HomeMy WebLinkAbout25A - AGMT - COMPREHENSIVE REPORT OF PROP 218 FEESREQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
OCTOBER 3, 2017
TITLE:
APPROVE AN AGREEMENT
WITH NBS GOVERNMENT
FINANCE GROUP, INC. FOR
A COMPREHENSIVE PROP
218 FEES AND CHARGES
COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
(STRATEGIC PLAN NO. 4, 1)
C MANAGE
RECOMMENDED ACTION
CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY:
APPROVED
❑ As Recommended
❑ As Amended
❑ Ordinance on I� Reading
❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading
❑ Implementing Resolution
❑ Set Public Hearing For
CONTINUED TO
FILE NUMBER
Authorize the City Manager and the Clerk of the Council to execute an agreement with NBS
Government Finance Group, Inc., to conduct a comprehensive study of enterprise funds to
identity full cost recovery of fees and charges and to complete a Proposition 218 fees and
charges compliance assessment for an amount not to exceed $111,970 which is comprised of the
sum of $92,560 and a contingency of up to $19,410 inclusive of a detailed analysis of funding
sources specific to the Federal Clean Water Protection Enterprise evaluation, for a six-month
period beginning October 3, 2017 through April 3, 2018, subject to non -substantive changes
approved by the City Manager and City Attorney.
DISCUSSION
Similar to many cities, Santa Ana collects fees to recover the cost of providing services including
those provided under its Enterprise Funds such as Refuse Collection (solid waste), Water,
Sanitary Sewer Services, and Federal Clean Water Protection (NPDES).. Since the passage of
Proposition 218, many of these fees have come under scrutiny throughout California. Cities like
Santa Ana, are proactively seeking opportunities to strengthen their policies, processes and
procedures to remain compliant, minimize legal challenges, and ensure its long-term financial
stability.
With this in mind, staff prepared a Request for Proposal (RFP) in collaboration with the City
Manager's Office, City Attorney's Office, Public Works Agency, and the Finance and
Management Services Agency. On July 3, 2017, the RFP was posted on the City's website
seeking a qualified firm to conduct a comprehensive Proposition 218 fees and charges
compliance assessment on four City enterprise funds. This included Refuse Collection, Water,
Sanitary Sewer Service and Federal Clean Water Protection Enterprise Funds. The objective of
the comprehensive study is to identify:
25A-1
Agreement with NBS for Comprehensive Prop. 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
October 3, 2017
Page 2
1) Any fees which are not paying full cost recovery, and to
2) Complete a Proposition 218 fees and charges compliance assessment and identify areas
that may be non-compliant.
The RFP closed on August 18, 2017 with a total of five proposal responses received. An
evaluation committee comprised of the Executive Director of Public Works, Executive Director of
Finance and Management Services Agency and a representative from the City Attorney's Office
reviewed and ranked all five proposals. The top three firms were invited to move forward in the
evaluation process and participate in an interview. The interviews were carried out on August 31
and September 1 and provided an opportunity to meet each firm's team, discuss the scope of
work, and gain insight on the process and approach that each firm will take to complete the
assessment. On September 4, the evaluation committee ranked NBS Government Finance
Group, Inc. (NBS) as the top ranked firm and negotiations and development of the agreement
ensued.
Vendor I Rank
NBS Government Finance Group, Inc.
Raftelis Financial Consulting
Black & Veatch
1
2
3
NBS is a Financial Consulting firm established in 1996 that specializes in cost allocation, cost
recovery, user fee studies, sustainable water and wastewater utility rate programs, and legally
justified fee design. Furthermore, NBS' area of expertise includes rate studies for municipal
water, sewer, storm drainage, and solid waste utilities. Headquartered in Temecula, California,
and with its regional office in San Francisco, NBS has worked with more than 350 public agencies
including cities, counties, municipal utilities, and special purpose districts.
NBS' team will be led by four senior project managers who each have a minimum of 10 years of
experience and will be supported by seasoned analysts in order to meet the established timeline
to complete the assessment within a four-month period. If it is concluded that a specific fund is in
non-compliance, the consultant may bring recommendations forward anytime during the
assessment. NBS' approach to evaluating rates and fees will rely on sound principles and well -
accepted industry practices that will enhance the City's legal and financial standing for its
Prop261218 rates and fees.
The comprehensive assessment will include the review of:
• Direct and indirect charges
• Cross charges
• Land development and permit operation
• Prop. 218 validation processes
• Fees and charges that are subject to Proposition 26 or 218.
25A-2
Agreement with NBS for Comprehensive Prop. 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
October 3, 2017
Page 3
Where non-compliance is identified, NBS will develop a menu of options that may be used to
ensure the City achieves compliance. The assessment will evaluate the City's current rate
structure, methods of collection and adoptions processes, and either validate the existing
structure or identify possible areas of concern and improvement.
Staff recommends approval of the agreement with NBS to conduct the comprehensive
assessment. Included in the proposal are two approaches for the Federal Clean Water Protection
Enterprise Feasibility Analysis. Approach number two is an add on additional task for the
development of a financial plan for a new dedicated funding source specific to the Federal Clean
Water Protection Enterprise Fund. This would not require the City to implement the new fee but
provide the option should the Council choose to exercise it.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of these item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #4 — City Financial Stability,
Objective #1 (maintain a stable, efficient and transparent financial environment).
FISCAL IMPACT
Funding is available via carry-over of prior year balance accessible for expenditure in the Fiscal
Year 2017-18 General Fund Non -Departmental Contractual Services account (no. 01105015-
62300).
U�
Fred Mousavipour
Executive Director
Public Works Agency
Obert C. Cortez
Deputy City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS:
Francisco Gutierrez
Executive Director
Finance and Management Services Agency
Exhibit A. Agreement with NBS (includes proposal, scope of work and fee schedule)
25A-3
25A-4
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE COMPREHENSIVE
PROPOSITION 218 ASSESSMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 3rd day of October, 2017 by and between NBS
Government Finance Group, Inc., a California corporation ("Consultant"), and the City of Santa
Ana, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and
laws of the State of California ("City").
RECITALS
A. On July 3, 2017, the City issued Request for Proposal No. 17-081, by which it sought a.
consultant to conduct a Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance
Assessment.
B. Consultant submitted's responsive proposal that was selected by the City. Consultant
represents that it is -able and willing to provide the services as described in the scope of
work that is included in Exhibit A to this Agreement,
C. In undertaking the performance of this Agreement, Consultant represents that it is
knowledgeable in its field and that any services performed by Consultant under this
Agreement will be performed in compliance with such standards as may reasonably be
expected from a professional consulting firm in the field.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual and respective promises, and subject to the
terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES
Consultant shall perform the services that are described in Consultant's proposal dated
September 15, 2017, with Approach #1 as described therein. City shall have the option to select
Approach #2 if desired. Consultant's complete proposal is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated
in fall.
2. COMPENSATION
a. City agrees to pay, and Consultant agrees to accept as total payment for its services
under this Agreement, the rates and charges identified in Exhibit B. The total sum to
be expended under the term of this Agreement, including any extension periods, shall
not exceed $111,970.
b. Payment by City shall be made within forty-five (45) days following receipt of proper
invoice evidencing work performed, subject to City accounting procedures. Payment
need not be made for work which fails to meet the standards of performance set forth
in the Recitals which may reasonably be expected by City.
Pagel of 8
25A-5
3. TERM
This Agreement shall commence on the date first written above and continue through April
3, 2018, unless terminated earlier in accordance with Section 16, below.
The services to be performed by Consultant under this Agreement will be under the
direction and supervision of the City's Office of the City Attorney. All information and documents
shared with Consultant as well as all work performed by Consultant in connection with this
Agreement should be treated as strictly confidentiaL Moreover, all communications between
Consultant and City shall be treated as protected by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney
work product doctrine. Accordingly, information received by Consultant from City should be kept
in a secure place, and no information about this work may be disclosed to any third party without
City's prior written approval. Consultant shall provide materials directly to the City Attorney,
Sonia Carvalho, or selected members of her office, as directed by the City Attorney. All such
information and any written product in connection with Consultant's retention under this
Agreement, shall be marked as "PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL / ATTORNEY -WORK
PRODUCT" and shall be the properly of the City Attorney's Office, and shall be returned/provided
to the Office of the City Attorney with all copies upon the request of the City Attorney.
5. INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT
Consultant shall, during the entire tern of this Agreement, be construed to be an
independent consultant and not an employee of the City. This Agreement is not intended nor shall
it be construed to create an employer-employee relationship, a joint venture relationship, or to
allow the City to exercise discretion or control over the professional manner in which Consultant
performs the services which are the subject matter of this Agreement; however, the services to be
provided by Consultant shall be provided in a manner consistent with all applicable standards and
regulations governing such services. Consultant shall pay all salaries and wages, employer's social
security taxes, unemployment insurance and similar taxes relating to employees and shall be
responsible for all applicable withholding taxes.
6. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS
This Agreement creates a non-exclusive and perpetual license for City to copy, use,
modify, reuse, or sublicense any and all copyrights, designs, and other intellectual property
embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, and other documents or works of
authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical
drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are prepared or
caused to be prepared by Consultant under this Agreement ("Documents & Data'). Consultant
shall require all subconsultants to agree in writing that City is granted a non-exclusive and
perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subconsultant prepares under this Agreement.
Consultant represents and warrants that Consultant has the legal right to license any and all
Documents & Data. Consultant makes no such representation and warranty in regard to
Documents & Data which were provided to Consultant by the City. City shall not be limited in
Page 2 of 8
25A-6
any way in its use of the Documents and Data at any time, provided that any such use not within
the purposes intended by this Agreement shall be at City's sole risk.
INSURANCE
Prior to undertaking performance of work under this Agreement, Consultant shall maintain
and shall require its subconsultants, if any, to obtain and maintain insurance as described below:
a. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial
general liability insurance naming the City, its officers, employees, agents,
volunteers and representatives as additional insured(s) and shall include, but not be
limited to protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury,
including death resulting therefrom and damage to property, resulting from any act
or occurrence arising out of Consultant's operations in the performance of this
Agreement, including, without limitation, acts involving vehicles. The amounts of
insurance shall be not less than the following: single limit coverage applying to
bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and property
damage, in the total amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence, with $2,000,000 in the
aggregate. Such insurance shall (a) name the City, its officers, employees, agents,
and representatives as additional insured(s); (b) be primary and not contributory
with. respect to insurance or self-insurance programs maintained by the City; and
(c) contain standard separation of insureds provisions.
b. Business automobile liability insurance, or equivalent form, with a combined single
limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Such insurance shall include
coverage for owned, hired and non -owned automobiles.
C. Worker's Compensation Insurance. In accordance with the provisions of Section
3700 of the Labor Code, Consultant, if Consultant has any employees, is required
to be insured against liability for worker's compensation or to undertake self-
insurance. Prior to commencing the performance of the work under this
Agreement, Consultant agrees to obtain and maintain any employer's liability
insurance with limits not less than $1,000,000 per accident.
d. If Consultant is or employs a licensed professional such as an architect or engineer:
Professional liability (errors and omissions) insurance, with a combined single limit
of not less than $1,000,000 per claim with $2,000,000 in the aggregate.
C. The following requirements apply to the insurance to be provided by Consultant
pursuant to this section:
i. Consultant shall maintain all insurance required above in full force and
effect for the entire period covered by this Agreement.
ii. Certificates of insurance shall be furnished to the City upon execution of
this Agreement and shall be approved by the City.
iii. Certificates and policies shall state that the policies shall not be canceled or
reduced in coverage or changed in any other material aspect without thirty
(30) days prior written notice to the City.
iv. Consultant shall supply City with a fully executed additional insured
endorsement.
Page 3 of 8
25A-7
f. If Consultant fails or refuses to produce or maintain the insurance required by this
section or fails or refuses to fiumish the City with required proof that insurance has
been procured and is in force and paid for, the City shall have the right, at the City's
election, to forthwith terminate this Agreement. Such termination shall not affect
Consultant's right to be paid for its time and materials expended prior to notification
of termination. Consultant waives the right to receive compensation and agrees to
indemnify the City for any work performed prior to approval of insurance by the
City.
8. INDEMNIFICATION
Consultant agrees to defend, and shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers,
agents, employees, consultants, special counsel, and representatives from liability: (1) for personal
injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief arising out of claims for
personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage, which may arise from the
negligent operations of the Consultant, its subconsultants, agents, employees, or other persons
acting on its behalf which relates to the services described in section 1 of this Agreement; and (2)
from any claim that personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable
relief is due by reason of the terms of or effects arising from this Agreement. This indemnity and
hold harmless agreement applies to all,claims for damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial
or equitable relief suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of the events referred to in
this Section or by reason of the terms of, or effects, arising from this Agreement. The Consultant
further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and pay all costs for the defense of the City, including
fees and costs for special counsel to be selected by Consultant and approved by the City (which
approval shall not be unreasonably withheld), regarding any action by a third party challenging
the authority of Consultant to enter into this Agreement, or asserting thatpersonal injury, damages,
just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief due to personal or property rights arises
by reason of the terms of, or effects arising from this Agreement. City may make all reasonable
decisions with respect to its representation in any legal proceeding, in consultation with
Consultant. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the above duty to indemnify, including the duty to
and cost to defend, shall be limited to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence,
recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant. If it is finally adjudicated that liability is caused
by the comparative negligence or willful misconduct of an indemnified party, then Consultant's
indemnification shall be limited proportionally to the established comparative liability.
9. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNIFICATION
Consultant shall defend and indemnify the City, its officers, agents, representatives, and
employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement of any United States'
letters patent, trademark, or copyright infringement, including costs, contained in the work product
or documents provided by Consultant to the City pursuant to this Agreement.
10. RECORDS
Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with the work to be performed
under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to
the costs incurred under this Agreement and any services, expenditures, and disbursements
charged to the City for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by
Page 4 of 8
25A-8
law, from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. All such records and
invoices shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of the City to
examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created
pursuant to this Agreement during regular business hours. Consultant shall allow inspection of all
work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to this Agreement for a period of three
(3) years from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement.
11. CONFIDENTIALITY
If Consultant receives from the City information which due to the nature of such
information is reasonably understood to be confidential and/or proprietary, Consultant agrees that
it shall not use or disclose such information except in the performance of this Agreement, and
further agrees to exercise the same degree of care it uses to protect its own information of like
importance, but in no event less than reasonable care. "Confidential Information" shall include all
nonpublic information. Confidential information includes not only written information, but also
information transferred orally, visually, electronically, or by other means. Confidential
information disclosed to either party by any subsidiary and/or agent of the other party is covered
by this Agreement. The foregoing obligations of non-use and nondisclosure shall not apply to any
information that (a) has been disclosed in publicly available sources; (b) is, through no fault of the
Consultant disclosed in a publicly available source; (c) is in rightful possession of the Consultant
without an obligation of confidentiality; (d) is required to be disclosed by operation of law; or (e)
is independently developed by the Consultant without reference to information disclosed by the
City.
12. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CLAUSE
- Consultant covenants that it presently has no interests and shall not have interests, direct
or indirect, which would conflict in any manner with performance of services specified under this
Agreement.
13. DISCRIMINATION
Consultant shall not discriminate because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status,
sexual orientation, age, national origin, ancestry, or disability, as defined and prohibited by
applicable law, in the recruitment, selection, training, utilization, promotion, termination or other
employment related activities. Consultant affirms that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall
comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations.
14. EXCLUSIVITY AND AMENDMENT
This Agreement represents the complete and exclusive statement between the City and
Consultant, and supersedes any and all other agreements, oral or written, between the parties. In
the event of a conflict between the tenns of this Agreement and any attachments hereto, the terms
of this Agreement shall prevail. This Agreement may not be modified except by written instrument
signed by the City and by an authorized representative of Consultant. The parties agree that any
terms or conditions of any purchase order or other instrument that are inconsistent with, or in
addition to, the terns and conditions hereof, shall not bind or obligate Consultant or the City. Each
party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or
Page 5 of 8
25A-9
agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any
party, which is not embodied herein.
15. ASSIGNMENT
Inasmuch as this Agreement is intended to secure the specialized services of Consultant,
Consultant may not assign, transfer, delegate, or subcontract any interest herein without the prior
written consent of the City and any such assignment, transfer, delegation or subcontract without
the City's prior written consent shall be considered null and void. Nothing in this Agreement shall
be construed to limit the City's ability to have any of the services which are the subject to this
Agreement performed by City personnel or by other Consultants retained by City.
16. TERMINATION
This Agreement may be terminated by the City upon thirty (30) days written notice of
termination. In such event, Consultant shall be entitled to receive and the City shall pay Consultant
compensation for all services performed by Consultant prior to receipt of such notice of
termination, subject to the following conditions:.
a.. As a condition of such payment, the Executive Director may require Consultant to
deliver to the City all work product(s) completed as of such date, and in such case
such work product shall be the property of the City unless prohibited by law, and
Consultant consents to the City's use thereof for such purposes as the City deems
appropriate.
b. Payment need not be made for work which fails to meet the standard of
performance specified in the Recitals of this Agreement.
17. WAIVER
No waiver of breach, failure of any condition, or any right or remedy contained in or granted by
the provisions of this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing and signed by the party
waiving the breach, failure, right or remedy. No waiver of any breach, failure or right, or remedy
shall be deemed a waiver of any other breach, failure, right or remedy, whether or not similar, nor
shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver unless the writing so specifies.
18. JURISDICTION - VENUE
This Agreement has been executed and delivered in the State of California and the validity,
interpretation, performance, and enforcement of any of the clauses of this Agreement shall be
determined and governed by the laws of the State of California. Both parties further agree that
Orange County, California, shall be the venue for any action or proceeding that may be brought or
arise out of, in connection with or by reason of this Agreement.
19. PROFESSIONAL LICENSES
Consultant shall, throughout the term of this Agreement, maintain all necessary licenses,
permits, approvals, waivers, and exemptions necessary for the provision of the services hereunder
Page 6 of 8
25A-10
and required by the laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, the City of
Santa Ana and all other governmental agencies. Consultant shall notify the City immediately and
in writing of its inability to obtain or maintain such permits, licenses, approvals, waivers, and
exemptions. Said inability shall be cause for termination of this Agreement.
20. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
a. Each undersigned represents and warrants that its signature herein below has the
power, authority and right to bind their respective parties to each of the terms of
this Agreement, and shall indemnify City fully, including reasonable costs and
attorney's fees, for any injuries or damages to City in the event that such authority
or power is not, in fact, held by the signatory or is withdrawn.
b. All Exhibits referenced herein and attached hereto shall be incorporated as if fully
set forth in the body of this Agreement.
21. NOTICE
Any notice, tender, demand, delivery, or other communication pursuant to this Agreement
shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be properly given if delivered in person or mailed by
first class or certified mail, postage prepaid, or sent by fax or other telegraphic communication in
the manner provided in this Section, to the following persons:
To City:
Clerk of the City Council
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza (M-30)
P.O. Box 1988
Santa Ana, CA 92702-1988
Fax: 714- 647-6956
With courtesy copies to:
Robert Cortez
Deputy City Manager
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza
P.O. Box 1988
Santa Ana, California 92702
To Consultant:
NBS Government Finance Group, Inc.
32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Attn: Kim Boehler or David Ketcham
Page 7 of 8
25A-11
A party may change its address by giving notice in writing to the other party. Thereafter,
any communication shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. If sent by mail,
communication shall be effective or deemed to have been given three (3) days after it has been
deposited in the United States mail, duly registered or certified, with postage prepaid, and
addressed as set forth above. If sent by fax, communication shall be effective or deemed to have
been given twenty-four (24) hours after the time set forth on the transmission report issued by the
transmitting facsimile machine, addressed as set forth above. For purposes of calculating these
time frames, weekends, federal, state, County or City holidays shall be excluded.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the date and year first
above written.
ATTEST:
Maria D. Huizar
Clerk of the Council
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
SONIA R. CARVALHO
City Attorney
By: wl1 R/
John Wik
Assistant City Attorney
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
ROBERT CORTEZ
Deputy City Manager
CITY OF SANTA ANA
Cynthia Kurtz
Interim City Manager
CONSULTANT:
Name:
Title:
25A-12
Page 8 of 8
EXHIBIT A
CONSULTANT'S PROPOSAL (INCLUDING SCOPE OF SERVICES)
25A-13
Aerial view of City of Santa Ana
Kia? v a Google Earth x `'
- F
r.:
_,..?, is j•r ., It
e,+'4t e i�
5'd ��yfn
q i
jvf
(.y'_i
;i CITY OF SANTA ANA
Proposaffor.
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive
Proposition 218 Fees and
Charge's Compliance Assessment
- September 15, 2017sn
• • • .a - l l =a:b ��E i y,�fi iia >
�
�9 iJr�z
s��I r„ 'fit � s �� �•`
-
'
32605 Temecula Pkwy., Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Toll free: 800.676.7516
www.ribsgov.com
September 15, 2017
Robert Cortez
Deputy City Manager, Project Manager
City of Santa Ana, City Manager's Office
20 Civic Center Plaza, 8th Floor Reception
Santa Ana, CA 92701
RE: RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
Dear Mr. Cortez,
Thank you for the opportunity to submit;this proposal to prepare a Comprehensive Proposition 218
Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment for the City of Santa Ana (City). We realize this is an
important project for the City and our proposal offers the following benefits:
• Experlerice and Demonstrated Sucqess. The NBS team is led by four senior project managers
who each have a minimum of 10 years' experience, and are supported by seasoned analysts and
consultants. When faced with several proposals from "national experts", an important question you
as the client might ask is, "who will actually be working on this study?" We can assure you that our
project team will be committed to this study from start to'finish, and available for all meetings and
presentations.
• Insightful Approach. We will commit to working with staff to ensure we understand the City's
concerns to assess the current rates, fees and overhead charges, and Wll ensure that all
perspectives are incorporated, all unique local issues are addressed, and provide an excellent result
the City can be proud of.
• Technically Sound Rate and Fee Assessment. Our approach to evaluating the City's rates and
fees will rely on technically sound principles and well -accepted industry practices that enhance the
City's legal and financial standing for its Prop 261218 rates and fees.
Our firm brings a broader range of skills to this engagement compared to competitor firms, as our sole
purpose as a company is to consult California's cities on various municipal revenues, including special
taxes and assessments, utility rates, impact fees, overhead cost reimbursement and user and
regulatory fee programs. Pertaining to our business entity structure, NBS is a California S -Corporation.
Please contact me at 800.676.7516 or via email at kboehler@ngsgov.com if you have any questions or
concerns about this proposal. We would sincerely like to work with you on this project and help the City
of Santa Ana move forward.
Sincerely,
* h W
Kim Boehler
Associate Director
David Ketcham
Vice President
25A-15
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CoverLetter........................................................................................................ Previous Page
Section1: Agreement Statement...........................................................................................1
Section2: Firm and Team Experience.....................................................................................2
Section3: Project Understanding...........................................................................................8
Section4: Relevant Project Experience.................................................................................17
Section 5: Schedule..............................................................................................................18
Section6: References...........................................................................................................19
Section7: Fee...............................:......................................................................................29
Appendix............................................................................................................................. 30
Appendix A: Proposed Project Team Resumes......................................................................31
Appendix B: Attachment 3-1 Non -Collusion Affidavit...........................................................45
Appendix C: Attachment 3-2 Non -Lobbying Certification......................................................48
Appendix D: Attachment 3-3 Non -Discrimination Certification ............................................. So
25A-16
SECTION 1: AGREEMENT STATEMENT
NBS accepts the terms, conditions and general form of the City of Santa Ana standard Consultant
Services Agreement with the following modification(s):
Update last three sentences in Section 7:
7. INDEMNIFICATION
The Consultant further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and pay all costs for the defense of the
City Including fees and costs for special counsel to be selected by Consultant and approved by the
City (which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld), regarding any action by a third party
challenging the validity a authority of Consultant to enter into this Agreement, or asserting that
personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief due to personal
or property rights arises by reason of the terms of, or effects arising from this Agreement. City may
make all reasonable decisions with respect to its representation in any legal proceeding but shall
not be entitled to settle any claim without the prior written consent of Consultant. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, the above duty to indemnify, including the duty to and cost to defend, shall be limited
to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct
of the Consultant. If it is finally adjudicated that liability is caused by the comparative negligence or
willful misconduct of an indemnified party, then Consultant's indemnification obligation shall be
reduced in proportion to the established comparative liability.��
00 27x°92.9, ttheabe extent vgbired-b}
Civil C -,e ligease,
reeklezanees;aww l misseRensukaat
,d p � BS City of Santa Ana
�`W RFP No, 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
25A-17
SECTION 2: FIRM AND TEAM EXPERIENCE
BS Helping communities fund tomorrow. In 1996, California
C)Nmunicipalities were struggling to appropriately implement local
funding tools
while trying to Interpret Proposition 13 and a host
of other rules and regulations. Then, Proposition
218 entered the scene making municipal funding
even more challenging. Seeing the potentially
negative effects this could have on local
communities, several experienced and concerned
finance and engineering professionals gathered to
create NBS.
While the firm originally focused on Special
Financing Districts, specifically the formation and
administration of special assessments and taxes,
we have evolved with our clients' needs. That
evolution gave rise to a Financial Consulting
practice that focuses on sustainable water and
wastewater utility rate programs, cost allocation,
cost recovery, and legally justified fee design.
Across all practice areas, we have worked with
more than 350 public agencies to date; including
cities, counties, municipal utilities, and special
purpose districts.
Our primary areas of continual investment include
the highest -quality training, software and
technology. In an effort to control overhead and
maximize local understanding, many team
members operate out of satellite offices spanning
California and reaching as far as Colorado.
Financial Consulting: Utility Rate
Group, Cost Allocation Plans and
User Fee Studies
Legal Name: NBS Government Finance
Contact: Kim Boehler
'.ep ho ne: 800.676.7516
.com
and Execute Agreement
Name: David Ketcham
Title: Vice President
Address:
Group
DBA:
NBS
Headquarters:
Temecula, CA
Address:
32605 Temecula Pkwy., Suite
Fax:
100
Email:
Temecula, CA 92592
Regional
Office:
San Francisco, CA
Employees:
40
Shareholders
100 % Employee Owned
(ESOP)
Contact: Kim Boehler
'.ep ho ne: 800.676.7516
.com
and Execute Agreement
Name: David Ketcham
Title: Vice President
Address:
32605 Temecula Pkwy.,
Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Telephone:
800.676.7516
Fax:
951.296.1998
Email:
dketcham@nbsgov.com
This project falls in our financial consulting area where we focus primarily on cost recovery
mechanisms and supporting justification for various agency revenue streams. Our areas of
expertise include:
• Rate studies for municipal water, sewer, storm drainage and solid waste utilities.
• Financial plans for public utilities.
• System capacity and development impact fees.
• User and regulatory fees for a wide variety of local government programs and services.
• Overhead cost allocation analysis.
NBSCity of Santa Ana
�� ��99 8.77 RfP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
25A-18
The lead team from NBS for the City of Santa's project is comprised of rate and fee setting experts
who are recognized leaders in their field. They are often asked to teach continuing education
courses and participate in workouts for troubled agencies. The City can be assured, NBS' team
has an In-depth understanding of all changes to laws, codes and regulations affecting local
governments, including Propositions 218 and 26.
While the team members assigned to this study currently serve many municipal agencies through-
out the State, we do not anticipate any difficulties in giving this project its due attention and
dedication. The team presented in this proposal will be available and are fully committed to
completing the study and meeting the deadlines of this project, and will be present as needed for
meetings and presentations.
Expertise and Continuing Education
We require all professional staff to continue their education by attending professional training and
personal growth seminars provided by both in-house experts and outside sources. We also
frequently conduct internal training sessions to discover and discuss changes to key regulatory
and governmental issues that may affect our clients.
Our Publications
In addition, we present a unique set of qualifications and
training to support our depth of experience and
understanding in the work we perform. We believe In
continuing education not only for our own team
members, but also for our clients and other municipal
agency employees. As industry leaders, we have
published two books on related industry topics that can
be downloaded for free at www.nbsgov.com/publications
or ordered through our office at 800.676.7516.
The Special Financing Districts Primer (Revised and
republished in 2015) has been credited as the best
publication on SFDs in a decade by prominent industry
professionals.
The Rates, Fees and Charges Compendium, released
2015, has received high regard and interest from industry
professionals.
Many public agencies utilize our publications as resources
and training tools for their own staff.
Key Personnel
NBS' staff of 40 professionals have 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. We work with our clients as partners by developing an
intricate knowledge of their needs and responding with strategic and timely solutions.
The following is a brief overview of the NBS consulting team proposed to manage and complete
the work noted for this engagement.
DNBS Qty of Santa Ana
tRFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
25A-19
Project Organizational Chart
7
City Stakeholders, Management and Staff
Greg Clumpner H Kim Boehler Nicole Kissam
Project Principal L Project Manager Project Director Tim Seufert
r J I Client Services Director
Pablo Perez i I Greg Henry Greta Davis
Project Principal 1 Utility Rate Consultant I Project Manager
Adina McCargo Craig Brewer Kevin Gardner &
Consultant Utility Rate Analyst Arleile Plourde
Financial Analyst
Description of Project Team for Utility Rate Analyses
KIM BOEHLER, PROJECT MANAGER
Project Role and Responsibilities: Kim Boehler will be primarily responsible for the Evaluation of
Enterprise Fund Rates on this project and will coordinate the work efforts of the project team and
work closely with the City's project manager to discuss and review the overall approach, findings
and recommendations, and will provide quality control on the project. She will coordinate analytical
efforts of the project team on the Federal Clean Water Enterprise feasibility analysis, provide
senior -level technical analysis and review, monitor the schedule and delivery of work products to
the City's satisfaction, and be on-site for all meetings and presentations.
Work Experience: Kim Boehler is a project manager who brings over 10 years of experience at
NSS, in all three of our major consulting practice areas. She has a comprehensive understanding
of agency funding needs through her work in utility rate and fee studies, utility financial
management, special financing district administration, and overhead cost allocation analysis.
For the past eight years, her work has focused exclusively on financial planning, cost -of -service
analyses and rate design for water and wastewater utilities in California. Kim Boehler leads project
teams on water and wastewater rate and capacity fee studies for our public agency clients. She
has completed over 100 utility rate and fee studies, and often speaks at public workshops, industry
conferences and educational seminars on related issues.
City of Santa Ana
�� ��11 ��77 RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
25A-20
GREG CLUMPNER, PROJECT PRINCIPAL
Role and Responsibilities: Greg Clumpner will work with Kim Boehler on the Evaluation of
Enterprise Fund Rates and will take a key role in the Refuse Collection rate evaluation. Greg will
also provide direction, guidance, and senior -level technical analysis and review. Greg will assist
the project team in developing recommendations that will best fit the City's unique characteristics
and issues.
Work Experience: As the director of NBS' Utility Rate Study Practice, Greg Clumpner's 35 -year
professional career has focused on cost -of -service rate studies for municipal water, sewer,
recycled water and solid waste agencies. He regularly makes technical presentations at industry
conferences and client workshops. His practice includes management -consulting assignments
related to utility operations, system valuations, and feasibility studies. He also created and
managed Foresight Consulting where for 6 years, his practice focused on water, sewer and solid
waste rate analyses. Greg has completed over 350 similar studies during his career.
Additionally, Greg often works with Prop 218 legal counsel and serves as an expert witness on
utility rate legal challenges; he is intimately familiar with the legal constraints as well as when to
solicit legal opinions to ensure rate alternatives will meet Prop 218 legal requirements.
PABLO PEREZ, PROJECT PRINCIPAL
Role and Responsibilities: If the City selects Approach #2 for the Federal Clean Water
Protection evaluation, Mr. Perez will support Ms. Boehler in developing recommendations on
whether or not the City should pursue a dedicated funding source for the enterprise, and what -
funding mechanism(s) are best suited to the City's needs. He will also develop the per parcel cost
estimates and will be present for meeting with City staff and the Council, as needed.
Work Experience: Mr. Perez is a Director in NBS' Special District Consulting Group and has over
20 years of experience working with public agencies in California and. has been at the forefront of
the interpretation and implementation of Proposition 218, Proposition 26 and the formation of
special financing districts. He is also actively involved in the daily management of district
administration operations, the preparation of the annual special assessment levies, and related
projects.
ADINA MCCARGO, CONSULTANT
Role and Responsibilities: If the City selects Approach #2 for the Federal Clean Water
Protection evaluation, Ms. McCargo will support Mr. Perez and Ms. Boehler on this study, in
developing the per parcel cost estimates and performing the research and analysis associated
with Task 2.1.1) in this study.
Work Experience: Adina McCargo is a consultant with NBS where she forms and administers
special financing districts and is actively involved with district formations and bond
issuancelrefunding analysis, feasibility studies as well as daily management of district
administration operations.
F' ,NBS City of Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
25A-21
GREG HENRY, UTILITY RATE CONSULTANT
Project Role and Responsibilities: Greg Henry will support the project team in data analysis and
input, if needed on the tasks related to the Evaluation of the Enterprise Fund rates.
Summary of Work Experience: Mr. Henry offers 6 years of experience in financial analyses,
budgeting and financial and rate projections for a California municipality, as well as experience in
drought planning. He serves as the primary consultant on project teams completing water and
sewer utility rate studies and capacity fee analyses, including development of financial models,
budget projections, establishing revenue requirements, multi-year financial plans, rate adjustment
strategies, and performing cost -of -service analyses. Mr. Henry also makes presentations to City
Councils, Boards and other stakeholder groups to present study outcomes and gain input on the
development of financial plans and rate structures.
CRAIG BREWER, UTILITY RATE ANALYST
Role and Responsibilities: If the City selects Approach #2 for the Federal Clean Water
Protection evaluation, under the direction of the project manager, Mr. Brewer will support the
project manager in developing the financial plan for the enterprise fund, in performing data input
and other analyses as needed.
Work Experience: Mr. Brewer has, a Bachelor's of Science degree in Applied Mathematics and
offers over two years of experience working directly with cities and special districts in California on
financial analyses, large scale data analysis and database management.
Description of Project Team for Cost Allocation Plan & Regulatory Fees
NICOLE KISSAM, PROJECT DIRECTOR
Roles and Responsibilities: Nicole Kissam will direct the work efforts of our project team for any
advisement pertaining to review of allocated overhead costs and user/regulatory fees for service.
She will be fully conversant in all findings and available for public events as needed. She will work
closely with the City's designated project manager to monitor the schedule and delivery of work
products to the City's satisfaction. While designing and directing analytical efforts, she will also
provide senior -level technical analysis as warranted.
Work Experience: Ms. Kissam is a Director with NBS in the Financial Consulting Group. She has
15 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 Full and OMB A-87 compliant cost allocation plans, user and
regulatory fee analysis, impact fee analysis, financial plans, and operational improvement strategy
for California agencies. Nicole holds a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration from
California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo. Ms. Kissam has completed similar
projects as requested by the City for many agencies across California.
GRETA DAVIS, PROJECT MANAGER
Roles and Responsibilities: Greta Davis will lead data acquisition, data collection, and data
validation efforts with City's staff, and also direct specific areas of model design and prepare
technical analysis supporting the determination and justification of cost allocations, and
user/regulatory fees. Greta will work actively with City staff members who oversee and perform
A�y � - City of Santa Ana% .
�,N V RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
25A-22
services under review in this effort. She 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.
Work Experience: Ms. Davis offers over 25 years of experience in all facets of financial,
organizational and operational consulting for local government clients. The majority of her
professional experience includes development of Full Cost and OMB A-87 compliant cost
allocation plans, and user fee analysis including establishment of realistic, customized fee
recovery policies. Greta holds a Bachelor of Arts in Social Science, with an emphasis in Finance,
from the University of California, Irvine. Ms. Davis has completed similar projects as requested by
the City for many agencies across California.
KEVIN GARDNER & ARIELLE PLOURDE, FINANCIAL ANALYSTS
Roles and Responsibilities: Kevin Gardner and Arielle Plourde will perform large-scale data
analysis and validation, design and implement cost allocation and user/regulatory fee models, and
prepare technical outcomes at the direction of the Project Director and Project Manager. They will
also facilitate data collection and reminders to City staff in order to keep projects moving along the
agreed upon timeline for completion.
Work Experience: All NBS Financial Analysts have a minimum Bachelors -level degree in
Business, Finance, or Economics and between one to three years of professional work experience
with NBS or in a related field.
Full resumes are included in the Appendix
Figure 1. Percentage of Staff Time Devoted to Project
1 City of Santa Ana
NBE-
1 RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
25A-23
SECTION 3: PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
NBS' Overall Understanding and Approach to the Study
We understand that the City of Santa Ana is embarking on a high-level and confidential third party
Peer -review of its rates, fees, direct and indirect charges, and cross charges from other City
agencies to its four enterprise funds: Refuse Collection, Water, Sanitary Sewer and Federal Clean
Water Protection. In light of the increased scrutiny on utility rates due to recent Prop 218 rate -related
court decisions, it is imperative to ensure the City's rates are in-Ilne with generally accepted industry
standards and are defensible from a legal perspective. We realize this is an important project for the
City and we have developed our proposal with this in mind.
Our proposed deliverables for this project include an evaluation of whether the City's current
practices align with industry standards and recommended technical approaches. Where a range of
acceptable practices exists, we will endeavor to objectively describe the range. Our efforts will
culminate in a report of strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement and, where
appropriate, recommendations for implementation.
This review consists of three major work plan components:
1. Utility Rates for the Water,, Sanitary Sewer, Refuse Collection and Federal Clean Water
Protection Enterprise Funds
2. Direct, Indirect, and Cross Charges to the Enterprise Funds
3. Land Development and Permit Operation Fees
Within the course of analysis of all Prop 218 and Prop 26 fees and charges, NBS will apply its
decades of professional experience in the areas of developing utility rates, overhead cost allocation
plans, evaluating Internal Service Fund charges, and establishing direct and indirect costs and
charges. Our ultimate goal is to help the City ensure that all costs allocated to the enterprise funds
are reasonable, are aligned with industry standards, and represent rational and defensible rate
designs.
NBS' review of fees and charges will also include fees charged for land development and permit
operations, otherwise known as user and regulatory fees. These fees are governed primarily by
Proposition 26, as well as subsequent government codes such as GC 66014 and GC 66016:
In November 2010, California voters adopted Proposition 26 (Prop 26), which amended
the California Constitution — prohibiting a local agency from adopting or increasing a levy,
fee, or charge of any kind without voter approval unless a specific exemption contained in
Prop 26 applies. If a levy, fee, or charge satisfies a specific exemption, it may be adopted
by a simple majority of the local agency's legislative body.
Permit fees for services such as improvement plan review, encroachment permit approval, and
discretionary planning approvals, all fall under one of Prop 26's seven stated exceptions, the
exception for Licenses and Permits:
'A charge imposed for the reasonable regulatory costs to a local government for issuing
licenses and permits, performing investigations, inspections, and audits, enforcing
agricultural marketing orders, and the administrative enforcement and adjudication thereof."
O(� 1 City of Santa Ana
1 W BS RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 8
25A-24
Therefore, these permit (user/regulatory) fees are not subject to Prop 26's definition of a tax. The
only limitation to the fee amount is that it not exceed the estimated cost of providing the service for
which the fee is charged.
Although NBS will coordinate data collection and review with each City department as appropriate,
we will directly be reporting to the City Manager's office, which will ultimately oversee the review of,
and direction provided on all alternatives and recommendations. The final work product for this study
will be a confidential white paper directly addressed to the City Attorney, but also provided to, and
coordinated with the City Manager's office.
Our task plan and methodology for completing this scope of work is presented in the following
section.
Task Plan
1. KICK-OFF MEETING AND DATA COLLECTION
NBS will hold a kick-off meeting with City staff to review and discuss the overall study objectives,
questions, and concerns that need to be addressed, to confirm a mutual understanding of how the
study will be conducted. A data request will be issued to City staff prior to the initial kickoff meeting that
will list the data needed for consultants to begin the study.
Types of data required from the City — The basic types of data and documents required from the
City will include the following:
• Annual operations budgets and projected capital improvement plan costs for each utility, and
staffing schedules
• Current fees, charges, and rate schedules for each utility
• Prior utility rate studies
• Prior studies supporting establishment of current user/regulatory fees
• Documentation supporting inter -fund charges and overhead cost allocations
• Total annual and monthly water sales, for the last three years
• Summary of annual water revenue from fixed charges and volumetric rates
• For refuse collection, the number of accounts by customer class (residential, commercial, etc.)
and level of service (i.e., size of container and number of pickups per week)
• For storm drainage, number of parcels subject to these fees and type of parcel
2. ASSESSMENT OF ENTERPRISE FUND RATES, FEES & CHARGES
NBS will work with City staff to perform an evaluation of the existing rate and fee structures, direct and
indirect charges, cross charges from other City agencies, and Proposition 26 and 218 validation
processes to evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement to strengthen the
City's legal and financial standing'.
NBS will meet with each department separately to discuss their initial perspectives on the concerns and
issues that will be addressed in this study. Once an initial evaluation is complete, NBS will review the
City's current practices against decades of professional experience performing cost allocation, cost of
' Since we are not attorneys, NBS does not provide legal advice or legal opinions; we assume the City
Attorney's office will provide all legal review— NBS will coordinate such review with the City Attorney.
.q� City of Santa Ana
k)NBS RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 9
25A-25
service, and rate and fee analysis to provide an assessment of strengths and opportunities for the City's
review.
The following tasks are planned for this evaluation:
2.1. EVALUATION OF ENTERPRISE FUND RATES
NBS will review the utility rates for the City's four enterprise funds: Water, Sanitary Sewer, Refuse
Collection, and Federal Clean Water Protection. This review will determine whether current practices
are generally consistent with industry standards and legal requirements, such as Proposition 218,
and where appropriate, will discuss ranges of acceptable practices. We will provide
recommendations on changes, if needed, to the City's utility rate structures, and costs shared
between funds.
This scope of services is not proposing to calculate new utility rates for the City; but rather, to provide
experienced professional opinions aiding the City's approach in the future to developing its utility
rates. The result of this effort will be an analysis of known or found improvements, which will allow
City staff to plan for and incorporate changes in future utility rate setting processes. NBS will review
the following information as part of this process:
Existing rate structures — specifically rate design
• Budgeted revenues and expenditures
• 2014 Water and Sewer Rate Studies, and other similar studies available for the other
enterprise funds and in particular the impacts that more recent Prop 218 court decisions may
have related to the cost -basis for rates
• How refuse services are provided, and potentially the cost -basis for current refuse rates,
which may include reviewing Refuse Collection Service Agreements
• Proposition 218 validation processes
Our approach to the utility rate evaluation for the four enterprise funds, is described in the following two
subtasks.
2.1.A, B and C: Water, Sanitary Sewer and Refuse Collection Rate Evaluation
NBS will perform the following subtasks (i.e., A, B and C) for the Water, Sanitary Sewer and Refuse
Collection rate evaluation:
Conduct an Orientation Meeting with City Staff - NBS will participate in a meeting with City staff
from each department, as appropriate, to discuss staffs pre -identified issues to be addressed
through the course of these services and NBS' initial observations. We will also establish initial
subsequent steps to continue the review and/or coordinate additional input needed from City staff
will be identified.
Document Existing Conditions — NBS will review the City's current utility rate schedules, rate
studies, budgets, and any other supporting analyses and/or documentation supporting the City's
utility rates. Acquire a broad understanding of each enterprise fund's operations, current rate
structures, known issues/deficiencies in current rates, known areas for improvement, and
availability of customer usage data. NBS will summarize key findings and coordinate review of this
summary with City staff to ensure mutual understanding of current practices.
ri—r B �mss- City of Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 10
25A-26
Document Evaluation of and Recommendations Regarding Current Practices - Provide the
relevant sections of a draft confidential white paper to City Manager's office documenting strengths,
weaknesses, and any recommended changes to current City practices. Once City Manager's office
has reviewed this document, we will facilitate a discussion of the findings and recommendations.
Assume one comprehensive round of review and edit to the draft report.
2.1.1): Federal Clean Water Protection Enterprise Feasibility. Analysis
Background on Stormwater Funding - There is not broad consensus within the industry on how
to pay for Federal Clean Water (or, storm drain, stormwater) costs, or what type of rate or fee
structure should be used. Some of the funding mechanisms that have been and are currently used
include sewer rates, water rates, solid waste rates, street sweeping charges, and separate storm
drainage utility charges.
The City currently funds this enterprise with charges from the Water, Sanitary Sewer and Refuse
Collection enterprises and a series of user and regulatory fees. NBS will work with City staff to
evaluate the current sources and uses of funds related to the Federal Clean Water Protection
enterprise, and future NPDES permit requirement costs, and evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, and
opportunities for improvement in current practice. This evaluation will also lay out potential funding
options to ensure the enterprise has stable revenues in the long -run.
Below there are two options for the Federal Clean Water Protection evaluation.
Approach #1
In this option, NBS will take the same approach to this evaluation as noted in Task 2.1.A, B and C, for
the Water, Sanitary Sewer and Refuse Collection enterprises. NBS will perform the following
subtasks for the Federal Clean Water Enterprise evaluation, if the City chooses this approach:
Conduct an Orientation Meeting with City Staff - NBS will participate in a meeting with City staff
from the department, as appropriate, to discuss staffs pre -identified issues to be addressed
through the course of these services and NBS' initial observations. We will also establish initial
subsequent steps to continue the review and/or coordinate additional input needed from City staff
will be identified.
Document Existing Conditions — NBS will review the City's current fee schedule, budgets,
revenue sources and any other analyses and/or documentation supporting how the City is
currently funding this enterprise. Acquire a broad understanding of the enterprise fund's
operations, current revenue sources, known issues/deficiencies, known areas for improvement,
and availability of customer data. NBS will summarize key findings and coordinate review of this
summary with City staff to ensure mutual understanding of current practices.
�` BS City of Santa Ana
tl9i RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 11
25A-27
Document Evaluation of and Recommendations Regarding Current Practices - Provide the
relevant sections of a draft confidential white paper to City Manager's office documenting strengths,
weaknesses, and any recommended changes to current City practices. Once City Manager's office
has reviewed this document, we will facilitate a discussion of the findings and recommendations.
Assume one comprehensive round of review and edit to the draft report.
Approach #2:
In this option, NBS will take the a more detailed approach to this evaluation than is noted in Approach
#1, and will include additional tasks such as: developing a financial plan and preliminary per parcel
cost estimates, for a potentially new dedicated funding source. NBS will perform the following
subtasks for the Federal Clean Water Enterprise evaluation, if the City chooses this approach:
Conduct an Orientation Meeting with City Staff - Consultants will participate in a meeting with
City staff to discuss in detail, staffs pre -identified issues to be addressed through the course of
these services and NBS' initial observations. At this session, initial subsequent steps to continue
the review and/or aid City staff work will be identified.
Prepare Financial Plan: NBS will prepare a detailed financial plan for the Federal Clean Water
Enterprise that will provide the City with a "financial road -map" for the fund. This plan will lay out funding
for capital improvements, repair and replacement needs, annual operating expenses, and reserve fund
replenishment. We will work with Cfty staff to evaluate the "nexus" between Federal Clean Water
Protection Costs and the benefits customers in the Water, Sanitary Sewer and Refuse Collection
enterprises receive from this program.
The financial plan will detail the enterprises' financial obligations and determine if any costs should be
funded with a new funding source. Financial plan deliverables will include:
• 10 -year financial projections model.
Summary of current and projected net revenue requirements.
• Review and recommend reserve fund targets, such as those for O&M and capital
replacement.
• Projected year-end reserve fund levels.
• Calculated debt service coverage ratios (if applicable)
Develop Preliminary Per Parcel Cost Estimates: NBS will develop preliminary estimates of the
per parcel cost to fund the City's Federal Clean Water Enterprise, through a new dedicated funding
source. We will evaluate two options for the City's consideration for funding the facilities: either a
property -related fee or a special tax. The fees developed in this analysis will be preliminary
estimates of the annual cost to property owners and will be based on property type2 (that is,
single-family, multi -family, commercial, etc.). We will provide a discussion of the of the relative
merits (pros and cons) of the various methods available for funding the City's drainage facilities,
and our recommendation on what method best meets the City's needs.
Prepare a Technical Memorandum: NBS will prepare a technical memorandum for review by City
Staff that summarizes our findings and recommendations for the financial plan and funding
Y This analysis will not develop a fee based on impervious surface area, orrunoff factors. if the City decides
to proceed with implementing a new funding source for the Federal Clean Water Enterprise, a more detailed
analysis will need to be conducted at that time which can include an evaluation of a fee based on impervious
surface area and other factors, pending the availability (or development) of the required data.
�ILN City of Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 12
25A-28
mechanisms. Sufficient information will be provided in the report for staff, the Council and the
public to review and understand the study. The technical memorandum will include:
A discussion of the project and relevant findings
Recommendations for establishing a dedicated funding source
Overview of the financial plan
Boundary map
Overview of potential implementation tasks
Proposed timeline/critical path for implementation
2.2 EVALUATION OF DIRECT AND INDIRECT CHARGES AND CROSS CHARGES
NBS will perform a professional review of all direct and overhead allocations received by, or charged
by, the enterprise funds, as well as all cross charges from City agencies allocated to the enterprise
funds. This review will determine whether current practices are consistent with industry standards
and provide recommendations, if needed, to the City's mechanics of sharing costs between funds,
departments, divisions, or programs. NBS will also consider whether practices In place are in line
with either the basic guidelines of Title 2, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 225, Cost Principles for
State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments (formerly known as OMB A-87), depending on the City's
preference.
This scope of services isnot proposing,to calculate new internal service fund rates or cross -charges
for the City; but rather, to provide experienced professional opinion aiding the City's approach to
maintaining and enhancing Hs systems independently. The result of this effort should be a time- and
cost-effective analysis of known or found improvements to enable City staffs subsequent update to
their own analytical tools. NBS will complete the following tasks in satisfying the core objective of this
effort:
2.2.A: Conduct an Orientation Meeting with City Staff
Consultants will participate in a meeting with City staff to discuss in detail, staffs pre -identified issues
to be addressed through the course of these services and NBS' initial observations. At this session,
initial subsequent steps to continue the review and/or aid City staff work will be identified.
2.2.13: Understand Existing Conditions
Review current charges in use by or affecting the enterprise funds, including review of the City's
existing supporting analyses and/or documentation supporting all direct and indirect charges to and
from the utilities, or between utilities. Communication with City staff will supplement review to ensure
mutual understanding of current practices before recommendations are documented.
2.2.C: Document Findings and Recommendations
Provide the relevant sections of the draft confidential white paper, documenting strengths and/or
recommended changes to current City practices. Distribute to City Manager's office and facilitate a
discussion to finalize and support implementation. Assume one comprehensive round of review and
edit to the draft report.
2.2.D: Support and Review Analytical Modifications
Remain available to support City staff's implementation of proposed recommendations for a specified
number of hours over conference call and/or email.
I BSRCityFP of Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 13
25A-29
2.3 EVALUATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT AND PERMIT OPERATION FEES
NBS will perform an experienced professional review of all land development permitting fees
(user/regulatory fees) that are charged by the enterprise funds in support of development review
activities. In general, the scope of services 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 portion of our
analysis. The following is our detailed User Fee Study Work Plan for the City's review.
2.3.A: Conduct an Orientation Meeting with City Staff
Consultants will participate in a meeting with City staff to discuss in detail, staffs pre -identified issues
to be addressed through the course of these services and NBS' initial observations. At this session,
initial subsequent steps to continue the review and/or aid City staff work will be identified.
2.3.B: Understand Existing Conditions
Review the City's current list of fees as well as the City's existing supporting analyses and/or
documentation supporting fees. Acquire a broad understanding of each enterprise fund'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. Communication
with City staff will supplement review to ensure mutual understanding of current practices before
recommendations are documented.
2.3.C: Document Findings and Recommendations
Provide the relevant sections of the draft confidential white paper, documenting strengths and/or
recommended changes to current City practices. Distribute to City Manager's office and facilitate a
discussion to finalize and support implementation. Assume one comprehensive round of review and
edit to the draft report.
2.3.D: Support and Review Analytical Modifications
Remain available to support City staffs implementation of proposed recommendations for a specified
number of hours over conference call and/or email.
3. FINAL CONFIDENTIAL WHITE PAPER
At the conclusion of this review, and after discussions with City Manager's office on findings and
recommendations, NBS will prepare a final confidential white paper that will be addressed to the
City's project manager and legal counsel. This white paper will include documentation of the
strengths, weaknesses, and any recommended changes to current City practices, with regard to:
• Water, Sanitary Sewer and Refuse Collection Rates
• Summary of the findings and recommendations made in the Federal Clean Water
Enterprise Feasibility Analysis
• Direct, Indirect and Cross Charges for Enterprise Funds and other City Agencies
• Land Development and Permit Operation Fees charged by the Enterprise Funds
This white paper will be a comprehensive study report that encompasses all aspects of the study
in a single document. This will also be the sole work product from this study and will only be
provided to the City Manager's office, but will officially be addressed to the City Attorney.
qy,' ��•,-
City of Santa Ana
A it 4� RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 14
25A-30
An executive summary and introduction will present the purpose and results of this comprehensive
review of the City's enterprise fund rates, fees and directlindirect and cross charges from other
City Agencies. Tables, graphs, and charts will be used as appropriate, but the emphasis will be on
providing a clear, concise and understandable paper that addresses:
Overall study methodology, with reference to Industry Best Management Practices,
Proposition 218 and 26.
Matrix and narrative of study findings, strengths and recommendations for changes in rate
and fee structures and how directtindirect and cross charges are applied to the four
enterprise funds.
Appropriate figures and tables summarizing key aspects and results of the study.
If it is determined in Task 2.1. D that the City should establish a new funding source (such as a
new property related fee or special tax) for the Federal Clean Water Enterprise, the financial plan
and preliminary per parcel cost estimates and will be Included in the separate technical memo
described for that task. As with the white paper, this memo will be addressed to the City Attorney
and directly provided to the City Manager's office.
Figure 2 below shows a sam le matrix of how this assessment would support the narrative explanation
of NBS' technical memorandum for the water utility. Similar matrices will be developed for the sanitary
sewer and refuse utilities.
Figure 2. Example of Initial Assessment Matrix
rr
Evaluate customer
characteristics: no. meters by City will evaluate
7/A1
iesclain rate
equities in rate
Easy to administer meter size, consumption consultants initial
payer s.
are based on patterns, and peaking factors by results of this
le User Class customer class. analysis, and
stomers aredetermine
Easy to understand/
Determine cost of providing
the
feasibility of
subject to the same
explain to customers.
service to each customer class.
implementing rates
rates
Develop rates that recover the
for each customer
full cost of service from each
class.
customer class.
City agrees and
Revenue to utility Is
gills are minimized
Develop a rate structure that
directs consultants to
highly variable/
for low water users
collects more revenue from fixed
develop rates in this
unstable.
charges.
manner.
High Percentage of
Will create a need for
Consider Implementing drought
Initial agreement from
Revenue Collected
larger rate increases
Gives customers
rates or conservation
City, will determine
from Volumetric
in the long -run if
more control over
surcharges that will enhance
billing system
Rates
deficiency is not
their water bill.
revenue collection as
capability.
corrected.
conservation Increases.
Establish a rate stabilization
City agrees and will
reserve that can be used when
evaluate consultants
water sales are low.
funding options.
%,))NB • City of Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment IS
25A-31
4. MEETING WITH CITY STAFF AND CITY COUNCIL
NBS will attend and present at one (1) meeting with City staff to review the final results of this
assessment, and one (1) meeting with the City Council to review the findings and recommendations of
our evaluation.
Please note: the number of meetings we have proposed for this effort is a preliminary estimate of what we
believe will be required to complete this study. This can be adjusted at any time as needed by City staff.
Qip���• Cry of Santa Ana
` } 1 �1 RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 16
25A-32
SECTION 4: RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
The following is a sampling of California municipal agencies for whom our proposed team has
completed (or been recently selected to complete) projects similar to the City's study.
• Agoura Hills
• Alameda
• American Canyon Fire
Protection District
• Association of Bay Area
Governments
• Arvin
• Avila Beach CSD
• Belmont
• Benicia
• Brea
• Calaveras County
Water District
• California Fire & Rescue
Traininghuthority, ,
• Camarillo
• Carlsbad
• Chula Vista
• Clearlake
• Colton
• Concord
• Contra Costa County
• Cucamonga Valley
Water District
• Culver City
• Desert Water Agency
• Dixon
• East Palo Alto
• East Valley Water District
• Emeryville
• EI Dorado Irrigation District
• Escondido
• Fairfield
• Fort Bragg
• Fountain Valley
• Greenfield
• Half Moon Bay
• Hidden Valley Lake
Community Services District
• Humboldt Community
Services District
• Huntington Beach
• Indio
• Lancaster
• Lincoln
• Livermore
• Los Altos
• Los Angeles
• Martinez
• Merced
• Moraga-Orinda Fire
Protection District
• Moreno Valley
• Morgan Hill
• Napa
• National City
• Palmdale
• Pasadena
• Patterson
• Petaluma
• Rancho Santa Margarita
• Redding
• Richmond
• Riverside
• Rocklin
• Sacramento
• Sacramento Metropolitan
Fire District
• Sacramento Public Library
Authority
• San Carlos
• San Diego
• San Francisco Municipal
Transit Authority
• San Jose
• San Juan Capistrano
• San Luis Obispo .
• Santa Clara County
• Santa Cruz
• Santa Paula
• Sausalito
• Seal Beach
• Seaside
• Sierra Madre
• Solano Irrigation District
• Solvang
• Stanislaus Consolidated
Fire Protection District
• Sunnyvale
• Taft
• Thousand Oaks
• Town of Atherton
• Town of Colma
• Town of Portola Valley
• Tulare
• Tuolumne Utilities District
• Turlock
• Tustin
• Vallejo
• Ventura
• Victorville
• Waterford
• Winters
Please see Section 6 References for specific
project descriptions and contact information
�I V BS City of Santa Ana
� RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
25A-33
17
SECTION 5: SCHEDULE
The following Is an overview of our proposed project schedule. We will discuss a detailed schedule at the klckoff meeting, along with the expected
timing for individual tasks.
While the project team for this study will have multiple projects In progress at the time this study will be completed, our team is fully committed to
this study and will balance the priorities of this project with other work in progress. Figure 1 In our proposal provides an estimate of the number of
hours required by each team member and percentage of workload for the project period.
This page Is Intentionally formatted differently (landscape) than rest of the oronosel in Imnmva t..;hmv.,'sy
yQIpiBS qty No. 17-081 Co
��Y 67 AFP No.i7-0elComprehenslve PrapasiNon 218 Fees anE Charges Compliance Assessment
25A-34
SECTION 6: REFERENCES
Please see Attachment 4 attached with additional pages including more detailed descriptions of
scope of services for each reference.
D N BS City of Santa Ana
RFP No, 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 19
25A-35
Appendix
ATTACHMENT 4 Page 1 of3
REFERENCES
CITY OF'SANTA ANA
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
COMPREHENSIVE PROPOSITION 218 FEES AND CHARGES COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
RFP NO.: 17-081
List five (5) references and describe fully the services performed by your firm which demonstrate your ability to
provide the services included in the scope of the proposal.Attach additional pastes if required. The City
reserves the right to contact each of the references listed for additional information.
Reference
Customer Name: City of Redding
Address: 777 Cypress Avenue
Redding, CA 96001
Contract Amount:.. $153,000
Brief description of scope or services provided:
Contact Individual: Brian Crane, Public Works Director
Phone Number: (530) 245-7155
Facsimile Number: Not Available
Year: 2016 / Previous study completed 2014
Utility Rate Program Update (further detail on each project is attached)
Reference
Customer Name: City of Vlctorville
Address: 14343 Civic Drive
. Victorville, CA 92393
Contract Amount: $200.000
Brief description of scope or services provided:
Director of Public
Contact Individual: Doug Mathews, Works and Water
Phone Number: (760) 243-6332
Facsimile Number: Not Available
Year: 2015 to Present
Water Rate Study, Sewer and Recycled Water Rate and Capacity Fee Study Storm Drain Feasibility Study
Reference
Customer Name: City of Victorville
Address: 14343 Civic Drive
Contract Amount: $25,000
Contact Individual: Joe Haggard
Phone Number: (760) 955-5000
Facsimile Number: Not Available
Year: 2016 - Present
Brief description of scope or services provided:
__. Overhead Cnst Allnnatinn Pias
THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED AND INCLUDED WITH THE PROPOSAL.
PROPOSALS THAT DO NOT CONTAIN THIS FORM WILL BE CONSIDERED NONRESPONSIVE.
City of Santa Ana RFP 17-081
Page 27
25A-36
Appendix
ATTACHMENT 4 Continued
Page 2 of 3
REFERENCES
CITY OF SANTA ANA
REQUEST FORPROPOSALS
COMPREHENSIVE PROPOSITION 218 FEES AND CHARGES COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
RFP NO.: 17-081
List five (5) references and describe fully the services performed by your firm which demonstrate your ability to
provide the services included in the scope of the proposal. Attach additional gages if required. The City
reserves the right to contact each of the references listed for additional information.
Bevert Marshall, formerly - WCMD Finance &
Reference Administrative Services Director
West County Wastewater Currently—General Manger of
Customer Name: District (WCWD) Contact Individual: Sewer Authority Mid-Coastside
Address: 1000 Cabrillo Hwy N.,
Half Moon Bay, CA 94019
(at Sewer Authority Mid-Coastside)
Contract Amount: $180,000
Brief description of scope or services provided:
Reference
City of Los Angeles,
Customer Name: Dept of City Planning
Address: 1200 N. Spring St, Room 525B
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Phone Number: (650) 726-0124
Facsimile Number: (650) 726-7833
Year: 2010 - Present
Contact Individual: Jan Zatorski, Deputy Director
Phone Number: (213) 978-1273
Facsimile Number: Unknown
Contract Amount: $65,000+ Year: 2011 - Present
Brief description of scope or services provided:
User and Regulatory Fee Studies
Reference
Customer Name: Desert Water Agency
Address: 1200 S. Gene Autry Trail
Palm Springs, CA 92264
Contact Individual: Martin Krieger, Finance Director
Phone Number: (760) 323-4971
Facsimile Number: Not Available
Contract Amount: $100,000+ Year:
2010 - Present
Brief description of scope or services provided:
Water, Recycled Water and Sewer Rate Study
THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED A14D INCLUDED WITH THE PROPOSAL.
PROPOSALS THAT DO NOT CONTAIN THIS FORM WILL BE CONSIDERED NONRESPONSIVE.
City of Santa Ana RFP 17-081
Page 27
25A-37
Appendix
ATTACHMENT 4 Continued
REFERENCES Page 3 of 3
CITY OF SANTA ANA
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
COMPREHENSIVE PROPOSITION 218 FEES AND CHARGES COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
RFP NO.: 17-081
List five. (5) references and describe fully the services performed by your firm which demonstrate your ability to
provide the services included in the scope of the proposal. Attach additional Pages if required. The City
reserves the right to contact each of the references listed for additional information.
Reference
Customer Name: Rowland Water District
Address: 3021 South Fullerton Road,
Rowland Heights CA
Contract Amount: $70,000
Contact Individual: Sean Henry, Finance Officer
Phone Number: (562) 697-1726
Facsimile Number: Not Available
Year: 2016 to 2017
Brief description of scope or services provided:
Water and Recycled Water Rate and Capacity Fee Study
Reference
Customer
Address:
Contract Amount:
Brief description of scope or services provided:
Reference
Customer
Address:
Contract Amount:
Brief description of scope or services provided:
Contact Individual:
Phone Number:
Facsimile Number:
Year:
Contact Individual:
Phone Number:
Facsimile Number:
Year:
THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED AND INCLUDED WITH THE PROPOSAL.
PROPOSALS THAT DO NOT CONTAIN THIS FORM WILL BE CONSIDERED NONRESPONSIVE
City of Santa Ana RFP 17-081
Page 27
25A-38
Attachment 4 References — Additional Pages
Reference #1:
Customer Name: City of Redding
Contact Individual: Brian Crane, Public Works Director
Address: 777 Cypress Avenue, Redding, CA 96001
Phone Number: (530) 245-7156
Facsimile Number: Not Available
Email: bcrane@ci.redding.ca.us
Contract Amount: $153,000
Year: 2016 with Previous Study Completed in 2014
Brief description of scope or services provided: Utility Rate Program Update
In 2014, NBS completed a rate study, including revenue requirements, cost -of -service analysis, and
rate design for the City's water, sewer and solid waste utilities. While the overarching purpose was
to sufficiently fund projected operational and capital improvement costs, a thorough review of rate
design was also a primary concern. Recommended rates and impact fees from the 2014 study were
adopted and implemented.
In 2016, the City retained NBS to update the 2014 study for the water, sewer, and solid waste rates,
with a focus on the legal concerns of Prop 216 court cases, particularly the cost -based tiers for water
rates. This study also carefully considered projected consumption levels, since the City's total annual
consumption has continued to decline the last several years in response to drought conditions.
Another key aspect of the rate study was working with a Citizens Advisory Group that reviews and
provides recommendations to the City Council. The committee's concerns included financial/rate
setting policies, details of the financial plans and revenue requirements, and developing legally
defensible rate design alternatives. In light of the San Juan Capistrano decision that placed more
demanding cost -basis requirements on water rates. Based on NBS' recommendations, the City
decided to switch to a uniform (single -tier) rate design rather than retain a multi -tiered rate design.
In 2017, the City has again retained NBS to update their development impact fees, reflecting their
continued confidence in NBS' ability to effectively complete these studies.
I See Capistrano Taxpayers Association V. City of San Juan Capistrano, Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division three,
April 18, 2016. This court ruling requires that tiered water rates demonstrate a clear "cost -basis".
� 11MB -RF
City of Santa Ana
%
�'�� P No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 23
25A-39
Reference #2:
Customer Name: City of Victorville
Contact Individual: Doug Matthews, Director of Public Works and Water
Address: 14343 Civic Drive, Victorville, CA 92393
Phone Number: (760) 243-6332
Facsimile Number: Not Available
Email: dmathews@ci.victorville.ca.us
Contract Amount: $200,000
Year: 2015 to Present
Brief description of scope or services provided: Water Rate Study, Sewer and Recycled Water
Rate and Capacity Fee Study, Storm Drain Feasibility Study
In 2016, NBS completed a Water Rate Study, for the City of Victorville. The main concerns
addressed in the water rate study include developing a capital funding plan that includes over $55
million in rehabilitation and replacement projects, updating the water rate structure to one based on
Industry standards, that transitions from a consumption -based fixed charge to one that is based on
meter size, and developed drought rates. A key part of this Study was working with the Board of
Directors in several workshops where they reviewed rate alternatives and provided
recommendations on the development of new water rates, and ultimately gaining their support to
adopt new water rates and fully -fund the needs of the utility.
Earlier this year, NBS completed a Storm Drain Feasibility Study to evaluate the City's costs related
to its storm drain program and provide funding options, based on the specific costs that need to be
funded and the City's unique needs. The ultimate recommendation of this study is to implement a
special tax to supplement existing funding for the program.
In addition, NBS is in the process of completing a Sewer and Recycled Water Rate and Capacity
Fee Study for the City of Victorville. Main issues that are being addressed in this study are
developing capital funding plan that includes over $37 million in rehabilitation and replacement
projects and updating the sewer rate structure to incorporate a volumetric component to
commercial sewer rates. Other issues include developing rates for the City -owned industrial
wastewater treatment plant, including pretreatment program charges.
ON®�v- City of Santa Ana
G�9977 RFP No, 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 24
25A-40
Reference #3:
Customer Name: City of Victorville
Contact Individual: Joe Haggard, Technology Officer
Address: 14343 Civic Drive, Victorville, CA 92393
Phone Number: (760) 955-5000
Facsimile Number: Not Available
Email: jhaggard@victorville.ca.gov
Contract Amount: $25,000
Year: 2016 to Present
Brief description of scope or services provided: Overhead Cost Allocation Plan.
NBS completed a full cost and OMB cost version of an overhead cost allocation plan for the City of
Victorville.
Reference #4:
Customer Name: West County Wastewater District (WCWD)
Contact Individual: Beverii Marshall, formerly - Finance and Administrative Services Director of
WCWD, Currently— General Manger of Sewer Authority Mid-Coastside
Address: 1000 Cabrillo Hwy N., Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 (at Sewer Authority Mid-Coastside)
Phone Number: (650) 726-0124
Facsimile Number: (650) 726-7833
Email: bmarshall@samcleanswater.org
Contract Amount: $180,000
Year: 2010 to Present
Brief description of scope or services provided: Wastewater Rate Study (including subsequent
updates), Wastewater Capacity Fee Study, User and Regulatory Fee Study
NBS has been working with West County Wastewater District since 2010, on its rate and fee program.
In 2012, NBS completed a Sewer Rate study for the District and has performed several subsequent
updates as the Capital Improvement Program was updated to incorporate changes from the recent
Master Planning effort. As part of this work, NBS developed capacity fees for the District to
incorporate the new Capital Improvement Program costs. NBS also established user and regulatory
fees charged by the District for reviewing, approving, and inspecting construction projects for private
residential and commercial development. This fall, NBS will begin a new wastewater rate and
capacity fee study for the District.
Additionally, NBS administers the District's sewer service charges. Our staff calculates the annual
sewer service charges for the District, places the charges on the county tax roll, and prepares and
mails Proposition 218 notices when new rates are adopted.
N BS City of Santa Ana p .p
RFP No. 17.081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 25
25A-41
Reference #5•
Customer Name: City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning
Contact Individual: Jan Zatorski, Deputy Director
Address: 1200 N. Spring St, Room 525B, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Phone Number: (213) 978-1273
Facsimile Number: Not Available
Email: jan.zatorski@lacity.org
Contract Amount: $65,000+
Year: 2011 to Present
Brief description of scope or services provided: User and Regulatory Fee Studies
NBS is currently under contract and nearing completion of a comprehensive review of all
Department of City Planning hourly rates and fees for services. Key consulting tasks include
development of a deliverable fully burdened hourly rate model, recommendation regarding a fair
and equitable fee structure for specialized services, and consideration of an appropriate fund
balance for off peak demand cycles.
Previously, in 2013, NBS was selected by the Department to provide on-call consulting services
related to development of a Case Management fee structure for development review services, as
well as a comprehensive fee analysis that is still ongoing and in the process.
In 2011, 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, recommendation regarding a fair and equitable fee structure for specialized services, and
consideration of an appropriate fund balance for off peak demand cycles.
Prior to joining NBS, Nicole Kissam and Greta Davis completed a comprehensive fee analysis for
this Department, as well as a study of EMS costs to providing services for the Fire Department.
OZ)R.SpS City
RFP of Santa Ana
�� GL�3�7 RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive proposition 218 tees and Charges Compliance Assessment 26
25A-42
Reference #6:
Customer Name: Desert Water Agency
Contact Individual: Martin Krieger, Finance Director
Address: 1200 S. Gene Autry Trail, Palm Springs, CA 92264
Phone Number: (760) 323-4971
Facsimile Number: Not Available
Email: marlin@dwa.org
Contract Amount: $100,000+
Year: 2010 to Present
Brief description of scope or services provided: Water, Recycled Water and Sewer Rate Study
NBS recently completed a new Water, Recycled Water and Sewer Rate Study for the Agency, and
has been working with the Agency since 2010 on its utility rate program. The main concerns
addressed in the 2016 study were providing more revenue stability for the potable water utility
(rates were previously over $0% volumetric), ensuring rates are sufficient to support the $45 million
capital improvement program over the next 5 years, maintaining sufficient reserve funds, and
retaining the Agency's uniform volumetric water rate. To address recent conservation requirements,
we developed drought rates for the Agency that can be implemented, if more severe drought
stages occur. Forthe Reclaimed Water and Wastewater utilities, the key issues addressed were
developing rates that fully fund utility operations, maintenance, capital replacement costs, and
establishing reserve targets for these enterprises that are separate from the Agency's main potable
water operation.
N BS City of Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 27
25A-43
Reference #7:
Customer Name: Rowland Water District
Contact Individual: Sean Henry, Finance Officer
Address: 3021 South Fullerton Road, Rowland Heights, CA
Phone Number: (562) 697-1726
Facsimile Number: Not Available
Email: shenry@rowlandwater.com
Contract Amount: $70,000
Year: 2016 to 2017
Brief description of scope or services provided: Water and Recycled Water Rate and Capacity
Fee Study
NBS recently completed a Water and Recycled Water Rate and Capacity Fee Study for Rowland
Water District. When the study began, the District was projecting an operating loss and was not
expected to meet its required debt coverage ratio without a rate increase. A key objective in this
stydy was to develop potable water rates that collect a greater percentage of revenue from fixed
charges to ensure long-term revenue stability for the District. Other objectives included developing
cost -based tiered volumetric rates, drought rates to coincide with the District's Water Shortage
Contingency and surcharges for customers in various elevations zones.
For the recycled water system, the main objectives were to develop a method for allocating costs in
the District's budget to the potable and recycled water systems and to establish a financial plan that
achieves the District's goal to have recycled water customers bear a greater percentage of their
costs. NBS supported District staff in a Board workshop to obtain approval to move forward with the
Proposition 218 process and at the public hearing to adopt new rates.
In this study, NBS also developed new water capacity fees, based on meter, size, to replace the
District's previous acreage supply fee. The main objective was bringing the fees for new
development in line with industry standards.
N 1135 City of Santa Ana
��1 i� RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive P ropositlon 218 Fees and Charges Complia nce Assessment 28
25A-44
SECTION 7: FEE
As requested in the RFP, the Fee Proposal has been included under a separate cover and titled as
indicated.
NESSCityRFP of No.17Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 29
25A-45
APPENDIX
This appendix contains
• Appendix A: Full Resumes for Proposed Project Team
• Certification Forms requested in the RFP:
o Appendix B: Attachment 3-1 Non -Collusion Affidavit
o Appendix C: Attachment 3-2 Non -Lobbying Certification
o Appendix D: Attachment 3-3 Non -Discrimination Certification
qD®�- City of Santa Ana
!1 RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 30
25A-46
APPENDIX A: PROPOSED PROJECT TEAM RESUMES
O NBS Qty of Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 31
25A-47
GREG CLUMPNER �'����
Project Principal
wnamm•.m.,
RESUME HIGHLIGHTS
35 years of experience in financial and economic analyses
Consulting practice focuses on municipal water, sewer, and
recycled water utilities
Completion of over 350 rate studies to date
EDUCATION
• M.S., Agricultural/Managerial Economics, U.C. Davis, 1983
• B.S., Environmental Planning, UC. Davis, 1977
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
• Vice -Chair,, City of Davis Utility Rate Advisory Committee
• Former Chairman, City of Davis Planning Commission
• Past President, Sacramento Economics Roundtable
• Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA), Member
• American Water Works Association (AWWA), Member
RECENT SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
"You have done a greatjob
on this project, especially
with the challenges we
faced. I would be happy to
serve as a client reference
whenever needed in the
future. Please have any of
your prospective clients call
me."
EL DORADO IRRIGATION
DISTRICT
JIM ABERCROMBIE
GENERAL MANAGER
[Greg Clumpner served as the
Proled Manager In completing a
Cost-of-servics Study of Water,
Sewer, and Recycled Water
Rates for the Distdctl
• "Cadillac Desert or Ford. Pinto Desert? An Update on Water Finances in California" —
CSMFO, Spring Conference, March 1, 2016
"Fiscal Health vs. Pricing for Conservation" — ACWA Fall Conf., Indian Wells, CA, Dec.
2015
• "What's in Your Rates? Drought? Recycled Water? Social Justice?" — AWWA/ACE 2015
National Conference, Anaheim, CA, June 2015
• "The California Drought — What's in Your Rates?" — CSMFO 2015 Annual Conf.
• "Water Rates: Fairness, Equity and'Social Justice'?", NBS Primer, 2014
• "The'Perfect Storm' or the'New Normal'? Meeting the Challenges of Maintaining Financial
Viability", Utility Management Conference, Miami, February 2012
• The New Financial Reality, ACWA Spring Conference, Sacramento 2011
BIOGRAPHY
Greg Clumpner's 35 -year professional career has focused on financial, economic, and cost -of -
service rate analyses for municipal water, sewer, recycled water and solid waste agencies. He
regularly presents technical papers at industry conferences and client workshops. His practice has
increasingly focused on management consulting related to municipal utility operations and capital
improvements.
Utility Cost -of -Service Rafe Studies: Mr. Clumpner has prepared more than 200 multi-
year financial plans, cost -of -service analysis, and rate design studies as well as
conservation -oriented water rates, funding analysis for water, sewer, and solid waste
utilities. These rate studies have primarily been for California clients, although he has also
completed projects in Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Egypt, and Mexico.
® Management Consulting & Strategic Planning: His management consulting and
strategic planning experience includes system operations, financial analyses, and long-
term funding strategies for municipal agencies. He also has an extensive background in
system valuations of capital facilities and systems, facility acquisitions, and municipal
versus private operations.
Ai V 13 % O I ty City of Santa Ana
I RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 32
25A-48
Project Financing/Bond Feasibility Studies: His financing/bond feasibility study
experience includes successfully preparing bond feasibility reports resulting in the issuance
of more than $500 million in revenue bonds to finance the acquisition or construction of
municipal facilities.
SAMPLE OF RELEVANT PROJECTS
City of Redding, CA— Water, Sewer, and Solid Waste Rate and Impact Fee Study. NBS
completed an extensive and highly visible cost -of -service study of water, sewer, and solid waste
rates and system capacity charges in 2013 that addressed City policies and overall objectives in
developing rate structure alternatives. A key part of this study was working with a City Council -
appointed Citizens Advisory Group that reviewed rate alternatives and provided recommendations
to the Council. Key tasks included preparing financiallrate setting policies, financial plans,
projecting net revenue requirements, cost -of- service analyses, and alternative rate designs. NBS
updated this study in 2016. Client project manager: Brian Crane, Public Works Director. Phone:
530.245.7155 bcrane@chredding.ca.us.
City of Pasadena, Expert Witness Testimony— related to litigation against the City of Pasadena
by its outside water customers that has been ongoing for several years, NBS has prepared an
analysis of outside surcharges for the purpose of defending the City's against this challenge.
EI Dorado Irrigation District, Placerville, CA —Water, Sewer, and Recycled Water Cost -of -
Service and Rate Design Study. Greg Clumpner conducted an extensive and high -visibility cost -
of -service study of water, sewer, and recycled water rates, including working with a 10 -person
cost -of -service study committee and regular updates with the district board. Key tasks include
reviewing existing and recommending changes to financlallrate setting policies, alternative rate
design methodologies, and recommended water, sewer, and recycled water rates. Client project
manager: Jim Abercrombie, EID General Manager. Phone: 530-642-4055.
jmabercromble@ejd.org
Valley of the Moon Water District, Sonoma, CA — Water Rate Study. This comprehensive rate
study evaluated the District's rate structure along with zonal elevation charges. Water
consumption data and billing records provided the basis for developing rate and cost allocation
alternatives, with the intent of improving revenue stability. Client contact: Dan Muelrath, General
Manager. Phone: 916.725.6873.
Desert Water Agency, Palm Springs, CA— Water Rate Analysis to Address Tribal/Non-Tribal
Rates. In 2012, when the District was preparing for a new budget cycle, NBS reviewed the
District's internal update to the utility rate model, to ensure that the rate model was generating
accurate outcomes and that the Water utility was on track to implement the planned rate increases
for the next 2 years. In 2013, NBS started a specialized rate study to determine water rates for
Tribal and Non -Tribal lands under a new Federal law restricting local agency charges to Tribal
lands and residents. Client contact: Martin Krieger, Finance Director. Phone: 760.323.4971.
martin@dwa.org
Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA) — Ocean Outfall Capacity
Lease. NBS prepared financial alternatives for leasing MRWPCA's ocean outfall to Cal -Water for
the disposal of brine.
(Confidential Client), CA— Ground Water Storage Valuation Analysis. To assist in their litigation
case, NBS is consulting with this District to help resolve an ongoing dispute related to the value of
groundwater storage.
,; NBS City of Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 33
25A-49
FLIM BOEHLER
Project Manager
RESUME HIGHLIGHTS
• 10 years of experience
Over g0 cities, counties, and special districts served
" Specialist in financial, rate and cost analysis for municipal
water and sewer utilities
• American Water Works Association (AWWA), Member
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Science, Business Administration and
concentration in Finance, California State University, San
Bernardino
SPEAKING. ENGAGEMENTS
• How Conservation, the Drought and Legal Issues Are
Changing the Landscape for Rate Setting in California,"
American Water Works Association Water Education
Seminar, August 2016
• "Conservation, the Drought and Social Justice," California
Water Environment Association Annual Conference, April
2016
BS
N
hvk4lp`amnn,Npea
luntlbiny,ow
1n my sixteen years as a
Finance Officer, I have
workedon numerous rate
studies. We found that
working with Kim Boehler
and her team at NBS to be a
great experience. They
Provide tremendous
knowledge and experience in
helping you develop water
rates and fees that are in line
with your objective. 1 would
recommend NBS to any
other agency."
ROWLAND WATER
DISTRICT
SEAN HENRY
FINANCE OFFICER
I lm Boehler was the project
manager on a water and recycled
ureter rate and capacity fee study
for the Dlstrict.J
• "Brown Lawns and the Changing Landscape of California Water Rates: Next Steps?"
AWWA CA -NV Section Spring Conference, March 2016
• "Water and Sewer Rates: from Defensibility to Tailor Made Rate Design," CSDA Annual
Conference, September 2015
• "Basic Rate Making Principles and Key Issues Affecting Rates in California," American
Water Works Association Water Education Seminar, August 2015
• 'Recycled Water Pricing Methodologies", CWEA, May 2014 (co -presented with Greg
Clumpner)
• "Drought Impacts and Recycled Water Pricing" and "Water and Sewer Rate Studies and
Key Issues Affecting Rates in California," American Water Works Association Water
Education Seminar, August 2014
• "Water and Sewer Rate Studies and Key Issues Affecting Rates in California," American
Water Works Association Water Education Seminar, August 2013
• "Financial Viability and the "New Normal' - The Unique Challenges of California Sewer
Agencies" and "Maintaining Financial Viability in the Face of the "Perfect Storm" — Meeting
the Challenges in California Today," CWF,, April 2012
BIOGRAPHY
Kim Boehler is a project manager who brings over 10 years of experience at NBS, .in all three of
our major consulting practice areas. She has a comprehensive understanding of agency funding
needs through her work in special financing district administration, overhead cost allocation
analysis, user fee studies and utility financial management. For the past eight years, her work has
focused exclusively on financial planning, cost -of -service analyses and rate design for water and
wastewater utilities in California. Kim Boehler leads project teams on water and wastewater rate
and capacity fee studies for our public agency clients. She has completed over 100 utility rate and
(x�� Gty of Santa Ana
� 7, NBS
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 34
25A-50
fee studies, and often speaks at public workshops, industry conferences and educational seminars
on related Issues.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
• Arvin Community Services District, Water Rate Study
• City of Arvin, Sewer Rate Study
• Avila Beach Community Services District, Water and Sewer Rate and Connection Fee
Study
• Azusa Light and Water, Water Rate Study
• Bellflower Mutual Water Company, Water Rate Study
• Calaveras County Water District, Water and Sewer Rate Study
• Citrus Heights Water District, Water Rate Study
• City of Colton Water Rate and Connection Fee Study
. City of Colton and Grand Terrace Sewer Rate Study
Cucamonga Valley Water District, Water and Recycled Water Connection Fee Study
Cucamonga Valley Water District, Water Rate Study
Culver City, Sewer Rate Study
Desert Water Agency, Water, Sewer and Recycled Water Rate Study
Desert Water Agency, Water Rate Analysis to Address Tribal/Non-Tribal Rates
Dixon-Solano Water Authority, Water Rate Study
East Valley Water District, Water and Sewer Financial Plans
City of Fort Bragg, Water, Sewer and Storm Drain Rate Study
City of Greenfield, Water and Sewer Utility Revenue Requirement Analysis
Hidden Valley Lakes Community Services District, Water and Sewer Rate Study
City of Livermore, Water Rate and Connection Fee Study
City of Los Altos, Storm Drain Master Plan Financing Analysis
City of Morgan Hill, Water and Sewer Rate Study
City of Pasadena, Water Rate Study
City of Redding, Water, Sewer and Solid Waste Rate Study and Connection Fee Analysis
Rural North Vacaville Water District, Water Rate Study
City of San Carlos, Sewer Revenue Requirement Analysis
City of Santa Paula, Water and Sewer Rate Study
San Mateo County, Sewer Rate Study
City of Sausalito, Sewer Rate Study City of Solvang, Water and Sewer Rate and
Connection Fee Study
City of Seal Beach, Water and Sewer Rate Study
City of Stanton, Sewer Rate Study
Suisun-Solano Water Authority, Water Rate Study
Sussex County, Delaware, Water and Sewer Rate and Capacity Fee Study and Oversizing
Credit Analysis
• City of Taft, Sewer and Solid Waste Rate Study
• City of Thousand Oaks, Water and Sewer Rate Study
• Twenty-nine Palms Water District, Water Rate Study
• City of Vallejo, Water Rate and Connection Fee Study
• Victorville Water District, Water Rate Study
• City of Waterford, Water and Sewer Rate and Connection Fee Study
• West County Sewer District, Sewer Rate and Connection Fee Study
ONBS CRP of Santa Ana
'910 RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 35
25A-51
PABLO PEREZ
RESUME HIGHLIGHTS
• Special Financing City Expert
• Proposition 218 Expert
• Experienced Assessment Engineer
`• Over 25 years of experience
EDUCATION
MZ
Master of Arts, Political Science with a concentration in Public Policy, American Public
University
Bachelor of Arts, Liberal Studies, California Baptist University
PROFESSIONAL, AFFILIATIONS
California Society'of Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO)
California Special Districts Association (CSDA)
California Municipal Treasurer's Association (CMTA)
SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
Pablo has participated in speaking panels for the CSMFO, CMTA, as well as the NBS educational
seminars, speaking on topics related to the formation and administration of Special Financing
Districts as well as Proposition 218 and 26
BIOGRAPHY
Pablo Perez is a Director with NBS where he and his staff form and administer various types of
Special Financing Districts (SFD). He has over 20 years of experience, and is actively involved
with City formations and bond issuancefrefunding analysis as well as daily management of City
administration operations. He also performs feasibility studies and related financial projects.
SFD projects: Pablo has significant experience with many types of SFDs including:
Community Facilities Districts (CFDs), 1972 Act Maintenance Districts, Standby and other
Fees and Charges, 1915 and 1911 Act Assessment Districts, Business Improvement
Districts (BIDs), Benefit Assessment Districts (BADS) and Public Safety Districts including
Fire Assessments and Taxes. His involvement includes analysis of City finances as well as
oversight of tasks such as audits of assessment liens, delinquency management activities,
apportionment of liens, and City workouts.
Financial Projects: Pablo has managed numerous projects relating to assessment and
special tax Districts, including apportionments of 1915 Act liens, tax roll billing services,
continuing disclosure reports, arbitrage rebate calculations, human resources consulting,
fund analysis and recommendations, bond tenders, conversion of bonds, delinquency
management, and special project consulting.
• Proposition 218: Pablo provides Proposition 218 consulting services related to the
establishment or increase of fees, charges and assessments. He is an acknowledged
seasoned professional in Proposition 218 compliance programs.
• County Data Procurement: Pablo is on a "first name basis" with many of the County
assessor and auditor's staff in the State.
ONS®ate- City of Santa Ana
P RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 36
25A-52
NICOLE KISSAM
Project Director, CAP & Fee
RESUME HIGHLIGHTS
Over 15 years of experience in public sector consulting,
city government, marketing and public relations
Expertise in financial and management consulting
Specialized in cost allocation plan, user fee and rate studies
for California agencies
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Science, Business Administration, California Polytechnic
State University, San Luis Obispo
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
• Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA)
. American Public Works Association (APWA)
• California Society of Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO)
SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
M1
`T really appreciate all of
the extra timeyou spent
educating me (and
my staff) on the basis for
the rates. It was extremely
valuable and gives me the
detail / need to explain and
justify any Increases.
Thanks again for
everything. It was a
pleasure working with
yowl"
CHAD DAVISSON
WASTEWATER MANAGER
CHY OF RICHMOND
[Nicole I(Issam served as the Project
Manager on various financial analyses
for the Cny.1
Revenue Remedies, Pre -Conference Workshop, CSMFO 2013
Verdict on User Fees, Panel on User Fees, CSMFO 2013
Strategies for Managing Your Building Department's Budget, CBOAC, 2011
BIOGRAPHY
Nicole Kissam is Director of Financial Consulting for NBS. She has over 15 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 plans, and user fee and rate studies for California agencies.
She also spent several years performing management audits to improve the operational efficiency
of various municipal services, including wastewater, community development, public works,
recreation and human resources. She has supported, developed, and directed financial services
consulting practices for three private consulting firms offering similar services to those proposed to
be completed by NBS in this document.
Ms. Kissam 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.
C) N BS City of Santa Ana P P g P
RFP No. 17-081 Com rehensive Pro osition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 37
25A-53
RECENT NBS PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Within the last three (3) years as Director of NBS' Financial Consulting practice, Nicole Kissam
has managed and completed the following relevant projects to the Scope of Services proposed in
this document:
• Association of Bay Area Governments
(ABAG), Indirect Cost Allocation Plan
Review
• Chula Vista, Cost Allocation Plan
Review and User Fee Study Analysis
• Clear Lake, Cost Allocation Plan
• Contra Costa County, User and
Regulatory Analysis Review
• Dixon, Cost Allocation Plan
• East Palo Alto, Cost Allocation Plan and
Comprehensive Fee and Rate Study
• Eastvale, Development Impact Fee
Study
• Fresno, Fire Prevention User Fee
Analysis
• Indio, Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee
Study
• Los Angeles,.Expedited Review Fees for
the Department of City Planning
• Napa, Cost Allocation Plan and User
Fee Study
• Petaluma, Cost Allocation Plan and
Internal Service Fund Rate Review
Portola Valley, Community Development
User Fee Analysis
• Richmond, User Fee Analysis for
Engineering, Code Enforcement and
Medical Marijuana.
• San Luis Obispo, Building Department
User Fee Analysis
• San Carlos, Citywide User Fee Study,
Police False Alarm Analysis, Sewer
Financial Pian and Rate Update
Recommendations
• Sausalito, User Fee Study (in progress)
• Taft, Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee
Study
• Turlock, Building Fee Study
• Sacramento Public Library Authority,
Cost Allocation Plan
• Santa Clara County Environmental
Health Department, User Fee and Fund
Balance Analysis
HISTORICAL PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Ms. Kissam was the project manager and lead analyst for the following engagements as Vice
President for the Matrix Consulting Group:
• Arcata, Building Fee Analysis
• Atwater, Building Fee Analysis
Centre City Development Corporation
(San Diego), Planning Fee Analysis
Elk Grove, Overhead Cost Allocation
Plan
• Fresno, Development Services Fee
Analysis
• Manteca, User Fee Analysis
• Marin County Community Development
Agency, Fee Analysis
• Maui County, Planning Department Fee
Analysis
• Petaluma, Citywide Cost Allocation Plan
and User Fee Analysis
• Richmond, Citywide Cost Allocation Plan
and User Fee Analysis for Planning and
Building
• City/County of San Francisco, Dept of.
Building Inspection Fee Analysis
• San Jose, Land Development/
Engineering Fee Analysis
• Sunnyvale, Development Services Fee
Analysis
• Temecula, Citywide User Fee Analysis
%, )f 1moi- City of Santa Ana
ys� 1 �l B RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
25A-54
38
GRETA DAVIS DRIBS
Project Manager, CAP & Fee Group
RESUME HIGHLIGHTS
° Seasoned Professional in Cost Allocation Plans, Cost of Service/User Fee Analysis,
Building Nexus Fee Studies and Fire GEMT Federal Claiming
° Solid track record of implemented results in assisting public entities recover additional
revenue to fund programs and services
• Over 25 years of experience
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Arts in Social Science; Emphasis in Finance, University of California, Irvine, 1990
Risk Management Certificate, University of California, Riverside, 1992
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
CSMFO — California Society of Municipal Finance Officers
MMASC —Municipal Management Association of Southern California
SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
- League of CA Cities — Annual Conference break out session, "Fire Department EMS Cost
Recovery", September 2013
NBS Workshop — Extreme Revenue (And Cost) Makeover - over 30 local jurisdictions
represented, May 2012
League of CA Cities - Financial Management Seminar, "Setting User Fees in the Current
Legal Environment", December 2007
BIOGRAPHY
Greta Davis offers over 25 years of experience in all facets of government financial, organizational
and operational consulting for local government clients. A dedicated professional and industry
professional with a solid track record of implemented results in assisting public entities recover
additional revenue to fund programs and services. Recent projects include working with local
agencies to become financially stable by re -aligning fees and increase service delivery of reduced
or eliminated programs and community services. Ms. Davis continues efforts in evaluation of cost
of service delivery of services and programs and establishment of realistic fee recovery policies to
assist local governments with the organizational strategic and business goals and objectives.
Ms. Davis has over 25 years of experience in local government services. Her range of experience
includes the following:
• Project Management; Training and Quality Assurance
• Indirect Cost Rate Studies/Federal OMB A-87 Indirect Cost Allocation Plans
• Cost of Service/User Fee Studies/Activity Based Cost Studies
• Federal/State Jail Rates
° Federal IV -D Indirect Cost Reimbursement Agreements
• Revenue Maximization, Process Re-engineering and Process Improvement
• Budget Analysis and Program Management, Consultation and Advice
• Government audit liaison on audits of indirect cost rates and cost eligibility
ACityN BS' UP of Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 39
25A-55
RECENT NBS PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Within the last three (3) years as a Project Manager and Lead Consultant with NBS' Financial
Consulting practice, Ms. Davis has managed and completed the following relevant projects to the
scope of services proposed in this document:
• City of Alameda, User Fee Study
• City of Bell, Cost Allocation Plan
City of Belmont, Indirect Cost Allocation
Plan and ICRP
• City of Camarillo, User Fee Study
• City of Concord, Cost Allocation Plan
and User Fee Study (in progress)
• City of Chula Vista, Cost Allocation
Plan Review and User Fee Study
Analysis
• City of Dixon, Cost Allocation Plan.
• City of Escondido, OMB A-87 Cost
Allocation Plan and Federal GEMT
Cost Reporting
City of Fountain Valley, CostAllocation
Plan and User Fee Study (in progress).
• City of Huntington Beach, Cost
Allocation Plan and User Fee Study (in
progress)
City of Lincoln, Cost Allocation Plan
and User Fee Study (in progress)
• City of Napa, Cost Allocation Plan and
991 Indirect Cost Allocation Plan
• City of National City, Full and OMB
Cost Allocation Plan
HISTORICAL PROJECT EXPERIENCE
• City of Moreno Valley, Full and OMB
Cost Allocation Plan and ICR Proposal
• City of Palmdale, Cost Allocation Plan
and Fully Burdened Hourly Rates
• City of Riverside, Cost Allocation Plan
City of Seaside, User Fee Study
• City of Santa Cruz, Cost Allocation
Plan and User Fee Study
• City of San Juan Capistrano, Cost
Allocation Plan and User Fee Study
• City of South San Francisco, OMB A-
87 Cost Allocation Plan and Federal
GEMT Cost Reporting
• Sacramento Public Library Authority,
OMB A-87 Cost Allocation Plan
• Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District,
Full and OMB Cost Allocation Plan
and Fully Burdened Hourly Rates
• San Francisco Municipal
Transportation Agency, OMB A-87
Cost Allocation Plan and Rates
Over the fife of her career, Ms. Davis provided Cost Allocation services to the following agencies:
Lancaster, Vallejo, Vista, Encinitas, Oceanside, Malibu, Dana Point, Huntington Beach, Mission
Viejo, Hawthorne, Rancho Palos Verdes, Rancho Cucamonga, Grover Beach, Orange, Lynwood,
Irvine, Maywood, Calexico, National City, Santee, Covina, Moreno Valley, Rancho Santa
Margarita, Turlock, Tulare, Lathrop, Imperial Beach, Solana Beach, Victorville, Yucaipa, San
Bernardino, Seal Beach, Los Altos Hills, Willits, Fresno, Pasadena, Bay Area Air Quality District
(SAAQ), Watershed Conservation Authority (WCA), Imperial County, Butte County, Orange
County, Solana Irrigation District, Olvenhain Municipal Water District, Los Angeles Metropolitan
Transit District (METRO), Greater Cleveland RTA.
t�1 �� City of Santa Ana
E",}9 RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
25A-56
40
ADINA MCCAROO idBS
Consultant
RESUME HIGHLIGHTS
• Experienced special tax consultant
• Seasoned professional and project manager for district administration
Nearly two decades of experience actively managing ongoing administration and annual
levy calculations
EDUCATION
• Master of Public Administration (MPA), Public Sector Management and Leadership,
California State University Northridge
• Bachelor of Science, Accounting, DeVry University
BIOGRAPHY
Adina McCargo is a senior consultant with NBS where she forms and administers special financing
districts including Property -Based Business Improvement Districts, Landscape Maintenance
Districts, 1913/1915 Act Assessment Districts, and Community Facilities Districts. Adina is actively
involved with district formations and bond issuance/refunding analysis, as well as daily
management of district administration. operations. She also performs feasibility studies and related
financial projects. She has worked directly with more than 75 agencies administering 300 districts.
• District Formation: Adina has formed Special Financing Districts including, Community
Facilities Districts (CFDs), Benefit Assessment Districts (BADs), Business Improvement
Districts (BIDS) and 1972 Act Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Districts
• Speaking Engagements: Beyond serving for seven years on the Annual Conference
Planning Committee for CSMFO, Adina has been a featured speaker at several CSMFO
chapter luncheons.
• Proposition 218: Adina also provides Proposition 218 consulting services related to the
establishment or increase of fees, charges; and assessments.
• District Administration: In addition to her nearly two decades of district administration
expertise, Adina has trained numerous staff members and has provided consulting services
related to curing troubled districts (some of which have involved judicial foreclosure),
refinancing, and property -owner bond tender programs.
• Financial Projects: Adina performs revenue audits, special fund analysis, parcel audits, tax
roll billing services, district closeouts,, analyses for bond issuance, and has led the formation
of various Special Financing Districts.
• Continuing Disclosure: While Adina has prepared and disseminated Municipal Disclosure
Reports for numerous California agencies, she is currently involved with the preparation and
approval of disclosure reports for 1915 Act, community facilities districts, tax allocations, and
general obligation bonds.
Special District Refunding: Adina has participated in several refundings of CFD and
1913/1915 Act districts and has prepared the analyses and reports as the Special
Tax/Assessment consultant on these projects.
�NBSCity
RFP of Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 41
25A-57
GREG HENRY ���
Utility Rate Consultant „•,«,�,«,�„,�•••
RESUME HIGHLIGHTS
6 years of experience and knowledge of financial and
[Greg) was not only
knowledgeable and agreeable
economic analysis
to listen, but he was also able to
• 3 years of hands-on work experience in a local agency
expOver
terms, the publicthe report inydida of
setting, within water and sewer enterprise and general funds
understand a concept ora
• Extensive experience with analysis software, databases and
particular explanation.... By the
spreadsheet programs
close of.the meeting, everyone
was in agreement that a rate
EDUCATION
adjustment was necessary for
the financial well-being of the
• Master of Science, Mathematics, University of Houston,
Distnct. The party of opposition
2004
became the assembly of
• Bachelor of Arts, Mathematics, Mississippi State University,
support."
2002
CABAZON WATER DISTRICT
BIOGRAPHY
Elizabeth Lemus, Administration
Manager
As a Rate'Consultant at NBS in our Utility Rate Practice, Mr. Henry [Greg served as the primary
has extensive experience with financial and statistical analyses and consultant In completing a Water
modeling -,His technical skills are essential to the work we perform. mad Study
District,
to the
This includes long term financial forecasting, net present value Board at Directors during the study]
modeling for capital projects and budget analysis. He is an expert in
manipulating utility billing software to extract and prepare data for utility rate studies. He is utilized
in particular for analyzing and manipulating large and complex data sets extracted from client
information systems, operating and capital budgets.
In addition to his technical skills, Mr. Henry's background as math professor honed his ability to
dissect and present complex information. Mr. Henry has been an asset to the project team on
similar studies, where he has been able to present complex technical information in an easy to
understand format for elected officials and the general public.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Arvin Community Services District, Water Rate Study
City of Azusa Light and Water Department, Water Rate Study
• Cabazon Water District, Water Rate Study
• City of Colton, Water Rate and Connection Fee Study
« City of Colton and Grand Terrace, Sewer Connection Fee Study
City of Davis Sewer, Rate Study
Montecito Water District, Water Rate Study
• City of Morgan Hill, Water and Sewer Rate Study
• Mountain House Community Services District, Water and Sewer Rate Study
• Napa Sanitation District, Sewer Rate Study
• City of Pasadena, Water Rate Study
• Rowland Water District, Water Rate Study
• Victorville Water District, Water Rate Study
§r ]�,� City of Santa Ana
— A `� B RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment
25A-58
42
CRAIG BREWERNB
Utility Rate Analyst eC" "�"
Iuntl bmurtew
RESUME HIGHLIGHTS
. Two years of municipal finance consulting experience.
. Extensive experience in large-scale data analysis, database management, and financial
analysis.
EDUCATION
. Bachelor of Science in Applied Mathematics, University of California, San Diego
BIOGRAPHY
Craig Brewer is an Analyst at NBS in our Utility Rate Practice. He offers two years of experience in
financial analyses, special financing district administration, tax roll submittal and performing
various parcel and financial audits for public agency clients.
Mr. Brewer provides support to project teams completing water and sewer utility rate studies, for
cities and special districts in California. Mr. Brewer performs various financial analyses, data
management, and utility customer data analysis for utility rate and capacity fee studies. Mr.
Brewer's technical expertise is essential to the work performed by NBS.
RELEVANT CONSULTING EXPERIENCE
Fiscal Consultant Reporting for Redevelopment Agencies to support repayment of bonds;
Includes analysis of Tax Rate Areas (TRAs), land use class make-up, top ten taxpayers,
historical assessed valuation, historical appraisal changes and projection tax increment
tables.
• Tax Rate Area and Boundary Audits using ArcGIS and secured property tax roll data
• Successor Agency Recognized Obligation Payments Schedule (ROPS) Audits
Prepared annual tax roll submittals for various Community Facilities Districts and
Assessment Districts following the Rate and Method of Apportionment
NBS City of Santa Ana
`7 RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 43
25A-59
KEVIN GARDNER, ARIELLE PLOURDE ��
Financial Analysts, CAP & Fee Group „•,•�a�a,n•,�•,�e,
RESUME HIGHLIGHTS
Experienced Financial Analyst supporting cost allocation, user and regulatory fee studies.
• Working knowledge of public finance and governmental accounting practices and policies.
• Extensive experience working with analytical software, databases, and spreadsheets.
EDUCATION
Gardner - Bachelor of Science in Business Administration, Finance Concentration,
University of California, Riverside
Plourde - Bachelor of Arts in Economics, with a Concentration in Finance,
City College of New York, New York
PROJECT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILTIES
NBS Financial Analysts provide support for data gathering, analysis, modeling and project tracking
on User Fee Studies.
RECENT RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
All NBS Analysts have between one and three years of project specific experience. Kevin Gardner
and Arielle Plourde participated in the role of Financial Analyst for the following NBS engagements
relevant to the proposed Scope of Work:
• Benicia, Citywide User Fee Study
• Brea, Citywide User Fee Study
• County of Contra Costa, Countywide User Fee Study
• County of Santa Clara, Department of Environmental Health User Fee Study
• Escondido, GEMT Cost Report
• Fairfield, Fire Department User Fee Study
• Half Moon Bay, Cost Allocation Plan and Citywide User Fee Study
• Huntington Beach, GEMT Cost Report
• Indio, Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study
• Los Angeles, Department of City Planning User Fee Study
• Morgan Hill, Planning Department User Fee Study
• Riverside, Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study
• Sacramento, Code Compliance Fees and Penalties Study
• San Francisco, GEMT Cost Report
• San Jose, Citywide User Fee Study
• San Juan Capistrano, Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study
• San Luis Obispo, Citywide User Fee Study
• San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District, Fire Department User Fee Study
• Santa Clara, Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study
• Santa Cruz, Citywide User Fee Study
�!� N "MS City of Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment qq
25A-60
APPENDIX B: ATTACHMENT 3-1 NON -COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT
Please note:
This Non -Collusion Affidavit noting a date of August 15, 2017 that was previously submitted within
initial proposal in August 2017 is still in effect as of this revised submission date of September 15,
2017.
City of Santa Ana
Q)NBSRFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 45
25A-61
APPENDIX
ATTACHMENT 3-1: NON -COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT
CITY OF SANTA ANA
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
COMPREHENSIVE PROPOSITION 218 FEES AND CHARGES COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
RFP NO.: 17-081
NON -COLLUSION AFFIDAVTT
(Title 23 United States Code Section 112 and
Public Contract Code Section 7106)
To the CITY OF SANTA ANA
In accordance with Title 23 United States Code Section 112 and Public Contract Code 7106 the BIDDER declares that the bid
is not made in the interest of, or on behalf of, any undisclosed person, partnership, company, association, organization, or
corporation; that the bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that the BIDDER has not directly or indirectly induced or
solicited any other BIDDER to put in a false or sham bid, and has not directly or indirectly colluded, conspired, connived or
agreed with any BIDDER or anyone else to put in a sham bid, or that anyone shall refrain from bidding; that the BIDDER has
not in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement, communication, or conference with anyone to fix the bid price
of the BIDDER or any BIDDER, or to fix any overhead, profit, or cost element of the bid price, or of that of any other
BIDDER, or to secure any advantage against the public body awarding the contract of anyone interested in the proposed
contract; that all statements contained in the bid are true; and, further, that the BIDDER has not, directly or indirectly,
submitted his or her bid price or any breakdown thereof, or the contents thereof, or divulged information or data relative
thereto, or paid, and will not pay, any fee to any corporation, partnership, company association, organization, bid depository,
or to any member or agent thereof to effectuate a collusive or sham bid.
Note: The above Non -collusion Affidavit is part of the Proposal. Signing this Proposal on the signature portion
thereof shall al o constitute signature of this Non -collusion Affidavit. BIDDERS are cautioned that making a false
cettificatior) ay. subject the certifier to criminal prosecution.
Signed
State of California
County of giverslde
Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this _-day of . 20_, by
proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me.
Please see attached completed page
as required by Notary
Notary Public Signature Notary Public Seal
City of Santa Ai a RFP 17-Ot31
Page 23
25A-62
CALIFORNIA JURAT WITH AFFIANT STATEMENT GOVERNMENT CODE § 8202
hSee Attached Document (Notary to cross out lines 1-6 below)
❑ See Statement Below (Lines 1-6 to be completed only by document signer(s], not Notary)
Signature of Document Signer No. 1 Signature of Document Signer No. 2 pfany)
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the Identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate Is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California
County of
BARINA CAMERON
Commleeion a 2088168
Notary Public • Caiffamla
Riverside County
Comm. 6x Ires00130.2018
Seal
Place Notary Seal Above
Subscribed and swom to (or affirmed) before me
on this GJ. day of 20j-7,
by Date IMonth Year
(?) Dovi d. c--E&gh,
(and
Names) of Signer(s)
proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence
to be the person(s) who appeared before me.
Signature��
Signature of Notary Public
OPTIONAL
Though this section Is optional, completing this information can deter alteration of the document or
fraudulent reattachment of this form to an unintended document.
Description of Attached Document n I �"
Title or Type of Documenbo 0-C0jLUS)-M iii t Gaff i T Document Dater IS.� Z� M
Number of Pages: —[ Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: —�
02014 National Notary Association - www.NationalNotary.org - 1 -800 -US NOTARY (1-800.876-6827) Item #5910
25A-63
APPENDIX C: ATTACHMENT 3-2 NON -LOBBYING CERTIFICATION
Please note:
This Non -Lobbying Certification noting a date of August 18, 2017 that was previously submitted
within initial proposal in August 2017 is still in effect as of this revised submission date of
September 15, 2017.
4,a>�NBS City of Santa Ana
RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment qg
25A-64
APPENDIX
ATTACHMENT 3-2: NON -LOBBYING CERTIFICATION
CERTIFICATIONS
CITY OF SANTA ANA
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
COMPREHENSIVE PROPOSITION 218 FEES AND CHARGES COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
COMPLIANCE ASSESSVIENT
RFP NO.: 17-081
The prospective participant certifies, by signing and submitting this bid or proposal, to the best of his or her knowledge and
belief, that:
No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any
person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any federal agency, a Member of
Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with
the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of any federal loan, the
entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or
modification of any federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
2. If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for
influencing or attempting to influence any officer or employee of any federal agency, a Member of Congress,
an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this federal
contract, grant loan, loan or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit a "Disclosure
of Lobbying Activities".
This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or
entered into. Submission of this certification is.a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section
1352, Title 31, U. S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less
than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.
The prospective participant also agrees by submitting his or her bid or proposal that he or she shall require that the language of
this certification be included in all lower tier subcontracts, which exceed $100,000 and that all such sub recipients shall certify
and disclose accordingly.
Signed and Printed Name:
NBS Government Finance
Vice President
Date August 18, 2017
David Ketcham
THIS FORM MUST RE COMPLETED AND INCLUDED WITH THE PROPOSAL.
PROPOSALS THAT DO NOT CONTAIN THIS FORM WILL BE CONSIDERED NONRESPONSIVE.
City of Santa Ana RFP 17.081
Page 24
25A-65
APPENDIX D: ATTACHMENT 3-3 NON-DISCRIMINATION CERTIFICATION
Please note:
This Non -Discrimination Certification noting a date of August 18, 2017 that was previously
submitted within Initial proposal in August 2017 is still in effect as of this revised submission date of
September 15, 2017.
D N BS• City of Santa Ana
17 RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and Charges Compliance Assessment 50
25A-66
APPENDIX
ATTACHMENT 3-3: NON-DISCRIMINATION CERTIFICATION
CERTIFICATIONS
CITY OF SANTA ANA
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
COMPREHENSIVE PROPOSITION 218 FEES AND CHARGES COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
RFP NO.: 17-081
The undersigned consultant or corporate officer, during the performance of this contract, certifies as follows:
1. The Consultant shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race,
color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Consultant shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants
are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without, regard to their race, color,
religion, sex, or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination;
rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The
Consultant agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment,
notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause.
2. The Consultant shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the
Consultant, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to
race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
3. The Consultant shall send to each labor union or representative of workers with which he/she has a
collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice to be provided advising the said
labor union or workers' representatives of the Consultant's commitments under this section, and shall post
copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment.
4. The Consultant shall comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and of
the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor.
5. The Consultant shall furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order 11246 of September
24, 1965, and by rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit
access to his/her books, records, and accounts by the administering agency and the Secretary of Labor for
purposes of investigation, to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders.
6. In the event of the Consultant's non-compliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or with
any of the said rules, regulations, or orders, the contract may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole
or in part and the Consultant may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts or federally
assisted construction contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Execution Order 11246 of
September 24, 1965, and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in
Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, or by rule, regulations, or order of the Secretary of Labor, or
as otherwise provided by law.
7. The Consultant shall include the portion of the sentence immediately preceding paragraph (1) and the
provisions of paragraphs (1) through (7) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules,
City of Santa Ana RFP 17-081
Page 25
25A-67
regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of
September 24, 1965, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontract or purchase order as the
administering agency may direct as means of enforcing such provisions, including sanctions for
noncompliance; provided, however, that in the event the Consultant becomes involved in, or is threatened
with, litigation with a subconsultant or vendor as a result of such direction by the administering agency, the
Consultant may request that the United States enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United
States.
8. Pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1735,
A contractor shall not discriminate in the employment of persons upon public works on any basis listed in
subdivision (a) of Section 12940 of the Government Code, as those bases are defined in Sections 12926 and
12926.1 of the Government Code, except as otherwise provided in Section 12940 of the Government Code.
Every contractor for public works who violates this section is subject to all the penalties imposed for a
violation of this chapter.
Signed:
Title: Vice President
Firm: NBS Government Finance Group, DBA: NBS
Date: August 18, 2017
THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED AND INCLUDED WITH THE PROPOSAL.
PROPOSALS THAT DO NOT CONTAIN THIS FORM WILL BE CONSIDERED NONRESPONSIVE
City of Santa Ana RFP 17-081
Page 26
25A-68
COMPENSATION
25A-69
u� xit-r
M _
n° ° c. �'iy l•Ytu r �
• Fl J t 11 6
i_
a
t
CITY -OF -SANTA ANA
p,. Fee Proposal:
Comprehensive Proposition 218
Fees and Charges Compliance
Assessment RFP -No. 17-681 a "
September 15;'2017
}.,fy4- aw m I rV�f d,F3-..4. E Cry=
.,"wPJ PRISON
t r -fix..:+ ° `SF"Lt3 a U S
P A IM4
In
32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Toll free: 800.676.7516 (P) 951.296.1997
w .nbsgov.00m
September 15, 2017
Robert Cortez
Deputy City Manager, Project Manager
City of Santa Ana
City Managers Office
20 Civic Center Plaza, 8th Floor Reception
Santa Ana, CA 92701
RE: Fee Proposal — RFP No. 17-081 Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and
Charges Compliance Assessment
Dear Mr. Cortez,
Thank you for considering our proposal for the City's Comprehensive Proposition 218 Fees and
Charges Compliance Assessment. The table on the next page summarizes our fee proposal for
this study.
Please do not hesitate to contact me, at either 951.233.7050 (cell), 800.676.7516 (office) or at
kboehler@nbsgov.com if you have any questions about our proposal.
Sincerely,
&)V-1 b JW
Kim Boehler
Associate Director
David Ketcham
Vice President
25A-71
FEE PROPOSAL
Our detailed project budget is shown on the following pages. Our professional fees are based on
our understanding of the District's needs and the effort we believe is necessary to complete the
scope of services described in our proposal. We express this honestly and transparently through
our price proposal. Work will be performed on a time and materials basis, at the hourly labor rates
show in the budget table belowwith a not to exceed fee of either $92,560 or $111,970 (depending
on the approach chosen for the Federal Clean Water Protection evaluation). Two approaches are
described in our scope of work for the Federal Clean Water Protection evaluation, and the City
should choose the one that best meets its needs and objectives.
Additional services requested, such as additional meetings or additional iterations of the
analysis, can be provided based on the hourly labor rates shown in the following tables. All tasks
would be mutually agreed upon by NBS and the City prior to proceeding.
The following pages are intentionally formatted differently to Improve legibility.
City of Santa Ana
N®S R P 17-081 Fee Proposal
25A-72
Consultant Labor [Yours) Grand Totals
Comprehensive Proposition 218
Fees and Charges Compliance Assessmirt
1. Klek-off Meeting & Data Collection
18.0
18.0
- 2,0
38.0
$8,290
2. Assessment of Enterprise Fund Rates, Fees & Charges
-
2.1 - Evaluation of Enterprise Fund Rates
2.1A -Water
12.0
22.0
4.0
38.0
$7,980
2.1.0 -Sari Sewer
10.0
20.0
4.0 -
34.0
$7,090
2.1.0_Refuse Collection T-
20.0
10.0
_4.0
_ 34.0
$7_540
_ _
2A.5- Federal Clean Water Pmtectlon
Approach #1'40
12.0
22.0
- -
34.0
$7,3
roach #2'
380
400
240
1400
$26750
-9r'dsk2..'1'titotalfWAPPt.E1Cff#lfoi%�'eilerJt;le3PlkYa(e�')
_380
Talk $.1; SUh10I21 {p/,'rTPPNach #21orPedAlet6lean,"N(el r r ,.. �. UP
2d '
M—� City of Santa Ana
% I N B RFP 17-031 Fee Propo531
25A-73
Comprehensive Proposition 218
Fees and ChargmCompliance Assessrnent, continue
o
2.2-Evaivationor Direct/Indirect/Cross Charges ,
e jA .fig
8
2.2A -Conduct an Orientation --g—with City Staff
8.0
6.0
2,2.B- Understand Existing Conditions
10,0
12.0
$2,670
2.2.C-DocumeM Flndin sand Recommendations
12.0
2.2.D -Su ortand Rewew of Mal ical Modifications
4.01
12.0
4 0
8.0
32.0
$fi,480
32s ,-32 _ .r , .8;0;
2,3- Evaluation or Land Development
r 72,0_ $15;380.
and Pernit Operation Fees-
_ 2.3_A -Conduct an_Orientation Meeting with Ci Staff_
t��.
6_0
6,0
2.3.8- Understand ExistingConditions
_
16.0
_
18.0
_ — ------
12.0
--
_$2_670
2.3.C -Document Findings and Recommendations
12.0
- -
32.0
$7,120
23.D -Su ortand Revlewo}MaI cal Modificahons
40
12.0
40
- II.0
32.0
$6,460
3. Prepare
8.0 1780
Final Confidential While Paper
inn
22.0
4. Meetings with City Staff& Council (two to W)
32.0
$6,850
24.0
32.0
56.0
$12280
Reimbursable Expenses (havelexpenses)
• e • o e r
$1,800
mown,
r
:r
i
1. Tiny approaches have been presented In our scope of wk for the Federal Cf W t
Clean
a er
its needs and objectives. Enterprise. erprise. The Cfly should choose the approach that best meals
,
�NB MY Of Santa A, I
P17 81 Fee Proposal
25A-74