation and allocation of an overhead cost
rate complying with OMB Circular A-87.
2. A study of each program with overhead costs that are borne in whole or in part by
the General Fund and that can receive overhead cost reimbursement from State or
3
Federal governments and/or other sources.
Software Application or Model for Cost Allocation Plan
The City of San Juan Capistrano desires a software application program or model which
would enable staff to add, delete, or update the final cost allocation plan as needed.
The software program should be Windows Operating System compatible with a GUI
interface or Excel model. In addition, consultants would provide the necessary training on the
software program/Excel model to selected staff in the Finance Department.
II. Mandatory Project Specifications: COMPREHENSIVE USER FEE AND RATE
STUDY
Project tasks shall include, but are not necessarily limited to the following:
A. Conduct a review of the current comprehensive fee schedule and rate structures for all
departments to determine whether the current schedule in place is consistent,
objective, and encompasses all areas where fees could be charged.
B. Meet with staff and conduct interviews where appropriate to gain an understanding of
the City's practices and operations.
C. Compare service costs with existing recovery levels; identify and report on all current
fee and rate levels that are lower than total cost recovery, and determine the necessary
and appropriate rate of recovery for all fees by type of fee.
D. Survey comparable cities in California as well as neighboring cities; recommend
adjustments to current fee levels and/or propose new fees based on the surveys as well
as on the consultant's expertise.
E. Prepare a draft Comprehensive User Fee and Rate Study and assist the Financial
Services Department in presenting it to selected City staff and the City Council. It is
expected that comments and concerns will be collected during the draft phase for
inclusion in a final version of the fee and rate study.
F. Provide the City with five bound and one unbound copy of the final comprehensive
user fee and rate study; as well as an electronic copy of the final version, including
related schedules and cost documentation in Excel format so that it can be updated
and/or edited by City staff.
4
4. PROPOSAL FORMAT GUIDELINES
Interested contractors are to provide the City of San Juan Capistrano with a thorough proposal
using the following guidelines:
Proposal should be typed and should contain no more than 20 typed pages using a 10 -point
font size, including transmittal letter and resumes of key people, but excluding Index/Table of
Contents, tables, charts, and graphic exhibits. Each proposal will adhere to the following order
and content of sections. Proposal should be straightforward, concise and provide "layman"
explanations of technical terms that are used. Emphasis should be concentrated on conforming
to the RFP instructions, responding to the RFP requirements, and on providing a complete and
clear description of the offer. Proposals, which appear unrealistic in the terms of technical
commitments, lack of technical competence or are indicative of failure to comprehend the
complexity and risk of this contract, may be rejected. The following chapter sections are to
be included in the bidder's response:
Vendor Application Form and Cover Letter
Complete Appendix A, "Request for Proposal -Vendor Application Form" and attach this form
to the cover letter. A cover letter, not to exceed three pages in length, should summarize key
elements of the proposal. An individual authorized to bind the consultant must sign the letter.
The letter must stipulate that the proposal price will be valid for a period of at least 180 days.
Indicate the address and telephone number of the contractor's office located nearest to San
Juan Capistrano, California and the office from which the project will be managed.
Chapter 1. Background and Project Summary Section
The Background and Project Summary chapter should describe your understanding of the
City, the work to be done, and the objectives to be accomplished. Refer to Scope of Work of
this RFP.
Chapter 2. Methodology Section
Provide a detailed description of the approach and methodology to be used to accomplish the
Scope of Work of this RFP. The Methodology Section should include:
1) An implementation plan that describes in detail (i) the methods, including controls by
which your firm manages projects of the type sought by this RFP; (ii) methodology for
soliciting and documenting views of internal and external stakeholders; (iii) and any
other project management or implementation strategies or techniques that the
respondent intends to employ in carrying out the work.
2) Detailed description of efforts your firm will undertake to achieve client satisfaction
and to satisfy the requirements of the "Scope of Work" section.
3) Detailed project schedule, identifying all tasks and deliverables to be performed,
durations for each task, and overall time of completion.
4) Detailed description of specific tasks you will require from City staff. Explain what
the respective roles of City staff and your staff would be to complete the tasks
specified in the Scope of Work.
5
Chapter 3. Staffine
Provide a list of individual(s) who will be working on this project and indicate the functions that
each will perform. Include a resume for each designated individual.
Upon award and during the contract period, if the contractor chooses to assign different personnel
to the project, the Contractor must submit their names and qualifications including information
listed above to the City for approval before they begin work.
Chapter 4. Oualifications
The information requested in this section should describe the qualifications of the firm, key staff
and sub -contractors performing projects within the past five years that are similar in size and
scope to demonstrate competence to perform these services. Information shall include:
1) Names of key staff that participated on named projects and their specific
responsibilities with respect to this scope of work.
2) A summary of the your firm's demonstrated capability, including length of time that
your firm has provided the services being requested in this Request for Proposal.
3) Provide at least five local references that received similar services from your firm. The
City of San Juan Capistrano reserves the right to contact any of the organizations or
individuals listed. Information provided shall include:
• Client Name
• Project Description
• Project start and end dates
• Client project manager name, telephone number, and e-mail address
Chapter 5. Fee Proposal
Provide a fixed, not -to -exceed price, including associated fees (i.e., printing costs, attendance at
meetings, etc.) for each mandatory and desirable project specifications. A project budget for each
study shall be defined by task with a collective total by milestone and deliverables.
5. PROCESS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS
Content of Proposal
The proposal must be submitted using the format as indicated in the proposal format
guidelines.
Preparation of Proposal
Each proposal shall be prepared simply and economically, avoiding the use of elaborate
promotional material beyond those sufficient to provide a complete, accurate and reliable
presentation.
Number of Proposals
Submit five (5) copies of your proposal in sufficient detail to allow for thorough
evaluation and comparative analysis.
Submission of Proposals
Complete written proposals must be submitted in sealed envelopes to:
Steve Montano, Assistant Director of Financial Services
City of San Juan Capistrano
32400 Paseo Adelanto
San Juan Capistrano, California 92675
RE: Cost Allocation Plan and City-wide User Fee Study
Proposals must be received no later than 4:00 p.m. (P.S.T) on February 24, 2012.
Proposals will not be accepted after this deadline. Faxed or e-mailed proposals will not
be accepted.
Inquiries
Questions about this RFP must be directed in writing, via e-mail to:
Steve Montano, Assistant Director of Financial Services,
smontano@sanjuancapistrano.org
From the date that this RFP is issued until a firm is selected and the selection is
announced, firms are not allowed to communicate for any reason with any City employee
other than the contracting officer listed above regarding this RFP, except during the pre -
proposal conference. Refer to the Schedule of Events of this RFP or the City webpage to
determine if a pre -proposal conference has been scheduled. The City reserves the right to
reject any proposal for violation of this provision. No questions other than written will be
accepted, and no response other than written will be binding upon the City.
Conditions for Proposal Acceptance
This RFP does not commit the City to award a contract or to pay any costs incurred for
any services. The City, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to accept or reject any or all
proposals received as a result of this RFP, to negotiate with any qualified source, or to
cancel this RFP in part or in its entirety.
Responses to this RFP become the exclusive property of the City and subject to the California
Public Records Act. Those elements in each proposal which are trade secrets as that term is
defined in Civil Code section 3426.1(d) or otherwise exempt by law from disclosure and
which are prominently marked as "TRADE SECRET", "CONFIDENTIAL", or
"PROPRIETARY" may not be subject to disclosure. The City shall not in any way be liable
or responsible for the disclosure of any such records including, without limitation, those so
marked if disclosure is deemed to be required by law or by an order of the Court. Proposers
which indiscriminately identify all or most of their proposal as exempt from disclosure
without justification may be deemed non-responsive. In the event the City is required to
defend an action on a Public Records Act request for any of the contents of a proposal marked
"confidential", "proprietary", or "trade secret", the proposer agrees, upon submission of its
proposal for City's consideration, to defend and indemnify the City from all costs and
expenses, including attorneys' fees, in any action or liability arising under the Public Records
Act.
7
6. EVALUATION CRITERIA
The City's consultant evaluation and selection process is based upon Qualifications Based
Selection (QBS) for professional services. The City of San Juan Capistrano may use some or all
of the following criteria in its evaluation and comparison of proposals submitted. The criteria
listed are not necessarily an all-inclusive list. The order in which they appear is not intended to
indicate their relative importance:
A. Compliance with RFP requirements
B. Understanding of the project
C. Recent experience in conducting similar scope, complexity, and magnitude for
other public agencies.
D. Educational background, work experience, and directly related consulting
experiences
E. Price
F. References
The City may also contact and evaluate the bidder's and subcontractor's references; contact any
bidder to clarify any response; contact any current users of a bidder's services; solicit information
from any available source concerning any aspect of a proposal; and seek and review any other
information deemed pertinent to the evaluation process. The evaluation committee shall not be
obligated to accept the lowest priced proposal, but shall make an award in the best interests
of the City.
After written proposals have been reviewed, discussions with prospective firms may or may
not be required. If scheduled, the oral interview will be a question/answer format for the purpose
of clarifying the intent of any portions of the proposal. The individual from your firm that will be
directly responsible for carrying out the contract, if awarded, should be present at the oral
interview.
A Notification of Intent to Award may be sent to the vendor selected. Award is contingent upon
the successful negotiation of final contract terms. Negotiations shall be confidential and not
subject to disclosure to competing vendors unless an agreement is reached. If contract
negotiations cannot be concluded successfully, the City may negotiate a contract with the next
highest scoring vendor or withdraw the RFP.
7. STANDARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Amendments
The City reserves the right to amend this RFP prior to the proposal due date. All amendments
and additional information will be posted to the San Juan Capistrano Procurement Registry and
the City's website. Bidders should check this web page daily for new information.
Cost for Preparing Proposal
The cost for developing the proposal is the sole responsibility of the bidder. All proposals
submitted become the property of the City.
Contract Discussions
Prior to award, the apparent successful firm may be required to enter into discussions with the
City to resolve any contractual differences. These discussions are to be finalized and all
exceptions resolved within one (1) week from notification. If no resolution is reached, the
proposal may be rejected and discussions will be initiated with the second highest scoring firm.
A sample agreement is linked to this Request for Proposal in the City web site.
Confidentiality Requirements
The staff members assigned to this project may be required to sign a departmental non -disclosure
statement. Proposals are subject to the Freedom Information Act. The City cannot protect
proprietary data submitted in proposals.
Financial Information
The City is concerned about bidders' financial capability to perform, therefore, may ask you
to provide sufficient data to allow for an evaluation of your firm's financial capabilities.
Insurance Requirements
The City requires that vendors have an approved Certificate of Insurance (not a declaration or
policy) on file with the City for the issuance of a permit or contract. The successful bidder must
furnish the City with the Certificates of Insurance proving coverage as specified in the Sample
Agreement in Appendix B. Failure to furnish the required certificates within the time allowed
will result in forfeiture of the Proposal Security.
Please carefully review the Sample Agreement (Appendix B) before responding to the Request
for Proposal enclosed herein. Your response to the Request for Proposal must indicate if
you are unwilling or unable to execute the agreement as drafted as well as providing the
insurance requirements. The City will consider this in determining responsiveness to
the Request for Proposal.
0
APPENDIX A - VENDOR
APPLICATION FORM
Page 1 of 2
TYPE OF APPLICANT: ❑ NEW ❑ CURRENT VENDOR
Legal Contractual Name of Corporation:
Contact Person for Agreement:
Corporate Mailing Address:
City, State and Zip Code:
E -Mail Address:
Phone:
Contact Person for Proposals:
Fax:
Title: E -Mail Address:
Business Telephone:
Business Fax:
10
Page 2of2
Is your Business (check one):
❑ NON PROFIT CORPORATION ❑ FOR PROFIT
CORPORATION - Is your business: (check one)
❑
CORPORATION
❑
LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
❑
INDIVIDUAL
❑
SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP
❑
PARTNERSHIP
❑
UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATION
Names & Titles of Corporate Board Members
(Also list Names & Titles of persons with written authorization/resolution to sign
contracts)
Name Title Phone
Name Title Phone
Name
Phone
Name Title Phone
Federal Tax ID Number:
City of San Juan Capistrano Business License Number:
(If none, you must obtain a San Juan Capistrano Business License upon award of
contract.)
City of San Juan Capistrano Business License Expiration Date:
11
EXHIBIT B - PERSONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT
PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this , by and between the City of
San Juan Capistrano (hereinafter referred to as the "City") and (hereinafter referred to
as "Contractor").
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, City desires to retain the services of Contractor regarding the City's proposal
for a Cost Allocation and Fee Study; and
WHEREAS, Contractor is qualified by virtue of experience, training, education and
expertise to accomplish such services.
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Contractor mutually agree as follows:
AGREEMENT:
Section 1. Statement of Work.
The statement of work to be performed by Contractor shall consist of those tasks as set
forth in EXHIBIT "_ " attached and incorporated herein by reference. Contractor shall begin work
effective
Section 2. Term.
This Agreement shall commence on the effective date of this Agreement and
services required hereunder shall continue until notified that said services are no longer required,
subject to 15 day's notice of termination.
Section 3. Compensation and Pricine.
3.1 Amount.
Compensation for the scope of services shall be for the total fixed amount of
per year for each year of the three year term of this agreement as further set forth in the
schedule of "Fees" at page _ of Exhibit ; Included within this fixed compensation are the
Contractor's ordinary office and overhead expenses incurred by it, its agents and employees,
including meetings with the City representatives and incidental costs to perform the stipulated
services. Submittals shall be in accordance with Contractor's proposal.
3.2 Method of Payment/Extra Work.
Contractor shall submit invoices in accordance with the payment schedule
12
indicated in Exhibit
For City requested extra work beyond the scope of work identified in Exhibit
authorization in the form of a written change order from the City is required prior to Contractor
undertaking any such work.
Invoices are to be submitted to the City's ship -to address, unless otherwise
directed in this Contract. Contractor shall reference Contract number on invoice. Payment will be
net 30 days after receipt of an invoice in a format acceptable to and approved by the City of San
Juan Capistrano and subject to routine processing requirements. The responsibility for providing
an acceptable invoice rests with the Contractor.
Billing shall cover services not previously invoiced. The Contractor shall
reimburse the City of San Juan Capistrano for any monies paid to the Contractor for services not
provided or when services do not meet the contract requirements. Payment made by the City
shall not preclude the right of the City from thereafter disputing any items or services involved or
billed under this Contract and shall not be construed as acceptance of any part of the goods or
services.
3.3 Invoicing Instructions.
Invoices and support documentation are to be sent to
City of San Juan Capistrano
Attn: Assistant Director of Financial Services
32400 Paseo Adelanto
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Contractor shall provide an invoice on the Contractor's letterhead for services rendered.
Each invoice shall have a number and shall include the following information:
1. Contractor's name and address
2. Contractor's remittance address
3. Contractor's Federal I.D. number
4. Name of agency/department
5. Purchase order number (if applicable)
6. Product/service description, quantity, and prices
7. Sales tax, if applicable
8. Total
The responsibility for providing an acceptable invoice to the City for payment rests with
the Contractor. Incomplete or incorrect invoices are not acceptable and shall be returned to the
Contractor for correction.
3.4 Records of Expenses.
Contractor shall keep complete and accurate records of all costs and expenses
incidental to services covered by this Agreement. These records will be made available at
13
reasonable times to City.
Section 4. Independent Contractor.
It is agreed that Contractor shall act and be an independent contractor and not an agent
or employee of City, and shall obtain no rights to any benefits which accrue to City's employees.
Section 5. Limitations Upon Subcontracting and Assignment.
The experience, knowledge, capability and reputation of Contractor, its principals and
employees were a substantial inducement for City to enter into this Agreement. Contractor shall
not contract with any other entity to perform the services required without written approval of
the City. This Agreement may not be assigned, voluntarily or by operation of law, without the
prior written approval of the City. If Contractor is permitted to subcontract any part of this
Agreement by City, Contractor shall be responsible to City for the acts and omissions of its
subcontractor as it is for persons directly employed. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall
create any contractual relationships between any subcontractor and City. All persons engaged in
the work will be considered employees of Contractor. City will deal directly with and will make all
payments to Contractor.
Section 6. Changes to Statement of Scope of Work.
The City Council authorizes the Assistant Director of Financial Services to execute change
orders for extra work within the budgetary authorization provided by the City Council for this
project.
Section 7. Familiarity with Work Place and Work To Be Performed For City.
By executing this Agreement, Contractor warrants that it has investigated the work to be
performed understands the difficulties and restrictions of the work under this Agreement. Should
Contractor discover any latent or unknown conditions materially differing from those inherent in
the work or as represented by City, it shall immediately inform City of this and shall not proceed
with further work under this Agreement until written instructions are received from the City.
Section 8. Time of Essence.
Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.
Section 9. Compliance
9.1 Compliance with Law.
Contractor shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of
federal, state and local government.
Section 10. Conflicts of interest.
Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest,
direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the
services contemplated by this Agreement. No person having such interest shall be employed by
or associated with Contractor.
14
Section 11. Ownership of Documents.
All reports, information, data and Attachments prepared or assembled by Contractor in
connection with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential to
the extent permitted by law, and Contractor agrees that they shall not be made available to any
individual or organization without prior written consent of the City. All such reports, information,
data, and Attachments shall be the property of the City and shall be delivered to the City upon
demand without additional costs or expense to the City. The City acknowledges such documents
are instruments of Contractor's professional services.
Section 12. Indemnity.
Contractor agrees to protect, defend and hold harmless City, its elected and appointed
officials and employees from any and all claims, liabilities, expenses or damages of any nature,
including attorneys' fees, for injury or death of any person or damage to property or interference
with use of property and for errors and omissions committed by Contractor arising out of or in
connection with the work, operation or activities of Contractor, its agents, employees and
subcontractors in carrying out its obligations underthis Agreement.
Section 13. Insurance.
On or before beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this
Agreement, Contractor, at its own cost and expense, shall carry, maintain for the duration of the
agreement, and provide proof thereof that is acceptable to the City, the insurance specified below
with insurers and under forms of insurance satisfactory in all respects to the City. Contractor shall
not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until all insurance required of
the Contractor has also been obtained for the subcontractor. Insurance required herein shall be
provided by Admitted Insurers in good standing with the State of California and having a minimum
Best's Guide Rating of A- Class VII or better.
13.1 Comprehensive General Liability.
Throughout the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall maintain in full force
and effect Comprehensive General Liability coverage in an amount not less than one million
dollars per occurrence ($1,000,000), combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the
work contemplated by this agreement. If a Commercial General Liability Insurance form or other
form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply
separately to the work to be performed under this agreement or the general aggregate limit shall
be at least twice the required occurrence limit.
13.2 Comprehensive Automobile Liability.
Throughout the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall maintain in full force
and effect Comprehensive Automobile Liability coverage, including owned, hired and non -owned
vehicles in an amount not less than one million dollars per occurrence ($1,000,000).
13.3 Worker's Compensation.
If Contractor intends to employ employees to perform services under this
15
Agreement, Contractor shall obtain and maintain, during the term of this Agreement, Worker's
Compensation Employer's Liability Insurance in the statutory amount as required by state law.
13.4 Proof of Insurance Requirements/Endorsement.
Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement, Contractor shall submit the
insurance certificates, including the deductible or self -retention amount, and an additional
insured endorsement naming City, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional
insureds as respects each of the following: Liability arising out of activities performed by or on
behalf of Contractor, including the insured's general supervision of Contractor; products and
completed operations of Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by Contractor; or
automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by Contractor. The coverage shall contain no
special limitations on the scope of protection afforded City, its officers, employees, agents, or
volunteers.
13.5 Errors and Omissions Coverage
Throughout the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall maintain Errors and
Omissions Coverage (professional liability coverage) in an amount of not less than One Million
Dollars ($1,00,000). Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement, Contractor shall submit
an insurance certificate to the City's General Counsel for certification that the insurance
requirements of this Agreement have been satisfied.
13.6 Notice of Cancellation/Termination of Insurance.
The above policy/policies shall not terminate, nor shall they be cancelled, nor the
coverages reduced, until after thirty (30) days' written notice is given to City, except that ten (10)
days' notice shall be given if there is a cancellation due to failure to pay a premium.
13.7 Terms of Compensation.
Consultant shall not receive any compensation until all insurance provisions have
been satisfied.
Section 14. Termination.
City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement without cause by giving ninety (90)
days advance written notice of termination to the Contractor.
In addition, this Agreement may be terminated for cause by providing thirty (30) days'
notice to the other party of a material breach of contract. If the other party does not cure the
breach of contract within fifteen (15) days, then the agreement may be terminated.
Section 15. Notices.
All notices shall be personally delivered or mailed to the below listed addresses, or to such
other addresses as may be designated by written notice. These addresses shall be used for
delivery of service of process:
To City: City of San Juan Capistrano
32400 Paseo Adelanto
16
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Attn: Assistant Director of Financial Services
To Contractor:
Section 16. Attorneys Fees.
If any action at law or in equity is necessary to enforce or interpret the terms of this
Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and
necessary disbursements in addition to any other relief to which he may be entitled.
Section 17. Dispute Resolution.
In the event of a dispute arising between the parties regarding performance or
interpretation of this Agreement, the dispute shall be resolved by binding arbitration under the
auspices of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service ("JAMS").
Section 18. Interpretation: Venue.
This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in
accordance with the laws of the State of California. Venue for any litigation or arbitration
concerning this Agreement shall be in the County of Orange, California.
Section 19. Entire Agreement.
This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement between the parties
and supersedes all previous negotiations between them pertaining to the subject matter thereof.
Section 20. Consultant's Employees.
City acknowledges that Consultant provides a valuable service by identifying and assigning
personnel to provide Services to City. City further acknowledges that City would receive
substantial additional value and Consultant would be deprived of the benefits of Consultant's
work force if City were to directly hire Consultant's personnel after they have been introduced to
City. As such, City shall not, without the prior written consent of Consultant, recruit, solicit,
induce, or attempt to induce any employee or any personnel of Consultant who are or have been
assigned to perform services during the Term of this Agreement (including any temporary
employee or contractor) to leave the employ of Consultant to become connected in any way with,
or employ or utilize any such employee in, any business of the City or any related
business. Consultant hereby agrees that it will not solicit, induce, or attempt to induce any
employee (including any temporary employee or contractor) of City to leave the employ of City to
become connected in any way with, or employ or utilize any such employee in, any business of
Consultant.
17
APPENDIX A
Circulation Fee Program Cost Summary
Vicinity Map of proposed Improvements
(During its initial preparation, the Circulation Pee Program Pas referred to as: News Pec Program)
ATTACHMENT 3 - Page 1
N 0 R 0 R
O � N
E
m
a
n
0
m
z z
00
0 w
z Z
w w
X X
w w
cc
wx
00
00
O F
N N
a
a a
Q Q
0 0 0
�5
55
O
m Ij
o
0
O
Ip
LL v
w
R
T d
L
4� lL LL
Q
U
j
_>
u>i
O
U�U
n
O O
N
YI
p
ATTACHMENT 3 - Page 2
N
N
N
w
N
w
NO
U LL
N P
(p m
m P
N
Q
0 m
P N
O
N
N V
O
O
VN]
O �
m
m
2
w
w
^
P
^
oY opm
m
I �qp
�8 �py �8
�
�y@ �yy
a
�yq
T Qp
Sh
opp Spp $
8qp
m
�8 E8
�yy Fyy
r0
p0 @p p@�
NAA.
mry- pp ym
MANAN
w
w
yy
hVl
pp pp
AW
AAAAA
8
AAAAA
ASA
AAAAA
AAA
N
N iv o
W
N
m m
P
O
VNi
N
VNi
P
c
LL p
U
w w w
N
w w N
w
N
w w W w
w
w
O O
O O
C01 N
m
m
w
P
C N
ul � O
E o
N m
m en
an
oa
V
w
w
f9 w
w
w
w
N
w
w N w
E
m
a
n
0
m
z z
00
0 w
z Z
w w
X X
w w
cc
wx
00
00
O F
N N
a
a a
Q Q
0 0 0
�5
55
O
m Ij
o
0
LL v
w
R
O� IL
4� lL LL
9� Q
U
j
_>
u>i
U�U
n
O O
N
YI
ATTACHMENT 3 - Page 2
ry � Pi ovoo�
O O1
t
NO qO
U
O
U a] u
=
n'0
�
U
v
n
M
O
O
U
E
m
c c c c
o
c
0
U
f F F f
I
a
E
N v
a
N
e
ry O
�O
N
m
o o O o
N
P
d
a
c c
yJ
W N N W
R
N
p
m
m
o 0 0
a`
N
o
-
az
i-2
o o
m
z
W
N
Z Z Z Z
m
1/i VI
o'" r.
Z
�n E p
-mmp 'pmy
E E E
o e
'
ZZW Z
Yet
O1
0 0
�
W
N
n m M N
r n
y
n
s�u.,
'o
a m mm
38
ry ^
appJ3�yy
�
U
0000
$qy
n
� q �p �p
8qm �ry@ 3
z
Oa
W W W W
w
W W W W
W W LLI
�
N
m
;❑c❑c
o
U U U U
aN
Y i
p m
N
pa ca
s
pya
A
AAAAAA
AAJO
AAA
yyw
AAA
mq
Ar
E
% A A
J
py
A�/l
a
n
N N N N
N
1
r i=
2
w� H
¢�
U
Nvl
U
H
(O VI
9
W
N
ry
O
O
O�
M
-
CI
•' �
V
O+
•- O-
V Of
U
b O
O
C y
m a LL
cpi o
°K
o
N ❑ a
0 0
C?
O
o
Y inU
w
Zz
'° w
U U
me.
LL O
U
O O O p O
0
a
ATTACHMENT 3 - Page
p
2 2
w v
o>
N ✓1
m p. m
Z
m
w
0❑
3 v
>>
zw
� ca
�m
m m
m G
H
mo¢
c
0 0
Z o o
na
n__
Q
0
¢ U
N N
z
a
N
P
'3
N
N
N Vi
✓1 N
YI
O O1
t
NO qO
U
O
U a] u
E E n
�
U
v
U
E
m
c c c c
o
VI !O VI N
U
f F F f
I
a
E
N v
F
O N y
o o O o
N
d
a
c c
yJ
W N N W
R
N
p
m
o 0 0
a`
o
az
i-2
o o
�
Z Z Z Z
m
UUQUft
o'" r.
Z
22 U2
`
E E E
u�
ZZW Z
m
W W W
W
LL' K R' LL
o
Oz ro
s�u.,
'o
zm zro
z
LL
❑ O❑
U U U U
U
0000
z z z z
z
zzz z
z
W W W W
w
W W W W
W W LLI
�
N
zaaa
;❑c❑c
o
U U U U
aN
Y i
p m
U
pa ca
0000
v
V o is
E H
�
a
J
a
n
N N N N
N
1
r i=
2
w� H
¢�
U
❑
U
o q
N
VJ
VI
m a LL
cpi o
°K
o
N ❑ a
0 0
C?
O
o
Y inU
w
Zz
'° w
U U
me.
O O O p O
0
a
ATTACHMENT 3 - Page
p
2 2
w v
o>
m p. m
Z
m
w
0❑
3 v
>>
zw
m m
m G
H
1
c
0 0
Z o o
na
n__
Q
0
z
a
P
'3
o
E E
E
�. �.
��
m
0
00
0 c
J J
-
K
r
S
L
cm
a w
0
O O
00
a n
E
O O
P W
N
c v
OOO
O
O
tt
tt ¢
Ohm
N
U
U
V
p
¢
O
N
Jn
N
F
U)
¢ N E
A
ii
w a�i�m
S
a a�iLL
w
�.
a-
O
❑�
❑i >
mm
�+'m
mLL
r
�m
r
_
>
e
ry
a,
n
O O1
NO qO
U
O
U a] u
U
c c c c
VI !O VI N
f F F f
I
a
E
N v
F
O N y
o o O o
p
d
W N
U
yJ
W N N W
R
N
p
a`
az
i-2
o o
�
Z Z Z Z
m
UUQUft
o'" r.
Z
22 U2
`
E E E
u�
ZZW Z
m
W W W
W
LL' K R' LL
o
Oz ro
s�u.,
'o
zm zro
z
LL
❑ O❑
U U U U
U
0000
z z z z
z
zzz z
z
W W W W
w
W W W W
zaaa
;❑c❑c
o
U U U U
Q a a
¢
Z Z Z Z
0000
Zz z z?
Z Z Z
J
O
N N N N
N
1
2
U
U
U
N
VJ
VI
m a LL
a' w m LL
n 4
N ❑ a
❑ S U N �,
O�
Y inU
in � a YU
JnU
me.
O O O p O
ATTACHMENT 3 - Page
3
0 0
`a
_
C q
y V
E o °
y a n
aga
au
P 6
N
R U
E L N
L �_ d
d C
W_ E✓¢
p$
N U a
d`
.6 q
X
_
d
y
n u E
m
q
VQC
F
r .O.
r.
N a d
co ry
m
m.- °1
U e
�n ¢
m_Na
2 a N i
d e _ q
P? R N
a° m c Z
d
N C L
�c
a t
C
[�
_
'V C
a
o�
Rq' 'v
'_
E dat
N ii t _a =
6
E]
O H
R
a
�n
C v
E L O
i N Q
W
d E
[l E
U
U
c
F
-m
W m a
m p
-16
N,-
d fl
m o
n c p
a
o
O
m q
v pf
p U 3
o L q d>¢
o n
6
R
ra
o=
V
Q
N�
Z
�➢
d % E�
v-
m a
L a c
N
3
p
W U
O
_
ui _➢
J�
N
O¢ .L. �
n�� U
d y)
C t-
p 6 G '/I y d
-
p
q
`a_
CW
�"¢^
a o
r
a E
< o
u�`
c E `
3
o�ow v
1n a
v
a
llW
c
c
oaO
W-
aUa N
d_
rn n`
y
A LL
,�
rn
n o
8�
Z O
d
w 2
O
n d U p
O 3 x
u �
m N O N
O`'o
E m
ry
� 6 c
N
- o a •-
� 2
m Z n
u y
Q o U
O
On �
a
U✓, o-,
r 35
U of -c_
t:, m-
pF of c
g p o <gZ
00
o
= T
b q
n
�
m
a
N
0
N
0
ATTACHMENT 3 - Page 4
(CCFP) Projects Vicinity Map
ATTACHMENT 3 - Page 5
Sa.. Juan Capi,t,,,,
of
Olt., no
Nexus Fee Program
April 13, 2000
2 f.,
2.8
4.2
Z? Z3
&2
411'
Z4
-Qq
>
A
3 k�f� 2. F-
S
f
Tf-
5.4 5.2
Q'I f 12.2
.2 0 ftbrawasm a TA10ft Sft�
Wk%"W
= =W
M h, WWI
Sepandwy fth N ". NOW ft NOW
I
I C...on, ft.w do, now ft Now
(CCFP) Projects Vicinity Map
ATTACHMENT 3 - Page 5